Wide vs. Tall

I would like to know what size robot you are planning to build.

Speaking from a design standpoint, I feel like a large amount of teams will choose the 24" version, because with the inclusion of bumpers in the size limit now, the 36" robot may just be too small for some teams to go with.

That being said, we decided to go with the 36" robot, because it will help us accomplish our goals of being an insanely fast gear moving bot, and since we aren’t climbing, everything works out great.

There should be 6 poll options

What volume /driving direction
Tall and narrow
Tall and wide
Tall and multidirectional
Short and narrow
Short and wide
Short and multidirectional

I’m personally leaning short and wide but I’m not with my team today to gauge their leanings

we are almost starting to figure out what our robot might want to do…still haven’t drawn a picture of it, let alone started on dimensions. So, maybe we’ll know by the end of the week?

I’m very curious how being 36" tall will help you put gears on faster…

It lets us power our robot using the momentum from five onboard bench grinders that we are reusing from last season’s reveal.

Better make sure they’re all powered by legal motors.

No, I want to see them show up at a regional with a completely bench-grinder powered robot just for the inspectors’ reactions.

Knowing Mitch they actually would.

New off-season project. :cool:

As of right now, we’ve decided on the 36" tall, but that’s subject to change. We think it will be easier to package a nice shooter that’s harder to block in those dimensions, and a climb might be easier to execute since you have to traverse one foot less. That’s all subject to change though, depending on what the conscientious is after prototyping.

I appreciate that the GDC made sure both robot size constraints have identical volumes. No storing extra balls in one config versus the other.

The early ideas were that we will likely not climb, which makes a short and wide robot most likely.

That said the tall one has a smaller volume in the frame perimeter.

Most likely tall and narrow.

I feel like it is easier to make a bot that can hold more fuel with the tall bot. However, it’s completely possible to make a bot that holds 20+ fuel with the wide one and its safer to make a short wide bot with a large wheel base if you’re planning on racing around the field. A tall bot that is trying to be fast and race across the field is going to have a hard time not flipping.

Why not square?

Do you think there’s going to be a lot of blocked shots this year? The trajectory to hit the goal is almost straight up in the air so I would be surprised if anyone was able to make an effective shot blocker.

Remember that the field side openings of the hoppers and loading stations are ~1" over 2 ft off the carpet. Anyone using open-topped ball storage will have to use the wide dimensions if they want fuel to be able to just be dumped in.

We went with the short configuration because the feeder slots, low goal, and gear spikes are all less then or close to 2 ft. of the ground. So because our strategy used minimal fuel we wouldn’t have been using the extra foot of height for ball storage. We couldn’t come up with anything we would put above the 2 ft. mark so short it is.

R03. I guess you could be small enough to fit both sets of criteria.

Haven’t decided yet, but more likely tall. Our gear retriever would benefit from us being able to go a bit over 2’. One of our stretch goals is to be able to gather fuel and dump them either into the low goal or (better) into an alliance partner shooter emulating a hopper, which means we’d need to be over 2’ tall. Being tall doesn’t hurt the climb, either.