Here is a sample of our autonomous. It gets two racks then scores them, check it out. Let us know what you think
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xQszAir01k
I have a feeling that RI went very well for you guys today…
Very impressive! But aren’t you worried about running into the other robots if they try any autonomous? Or are you using the sonar to look for other robots?
Yeah. I feel that there is too much room for error. If you run into something and if you are using encoder counts, the exact distances will be different on the field.
Personally, one which scores one at a time has more insurance.
None the less. SO good.
We used light sensors to pick up the racks. True, there is room for error over the entire program, but “one which scores one at a time” in auto will never have a remote possability of scoring 190 points in auto. We made an auto that got one rack, and then we made this one.
How do you score 190 points in auto? 32 pucks in the racks plus 3 on the robots is 35 total pucks times a maximum of 5 points each is 165 points. Even if you had both robots drive up ramps in auto, you still don’t get 190. How do you get to 190 autonomous points?
If they’re scored in autonomous and not de-scored during the rest of the match, the pucks will be counted a second time. So, 165 + 165 for pucks. 25 for clearing the racks. 20 for getting both robots off the field. Max score for a team is 375 points.
The possibility is not remote. It’s just more likely that you will get at least one rack, rather that not get any at all. And then at world, where almost ever single robot will be moving, running into someone might be a big issue.
I saw this Auto in the finals at the RI regional. It was pretty sick. It was awesome teaming up with you guys again!
Yeah, we had to try and run it at least once hahah:)
nice winning with you guys, great finals round
Nice job… looking forward to seeing you folks in Atlanta.
-Jonathan
Crazy good, I’d recommend hooking up some ultrasonics for avoidance techniques, while avoiding a robot, keep track of the encoders, and then do the reverse movements
Hey…Andy…No giving people my ideas. :D.
rofl yeah!! but yeh rly props to whoever can do what andy suggested :ahh:
Well, it’s not that hard to implement. Let’s say you’re following a code, and something’s not right. For example, if you’re using a compass sensor, your sensor indicates you’re not facing in the right direction or something, at that moment, your robot start counting encoder counts and angle measurements from the initial “alarm”. After you no longer have movement or your encoders stop moving, then you simply perform the actions you did in reverse.
yes THAT would not be hard. but actually avoiding robots… can be quite hard… especially in this small space :ahh:
I was planning to do this if I got the time, and my plan was to have specific likely interference points. Then it would just go to something like:
if (interferenceDetected) {
//do something
} else {
//do something else
}
Now “all” you need to do is figure out what code to include for:
“//do something else”
Were you thinking “Different Goal” or “Different approach to the Same Goal”?
If we were interfered with as we attempted to put pucks in the goal, we would have tried to go around them. If we were interfered with as we attempted to collect the pucks, we would have dumped another of our opponents racks.
From our experiences, the ultrasonic sensors aren’t reliable enough for accurate use in robot-avoidance procedures.