Robot Types For The Season

I was just wondering what types of robots your teams will be using to start the year.

A good one, I hope. I believe we’ll make use of tank treads somehow, but what we’re doing will mostly be up to months of experimentation.

Until then, we’re not really sure, but hopefully it will work.

Our team will be using an 8 bar lift this season

Your guys design was pretty close to my design. Great minds think alike eh?!

My team will hopefully be using an 8 bar just because it is very compact, and it can reach the 30" high goal. We will be going more of a scary fast efficiency bot. It can maybe hold 10-12.

I’m going to college next year and were planning on building one robot using and 8 bar linkage, and the other were going to make a hoarder that scores a 5-10 quickly using a double elevator. Both robots are going to use the same leg wheel intake.

How many motors will you use on the lift for the 5 or six pounds of game pieces? Will you use any elastics?

We will be using 2 motors on the lift geared 5:1 (devinc ;)). We will be using TONS of elastics to help lift and keep the 8 bar steady.

What is your plan?

we will be using a six bar efficiency robot with the lift powered by 4 393 with the use of elastics for higher piece capacity.

What i don’t understand is how an “efficiency” robot is considered to have a 4 or 6 bar lift, and how a “scissor lift” is a type of robot design.

Yes, but there are also a lot of stability issues with a 4 bar that reaches over 30 inches, although if you manage to overcome those issues then theres no reason not to use a 4 bar. An 8 bar is simply unnecessary in my opinion.

So true.

I don’t think it’s very practical THIS year to use only a four bar, because ideally you have to reach well above the high goal to score many pieces in it (as they stack up). However, its certainly a doable and feasible idea.

Last year though, people started calling side intake robots “Six Bars”, as almost all of them made use of a six bar linkage, which kinda confused me, because it was very easy for a side intake robot to reach 30 inches (ours could reach about 35 inches) with just a normal 4 bar.

That being said, I will probably be using an efficiency design for the start of this season involving a 6 bar.

I’m curious what you mean by this statement? Is this a generality, or do you have some engineering reason why 30" reaching 4-bars are inherently unstable? :slight_smile:

I plan on using a double 4 bar or scissor lift, I plan to use one of these just because they look cool :cool:

This is one of the reasons why we picked the scissor lift, but it turned out to be slow and somewhat unreliable. To get the same lifting capacity as a 6-bar lift, our scissor lift had to have 4 269s with a 1:21 torque ratio.

We’re looking into making an arm for this season (not completely sure what kind yet; probably a 4-bar).

We found that scissor lifts are more compact and can expland larger than arms(4-Bars, 6-Bars), but the main problem is starting the lift, once past that point they become much easier to lift

The same thing here but we are having a hard time trying to go under the 15 in while trying to score in the 30 in.

We are playing around and using a 6 bar. its under 15in and can reach the 30in. we make a roller intake and is working very well. it can hold up to 10 but we are looking for speed than holding alot.

Yet another poll that doesn’t allow me to select more than one. :confused:

But I’m with Chuck and JVN on this one guys. No need to restate the question.

  • Andrew

It depends on how you are lifting the scissor lift. If you attach two 12 teeth gears surrounding a 84 tooth gear attached to a bar at one of the pivot points, you will get constant torque. I got it from the Middle School World Champions of round up.

My team will use a scissor lift. As a middle schooler the last two years, I have seen first hand the dominance of the scissor lift. Using rubber bands to help start it helps alot. I also think that getting under 15 inches is easier with a scissor lift, because they are more compact.