Intake style

i am curious to see which intake style is more common and why

this is team 1107B’s first iteration intake system =D (prototype)

(no, its not a joke) :stuck_out_tongue:

some pics of it

here is iteration number TWO!

dont you just LOVE our prototyping style? ;)](

(just lost my long post by slow posting without copy-all, from a new computer)
One word is too little for an intake description, and there are many more
choices than two.

I’m looking at these two types, for the autonomous period of the college field setup:
Crab Claw, as 1103 Roundup; is that vertical/angled or other?
Vertical axis roller claw; vertical/angled or other?

Design Criteria common to both Iso-bot and Inter-bot manipulators/intakes:

  • must be simple and light, single motor powered each
  • must be able to pick up a preset stack without fine alignment
  • max capacity is one stack of barrel plus ball each
  • must hold preloads securely
  • must unload quickly

Additional Design Criteria for Iso-bot manipulator:

  • needs to deploy outside the 18" cube

Additional Design Criteria for Inter-bot manipulator:

  • must be able to gently deposit a stack on floor on the Iso side of a gate
  • must be able to pickup a pair of preset stacks multiple times
  • must be able to accept preloads easily

Murdomeek, I’m more interested in your lifting mechanism. Some sort of single belt ball processor, perchance?

I’m well aware of this but some teams (like mine) want to keep their intake method private until we compete also their are a TON of intaking methods and with only 10 pole options i dont know if i would have enough room for all the choices thats why i decided to generalize it into 3 categories (i realized i should have added claw immediately after i posted it)

crab claw would be other and whats a vertical axis roller claw? but im going to say its probably vertical because its in the name. :wink:

it seems like your team has done some serious planning but why is your max capacity so low? only 2 i hope the rest of your robot is really fast to make up for the low capacity intake.

(no, its not a joke) :stuck_out_tongue:

some pics of it

here is iteration number TWO!
dont you just LOVE our prototyping style? :wink:

it looks like something from clean sweep, and i’m not sure if thats a bad thing yet, depending on your strategy. but your not the only one who uses paper to prototype i did it a lot last year, everyone thought i was crazy but i had the nicest robot in our school so i guess the crazy man won that round.

None of your text addresses a better description of what you even mean by “vertical” or “angled”.

You want to keep your own team’s designs private,
yet you want others to disclose their designs and explain why.
Apparently the great feedback that they “disclosing teams” have received here has not swayed you to the advantages of open design.

Regarding your comments on my planned intake capacity, it points out that I haven’t completely disclosed my (theoretical) design either.
However, you have misread between the lines, by missing the word “each”.

As for “really fast” drive to compensate; Ideally, I’d have a travel path planned for the 1-minute autonomous (college) period, and plan my robot speed for that. I don’t have that level of detail yet, but for the Iso-bot, it appears precision, manueverability, reliability, and good lift capacity are higher priority than drive speed. Therefore, I’m looking at 1:1 gearing, 4" omniwheels, with 4 HS393 motors in a + form holonomic setup.
I’d be happy to score 30 points in the 1 minute autonomous mode, and just rest after that, for a hypothetical “0-drivers” college competition entry.

What does the poll mean? I don’t understand how to vote on our design based on the poll…

a vertical intake is simply one that stacks the game elements vertically (one on top of another like this robot )

an angled intake is one that intakes its objects on an angle thats smaller than 90 degrees like this one [
that seems like a practical goal our robot currently can score 10 points in the isolation zone in 25 seconds with out opening the gate.


We are using a Vertical intake.

no, a 4 bar :wink:
(again, no joke :))

a 4 bar isnt actually as hard as you might think, we had our first prorotype as a 4 bar and it reached, you just have to do it right and it will reach :stuck_out_tongue:

Hey look, it’s us! Guess I don’t need to fill out the poll.
Let me tell you something, though: not all angled intakes are that slow…

Heads up, you may want to aim higher. Our first robot could do it in 18 and still barely won the first tournament with a very good alliance partner. Besides, that’s not really a great benchmark. Performance unfettered in an isolation dream world is very different from performance in a match. Consider what you’ll be doing after those 18 seconds are up.

Looking at the videos for the tournament matches, it looks like you guys missed a lot of oppurtunities to score, however. That specific link shows how you guys missed scoring a barrel, multiple mistakes could slow you down and cost you the match or tournament. Our robot may be slower, but our team’s robot is very consistant and accurate when collecting objects and scoring. There is a reason our team does not want to disclose our design yet, its because we have yet to see it and we do not want to give everyone else our unique idea. It will be revealed soon enough :slight_smile:

ThirteenTwo your robot was as fast or possibly faster than ours (we have only tested it with bad motors and we are still working to improve our intake) but mistakes like the one you made could cost you the match or tournament and when you have an experienced driver (like hason) and an experienced coach screaming in there ear (me) you are less likely to make those mistakes

Slower? i remember running it through the scenarios ThirteenTwo’s robot had been in and sometimes beating their time.

other than the fact that our mentor would KILL us

its pretty sick and extremely unique and took us almost 3 months to get right

we know that’s why were having our second teams robot be an angled robot

we could probably score them faster but we scored them in a manner where it could be easily programmed to do autonomously

we know the performance is different in a match than by your self and to be honest our team has almost always beat our practice scores in competition (which you have to do if green egg is always around) and we have several strategies we are going to implement but most them are dependent on what our opponents are doing as well as there robots limitations. we scout the hell out of competitions to get the opponents limitations and pick teams that complement our robot. if you know your enemy and know yourself you can fight 100 battles without disaster. if you know your self but not your enemies…well you could become surprised and underestimate them.

I personally think the Vertical Intake is the best option for this game… The claw doesn’t pick up that many, and the angled intake doesn’t hold as much. The both can be effective. It is what fits your design.

NOOOO NO NO NO NO NO NO ON NO!! you should design your robot around your intake not your intake around your robot!!

Vertical is not necessarily the best (even though you personally said it). I know what you mean but it depends if it has to stop while picking up pieces, i think that not stopping is a huge advantage.

Iolani’s (2438) robot was probably the best robot at that competition. Let me point out it was a very early competition too. Their coaches and drivers are very good. And they’ve made improvements since Vexhibition.

So far on the forum, I’ve seen few robots that come close to them.

I can’t wait to be wowed by what robots you folks have come up with (remember to post videos!).

From what I have seen, vertical and angled intakes are comparable. It looks like a major determining factor is driving skill and just exactly how the intakes work (meaning it doesn’t “flick” the game piece out).

When people say angled intakes, they mean something like a ramp with clean sweep rollers, and vertical intakes are usually all-round rollers that come down on top of an object, right? Has anybody tried or thought about rollers on either side like in Elevation, but without the rest of the tank tread? Also, do you think a “ram intake” (rams objects into a wall to pick up; see #44 Clean Sweep bot) is viable in Gateway?

How can you design your robot without your intake at least at the back of your mind? The intake, for the most part, is linked to shape of your drive, your lift mechanism, any supplementary systems, and your play style.

Sorry, that is what I meant, I said it wrong. SO sorry… :frowning: