Anyone going under the rail?

Posted by Rick Gibbs at 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST

Engineer on team #145, T-Rx, from Norwich High School, Sherburne-Earlville High School and Procter & Gamble Pharmaceuticals.

Maybe I’m going out on a limb by asking this - or asking it way too early, but here I go anyway. Is anybody seriously considering going over the 4x4 and under the rail to get to the opposite side of the arena? It’s an interesting idea - we’re just curious how common it is. Isn’t this fun!

Rick

Posted by Bonnie 166 at 1/10/2001 9:20 PM EST

Student on team #166, Techno Insanity, from Merrimack High School.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

Well, I have been trying to think of a way to get over, but haven’t thought of anything that would work. Besides, I’m here for the animation.

-Bonnie
Team 166
Techno Insanity

Posted by Stephen at 1/10/2001 9:25 PM EST

Other on team #122, NASA Knights, from Grafton High School (Robotics team is at NHGS) and NASA.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

Well, some ideas have been shared at our team to go under the rail, but 2 very interesting (and very plausible) ways have been discussed to go over the bar. We are still at a point where we don’t know what’s going on our robot (this will change tommorow), but I’m pretty sure that if we decide to transverse the rail, it will be by going over it (but not climbing,stepping over it).

Posted by Zach at 1/11/2001 10:31 AM EST

Student on team #537, Domo ARIGATO, from Hamilton High School and GE.

In Reply to: Re: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Stephen on 1/10/2001 9:25 PM EST:

We won’t know until tonight but we have brought up the idea of going under the bar, over the bar and over the bridge.

Posted by bill whitley at 1/10/2001 9:37 PM EST

Student on team #70, Auto City Bandits, from Powers Catholic High School and Kettering University.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

I toyed with the idea, but in the end decided that I thought it would take away too much space to leave constructive mechanisms. Although, last year I couldn’t picture a bot that could hold 7-8 balls that could go under that 30" bar and I was wrong, I could be again.

Bill

: Maybe I’m going out on a limb by asking this - or asking it way too early, but here I go anyway. Is anybody seriously considering going over the 4x4 and under the rail to get to the opposite side of the arena? It’s an interesting idea - we’re just curious how common it is. Isn’t this fun!

: Rick

Posted by Jake at 1/10/2001 10:57 PM EST

Student on team #365, Miracle Workerz, from Avon Grove High School and DuPont Engineering.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

The idea has been introduced with some energy behind it, and we are attempting to integrate going under the bar into some plausable designs. As of yet, there is not one design that we will stick with. I cannot clearly say if we will be going under the bar at this time.

~ Jake

: Maybe I’m going out on a limb by asking this - or asking it way too early, but here I go anyway. Is anybody seriously considering going over the 4x4 and under the rail to get to the opposite side of the arena? It’s an interesting idea - we’re just curious how common it is. Isn’t this fun!

: Rick

Posted by Raul at 1/10/2001 11:10 PM EST

Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

I believe its is a little too much to ask to have a useful design that can squeeze down to a 12" space. Unless of course all you aim to do is sit in the endzone or push/pull things around. Now over the rails is quite a bit easier - but is it worth it?

We could only think of three reason to consider getting over or under the rails.

  1. If 4 bots are on one side and a ball lodges under the bridge on the other side - you are stuck unless someone can get past the rails to free the bridge.

  2. It reduces the wait time to reset the bridge. In other words, more robot can get to the endzone quicker.

  3. You can balance the bridge from the player side and still get to the endzone.

  4. OK, there is a 4th but it doesn’t really count - it would just be cool to be able to do it!

Raul

Posted by Joe Ross at 1/11/2001 3:16 AM EST

Engineer on team #330, Beach Bot 2001, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA/JPL and J&F Machine.

In Reply to: Limbo-bot?
Posted by Raul on 1/10/2001 11:10 PM EST:

It all depends on whether you want to score, or make it easier for others to score…

Posted by Justin Ridley at 1/12/2001 1:17 AM EST

Engineer on team #221, MI Roboworks, from Michigan Technological University.

In Reply to: Limbo-bot?
Posted by Raul on 1/10/2001 11:10 PM EST:

Where are we getting the 12" figure from between the bar and the 4x6. It seemed to me it would be a few inches bigger. Does anyone have an accurate measurment from a center rail with correct key clamp flanges? If so I would appreciate a post of that number.

Thanks,

Justin Ridley - MI Roboworks

PS: We’re gonna do it, 12" inches or not :slight_smile:

Posted by Joe Ross at 1/12/2001 2:46 AM EST

Engineer on team #330, Beach Bot 2001, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA/JPL and J&F Machine.

In Reply to: 12 inches ??
Posted by Justin Ridley on 1/12/2001 1:17 AM EST:

: PS: We’re gonna do it, 12" inches or not :slight_smile:

So are we (but not necessarily all the time).

