ball cannon???

[stinkypooman]

Im 100% sure were not the only team that had a debate over this design. Quite frankly at first i thought this idea was pretty dumb... jeez its hard enough for a person to get that ball in, how the heck is a robot gonna do it, espically on that crazy surface with the crazy wheels. But Ive been thinking a little more now, if you position your "ball cannon" higher than the low edge of the trailer and make some kinda of rotating turret stand for it then mabye it could be effecent from distances of 5-15 feet if you chased robots from behind. It would be a programming nigtmare though. I guess we would have to mount the camera so that it can track the colors on the trailer and look at the angle and from there determine the distance. but heck it was our programmer that made up the idea... i mean that doesnt solve the problem of the skidding surface or the lag made form the air time fo the ball...

any takes on this? pros cons?

[Darkcrosbone]

erm.... in my opinion i think launching is out of the question.... better just to throw from the stations and to sort of dump the balls into the other alliances trailer

Edit: tho i AM a rookie, anyone more experienced want to comment?

[ginosoprano09]

I was actually going to start a thread about this so that more experienced teams could make some suggestions about it.

That's the design I want to use,but I'm not really sure how to actually build one.
(Anyone want to take a shot at it and describe how to build one? )

Originally Posted by Darkcrosbone

erm.... in my opinion i think launching is out of the question.... better just to throw from the stations and to sort of dump the balls into the other alliances trailer

Edit: tho i AM a rookie, anyone more experienced want to comment?

Relying on dumping and throwing will be less efficient though. In order to dump the balls on another robot, both robots have to come to an almost-complete stop, and considering how slippery the surface is, both robots are going to end up skidding in a small area and will make them easy targets for the throwers.

You cannot rely on your throwers because teams are going to have solid robots that are going to find an efficient way to overcome the slippery surface and will be a fast moving target. And as we all know, nobody counts with a perfect aim.

So does anyone know how to build a ball cannon?
( I might start a new thread on this)

[Taylor]

For those of you who are relatively new to FIRST, in 2006 there was a game "Aim High" where we were asked to launch 7" poof balls into a vertical target eight feet off the floor. Many teams used a modified softball pitching machine design for their robots, with moderate to high success. Although the geometries of the poof balls and the orbit balls are quite different, this could be a possible strategy to revisit.

[stinkypooman]

Originally Posted by Taylor
For those of you who are relatively new to FIRST, in 2006 there was a game "Aim High" where we were asked to launch 7" poof balls into a vertical target eight feet off the floor. Many teams used a modified softball pitching machine design for their robots, with moderate to high success. Although the geometries of the poof balls and the orbit balls are quite different, this could be a possible strategy to revisit.

this was actually what we were thinking about using like the tennis/baseball/softball launcher type design. im still a littel skeptical beuacse we can argue that its going to be hard to use a dumping design accurate, but that doesnt change that fact that a launching design would be any more accurate...all of this is super dependent on how much sliding we get on the new surface because really no one knows how different its gonna be from carpet. also the balls are not soccer balls anymore, they are plastic wrapped in cloth, this years balls will definitely have more give than soccer balls used back in 2006. This may make the "baseball machine" design useless or highly ineffiecent? i dont know, maybe it will work? I was thining maybe a pneumatic cannon thats nice and simple, but the problem with that is the velocity will not be variable like the baseball pitcher design would.

[Raumiester2010]

Originally Posted by ginosoprano09

I was actually going to start a thread about this so that more experienced teams could make some suggestions about it.

That's the design I want to use,but I'm not really sure how to actually build one.
(Anyone want to take a shot at it and describe how to build one? )





Relying on dumping and throwing will be less efficient though. In order to dump the balls on another robot, both robots have to come to an almost-complete stop, and considering how slippery the surface is, both robots are going to end up skidding in a small area and will make them easy targets for the throwers.

