Triangle Base - Opinions?

An argument started on our team this morning, and we could use some help. A couple students (myself included) began considering one day building a triangle FRC robot.

For the triangles: A robot with a triangular base is, in theory, much harder to pin against the wall than a traditional square or rectangular robot because of how the 3 pointed frame reacts to forces like ramming. When forced against a wall by a robot on one of the 3 sides of the robot, the triangular frame will turn to have a flat side against the wall, and have the ramming robot on one of the 2 open sides, giving the triangular robot a chance to escape being pinned. Due to this design, at least 2 robots are required to pin this one robot against the wall, seriously improving the offensive potential of this bot.
Also, a triangle robot would be slightly easier to align for shooting into a goal. With two pneumatic wheels and one caster wheel (or shopping cart wheel), the front of the robot would be able to turn to face a general direction without having to back the up and move it back into position.

Are there any obvious flaws with this plan? Is this, in theory, possible? Has anyone tried this?

The problem with our reasoning is deciding what type of wheels to use. Any suggestions?
Keep in mind, this is not a legit robot design idea for this years game. We, as everyone else, have not received the game yet. This is a general idea and has no current game affiliation.

1 Like

Take a look at 1501 in 2010. They ran a triangle kiwi. The disadvantage was that it fit in that year’s goals… Not this time though!

Already? Calm down! :stuck_out_tongue:

Well, a few things I can see:
How stable is such a robot against being turned sideways against its will?
How easy is it to drive such a robot straight?
If you are pinned by an opponent pushing against a point of the triangle, or if the point is what is going against the wall, how effective is that design?

The bottom line is that designing your robot around being pinned, which is limited to 5 seconds anyway, might be a smaller advantage to, say, a drivetrain that has sufficient power to win any pushing match.

Please Georgia team, spend time to really consider what STRATEGIES will win the game, then define CAPABILITIES that can make those strategies happen.

Until that’s done, you’re just wasting time speculating.

GO DAWGS

At the time you posted, we didn’t know. But now we know the ROBOT has to fit into a rectangular box. building a triangle shape cuts into the amount of interior space you have for mechanisms and such.

But curiously, an equilateral triangle 33 inches wide is 28.57+" deep. An equilateral triangle 32.3" on a side can fit in the box. If you truncate the corners (which works well with kiwi or 3 wheel swerve), you can fill a lot of the available box.