Top 3 bots in your state: 2013

[mdiradoorian]

Originally Posted by MrTechCenter

From what I've hear, 696 had a fantastic robot as well, but I didn't get to see it in person or in action.

Yeah we do have a fantastic robot we got invited to IRI and performed above expectations although we did not make it to the Elims.

[MrTechCenter]

Originally Posted by mdiradoorian

Yeah we do have a fantastic robot we got invited to IRI and performed above expectations although we did not make it to the Elims.

Oh, you guys should come up to Sac next year, you'd win for sure up here

[Navid Shafa]

Originally Posted by tickspe15

1983: Great shooter with only reliable 5 disk auto in washington.sadly one of the slowest 10pt hangers i saw this year

In Washington, we were the only 4 disc+ auto, until Spokane. We did have a fairly reliable auto and it certainly helped us at the regional level. However, we didn't get our 6 disc working until the end of Spokane and didn't implement it in a real match until champs.

We certainly had a slow hang for 10 points. We had originally focused on designing a 30-point climber and didn't have the time to implement it, so we were stuck with what remained.

Originally Posted by gibbta

I do not believe 1983 had a full court shooter they had a very strong mulit speed drive train and in

Elensberg they finally got there shotter up and running just barley by the last day of qualifiers.


1983- Skunk works robotics - At the Elensberg Regonal was by far the best defensive bot there also by the time of

Eliminations was scoring hard core as well.

Correct, we did not FCS. We were a cycler with a floor pick-up and we were capable of 5-6 cycles a match. We had a 6WD, with 4 CIMs and dual speed shifting. We can play brutal defense if we have to, but we prefer playing offense. At our first regional, we had a rough start and got to show off our drive train's capabilities.

*I agree with all the PNW teams mentioned before, but I'd also like to add 948. They weren't as versatile as 2471 or 1425 in FCS, but they were the most accurate and had the highest point potential. It was fun playing with all three of these FCS this season. It was interesting to see how differently each of them did an almost identical task and the additional capabilities each of them brought to the alliance.

[Pault]

Massachusetts:

126: Amazing cycler with buzzer beater hang.

190: Climb and dump robot with a 3 disk autonomous that defends for half the match before going to climb.

125: Great cycler, awesome blocking mechanism, buzzer beater hang, and a floor pickup (though rarely used for more than their 4/5 disk autonomous).

[Madison]

Originally Posted by tickspe15

In no specific order
Washington:
1899: amazing use of wood for the entire robot
1425:great full court shooter with amazing drivers
1983: Great shooter with only reliable 5 disk auto in washington.sadly one of the slowest 10pt hangers i saw this year

1425 is from Oregon.

[Link07]

For New Jersey

2590 - Amazing ground pickup and autonomous, won two events, and a chairmans award.

1676 - Very accurate cycler, won a district and an EI at MAR champs, performed very well at IRI

303 - Great FCS, while struggling in MAR play, won Newton and almost made it to Einstein finals.

[Gregor]

There were no good robots in our state.

In our province however, I'd have to say 1114*, 2056*, and 1310.

1114. 3-4 cycles, 50 point climb consistanly. #1 seed at IRI.

2056. One of (if not the best) floor pickup robot in the world. If there are disks on the ground, they won't be there for long. Very consistant 7 disk auto. #2 seed at IRI.

1310. Another fantastic floor loader that was very good at sweeping. Another reliable 7 disk, but their full court ability was their least famous attribute that makes them so good. #3 seed at IRI.

*1114 over 2056 you ask? Well 2056 made a robot primarily to win regionals. Their stellar floor pickup gave them ridiculous AP, which seeded them first at every regional they attended. They had the control in their hands at every regional they attended. 1114 made a robot to do well at the championship. They proved this by being the overall #1 pick on Galileo.

1114's higher poing ceiling gives them the edge, but both machines were constantly pushing each other, and it really is too close to call.

