different type of balancing, which one do you like better?

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 03/19/2001 5:46 AM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.



There are a lot of solution for the single proble: Balancing the bridge.

It's really interesting when looking at other robot trying to accomplish the same thing as you do, but using entirly different method.

Can people suggest the teams that have done the following method(s)?

The most basic method is to use the drive train and move the robot into a balanced position, while counteracting the momentum of the bridge as it swing down.

Then, there are the ones who use long arm to push the goal(s) to tip the bridge down, use the arm to pull them into balanced.

A third method is to use a "wedge" under the bridge to stop it from moving in the balanced position, then another robot adjusting the goals to keep it more stable.

Another clever solution is using the gyro chip and fancy programming to auto-balance with the drive train.

Our team came up with yet another solution by building two arm to help balance, and it works because the arms slow down the motion of the bridge...

So, there are many of these design, and I am sure there are more.

I am just wondering, which one of these are the "better" method? I am not so sure it is possible or appropiate to actually compare each one of them to another, and judge which one is "better". What do people think?

Maybe a better question is: Which one do the people like better?

[archiver]

Posted by Chris at 03/19/2001 2:22 PM EST


Student on team #69, HYPER Team 69 Quincy Public Schools Gillette , from North Quincy High and The Gillette Company.


In Reply to: different type of balancing, which one do you like better?
Posted by Ken Leung on 03/19/2001 5:46 AM EST:



A gyro!

Many people where using GYRO's at the UTC not many of them worked!! There is no solution better than the human hands!!!!!

About the wedge, This year we are a wedge\ramp bot and it seemed to work every time! We can either wedge or become a ramp on either side for robots and goals to drive over us!

There is no simple solution except for the HANDS OF A HUMAN!


CHRIS
TEAM 69

www.qhs.gillette.com

PICTURES

[archiver]

Posted by colleen - T190 at 03/19/2001 6:40 PM EST


Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Massachusetts Academy of Math and Science and WPI.


In Reply to: different type of balancing, which one do you like better?
Posted by Ken Leung on 03/19/2001 5:46 AM EST:



There is no reason.. 'cept for lack of a robot that can do it.. that ANY team, no matter how good, should really try balancing two goals without a wedge (not speaking for those who balance two w/o being on cause i haven't seen exactly how they do it..)..

It is easy.. fast.. and efficient.. you can drive up full speed (many teams have a problem getting up if they have to slow down to make sure the ramp doesn't toggle erradically).. slam down on another bot and then make the MINOR adjustment to balance.. there are many times that all the ramp needs is that stop of momentum by the wedge bot and it will be balanced..

Wedges also allow the big balls to be loaded before hand and then balancing to occur w/o them falling off.. the balls usually stay in the 12in drop from tilted to flat.. but they fall out when the ramp goes from one extreme to the other.. (and the more small balls you want in those goals, the more critical this is)..

Wedges all the way.. use 'em!! don't be stubborn!! no matter HOW GOOD you think your drivers are.. it is really only to your benefit!

even better are wedgebots that can load the big ball while wedging adn you're balancing (just to ensure no loss.. cause that's also dependent on how inflated or not those bigballs are)... it was what we did all during the finals in LI.. .. it helps when you have someone come grab the far goal while the other is being loaded (saw 126 do it in their UTC win.. our alliance did it to win long island too) and then you can still get the big ball on with no risk of unbalancing..