You cannot rely on your throwers because teams are going to have solid robots that are going to find an efficient way to overcome the slippery surface and will be a fast moving target. And as we all know, nobody counts with a perfect aim.

So does anyone know how to build a ball cannon?
( I might start a new thread on this)

Our team debated about a dumping mechanism too, we elected not to use it because in order for it to work, you have to get up close, be fast, accurate, and (this is the hard part) find [i]some[i] way to get it in the opponents trailer without leaving your 28" X 38" X 60" box. (remember that rule, we hate it too).

That is why we are planning on some sort of shooter. haven't made too many decisions about that though.

[Ryan Albright]

I am not sure I am feeling the Launcher. I think the most efficient designs are going to be a robot that can suck up the balls and place them in a hopper so they can be dumped or a robot that can "plow" the balls into the corral for the human player. Over the years I have been involved these kind of robots always succeed in the end.

[XXShadowXX]

I think the most efficient robot will be one that can not only scope up balls, and dump them into nearby trailers but...
track oposing trailers autonoumly, and launch balls across the feild into said trailers

[sdcantrell56]

I know we are fully planning on a fully turreting ball launcher. We will also attempt to track the opposing trailers at all times and have the computer handle all the shooting. If no one has tried it yet, it is quite easy to make the balls in the trailer. We are also planning a very quick ball harvester and large hopper so we can easily corral balls as well. I don't think launching balls from any distance will be easy, but some teams will undoubtedly be able to accomplish this task, and the best of these will be the champions. This is of course just my opinion.

[Petey]

My $.02? You will see almost no successful launchers this year. A few teams will pull it off, and we will marvel at them and slap our forheads and say OF COURSE, but most of the most successful teams will find a way to get balls reliably and quickly to the human players (including all four empty cells) and then have a human player who is absolutely golden scoring goals.

Someone namedropped Aim High; I'm thinking more like 2004 here.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Petey

My $.02? You will see almost no successful launchers this year. A few teams will pull it off, and we will marvel at them and slap our forheads and say OF COURSE, but most of the most successful teams will find a way to get balls reliably and quickly to the human players (including all four empty cells) and then have a human player who is absolutely golden scoring goals.

Someone namedropped Aim High; I'm thinking more like 2004 here.

I seem to remember people saying this about hurdling last year, too.

[Enigma's puzzle]

I seee the teams that have been around a lot longer will have an advantage and will be more likely to build a succcessful shooter, EXCEPT there will be a few teams that find and make simple shooters. the rest of us that didn't attempt it because of complexity will hit ourselves.

And of course thier will be a fair amount of unsuccessful failures.

[2241]

Originally Posted by Petey

My $.02? You will see almost no successful launchers this year. A few teams will pull it off, and we will marvel at them and slap our forheads and say OF COURSE, but most of the most successful teams will find a way to get balls reliably and quickly to the human players (including all four empty cells) and then have a human player who is absolutely golden scoring goals.

Someone namedropped Aim High; I'm thinking more like 2004 here.

i agree with this guy. there will be no successful launchers, however that doesn't mean there will not be launcher like items used, however i don't agree that the human players will have to be the reliable scorers. it will come down to dumping, if you can get a cage to dump with enough force, it will create a shotgun effect, and will score more effectively than anything else.

[AlexD744]

I think with the openings in the balls there would be very little accuracy from a shooter especialy from a moving target. There air passing through the ball would veer it in a different direction every time.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by AlexD744

I think with the openings in the balls there would be very little accuracy from a shooter especialy from a moving target. There air passing through the ball would veer it in a different direction every time.

We prototyped a shooter yesterday, and were able to get it to go 6 feet consistently within a 20-degree or so spread. Now all we have to do is adjust the speed, angle, and have a decent feeding mechanism. We should have an accurate shooter out to 10 feet or so...but 10-15 foot shots are our strategy anyways. It's possible, even with how squishy the balls are -- I'll post a picture sometime next week.