[Jay O'Donnell]

Originally Posted by Gregor

There were no good robots in our state. In our province however, I'd have to say 1114*, 2056*, and 1310.

If you'll notice I said state or province twice in my post just for our friends in the north. Although I guess I should also say or country for Israel, Mexico and other countries.

[David13]

Originally Posted by Gregor

In our province however, I'd have to say 1114*, 2056*, and 1310.

I agree with you on the first two, but I would choose 610 over 1310 as the third choice. Given 610's ridiculous speed, driver skill, and shooting velocity, I would argue that they may have been the best cycler in all of FRC (although teams like 1986, 3539, and 1114 may challenge them for that title). At Waterloo I remember a few matches where they went to the feeder station with less than 15 seconds left and still managed to score all four disks and hang for 10. I think they once ran 8 cycles in a game or something absurd like that. Combining that with FCS capability, a 5-disk auto, and a quick 10-point hang, I would give them the #3 spot in Ontario. On a side note, 610 won the World Championships.

My Ontario Top 3: 1114, 2056, 610

Honourable Mentions: 1310, 1334, 1241

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by David13

...5-disk auto

610 was great, but their floor pickup was lacking, and it only existed for 12 official matches. In those 12 matches I believe they scored something like 4 extra autonomous disks.

1310's 7 disk gives them a 24 point (2 cycle) jump on 610 coming out of auto. 610 is indubitably the better cycler, making at least 2 more cycles a match than 1310. However 1310 has a more consistant full-court shooter, and a floor pickup.

In conclusion, I don't really know who's better.

[jamierose]

I agree with Gregor that we're not necessarily better than 1310, at least in terms of the robots.
First of all, we could never full court and intake at the same time because we couldn't fit both mechanisms on at once. Also, like Gregor said, our intake was very inaccurate because we didn't have a proper practice bot to test it on when we made it.

Also, 1310 had an intake, a good FCS, and was able to cycle at a speed comparable to ours.

They also had the same shooter design as the one we had for our first two regionals. We then made a slightly more powerful one for the championship. I don't know how much faster the new one is, but if we could shoot 7 cycles at our first regional I'm sure they have the capability to as well. Our retractable hard stops may make a small difference in cycling time, though, but I don't think we ever measured how they affect cycling time.

[donkehote]

Originally Posted by jamierose

They also had the same shooter design as the one we had for our first two regionals. We then made a slightly more powerful one for the championship. I don't know how much faster the new one is, but if we could shoot 7 cycles at our first regional I'm sure they have the capability to as well.

Not quite true.
As the mentor assigned to the shooter i feel i have to step in here. 1310's shooter has always been very similar to 610's, and all the other teams with 90* curved shooters, however, your post is significantly inaccurate.

1310 always had a shooter in that orientation, and had at least 2 mini cims. Our prototype had 3 minis, and was WAY overkill. 610 actually flipped they're shooter to match ours as the full court shots hit more of the goal that way. 610 also added a second minicim. We worked with 610, building our shooters with insight from the other team, but neither of us copied each other. we both prototyped our shooters in private, and only saw each others 3 days before bag day.

At that time, we were using a 6" colson, had 3 mini cims, belt drive with a 1:1.3 ratio and plates made of 1/8 aluminium. 610's shooter was a mirrored version of ours, made of polycarb and UHMW, with 1 minicim, and the magical 6" pneumatic tire from McmasterCarr. When i saw that tire, I immediately saw its advantages, and realized we would need to make a new shooter that was wider to accommodate the wheel. Andymark had released the 6" plastic hub at this point (610 made they're own) so we knew what the next version would be.

