The new 84 inches

With the new 84 inches rule for robot expansion i was wondering if any teams are considering a more defensive strategy more than before.

On the contrary, the 84 inch rule is making my “dream” offensive robot possible. :slight_smile:

How so??

How do you see a larger playing configuration as a means for defense? I may be missing something, but I see most extensions as too weak to perform well in a defensive strategy.

With the 60 inch rule, my team had all but decided not to load tubes from the floor. We figured we would be a more valuable robot scoring on the top row in auto and either running back and forth from the load lane or just passing tubes that floor loading wasn’t worth the effort.

With 84 inches my team has a lot more space to build a floor loader.

My thinking was that your robot would expand and block a lane or be in front of the scoring zone. Playing pong with your the other robots.

Yes, I had thought of this from day one, only to be sorely disappointed by the 60" rule. Now that we have more room…

Remember the danger - if you’re playing defense with a super-wide robot, great. If you get pushed into the forbidden zone - penalty? Or does this fall under the penalty rule as the other team’s fault?

Jacob

Careful with that. You have to deal with R02a (not blocking or obstructing vision of drivers) and G48 (both possible entanglement risk, and all extensions out of frame perimeter are made at the own team’s risk).

84" = 7’
Width between the lanes is 18’.
7/18 = .38888… = 38.9%

Your “pong blocker” can only block 38.9% of the opponents scoring area at any given time. Just food for thought.

On top of that, you (IFB662) are assuming that all of your opponents are slower than you, and less maneuverable than you. You’d best make sure that d-bot will be as effective as all get-out.

On top of *that, *that wall will take a pounding, so it needs to be strong, and that requires thickness. You won’t be quite able to utilize the full 84" diameter circle due to the thickness.

yes but it is better than 5 feet.

yeah that too idk just an idea i think first made defense hard this year

Really?

Forklift + articulated grabber = easy solution to that problem, whether it be 60" or 84"…

Not that I’m saying that it’s the best solution, but it’s one of the obvious ones!

Assuming each robot is two feet long, you dont have to cover the areas at the end, so its actually 9/18, which if 50%.

If you have two properly made pong blockers on an alliance, thats 100%.

And we have this year’s game breaker!

We really don’t… Assuming the defensive robots can’t be pushed with a long moment arm, and that two of them won’t (a) ever get in each others’ way, or (b) get crushed when their one offensive partner gets shut down, is, IMO, why an assumption makes a donkey out of you and upmtion!

We didn’t think a forklift would be simple enough for our team to build given our constraints.

A good team would have designed for the 60" and would have kept it.

I read this several times, and do not understand what you mean. Are you saying that you think a forklift is too complicated?

They’re easy, especially with 80/20 or Bosch-Rexroth parts.

Yes. No one on the team has experience with a forklift, especially the multiple stages the 9.5 foot top peg would require. Concerns about minimizing friction, cable rigging, etc. led us toward an arm design, especially with the change to an 84" rule.

They’re easy, especially with 80/20 or Bosch-Rexroth parts.

Oh…

No, we have this year’s worst-case scenario alliance!