Robosavages 2D Reveal

This is the second version of our robot. We did a partial rebuild of our first robot over the past month and we built with the expectation that this version would be more or less our last; however, after only a single competition (this past Saturday), we realized that this type of robot cannot be successful in this type of game. The demolition of this robot will commence tomorrow.

The robot:
Drive: six motors internally geared for torque on a two-speed transmission, with 1:1 (torque) and 7:3 (more torque) gear ratios. Six wheel drive with four omni wheels and two normal wheels.
Arm: six-linkage bar with two motors on a 7:1 gear ratio and a four-piston pneumatic assist (thanks to 2K for giving it to us!)
Intake: side rollers attached to hinges to expand when intaking large balls

Some more pictures:

This robot has its strengths and weaknesses, however, we have found that the strengths (its defensive ability and power) are not needed in this game, whereas its weaknesses (its slowness and bulkiness) can be exploited by the opponents. This robot can score many points if given the time, but in reality there are less than two minutes and there are two goals that quickly fill up. In the higher torque mode, the robot moves at an incredibly slow pace, making it easier for our opponents to score. Once Bucky Balls are stashed, they become permanent points (until someone develops a descoring mechanism). There is simply no time to be moving around so slowly–we don’t have all day–we are given two minutes, and because we chose to play this game with this kind of robot, we were unsuccessful this past weekend. We have tried a faster gear ratio, but the transmission itself weighs almost five pounds and the motors could not handle it. In fact, the robot is so heavy that it can only go over the bump in the 7:3 mode.
This kind of robot may have been more effective in the Gateway interaction zone, with game objects everywhere (no need to drive to the other side of the field to pick up objects) and constant fighting in its tight spaces (especially when the special barrels were introduced), but Toss Up, at this point, appears to be a fast paced game where efficient robots dominate.
Feel free to comment on the robot and agree/disagree on my analysis of this game.

reminds me of 10D’s transmission a few years back :slight_smile:

are you still sticking with the general NZ design?
(but more lightweight + speedy)

What is that you’re using as a large ball intake? I don’t recognize the part.

I believe those are high traction tires flipped inside out.

They are high traction tires (4", it looks like) flipped inside-out.


At this point, that seems to be the only viable option.

In Gateway what impressed me most about the Gladstone robot that was on the World Championship alliance was that it wasn’t designed to be the best robot at the tournament… it was designed to win the tournament.

When looking at the competition that will exist at the BC Championships, BCIT “A” Division, and Worlds, it seems that there will be no shortage of robots that can pick up balls and stash them with reasonable efficiency. Everybody seems to be building to dominate the goal zone, but no one seems to really have seized the opportunity to dominate the rest of the field.

For instance, what if the robot starting ‘behind’ the bump could throw a buckyball in autonomous directly into the path of the opponent’s robot as it steams forward to stash a bucky ball? Auto mode suddenly becomes more difficult when you don’t know where those buckyballs are going to be… large balls even more so.

I also haven’t seen anyone intentionally gathering up the opponent’s buckyballs and placing them in an awkward location and making it difficult for their opponent to get the bucky balls and score.

Yeah, you’d give up some points, but if you wrapped it up with a 20 point hang, that might more than make up for it.

I don’t have a complete solution yet, and I don’t think there is the “mathematically guaranteed win” that Gladstone figured out in Gateway, but somewhere there exists the possibility be the best possible partner, rather than the best possible robot.

Good luck with whatever you choose to do, and congratulations on having the courage to reject “very good” in order to pursue “great”.


6 motors geared for torque could not go over the bump even on a 1:1 ratio? I wouldn’t have thought that weight would make such a difference… I’ve seen robots clear the bump on a 1:1 4 motor drive geared for speed


Thank you. It is definitely not easy to take apart something that just one week ago, you were working so hard on and thought had potential.

There is a considerable amount of energy loss with the gearing. That, and the robot weighs 24-25 lbs.

2D/M always with that impressive build quality and unorthodox robots. Needless to say I was speechless when you told me the transmission was 7:3 for torque this weekend. I think your game analysis is pretty spot-on and good luck with the rest of the season!

make a GER
you’ve got 3 months…

worse case scenario, scrap it and build an NZ last 2 weeks
not like NZ robots are hard to perfect nowadays…

Loved seeing this robot at Lake Washington! Sad to see it go, but evolution is robotics.
Also, about how heavy was your robot?

I always hear these “out there” robots being called Green egg but why. I have seen Murdo’s super stacker and robosavages gateway thing, but what has GER done?

That’s a hefty robot.

Sorry, didn’t see that XD

Green Eggs 44 in Round Up were the first (?) to create a robot that could efficiently score a doughnut and stick the weighted goal under the ladder in the middle.

You finally retire from using torque and going to change to speed… We don’t got all day! :cool:

Yes, it’s time to build a fast robot for a change.

First to do it during a competition :slight_smile: