Here is our 2008 robot from the morning of ship.
The claw idea was mentioned for our manipulator but we never thought it would work >.<
Cool i like the fencing. Are you going to GSR???
No, we are going to Boston.
D-FENCE! Looks good, we’ll be cheering for you in Boston!
nice design, that looks like a very lightweight but sturdy arm. i wish i could see it in action. any videos?
As far as I know, we haven’t got any video yet. The entire robot is extremely lightweight - one person can lift it quite easily.
hi nick!!! We have one smexy robot, dont we?
Say, what material did you use for the claw? Steel conduit? Fiber glass?
shrugs shoulders i dont know, but i *do *know it didnt work
Were there any non roller or grabber claws that worked?
I am talking about something like driving against the ball when its against a wall and have the ball get “trapped” in the claw.
Our manipulator design requires the ball to be able to escape out the top but not so much the sides or front.
I’m sorry. I am so unhelpful.
We don’t even deal with the ball anymore, we use our speed. We just race around in circles… or try to at any rate.
Vivek, look up 230’s robot from this year (Gaelhawks). Their ball acquisition mechanism is similar to what i think you’re describing.
That is like our manipulator right now except we don’t have those long (plastic? fb?) white rods in the front to keep the ball in. We have tried a lot of things but nothing really seems to work. Look at this video to see how our manipulator worked. We are the large black robot with 2264 on the side.
Was 230 able to pick up balls off the ground to hurdle?
the white rods in the front are pvc (.5’’ i think). they smashed a ball into a field element/other robot to acquire.
We had “PAWS” that were pneumatically operated and worked beautifully in Atlanta. The main premise was based upon two arcs that curved with a 20" radius over the top of the ball. The arcs were mounted at a specific distance (determined via CAD) that extended past the apex of the ball as much as possible yet also stayed just barely inside our starting constraints. The mount point allowed us to not only “pounce” on the ball but also kick it off in the same motion when releasing.
The bottom part of the arcs were separate forklift-style arcs that played no real role in capturing the ball. In Atlanta, they were pneumatically actuated so they could be brought up and down as we saw fit.
The upgrades we did for Atlanta would have put us near the top in hurdling capability at our other two competitions had we thought of these ideas earlier in the season. The paws worked out really well, gaining us at least 1-2 hurdles every match in Atlanta (our elevator wire kept snapping which is why we only got one until 1983 suggested and donated some sailor’s rope).
The time it took to capture the ball was dependent upon driver’s skill, but once it was lined up it took less than half a second for the piston to close the paws and capture the ball. Pic to come later.
From what I saw at Hartford and battlecry, they were quite successful in doing so. There’s no video of these events on TBA, but here’s a video on youtube of the robot hurdling. The rods would flex enough for the ball to be acquired (by pushing it against a wall, usually).
edit: oops… I take a while to write responses…
217’s grabber worked pretty well.
I heard about those guys.