Thank for answering the questions so fast 
Good robot btw
Yes it shoots from the middle quite easily. The recovery time is about 1.5 seconds, still quite decent. Once again the range is affected by the battery level, but is still reliable. 8059Kās strategy was to dominate the front half of the field with the 0.6 or 1.6 speed to push opponents around.
What was the rate of fire for 8059A? And do any of your teams use pid velocity control? Because despite all the factors mentioned that affect accuracy the accuracy appeared to be very good in the videos
The rate of fire is 32 match loads in 30 sec (best) to 40 sec (as seen in our programming skills run).
Instead of using PID velocity control, we decided to control the loading speed of the match loads manually (i.e. the intervals in which we load the balls). Hope that answers your question.
Thats an impressive rate. Sorry if my question wasnt clear. I meant velocity control as in encoders on the flywheel to control its speed
Same Question to you as for Cameron, would you be willing to switch to a 12 motor instead of use pneumatics?
They used PD for control.
Update:
My students just told me that they actually stop using the encoder. The shooting wheel was turning so fast that it is difficult for the encoder to accurately track the rotations.
I canāt really answer for my students on what do they intend to do.
But for me, whatās really important is to figure out how and what do you intend to use it for.
There are certain movement that make more sense to use pneumatics, and of course, there are also certain applications that we should use motors.
So it is really the issue of - how do you want to use it?
May I ask what is the average weight for the 3 robots?
I assume when you said PD you meant PIDā¦
But when you say ācontrolā do you refer to the general robot controls or when controlling the shooter in the matches?
Ermmā¦ we never weigh. But 8059F and K are definitely light weight enough to be lifted.
Noā¦ I mean the P and D of PID.
You need not use all the three components of PID every time.
Sometimes, P is enough for your purpose. Most of the time, P and D are good enough.
From what I can see through the angle of the pictureā¦ The pistons look like they are to flip the balls up.
By switching to motors at the pivots of the flipper, you have a few advantages:
-Not damaging the pistons if collided with field elements or other robots
-Save air, has an unlimited number of flips.
-has a controlled distance of travel, does not have to be a constant 2 inches of movement.
Also, correct me if I am wrong, but am I noticing that you have 1 solenoid for each piston? Thats a bit over-engineering in my opinion haha. That is wasting quite a bit of air, compared to using a T-Joint. Also, If one solenoid wire disconnects, the intake would be out of sync, and bend the metal bars. By T- joining it into 1 solenoid both your pistons would be synced, and would flip at a consistent rate. Just some food for thought.(unless iām wrong)
Either way, congrats on your success in the 2015 Singapore Vex Robotics Competition. Canāt wait to see you all at worlds!
Actually, the four balls are very light. It doesnāt take a lot to flip the balls into the tray. In fact, the balls are no big deal comparing to flipping sacks in :rolleyes:
Having one solenoid need not necessary means lesser air wasted. The length of the tubing will make a bigger difference. And of course, adjusting the amount of air per flip matters a lot more too.
We donāt see it as over-engineer. In fact, I would rather have a bit of redundancy in the design.
Using pneumatic for flipper is just more convenient as oppose to using motors.
And we never have issue with pistons not syncing. Think it is easier to get the pistons to move at the same time than to find 2 identical motors.
What is your reasoning behind using a single flywheel design as opposed to a dual flywheel shooter or a shooter utilizing pneumatics or tension to fire the balls? Did you find a single flywheel is more accurate?
Also, were pushing matches a big problem when you were going to position your robot to aim for the net?
Thank you for sharing your robots and answering our questions about them. They are very impressive.
All the 3 robots did not use pneumatic or tension to fire the balls.
8059A - 12 motor
8059F - Pneumatic to intake the balls
8059K - Pneumatic to lift up top roller to intake the orange ball on top of the stack and for power transmission
We prefer singe flywheel simply because of the more elegance in the design (we are vain).
But of course, single flywheel generally means lesser space required.
And we dont have the issue of making sure both shooting wheels are turning exactly at the same speed in the case of double flywheel.
We also prefer looping the balls up rather than shooting straight into the goal.
Definitely there will be lots of jousting for position and blocking.
But we have no stalling issues during pushing and generally, the robots are fast enough to get away from āman-markingā.
Thank you 
Could you guys post pictures of your intake and ramp. It looks interesting:).
Which robot do you want to see specifically? What part of the intake and what do you mean by ramp?
May I ask what parts these are that is shown in the picture.
They are one of the two pieces in the 90 degree angle gusset pack.
http://www.vexrobotics.com/gussets.html
By ramp, I mean where the ball is intaked and a picture of the āgearboxā in the back. Robot 8059A. Thanks.
By ramp, I mean where the ball is intaked and a picture of the āgearboxā in the back. Robot 8059A. Thanks.