We assumed that the 18" figure is to the top of the schedule 40 pipe. The diameter of the pipe is 1 5/8" (the 1 1/4" figure is only inside diameter). There is also a 4x4 on the ground, which is really 3.5" x 3.5".

This works out so that the gap is 12.875"

Joe Ross
Beach Bot 2001, team 330

Posted by mike o’leary at 1/15/2001 10:42 PM EST

Student on team #419, rambots, from bc high.

In Reply to: Re: 12 inches ??
Posted by Joe Ross on 1/12/2001 2:46 AM EST:

our team did the math and got a clearance or 14.5" from the bottom of the pipe to the top of the wood. we found somewhere in the blueprints that the pipe was 18" above the ground, measured from the bottom of the pipe. now how accurately the playing field will be built is anyones guess.
and i dont think that building a bot to fit the demensions that would be neccissary given the size constrictions that the lumbar-pipe gives you should be TOO impossible. i think weve got a very viable design that should solve this problem
mike oleary

Posted by Jim Meyer at 1/12/2001 10:09 AM EST

Engineer on team #67, HOT Team, from Huron Valley Schools and GM Milford Proving Ground.

In Reply to: Limbo-bot?
Posted by Raul on 1/10/2001 11:10 PM EST:

I see a limbo bot being a key player on a team especially in qualification matches. When I look into my crystall ball I see that for qualification matches four robots in the endzone under 30 sec every match will yield a highly seeded team. Not tying up the bridge would be a key aspect to this strategy!

IMHO

Posted by Raul at 1/12/2001 10:23 AM EST

Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.

In Reply to: Limbo-bot A key player…
Posted by Jim Meyer on 1/12/2001 10:09 AM EST:

I agree. I would strongly consider one of these for my team of 5.

Raul

: I see a limbo bot being a key player on a team especially in qualification matches. When I look into my crystall ball I see that for qualification matches four robots in the endzone under 30 sec every match will yield a highly seeded team. Not tying up the bridge would be a key aspect to this strategy!

: IMHO

Posted by Ken Leung at 1/11/2001 3:07 AM EST

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

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

As Raul said, and as seen at kick off, there are only clearance of about 12" under the bar. Now, it’s not only 12" clearance, we are talking about a 4X6 under it that the robot have to cross. Now you will want some kind of wheel setup and/or something that can help you through. With all these, you will have to fit the electronics and the BATTERY in that robot. This is going to be so hard to build, and I am not even sure it’s worth the time and design, as well as sacrificing a of what your robot can do. Maybe you can have a 5’ X 1’ X 3’ robot standing up and flip down after you start, but not sure how well that robot can do unless it can fold up and do something.

Posted by Tim Baird at 1/11/2001 12:14 PM EST

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

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

It would be very cool if someone could go under the bar. However, the only way I can see it be feasible is to do something on the lines of the #157 machine from '99, and then all your robot could do is be the first one in the endzone, help push around stretcher and goals, and maybe even integrate (if there’s still room) a device to reset the ramp. Good luck to anyone trying it, I would love to see it work!
Tim

Posted by Raul at 1/11/2001 12:47 PM EST

Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.

In Reply to: Re: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Tim Baird on 1/11/2001 12:14 PM EST:

Are you telling me that your Hampster Secret Weapon won’t be able to do this? :o

Raul

: It would be very cool if someone could go under the bar. However, the only way I can see it be feasible is to do something on the lines of the #157 machine from '99, and then all your robot could do is be the first one in the endzone, help push around stretcher and goals, and maybe even integrate (if there’s still room) a device to reset the ramp. Good luck to anyone trying it, I would love to see it work!
: Tim

Posted by Tim Baird at 1/11/2001 9:40 PM EST

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

In Reply to: Re: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Raul on 1/11/2001 12:47 PM EST:

Please do not assume. I never said that the Hamster Hop project could not do that, I just said it would be a little challenging. Are you still not a firm believer in the power of a hamster?

Tim

: Are you telling me that your Hampster Secret Weapon won’t be able to do this? :o

: Raul

:
: : It would be very cool if someone could go under the bar. However, the only way I can see it be feasible is to do something on the lines of the #157 machine from '99, and then all your robot could do is be the first one in the endzone, help push around stretcher and goals, and maybe even integrate (if there’s still room) a device to reset the ramp. Good luck to anyone trying it, I would love to see it work!
: : Tim

Posted by Steve Prairie at 1/11/2001 4:24 PM EST

Student on team #173, RAGE, from Rockville High School and UTRC.

In Reply to: Anyone going under the rail?
Posted by Rick Gibbs on 1/10/2001 8:54 PM EST:

I’m trying to think of reasons why we should NOT go under the bar.

  1. Can’t lift large balls 7 or 8 feet. That’d be something to see.

  2. Can’t reset tipped goals? Havn’t thought of a way around that one yet.

  3. Can’t lift small balls to goal. I don’t see why we should.

Any other problem that could be on this list I’ve been able to solve. :wink: Any thoughts?