I’ve seen many designs for the new game. However, I feel as if most of them aren’t exactly driver friendly especially because you have to stand on the side. I was thinking about some sort of upside down claw with a conveyor system on it. Does anyone else have any other ideas that generally ‘driver friendly’?
Vision sensor targeting for your cube flywheel duh
In all reality I think similar to itz passive aligning devices will be common. One thing I’ve considered is making your drive unable to get over the bump of the goal zones so you can use it to align
What do you mean by passive alignment? Could you give some examples of videos or images?
The easiest thing is to have some sort of funnel. In TP, people had pieces of metal or lexan that would guide the balls into a small area. This made driving easier, as you could be much less precise. In TT, you could have the same general idea where you’d drive into a cube, which would reorient it into the right position. Hope this helps!
The best way to make your robot driver friendly is with good programming and use of sensors. This is really useful where robots have to do more complex sequences repeatable such as the ITZ stackers. Or for last competition season as example, the vision sensor if tuned properly could automatically line up with the flags (getting it to a point where it is consistent with the inconsistency of competition venues is a problem though) and place caps with a single button press.
Also have the controls be split between two drivers if you can. So one can focus completely on driving and the other can focus on the other subsystems. This requires two controllers though.
I definitely agree with the first points. Good programming can help a ton.
However, two drivers can be a blessing or a curse. Yes, you can have divided focus, meaning you could do more. But, if you have two drivers that think they know best, they might disagree and try to different things. This is a huge problem, but can be fixed by having a good selection of drivers. Another issue is driving practice. If you have two drivers, you have to practice with two drivers. If not, the drivers won’t be even, or one will have thought of something without telling the other. Also, just logistically, it usually means less practice time.
But, if you can get past those two points, dual driving can produce some amazing drive teams! Good luck!
In our experience, two drivers is more trouble than it’s worth. Good programming can make driving even the most complex robots manageable. Although there are plenty of teams that have success with tandem controller setups, there is an advanced rapport required for smooth operation that takes lots of time to perfect.
However, auto stacking will be integral to efficient scoring and as a few teams showed in ITZ, a second controller can be used to monitor the current stack height to allow for easy auto stacking functionality, giving the driver one less thing to think about. This avoids having to communicate and practice well together but also takes advantage of more buttons.
I can see both sides of the two drivers vs. single driver discussion. I have had some teams that went with two drivers and some with a single driver. To me, it depends on the preference of the teams and the complexity of the robot. The two driver option does take a bit of practice and communication. In my opinion, I have no problem wit that additional challenge, My 536C team that made it to Worlds in 2016, 2017 and 2018 was a two-driver robot. They communicated extremely well (was on the Champion alliance for the US Open in Starstruck) and their “coach”, the third member of their drive team, was very vocal and the drivers trusted him. My 536E team ,which made it to Worlds the past two years, was a two driver robot last year and a single driver robot this year. They both have their strengths and weaknesses. On just has to decide what works best for their robot, for their team and the game. And I agree that good programming can certainly make a single driver robot more feasible, in my opinion, even with outstanding programming a two driver robot driven to the best of their ability will outclass a single driver robot, particularly the more complex the game and robot become.
Before this turns into a BO1 vs. BO3 kind of argument, let’s get back to the topic. In my opinion the best way to have a driver friendly robot is to have very simple but complete design and good programming. Another way is simply to practice a lot. With a good amount of practice, any robot will become driver friendly.