While 610 bagged they're shooter with the robot, (IIRC, correct me if im wrong) we kept developing. Apart from widening the gap between the plates, using thinner aluminium to save weight, and changing to a 3 plate design for ease of maintenance, the geometry and design of our shooter stayed the same. With the pneumatic tire, we instantly saw a more consistent full court, with more accuracy, and the drop to 2 mini cims didn`t affect our shot speed or rate significantly. Before champs, we tested 9 different backing materials and found one that gave us an amazing grouping. Besides the odd anomaly disk, we were basically able to shoot into a shoe box at the full court distance.

In total we made 3 full shooters, culminating in the shooter we have today, an 85%+ accurate Fullcourt with a 1 second frequency, and a comparable shot rate to 610 up close, about 2 disks per second. We had the same motors, same wheel, same belt system, same gear ratio, same orientation, and the same PID system.

The only difference was hopper and hammer design. 610 had an internal hammer, catching the inside edge of the Frisbee, and a detent piston that stopped premature firing of disks. we had an external hammer, pushing on the outside of the disks, with 3 zip ties as our detent.

Our shooter at waterloo was the setup 610 changed to for champs. (aside from the differences above)

Sorry about the wall of text, but i wanted to clarify that we did not copy 610, and 610 did not copy us, we both ended up at the shooters we have now due to separate development, with similar goals, while learning from the systems each other had.




As far as picking the top 3, (i should do that instead of just derailing the thread) I choose to pick 610, 1334 and 1241. All of us in Ontario know that 1114 and 2056 are going to be the #1 and #2 in Ontario, if not the world, so im ignoring them completely
I want to share the love with some other Ontario teams.

610 was the fastest pure cycler in Ontario, 1334 had the fastest climb and dump combo in first (1114 could climb faster, but if you add the time for the dump, 1334 is faster by a second or so at IRI) and 1241 had the most dedicated, practiced drive team, and an amazing coach.


TLDR:

why should i make a summary, either read the post, or move on, your choice.

[Peter Matteson]

Thanks for all the 177 love among the CT teams.

I agree Cyberknights were the best team in CT this year with their accurate full court shooter.

After that I'm thinking Buzz with their 3+ automode floor pick up and solid cycling. They had everything needed to be dangerous, and not a team you wanted to play.

But I have to say the CT team that everyone is missing that belongs on this list is 2067 Apple Pi. They have been steadily becoming one of the stronger teams in the state over the last few years and deserve to be recognized for it. Take every thing I said about Buzz and Apple Pi was just a half step behind.

[jamierose]

Originally Posted by donkehote

Not quite true.

Thanks for clearing everything up. I heard at various points throughout the season things like "1310 has our shooter" from people on my team , so I was under the assumption that we gave our design to 1310 in a similar way to how we borrowed much of 188's design in 2012. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

Also, we didn't even have a piston to stop the discs until the championship.
We only had a zip tie that was cut to a very short length. It stuck out a bit from the top of our shooter, and it was enough to do its job. We had to change it every so often, though.

[Tetraman]

New York produced many good teams this year, and the top 3 are well deserving.

#20, The Rocketeers
Not only the top NY team of the year, but also the top NY team - end of sentence. Think of it like this: they were the only New York team selected for IRI. They had a great machine this year and they shown it with impressive wins, including a 15-0-0 record at the Connecticut Regional, shooting less than 100 points in only 2 of those 15 matches.

#2791, Shaker Robotics.
An overall impressive robot this year. While I could give this spot to about 10 other teams, Shaker Robotics has to be mentioned. They played impressivly at WPI, earning top spot and picking team 20. So even though they just got finalist, if you make it first seed and pick the overall best NY team, then you are getting the second overall NY team by golly.

#3003, TAN(X)
Again, I could give this spot to so many teams, but I want to specifically highlight 3003. They won the most difficult FLR to date, played solidly at Buckeye and was ranked 34th in Archemedies with a 5-3 record. Still need more proof? They went 24-14-0 this year. Their total record from 2009 to 2012 was 18-25-2. Yes, they won more matches in 2013 than they had in their previous 4 years combined. Let's hope they can keep it up.