What do you think of a wedge

[Panda Drifter]

Hey im wondering what you think of a wedge design with treads and an arm small compact and light.

[Raul]

It depends on what you intend to do with a wedge bot. Do you intend to just play defense by harrassing other robots? Or do you intend to help your alliance partner get on the platform? Or, something else?

[Mike M.]

If the wedge is ment to be harrassing to other bots and try to filp them i would say no that a wedge is a bad idea. But if it is ment for good purposes ya it's fine.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by Panda Drifter

Hey im wondering what you think of a wedge design with treads and an arm small compact and light.

Most small bots that have arms usually have poor arms. VERY POOR. Look at some of the 2001 bots that had small frames, and arms. If you go the arm route, go for a bigger bot that can support the arm, it's motors, and other things the arm will need. Go into the gallery and look at the 2001 bots for inspiration.

[Cory]

And if you want reassurance that it can be done, go take a look at Team 60's robot. Very nice, small robot, with a long arm that folded down into a small space.

Cory

[sidt33]

In my humble opinion I don't recommend using wedgies in any use. Wedgies, by their nature, are performed with malicious intent and I believe them to be against the spirit of FIRST, especially those nuclear in execution.

[Gadget470]

Most small bots that have arms usually have poor arms. VERY POOR. Look at some of the 2001 bots that had small frames, and arms. If you go the arm route, go for a bigger bot that can support the arm, it's motors, and other things the arm will need. Go into the gallery and look at the 2001 bots for inspiration.And if you want reassurance that it can be done, go take a look at Team 60's robot. Very nice, small robot, with a long arm that folded down into a small space.

Not all of the bots from 2001 were poor with a small base.
Pictured here, 2nd from Left (Grand opening of the "New Detroit Science Center"), is the H.O.T. Team's little fella

[Clark Gilbert]

Originally Posted by Panda Drifter

Hey im wondering what you think of a wedge design with treads and an arm small compact and light.

Since you didn't mention anything about a robot, I'll have to say that it will make one heck of a doorstop, just imagine the possibilities.

Err...I'm tired, have a headache, have math homework, just got back from the purdue game (we won!!), and want to sleep. I feel like laughing..haha...

[SkitzoSmurf]

From my own experience with "the wedge" I would not recomend one, reguardless of your intnet. Tons upon tons of controversy can compile once a wedge bot makes it presence. The only wedge I think may be user friendly comes from a robot I saw in 2001, it was basically a ramp that other robots could climb to get onto the teeter totter. "Wedge", bad. "Ramp", good.

[KenWittlief]

I can think of a really good application for an upsidedown wedge this year

if your bot has enough momentum when it makes contact!

[Ben Mitchell]

To be honest, I really don't like wedges.

Although they might be made with a good purpose (helping others onto the platform, etc)

The temptation and randomness of autonomouse mode makes real and major risks for them to be used to flip others - if even accidentally.

[Andrew]

We've had a movable wedge on our robot for the past three years. Our net flipping of robots is zero.

A wedge (inclined plane) is the simplest of the simple machines. It would be poor engineering to eliminate this concept just because you think it might be seen as "ungracious."

What's next? No wheels? (That's the other super-duper-simple machine.)

I can hear the discussion now. "That robot is made to roll around. Some rolling robots ram into other robots. That's ungracious. Therefore, all things with wheels are ungracious. Therefore, wheels are bad and shouldn't be used."

[Ben Mitchell]

At the same time - why would any robot need to be made to be shaped like an angle?

A number of teams from my own experiences have made wedge like designs, and unintentionally flip teams or carry the risk of flipping them.

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Ben Mitchell

At the same time - why would any robot need to be made to be shaped like an angle?

A number of teams from my own experiences have made wedge like designs, and unintentionally flip teams or carry the risk of flipping them.

If my robot is shaped like a giant wedge, and I am minding my own business picking up balls... and your robot decides to attack me for defensive reasons... you are going to have a hard time pushing me around. You are at risk of flipping yourself.

It's not the wedge itself that is ungracious... sometimes they are just used ungraciously. *Shrug* When I reffed last year, I would warn teams that I felt were playing "rougher" than they should. In most cases, this put a stop to it.

JVN

[Gui Cavalcanti]

First of all, I'd like to point out that the robot pictured is Chief Delphi's, not HOT's. It says so on the side

I think wedges are a valid design, but gracious professionalism has to go hand-in-hand. If you are an aggressive wedge you're going to be called on penalties. I see it like basketball; you're not allowed to shove someone, but if they run into you it's their problem. In that manner, a defensive wedge would be perfectly legal.

A wedge with another, non-offensive or defensive use would be perfect (Wildstang in 2001, wedge-to-ramp).