Max Efficiency in Sack Attack

Since the US school year has come around I would like to start a discussion thread on what is efficiency this year.

There has already been discussions on intakes, lifts, and drives but I would like to discuss the strategy and robot of capabilities of an efficiency robot.

There has been robots already posted such 4886, 323Z, and 24C that are in some people’s minds considered efficient.

I would like to start with a definition of efficiency in Sack Attack that I have come up with this summer.
The bots will frequently win autonomous mode by utilizing the high goal and the troughs. During the match the bots will control two of the troughs next to each making sure that the opponents is descored aggressively and rescored quickly, and the high goal is not imperative because of its relative easiness to descore.
The capabilities of the robots are as follows able to maneuver the whole by going the troughs which helps during skills. The intake is wide for massive pull ins and can double as a descorer. The lift is quick but does not use excessive motors to get to the troughs. The drive is fast but able to avoid the obstacles posed by the sacks. The whole robot can hold 10-25 objects for being able to hold lots of descored objects to rescore and dump during autonomous.
Then at the end the robot is able to descore a trough and rescore it all in less than 45 seconds and hopefully 25 by worlds. Parking is overlooked because of the point sway of descoring.

Feel free to comment and change any of the suggested strategies and capabilities because they are meant to resemble efficiency from many points of view.

These strategies and maybe capabilites have been used to win 328-4(NZ), 210-15(Maryland), and various other routes seen of Singapore before it was removed.

Yes I completely agree with this. Efficiency is SO important this year, which has prompted Owen and I to change designs quite a few times now, and we are finally set for maybe like 2 weeks on our current. I can say now, our current design, which we should be releasing fairly soon, is MUCH different from our first reveal in May. We just keep learning so much from each robot we build (We haven’t even gone to a meet and we’ve built over 3 robots already.)

You know, maybe you should think of your own designs before you beg for designs. You know, like maybe coming up with something original, instead of copying all the time and asking for more stuff.

What I’ve been thinking recently is this:

Efficiency of descoring is more important then efficiency of scoring. Even more so, a hoarder bot that is efficiency-descoring will beat-out any efficiency-scoring bot because they can just collect anything the other team scores. For instance, it takes a good deal of time to get 20 sacks from different locations, but when descoring, they are all in the same trough.

There’s nothing wrong with a little collaboration. And he offered his ideas asking for people’s opinions, not the other way around.

Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough but this thread is about discussing strategies and capabilities of the efficiency bots such as opinions on going under the trough and holding lots of objects. Nowhere did I say that I wanted designs on how to execute these strategies, if I did I would have titled this thread how to **make **a max efficient bot in sack attack.

Also Unforseengamer, great suggestion of adding hoarding to the definition that could be really effective versus scoring focused bots

doesnt it seem a little harsh to go blaming people for copying already? they didnt even ask for people to give them their designs… its a strategy discussion. if you dont want to take part, NOBODY is making you.

I would agree with this, BUT hoarding will actually be VERY hard. Efficiency by our team is 15-20 sacks, hoarding is a lot more, and let me tell you, picking up 20 sacks is 10 pounds, anymore would require a VERY high torque geared lift with 4 motors, and then you would need to make sure you were very stable with those sacks when you raise your arm in the air.

Our team has decided that (at least in the later competitions), we will be getting a lot of our “scoring objects” from our opponents troughs. Basically we want to descore into our own intake, then take those “descored” sacks and dump them into our own goal (High or Trough).

The first few competitions we will most likely be getting our main scoring objects from the floor, but later into the year we plan to be descoring the opponents sacks and using those to score for our alliance.

That is one thing our team thought will be HUGE this year. I just tested our intake (attached it onto the bot) and it descores very well. There will be videos of our testings tomorrow on our YouTube Channel, so Subscribe!

Our average capacity will be 5-6 objects. We plan on being quick.

Assuming some robots max at 20lbs that is double the weight of the robot itself.
Not including the 678J required to raise the sacks 15 inches.

Since when was making a robot like that not “very hard” :wink:
Anyways, I think you meant 80 sacks is 40 pounds, which I agree is very very heavy for 4 motors, however who said you ever needed to lift 40 pounds?

I see two ways around this:

  • One time “dump” at the end which could score a good amount in the troughs. No motors required.
  • You find a super efficient way to gather as many sacks on the floor as possible and descore very quickly, then dump 90+ sacks on the floor goals.

I think the 1st one would be the better option just so if you don’t get all 90+ sacks, you can still get a decent amount of points.

Well who said you needed to lift anything? What we have found out is you need to be fast at scoring high amounts of points, and be able to keep them in there, so stop descoring from happening

Exactly, you don’t need to lift anything. You could have a 8-motor drive, 1 motor intake, and 1 motor descorer. If you can score high amounts of points and prevent it from being scored, that could work well, but then you aren’t scoring any more (of course, I don’t know your circumstances… you could mean many things by your last sentence).

Let’s say you balance and keep protect of 15 sacks on the high goal, that’s 150 points, which then I can go and get 85 other sacks, which is work 400+ points. Or lets say you get 40 sacks in the troughs, that leave 60 other sacks on the field.

Well you need motors to get the lift up :stuck_out_tongue:

Pneumatic are not motors :slight_smile:

Lots and lots of elastics :wink: You just need to make to a piston release.

:wink: Piston lifts are challenging this year. We tried to get them working today, but no good so far.

I actually have experience with pneumatic lifts, since my team actually successfully built and competed with one. A pneumatic lift is not practical for the amount of sacks hoarding would require, a high torque gear ratio would be more efficient and very possible to pull of.

My thoughts on hoarding are:

-Instead on worrying about scoring the sacks a hoarder’s purpose could be to take the sacks out of play so that the only ‘scored’ sacks are of its alliance.
If you wanted a scoring hoarder:

-the hoarding robot does not need to be able to hold 80+ sacks, in fact it should only hold 40. this allows for 200 points to be scored in the trough and the weight is easier to lift.

-you don’t need an 8 motor drive, 4 motors should be fine as long as it is built correctly.

  • i would make the manipulator/ pick up system pneumatic powered and dedicate 6 motors to lifting the weight.

One issue with hoarding however, is that any opposing team looking at the entire field will notice the big robot with 20+ sacks in it’s intake and immediately play defense on the robot. With a 20+ sack load, you’re talking over 10 pounds of sacks on a 12-15 pound robot, so gearing for speed would probably overheat the motors. That’s why I think a good hoarder should have a drive-train geared for torque so that it could at least push past the defense it will face.

have to agree with sabir on this one. 599D’s robot was designed because it honestly took no real power to lift the tubes last year, other than really rubber bands. This year you actaully need torque, which is something that the vex pistons are not really capable of (they are made for applications that need less torque).

When is it not important???


If you have them out of play, then why not rescore them? The only way you can easily take sacks out of play is by having them on your robot…


Make it harder for people to play defence on you :stuck_out_tongue:

It will be interesting to see how quickly low capacity robots can score compared to probably slower high capacity robots…