So, this is an idea that I’d like to try and implement for all future years. Every year, a number of people go to the forums and look for the best designs to do this and that. Well, why not centralize it? What I’d like to do here is list out several categories of robot designs for the specific years, and people list their suggestions for what should be considered the “best design” for that category.
Now, this is in no way going to end up being a definitive list of the best designs, because what someone considers best will vary from person to person. My goal for this thread is to have a list of designs for a specific task that people looking for inspirations in their robot designs can turn towards, analyze, and develop as they see fit.
So what do you guys think of this idea? To the best of my knowledge, so thread like this has been started with continuity, and I feel this is something that people on Chief Delphi can really benefit from.
So, here are the guidelines:
- When making suggestions, you don’t need to make a recommendation for all design categories. You can suggest anywhere from one to as many as there are categories!
- When making a suggestion for a design, include the following: Design Category, Team Number, a description of the design, and what you think makes this design better than any other.
- If you feel someone has posted a design that IS NOT the best, don’t just say that. Put up another design that you think it better, and expain why you feel that way.
- Suggested designs will be recorded in this original post, for ease of access for all.
- Don’t hesitate to suggest a design that has already been suggested. If multiple people back a design, I will note it in this post. And if you feel you have anything to add to what has been said about that design, go for it!
- Including pictures or videos of the design would be ideal. Links would be preferable, so I can link to them in this post.
- If you feel another category needs to be added to this, please let me know. I’ll determine if it deserves its own category, or if it can be combined with an existing category.
So with that, I’ll kick things off with my proposals for 2012:
Swerve Drive, as seen by 16, 1717, 973 and others
-Omnidirectional drive system allowing teams to move in any direction, anytime.
-The Swerve Drive in 2012 aided teams in a variety of ways. With it, teams were able to drive onto the bridge on either the long or wide orientation. It also gave teams an amazing ball intake ability, allowing them to turn to any direction to acquire a ball. By avoiding defense robots, and traversing the field and acquiring balls quickly, Swerve drives had a huge advantage this year.
Ball Acquiring System:
Multi-Directional Drop Down Intake, as seen by 973 and 177
-A drop-down intake system consisting of a series of rollers and urethane belt that sucked the ball into the robot, no matter what part of the device the ball contacted.
-This system gave 973 and 177 an amazing intake ability, being able to touch a ball with any part of the system and have it be acquired. This gave teams a lot of leeway when going to acquire balls, having a smaller chance of missing and not acquiring the ball.
Over-the-Bumper Intake, as seen by 469, 2056, 1114, 2826, 341 and others
-The over-the-bumper intake system was a very common design in 2012, with many dominating teams using it. Essentially, it’s just a collector system that drops out over the bumpers and sucks in balls. This can turn an entire side of a robot into a collector.
-By using this, teams were able to greatly speed up their collecting of balls. By making them as wide as the side of a robot, teams were essentially able to just drive at a ball and collect it. This proved to be a huge asset for teams who were shooting, and teams who were stealing balls.
Ball Transport System:
Rotating tower, as seen by 33, 973, 177, 78 and others
-Instead of just the shooter rotating, the entire tower/storage system and shooter rotated. In doing so, balls entered the same way every time.
-In doing so, the teams who used this were far less prone to jamming as the balls would enter the tower the same way every time.
Perpendicular Entry” Tower, as seen by 971
-971’s tower and intake system put the balls in around a corner, greatly reducing their risk of jamming.
-Like the rotating tower, 971 rarely (if ever) had ball jams, keeping their shooting consistent every match. Combine that with their lightening quick ball elevation, and 971 was a force.
Ball Scoring System:
Arm/Shooter combo, as seen by 548, 330, 1323 and others
-These robots had a shooter attached to an arm, allowing them to get their shooter up to the top basket, and pop the shoots out from a much closer distance.
-Many teams had an issue getting consistent key shooting throughout the season, but by having the shooter on the lift, the teams were able to greatly increase their consistency. Most of these teams also acquired the ability to shooter from distance, allowing them to circumvent defense.
Rotating Wheel Shooter, as seen by 1114, 610, 118, 1717, 399 and many, many others
-The rotating shooter is exactly as it sounds: A spinning wheel acting as a shooter, on a rotating device so it can point in different direction
-By using this design, teams could target a basket and face it with a turret design, and then shoot from a distance. By tracking the target well, teams using this could avoid defense and put in a lot of points.
The Utility Arm, as seen by 67
-67’s Utility Arm allowed them to acquire balls, go over the bump, and manipulate the bridge. This arm would push the bridge down with little effort.
-The utility arm was built to be robust, so 67 would always be capable of manipulating the bridge. It could quickly and easily push the bridge down to allow 67 to drive on smoothly.
Large Pneumatic Wheels, as seen by 1114 and 2056 and many others
-These teams use large pneumatic wheels in their drive systems, which allowed to simply drive over the bump, quick and easy, forward or backward.
-By relying on the type of wheels they used, these teams had a passive device that worked every time, no failure. This gave them more time to work on other robot functions and gave them and even more robust design.
Drop-Down castor wheels, as seen on 254, 971, 111 and others
IN PROGRESS OF RESEARCH
Bridge Balancing Aid (i.e. Stinger, etc.):
FRC1986, The Teeter-Totter Talons
-1986 had a pair of pneumatically powered ‘talons’ that would push down and aid in the balancing of the bridge.
-With the aid of the talons, 1986 could not only push up on the bridge to even it out, but they could even brace the bridge from falling. Quick and effective. With the addition of the Twin Tucking Tabs, 1986 was a balancing machine.
So what do you guys think? Also, if I post any incorrect information, please let me know.