246 Lobstah Bots | 2025 Build Thread | Ocean (Open) Alliance

Welcome to the Lobstah Bots 2025 Open Alliance thread!

Links

Instagram
YouTube
Website
GitHub
2025 Robot Code
2025 CAD link will also be here once it exists!

About Us

We are a Bostonian FRC team based out of Boston University Academy and the Match Charter School. We were founded in 1999, although we jokingly refer to 2022 as our “second rookie year” since the team lost nearly all of its members and institutional knowledge over the COVID-19 pandemic.

Our 2023 rebrand from Overclocked to Lobstah Bots provided a fresh start (and cuter branding) after a rough 2022 season. Since then we have been growing and improving steadily; over the course of 3 years, we have grown from 5 to ~40 students.

Our mentor base trends pretty young – our oldest mentor graduated high school during the 2016 Stronghold season, and this means that our team is a lot less of a top-down structure. We propel students to have a major role in administrative leadership of the team, making decisions on team leadership, structure, policy, and organization, as well as running trainings.

Open Alliance?

The idea of doing Open Alliance was brought up near the end of our 2023 season, and we decided to give it a shot for this year, as we now have enough people to support writing the thing. Our main goal with this thread is to motivate ourselves to document our season progress better and to give our students some practice with technical writing. (We’re also hoping to write about some non-technical team stuff!)

We’re excited to share our progress as a reestablishing and steadily improving old-new team. Here’s to an even better 2025!

-Kendree & Coco

22 Likes

Wake Up, New Game Just Dropped

Water game is here! So let’s dive into what we did this kickoff.

In the past, kickoff might have been the single most hated weekend of the year for new members. Understandable, since it’s a lot to take in, especially when you don’t have a lot of experience with FRC yet. With that in mind, we revised the kickoff plan this year to prioritize engaging all attendees, rather than necessarily maximizing efficiency of time. Since kickoff is new members’ first glimpse of build season, we want to make it enjoyable.

Here are some of the major components of kickoff and changes we made this year, and our thoughts on how effective they were:

Day 1

Activities watching the stream: We found this to be a pretty good way to keep students engaged when watching. Activities this time included playing kickoff bingo, teaching new members how to crochet lobsters, and counting how many times the stream said “Sponsored by…” or ”Presented by…”

Highlighting specific sections of the manual to read instead of the whole thing: Absolutely, 100% a keeper. Reading the whole manual in one sitting, as we used to do at kickoff, took hours, and usually became “in one ear and out the other.” Tackling only the relevant sections for Day 1, which focuses on game play and strategy, helped students retain information a bit better and kept interest up.

Rules Kahoot: Probably a keeper. We’ve used Citrus’ rules test in the past, but the Google form style didn’t really work for us since it didn’t give feedback until the very end. This year, we converted it into Kahoot format and played with the whole team. It was a lot of fun, and allowed us to pause and clear up any rule misunderstandings after every question. Only drawback is that it takes longer to make than a Google form.

Scheduled Breaks: How did we ever survive without these? Whether it’s half an hour between activities or ten minutes every hour, it was amazing at how much these helped people focus. Never underestimate breaks, apparently.

Archetype Naming: Classic and something we do every year. We do this exercise to get an idea of the types of robots and game strategies we might see in the game, generally a range between “Doesn’t Move Darryl” and “Worlds Winner William” (the robot that does everything to an optimal level). This combined with a points analysis helps us get a better idea of what’s possible and what isn’t.



Day 2

Goal Setting. We’ve done this every kickoff in the past, but never with so many people before — it was great to see! We broke down our season goals into four:

  • Quality. We made it through the competition season last year without a single wiring failure (unless you count forgetting to strap the battery down, which electrical subteam…doesn’t think counts); we’d like to keep up a similar standard of reliable wiring and construction this year. This might include throwing together proper electrical guidelines, since we’ve mostly been winging it since we started rebuilding the team after 2022.
  • Make it to Week 0. Last year, we weren’t even close to having the robot built when Week 0 came around, and we were scrambling to finish the robot and its software the morning of Quals Day 1 of our first event. This year, the number of team members with some experience has gone up 5x, so we hope to be able to finish a working robot by Week 0. Attending Week 0 would also help our new driver gain some experience before our first event.
  • Enjoyment, engagement, education. (A.K.A., learn, have fun, be satisfied). We aim to actively facilitate these amidst the chaos of build season, since they are the most important aspects of our team.
  • Qualify for Worlds. Our stretch goal last year was to qualify for DCMP, which we accomplished; this year we’re seeing if we can take it up another notch by performing well enough at DCMP to qualify for worlds.

Points/Time To Score Analysis: This was a little disorganized since the complexity of the game naturally brought about a lot of conflicting opinions to balance (and I’m not a great moderator), but we’ve come up with something resembling this:

Ideas Pitch. We like to do these kinds of pitches a lot, partially to help freshmen get more used to speaking up for their ideas, and partially because it’s just fun. Each person gets a few minutes and a slightly janky projector display, and has to give their best explanation with a combination of paper drawings and improvised props.

Need/Want/Wish

With the information we compiled over the weekend, we’ve started to put together a need/want/wish chart, although it’s still undergoing some editing:

And here’s a pic of one of our lobsters, who’s disappointed that there’s no actual water in the water game.

Details on our robot ideas and sketches are coming soon, so keep an eye out for that!

