Hello,
One of our teams are thinking about how to manipluate the game objects (barrel,Balls) they compared it to the way we played cleansweep by switching out the footballs for barrels and they are thinking about an intake
My question is what do you think about this idea pros/cons? why?
Also do you have any other suggestions on different manipulaters for gateway?
Thanks
pros for the clean sweep “sweeper”
fast, efficient, can sweep in lots in a small amount of time
cons:
hard to score (aiming wise), hard to get a massive bucket 30" high
alternative:
the most obvious thing to US was the “roller claw” in round up
all we have to do is to make it compatible with the 6" balls and barrels
the depth would also be around 18" so it can hold three objects at a time
it would be angled a bit at a gentle slope so once a ball was scored, the other balls would slide forward ready to be scored
ill make a simple sketch if you dont get what i mean
I suppose that’s the most obvious thing… but get crazier then that! IT’s only May, this is the time to test those absolutely insane ideas.
Although out of most of the people on here, you’re one of the last people that needs to be told that 
by obvious i ment the most “KISS” way to do it
we have no doubt been brainstorming other ways to achieve this 
Hey,
I see what you are getting at more like elevation where you can carry multiple cubes at a time.
Your idea of an intake is very well thought but can you please explain more about how this works and provide pictures I used a simple open and close claw instead of the claw intake roller.
Also what if you got and intake but you used the long aluminum and produced parallel bars to assist you on the height problem what type of manipulator would you use then.
Thanks:)
Hello,
I was wondering what you had in mind?
a quad arm claw thing
one on each corner of the robot
Hello,
Can you Explain?
yes
or 4 “mini” less complex versions
I don’t think that more arms is essentially going to help as much as one might expect. I would rather build one really good arm that can get the job done well, but for high school this all kind of goes out the window.
For high school I would suggest an omni bot (X config) with a central lift device (not an arm). Perhaps a double four-bar or a scissor (I know their a pain but they DO work).
For the manipulator I would say that the roller-gripper, the titan claw, or a “scoop” design not yet discussed here could all do well.
-Cody
It seems to me that raw speed is more valuable than strafing for most bots; getting to the goals first is important, so we’re thinking tank. I agree as to no arms. Whatever your lift is needs to keep the weight directly above your robot.
The roller claw is the obvious manipulator, but there were a few other designs in Math and Engineering this year that are likely superior options…
Also, amusing side note: We put the game pieces in 2438B’s external intake roller, and it’s still the perfect size. Too bad the lift can’t reach…
We are currently prototyping intake designs. We noticed that using the small black rollers is too slow so we moved on to larger bore intakes. The pictures I attached is a version of one of the intakes we prototyped that sucks in and spits out (plastic jars because we are improvising) very smoothly. We also designed it to release game objects one at a time to aid in more efficient autonomous scoring (the intakes can be adjusted to open or close almost acting as shocks to accommodate the different sized game pieces). Probably not what 3008A is going to use for Mckinley Vexhibition because it uses up two motors. No idea if intakes will be better than claws though. Perhaps a hybrid might be the best option 
We’re going for tank as well, possibly a drive with more than 6 motors.
Totally agreed: Math/Engineering has a robot that can already play most of this year’s game.
You guys were the first thing I thought of when I saw Gateway. I’m glad I got to see your robot up close!
//Andrew
I think a good idea, if done effectively, wold be to get all your colors, then put them in a bucket, then (with some SERIOUS power) put all of them in a bunch of diffrent goals. (kinda crazy idea, but if anyone does this, please post pics! ;)) But I think the main strategy for this game is speed. Ex. getting to the goals first. I think a Titan lift (with a little bit of ingenuity) could get the job done for the lift.
Anyone using this idea should probably use two lifts. Our team used a Titan lift this past year, and the major problem we ran into was the weight of our claw pulling the slides out of alignment. Two lifts (one on each side) would help negate this affect.
Andrew
Can you give some more information on the types of manipulators and how they could act in a match?
Also can you describe what you mean by omni bot (x config)
Thanks
There are two basic types of omni/holo drives: X and +. (and H, but that’s really a variation of +) Holonomic/omni drives can move in any direction, and use omni wheels. This refers to the orientation of the wheels on the robot. A X config uses four omni wheels in the corners of the robot, at 45 degree angles.
Smartkid (Cody) posted a holonomic drive tutorial a while ago. Search and you will find…
The Vex Wiki Motion page (scroll to the bottom for terms) has definitions for holonomic, plus-holonomic, x-holonomic, and H-drive that might be useful.
Programming an X-holonomic is much easier in EasyC v4 than it was in V2 – under the R/C menu, there are commands for configuring an X-holonomic and diagrams on how to place the motors.
cheaters >=(
i remember those days when forum members were discussing the “proper” way to code a holo
watch the next version have ramp up/down command all ready for you to use…