I was thinking of something that went over top the cubes and sucked them up into a rectangular prism and was big enough to effectively posses 3 cubes. The device would be lifted by a linear lift. Then to collect the SR parts, two pistons with c shaped hands just gripped the SR part and released to build
I have a fair amount of experience with elevators and can tell you that I would NEVER consider building one above three stages.
I have already prototyped my intake and it should hold 4 to 5 cubes. I won’t post pictures but the idea came from tecnapawns round up robot.
1 word…
Currahee
Does anybody have a CAD file of what their intake might look like?? I was thinking about rollers on a double 4 bar. Capable of holding 2-3 cubes.
O.M.G. Dat lift doe!..:eek:
A lot of you are saying that claw would work best for the skyrise sections, but I think it would be much more efficient if the mechanism was passive, that way you’re not an odd motor out.
We’re thinking about using a scissor lift with three, maybe four "X"s. That should be enough to reach the 5’ top of the Skyrise stack. I’ve got a really great idea for an intake that should hold four or five cubes without any expansion at all, which is going to be important to avoid tipping and balance issues caused by a long tray. I’m hoping we can use pneumatics for our Skyrise claw, but I don’t want to over-burden our lift. We’ll also be using an X-drive holonomic again this year, since I expect maneuverability will be key. We’re also thinking about some kind of guidance mechanism for the Skyrise sections, like a little - shape that keeps robot oriented against the base so the claw comes right down into position. So, if we can get the pneumatics to work, we’ll be running a 4 motor drivetrain (geared 1:1 since an X-drive is a little faster than normal anyways), another 4 on the lift (we may bump these up to 1.6 if there’s enough power to spare, I expect lift speed will be big this year with such tall scoring posts) and 2 for the intake, which will also probably be at 1.6. If pneumatics are a no-go, we’ll drop the intake to one motor at 1:1 and use a claw instead, which won’t be too mush of a sacrifice because of the nature of the intake.
So where are the winning points going to be in a match. Should teams place fast around the outside or go for building the skyrise. im thinking the skyrise is the best idea for max points.
The Skyrise, definitely. Since the Skyrise at least starts out fairly low, it will be really easy to get quick points there, and ignoring the cap bonus, you will be getting twice the points (or four times counting the assembly itself) of storing those cubes on the posts. If you can coordinate your alliance on assembling the Skyrise and stacking the cubes as efficiently as possible, you should max out the 60 points it’s worth (7 stages at 4pts each = 28, 8 cubes at 4pts each = 32, 32 + 28 = 60) really fast. Especially because, by my count, max score is 108 (8 cubes on a fully assembled Skyrise for 60 pts, each of the 10 posts capped for 30 pts, and the remaining 4 cubes on the posts somewhere for 8 pts and winning auton), 60 points that are locked in completely are going to be big.
The skyrise is really a key focus of the game.
Every post, regardless of height, nets you 2 points.
Assuming you own them all…
On the high posts you have a capacity of 4 cubes and there are 2 so you get 2 * 4 * 2 = 16 pts + 2 pts for owning = 18
Low posts There’s a capacity of 1 and there are 4 for 2 * 4 * 1 = 8 pts + 4 pts for owning = 12
Medium posts with a capacity of 3, so 2 * 4 * 3 = 24 + 4 pts for owning = 28.
18 + 12 + 28 = 58 pts.
Yeah, the Skyrise, shockingly, is the focal point of the game Skyrise.
Of course, it’s actually impossible to even get that much, since you have 24 cubes there - 8 on the high posts, four on the low ones, and twelve on the mediums. Each team only has 22 cubes.
Ah you’re right, I forgot about that.
So that modifies the best score by 2 cubes… so 54.
If you want to win at the highest of state levels and make it anywhere at Worlds, that Skyrise is your friend.
Of course, once it’s pretty far into the season and the good teams have the ability to max out their Skyrise, finals is going to come down to those caps. I expect we’ll see a lot of back-and-forth descoring on the tops of those posts; the field only has space for 40 protected cubes - there’s going to be four or more bouncing around towards the end as teams make an effort to cap the goals. It may even turn out that, in close matches, it pays to actually hang onto a few cubes and NOT score them, so at the very end you can go in and quickly cap the goals for your bonus points. Since it’s possible to score everything, I expect that late in the season, we’ll see a lot of close matches decided by auton and those capped goals.
Why didn’t you, or why don’t we use two or more chain cycles for an elevator? I don’t see what’s wrong with doing that to increase chain strength.
Yes you are right. Based on the assumption that 393s output 60 percent more power, six 269 motors theoredically equal to 3.75 393s.
Mind the speed and difficulty differences between the two pathways.
Building skyrise requires precision. Can you guarantee that you can precisely grab the skyrise section, turn, aim, place the skyrise section on the tower accurately, turn back and reposition at the autoloader and complete the cycle faster than your opponent picking up two cubes and dump them on the pole? I cannot tell the answer.
Also, remember that Currahee’s elevator was actually spring tensioned downwards, in order to help lift the robot for a high hang. You can spring tension upwards in skyrise. Multistage elevators can be quite fast if they’re well spring loaded.
I would point out, though, that line trackers and/or ultrasonics could help pick up the location of the base and help orient the robot. Also, remember, in building the tower you are also making an investment - when you stack the tower, in addition to gaining points for the tower itself, you will later be able to dump your own cubes onto it for twice the points your opponent had been scoring.