I have reached a dilemma and I was wondering if anybody had an opinion on this to support either side. I read that an effective side roller intake runs best when it rotates faster than the drive wheels. So, I geared up our intake internally. My team was wondering, though, if this would help or not. Would it knock objects away, or intake them more efficiently? (we have two rollers, each on an 18 tooth sprocket with large intake flaps)
As far as NZ intakes go, in your opinion/ based on your observations, is faster better?
It depends on the size of your sprocket and how much faster it is spinning. If your drive runs at 150 rpm with 4" wheels, and you have an intake with 18-tooth sprockets that spin at 160 rpm, the edge of the sprocket (where it contacts the objects) will be moving more slowly than the edge of the wheel because it has a much smaller radius than the drive wheels do.
Ideally, you want intake rollers that intake the object faster than the speed of the robot so that you can pick up objects at full speed and not worry about them rolling away from the robot. I suggest using larger sprockets than 18-tooth or using a higher gear ratio to intake more efficiently.
from my experience in gateway (I am just starting to experiment with them this year) the faster you spin the rollers the farther apart you should space the flappers so as to not push the objects away.
I would also note that that year we eventually settled upon a slower intake because of ease of out-taking. I think it paid off.
What matters the most isn’t drive vs intake speed. Even a high speed drive with a torque intake should technically work well. It’s really how you build and tune your intake. If done correctly, your intake should never hit buckyballs away, regardless of how fast or slow they are.
A few teams here in NorCal have figured out a really good way to do siderollers (dubbed “magic intake”), but I’d have to get permission from team 21 to post it.
This thread is so enlightening… I don’t know why I haven’t considered this before… thank you all…
I feel like torque only matters when the rollers are very close, and they need more force to pull balls in. The further apart, the less torque necessary, and the lesser level of driving accuracy required to drive through a buckyball, and the faster you can pick up the balls. so I think the ideal situation is a wide-as-possible intake with really fast rollers.
Yeah I know right? I think the fact that they start their year earlier than we do tends to have their robots visible first. I have seen the side rollers called NZ intakes and Gateway intakes. I prefer to refer to them as side rollers which is what they are.
I call them side rollers/side feeders too, it seems much nicer than NZ taking all the credit.
And just fyi, we start our season no earlier than you it’s not as if Toss Up was released to us back in January last year or anything. We all saw it the first time at the same time, at the same place - Worlds. I kinda get a bit annoyed when people say we start our season before everyone else. I know plenty of American teams that start at the same time as us. We just don’t take a break between Worlds and starting to build our Toss Up robot.
Pretty sure New Zealand originated a long time before Gateway
Most american teams have a school break during June/July/August.
I know my club is one of the few in the area that had more than one or two meetings over summer break. The other thing is that it means our competition season doesn’t start until November at the earliest, meaning less time for ideas to be shared.
I know we started planning for “Toss Up” the evening the game was announced, and started building the Monday we got back. We used the energy from the World Championships to get the design process started, and I think the results of that will show in a few weeks when the Arizona season officially “starts.”
The fact New Zealand has won or been in the championships for almost every year at Worlds might be an indicator they’re doing something right. I’m betting not taking a 6 month break is at least a small part of that.
