I think people are overestimating the traffic at the bridge.
Let’s put a vote here
Is the question which one i prefer to go over?
Yes
Your most valuable resource in game during a match is time. If it takes you 5 seconds to cross a bridge and 2 seconds to go over the barrier (and neither damages/tips your robot), it is best to traverse the barrier. This extra 3 seconds per zone change is an extra 3 seconds that could be used to get that balance done just right as the clock strikes 0, or hit that buzzer beating 3 pointer! Always keep time in mind when evaluating your options.
Bump. The bridges will be like the Breakaway tunnels. Even without traffic, they will take too much time to traverse.
Optimistically, the bridge. Most likely, we will go to the bridge during autonomous and get on. We will then stay on the other side feeding the whole time.
The tunnels didn’t take longer to go through. In fact you can argue that going over the bump took longer. Only when you include traffic did it become a hinderence. That being said there are 3 bridges in this years game so traffic shouldn’t be as big of an issue.
psst…kinda captained an alliance to einstein in 2010 with a robot that never went over bumps.
Remember, you need to push the ramp down every time you have to get on. Depending on the mechanism, this can add a whole lot of time to traverse the same distance over the bump. Getting on the bridges is really only helpful in the end game.
The bridge ramp angle is about 17 deg.
With long config and 10" wheels, the bump causes the robot to tilt about 9 deg.
I vote for the bump during game play
Reliable ways to quickly crawl up the bump seem to be more feasible if done in the long configuration. If a wide wheelbase is chosen to more easily enable floor-loading, it might be very difficult to cross the bump with a wide but short robot.
Our team has almost finished constructing the bridge and its big.
While I do agree most of the team it would be faster to traverse the bump, it may not be always be faster, nor safer.
-
Why it might not be faster.
U have to slow down to cross said bump, if u full throttle the bump, u could flip or damage ur robot. Thus it may not be faster. -
Robot safety.
Like I stated above, flipping or internal damge is not good. -
Why bridge.
Practice is perfect. If u can traverse the bridge in qual games, u will get better at balancing because while the bridge is large it is still a challenge.
Personally I would rather traverse the bridge, unless u design the robot to absorb the shock that it will take hitting that bump.
While this is my own personally opinion, I warn caution to any team who tries to traverse the bump.
You sure?
having been on a team that went over the bumps in 2010 full speed with little slow down, i know going over these “curbs” is nothing if you use the right drivetrain.
Well it went over once…
If your design can cross the bump, then you will never be forced to cross the bridge.
As a competitor in the 2001 competition with a similar bridge, I can tell you going over that WILL take you longer than you think, and WILL tip more robots than you think it will. Also, tipping the bridge down so that you can initially get onto it will not be a trivial task for most teams, and will take a significant amount of time. Do not forget that the bridge does not stay down and must be lowered before you can begin to traverse it.
If you doubt me, look up some game video from 2001 and see how bad it can be, that year there were no apposing alliance, everyone was working together as one time and still some robots never traversed the bridge.
I think the bridge is a viable option because of the damage that going over the barrier could cause to components, as well as the problems of tippy-ness and designing a frame and manipulator around a bump. Here is more video of the bridge (built by my team today) :http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zG01rZLWXxM&feature=plcp&context=C3356b40UDOEgsToPDskIwOrMm6EKrS8tzFvtklp1w
That’s true, but I think that the 2010 game had a much different dynamic than this game. Zone game play was preferred, and strategies centered on teams staying and controlling a specified zone.
Here, one might have to take multiple trips back and forth in order to retrieve balls. That is, of course, if long range feeder/shooter bots don’t become a norm.
But I suppose it’s only speculation at the moment. I’ll say better to be safe and be able to do both.
- Sunny G.
The bridge is a safe-haven from defending/opposing robots. As long as you are traversing the bridge of your color, your robot is “completely protected” from any defensive or opposing robots. One side of the bridge leads to your alley, which is also “safe” from opposing robot interaction (unless the opposing robot wants to get fouled). These are guaranteed by rules G28 and G25.
I could not say the same for the bump. A good defensive robot could theoretically pin you anywhere near or on the bump, which causes problems.
Simply put, if your only option is the bridge, you are stuck with the bridge. But, if our system can do both, you don’t have to worry about it, and can surprise the competitors. Most systems to cross the bump can also be made to cross the bridge. Just do both.
Both. Even if you can get over the bridge swiftly and smoothly every time, another robot can fall off and block it or take half the match to negotiate it.
Wetzel