-Kendree

12 Likes

omg wow such a great team, def going to worlds so excite

3 Likes

Finalized Need/Want/Wish:

Action Category Numerical Weight
L1 Coral Need 1
L2 Coral Need 1
L3 Coral Need 1
Pick Up Coral From Station Need 1
Controllability Need 1
Low COG Need 0.9
Robustness Need 0.8
Fast Acceleration Need 0.8
L4 Coral Need 0.7
Pick Up Algae Off Reef Need 0.7
Simplicity Need 0.7
Score on opposite side of robot from intake Want 0.65
Process Algae Want 0.6
Fast Drive Speed Want 0.6
Pick up Algae From Ground Want 0.4
Pick Up Coral From Ground Wish 0.3
Shallow Climb Wish 0.3
Algae In Net Wish 0.2
Fit Under Shallow Cage Wish 0.2
Deep Climb Wish 0.1
5 Likes

Are We Building A Submarine?

Well, unfortunately water game doesn’t have much in the way of water. As an aside, it’s technically also promoting harmful practices: algae and coral reefs actually typically have a beneficial symbiotic relationship and removing algae technically contributes to coral bleaching. Wonder if that’s why the coral gamepiece is white…

Prototypes

This year, we’re using a mix of Protopipe, Hypeblocks, and laser-cut wood pieces for rapid prototyping. This week, we mainly tested two concepts: a roller claw for picking up coral, and an OTB intake.

Roller claw was more of a proof of concept, and showed that we can design a claw to pick up both coral and algae if needed. Algae intake was also pretty simple, and after prototyping we’re fairly sure we can just add a slap-down roller that could work as an OTB algae intake and outtake. However, OTB intake for coral was less than consistent, and it raised some concerns about its viability, especially when aligning the coral for the handoff into the gripper will need to be done so many times.

We are also busy testing ramps/funnels for coral station intake and passive alignment methods for reef scoring.

A Menagerie of KrayonCAD Animals

With a combination of designs from kickoff weekend, RI3D inspiration, and random shower thoughts that people shared throughout the week, we put together a library of design archetype ideas that we sketched and then KrayonCADded. When the list was compiled, we pitched each idea to the team on Saturday. As is a budding tradition, each design idea got an animal name — this year they’re all aquatic themed.


I won’t bother talking through all of them, but here’s an overview of a few notable ones:

Anemone


Telescoping arm on a pivot with a wrist for dropping off coral; gripper can be used as an intake or for scoring. Decent arm geometry would allow for ground intaking (the gripper would cup the circular base of the coral).

Main cons: TOO MANY DOFS. Also, it’s generally harder to adjust the position of the end effector with precision when the arm is so long.

Loch Ness Monster


The idea of this is a side intake (originally planned as OTB, but switched to station intake after prototyping wasn’t very OTB-favorable) could feed horizontally aligned coral into the center of the robot, but with an intake offset 90 degrees from the elevator, it would eliminate the need for coral realignment since the gripper could just grab the coral at the right angle straight away. It also theoretically leaves more space in the center of the bot if we want to try incorporating a climb.

Main cons: May slow down autos since it would require turning the robot 90 degrees in between the coral station and the reef. There are also lingering questions about if it it would be easier for coral to get stuck in the robot with this design. It’s also harder to design a gripper that can do both algae and coral if the gripper is doing this style of handoff.

Manatee/Whale


(Pictured is Manatee, please excuse the questionable KrayonCAD)

These are essentially the same thing, the only difference being whether or not there is a wrist joint. The primary consideration of this design takes inspiration from the Penn State RI3D, which has an asymmetric end effector with the coral outtake offset to one side so that the robot is capable of removing algae and scoring coral all in one go. We like the idea of being able to parallelize tasks like this, but this led us to wondering if we could make the offset side adjustable. Manatee theoretically would use some sort of linear drive, whether worm drive or rack and pinion, to shift a coral outtake left or right. This could also provide finer control when scoring coral, since just the coral outtake could be lined up as opposed to having to adjust the entire robot.

Main cons: A moveable coral outtake adds a ton of complexity and likely weight to the end effector, as well as another degree of freedom. We’re not sure if the advantage of being able to remove algae and score coral at the same time is worth all this added trouble.

Beluga/Sea Snapper/Orca


Pictured: Orca

These are all derivatives of the same archetype, which is somewhere between the Rusthounds and Cranberry Alarm Ri3D. All of them have a station intake that passes into an elevator, with an end effector on the end capable of scoring/removing either coral or algae. Beluga is the simplest, with a fixed-angle end effector. Sea Snapper adds in a passive align feature, hopefully to speed up scoring in-game. Orca has the end effector on a wrist. An OTB algae intake/scorer similar to that of the Rusthounds is only listed for Orca, but we’re fairly sure we can fit that onto the robot.

On Saturday team meeting, we managed to narrow down the archetype list to Sea Snapper, Loch Ness Monster, and Whale. These designs actually aren’t that different, and once we’re done deciding some of the finer details we’ll essentially have made our final choice.

Decisions

Features we have solidly decided on including are:

  • An elevator
  • A station intake (probably going to be a ramp/funnel-style thing)
  • Some form of aligning to the scoring target (passive: Sea Snapper, active: Whale, or moving the drivebase side-to-side)
  • Algae intake on the elevator end effector

We have yet to decide:

  • Wrist or fixed angle outtake
  • Active or passive align mechanism
  • Location of ramp and intake in robot
  • Whether to combine algae gripper with coral gripper

To help along the rest of the decisions, this week we plan to work on prototyping:

  • Passive align mechanisms
  • Active align motion (worm drive and alternatives)
  • Algae intake/gripper with offset coral gripper (Whale)
  • Algae intake/gripper that is combined with a coral gripper
  • Coral intake ramps and handoffs
  • Fixed angle outtakes

Thankfully, with some major decisions made, we can now start the actual robot CAD as far as the mechanisms we know we’re going to have.

Lobster photo of the week is this crocheted one I made a while back, where I somehow managed to take a day to make the pieces and a week to sew them all together…though honestly, that’s probably average for weirdly shaped amigurumi.

-Kendree

6 Likes