30pt climb under 15 seconds

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by mikegrundvig

Our climber design is significantly faster than 15 seconds in it's raw form. In practice, we will likely slow it down to be closer to 15 seconds so it doesn't beat up the robot so much. It also takes up a lot of space on the robot so all our other components need to be well positioned.

Pictures? (nevermind, I really need to read the whole page before commenting...)

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by markmcgary

I dunno... 18 to 30 points auto. Plus around 30 in teleop. A quick 10 at the end. That 58 to 70 point shooter beats a 30 to 54 point climber. Maybe I'm just optimistic.

They need to go to feeder everytime, and that is where all the opponents are. I say: 18 points in auto(3 top, average), lets say 12 points in tele. (4 HP frisbees), 10 point hang vs. 6 points in auto, 6 points in tele. (4 HP frisbees), and 30 hang.
40 vs 42
(not counting the 4 Bonus disks)

[markmcgary]

Originally Posted by xSAWxBLADEx

They need to go to feeder everytime, and that is where all the opponents are. I say: 18 points in auto(3 top, average), lets say 12 points in tele. (4 HP frisbees), 10 point hang vs. 6 points in auto, 6 points in tele. (4 HP frisbees), and 30 hang.
40 vs 42
(not counting the 4 Bonus disks)

I think there will be some elite bots that can both shoot and climb for 30, but it will be rare. We are a second year team and have pretty much ruled it out. Not even sure we could climb for 30 as our only goal. That is a big challenge even with the appropriate design, engineering and manufacturing resources. I think that defense is a wild card, but you guys have more experience at this than I. Definitely looking forward to seeing some interesting designs this year.

[efoote868]

From a pure work / energy perspective, it should be very feasible.

Tossing out a few rough numbers:

200 lbs * 10 feet * 32 (feet / second^2) / (15 seconds * 12 volts) = 15 amps.

YMMV.

[Orion.DeYoe]

Originally Posted by markmcgary

I dunno... 18 to 30 points auto. Plus around 30 in teleop. A quick 10 at the end. That 58 to 70 point shooter beats a 30 to 54 point climber. Maybe I'm just optimistic.

I think you're forgetting the fact that there are three robots on an alliance. The game can't support three awesome shooters, just like last year. I know if we are fortunate enough to seed first in our regionals, and there is a RELIABLE 30 point climber that can play defense and (maybe) dump discs in the lowest goal, that they would be our first pick. Who would you pick? A robot who can climb AND drive around to play defense, or a robot who can just drive around?

Just a note to people designing 30 point climbers and plan to dumb in the low goal. Make it a priority to pick those discs up off of the floor. There are going to lots of discs on the floor from when (yes... when) the powerful shooting teams miss their shots. It's also a very good strategy to rob discs from the opposite side to disable an opponent who can pick up off of the floor. Trips back and forth from the feeding station are going to KILL your efficiency (think 2011) so they'll also kill your opponent's efficiency.

[Walter Deitzler]

Originally Posted by Ronnie314

I guess I'm just not seeing the point in teams going for a 30pt hang, most teams are taking a lot of there robot space for a climbing mechanism when you can make up for a 30pt climb in auto easily by scoring 3-4 disks plus an easy 10pt hang that can be done in less than 3 seconds and take up little space. Thoughts please

My team is going for the climb based on past experience.

In 2012, we decided to try a shooter, and spent ~4 weeks prototyping our shooter. at competition, for more reasons than one, we ended up being a less than average shooter, and scored most of our points by balancing, and ended up not playing in eliminations. Then, at Cow Town Throw Down, after we had tried to renovate our shooter, we ended up placing nearly dead last, with only 1 win. This influenced our strategy this year. We determined that if we built a shooter than we would be a 'vanilla' robot, and not be playing in elims, just like last year.

So we decided if we could do this one thing, climb, than we could do better than many robots at STL regional and maybe have a chance at playing in eliminations. With new materials and sponsors this year, we think we can do it.

tl:dr: bad previous experience made us re-evaluate our game plan, and determine that a 30pt climb was our best chances at eliminations play.

[mrnoble]

one minute? we'll see pretty soon.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by markmcgary

I dunno... 18 to 30 points auto. Plus around 30 in teleop. A quick 10 at the end. That 58 to 70 point shooter beats a 30 to 54 point climber. Maybe I'm just optimistic.

Why assume that a 30-point climber can't do the same points in auto as the 10-point climber?

[markmcgary]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Why assume that a 30-point climber can't do the same points in auto as the 10-point climber?

I think a shooter + 30pt climber will be rare. But, I could be wrong. I am hoping to see it. FRC teams can do amazing things.

[Jibri Wright]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Why assume that a 30-point climber can't do the same points in auto as the 10-point climber?

Ya why assume this? There is a good chance that some teams found a way to get a good shooter while still getting a 30 point hang

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Why assume that a 30-point climber can't do the same points in auto as the 10-point climber?

I'm just going by the average bot. I'm counting out 67, 1114, 254, etc. (just have to eliminate outliers) We all know they are going to have climbers and shoot. The average bot will either shoot poorly and get the 30 point hang, or shoot well and get the 10 point hang.

(and I'm sure Team Titanium is going to have an insane climber, and a great shooter. You guys always put out a kick-a** robot, but always seem to go under the radar.)

[Orion.DeYoe]

Originally Posted by xSAWxBLADEx

I'm counting out 67, 1114, 254, etc. (just have to eliminate outliers) We all know they are going to have climbers and shoot.

In a poll asking where your team was going to climb, a team member from 2056 (I hope you know who that is) answered that they weren't going to even go for a climb.
I am 90% sure that the entire reason for the frame perimeter size change was to keep teams from doing everything well. The powerhouse teams are the the same boat as everyone else. They don't have space, and they have to make a choice: Climb or Shoot.

[RonnieS]

Originally Posted by Orion.DeYoe

In a poll asking where your team was going to climb, a team member from 2056 (I hope you know who that is) answered that they weren't going to even go for a climb.
I am 90% sure that the entire reason for the frame perimeter size change was to keep teams from doing everything well. The powerhouse teams are the the same boat as everyone else. They don't have space, and they have to make a choice: Climb or Shoot.

Not really. We were able to make a very good shooter and decent climber and we have room for a floor pick up mechanism. It is all on how you design your robot. The key is not to package it all into a tiny area. The key is to making one thing do multiple tasks such as hot in 2012, there arm was used to pick up balls, balance, bridge assist, get over bump, and could also be used to pull the robot if there drive train failed. Just some thoughts.

[xSAWxBLADEx]

Originally Posted by Orion.DeYoe

In a poll asking where your team was going to climb, a team member from 2056 (I hope you know who that is) answered that they weren't going to even go for a climb.
I am 90% sure that the entire reason for the frame perimeter size change was to keep teams from doing everything well. The powerhouse teams are the the same boat as everyone else. They don't have space, and they have to make a choice: Climb or Shoot.

What that a poll on chief delphi? If so, was it a student or a mentor who posted it? any links?

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Why assume that a 30-point climber can't do the same points in auto as the 10-point climber?

A random 30-pt climber probably can't do the same autonomous points that the 10-pt climber which specializes in autonomous can. Probably. The robot geometry constraints & height of the low rung make this difficult (IMO).

Now, if it's a NASA team we're talking about ... all bets are off. If it's a team who had great success in previous years at doing all aspects of the game, then it's worthy of a raised eyebrow. Yet until we see 'bots in action, it's 'probably' a safe assumption for most robots who do a 30-pt climb that they can't also do a 7-disc autonomous.