I have built a 5:1 4in drive with 8 motors before…
1000rpm… >:)
If you built a turret bot, which design would be (in theory) better?
either:
6 motor drive (600rpm)
1 motor flywheel
1 motor turret
transmission for disc intake
Or:
4 motor drive (mechanum or x-drive, 300rpm)
1 motor flywheel
2 motor turret
1 motor intake
Why a 2 motor turret? Just use 1 motor.
However our build will be similar to this.
What about having a manually controlled turret? So you have a 2 controller setup where one person drives and the other just aims the turret the whole match?
I think that it would be hard to manually control the turret, but it is possible with enough practice.
OK. Our robot will probably be 6 motor 600rpm. Pneumatic transmission intake, 1m flywheel and 1m turret, then.
I would also consider using a ratched intake because you will want to drive and intake 90% of the time
I’m surprised that out of all of the turret talk, nobody bothered to mention 185A from Turning Point. They arguably had one of the most functional turret system for aiming and firing… A video of one of their matches is posted below:
Something like this might seem viable if teams figure out how to load discs in a similar manner, alongside fitting a proper flywheel (or a slapper, who knows) for shooting the game objects.
I have also tried my own take on 185A’s robot from that year, with renders below to better grasp on how the rotating and angling works:
Teams could use odometry instead of the GPS sensor for tournament matches.
During the 2021-2022 season my team tested the GPS sensor for some time and we found it to be extremely inaccurate to use.
Great design and renders! Only thing I may suggest is to replace the 84t gear in the turret with one of the new 84t turntables for a sturdier turret.
One thing I will point out here is that the turret didn’t make them any faster.
They could have just as easily made those corrections with the drivetrain in the same time. It didn’t make them any more accurate either, as they usually missed when they used their turret for quick aiming.
It seems to me like it is a waste of a motor if it’s not making you any faster. I see more value in putting that last motor on your flywheel, making you faster in that you don’t have to wait at all between shots for your flywheel to spin up again.
Thing is you have to be able to stop the robot fast. If you can basically instantly stop the robot, and not have to turn and aim, it’s a very viable solution. Aiming code can be done with a lot of math and Odometry, brake can be done with pnumeatics or just moving the motors in the different directions. There’s a lot of ways to improve on their design, mostly in the programming, as for turrets that will be the MAIN factor on whether or not it is effective. Without the best programming, the turret is ineffiencient.
So if I’m understanding correctly, a turret will be good for the top 1% of teams who can actually pull off a programming feat like that. But for the rest of us who don’t have that kind of skill or time, just put a flashlight on your robot. That would be mich easier than a turret and would get you much the same result of just stopping and bring able to shoot because you can aim while you’re going over to the goal.
As long as you have a programming enviornment, you can program. I’m 100% self taught if you count YouTube and some stack overflow, which unless you don’t have internet access (which would be unlikely considering you’re on the forums) you can get to. If you are looking for programming in c++ resources, I’d suggest The Cherno on YouTube. Extremely comprehensive. Trust me mate, you can learn C++ without having teachers and a bunch of expensive courses thrown at you. Don’t misinterpret a situation like the “bottom 99%”: while it is DEFINITELY rigged in terms of materials, it is 100% fair in programming. Just practice
Turning Point, I think, had a 2 ball limit, compared to Spin Up’s 3 disc limit. I don’t recall (m)any turrets for it. Arguably, since the balls “recycled” (whereas scored discs are effectively removed from gameplay), turrets would have been more valuable then.
Time will tell; I think from a pure feat-of-engineering perspective, turrets will have a huge Wow factor. Whether that translates into superior match play (or skills) is an open question.
Might be like the question of double lifts, if you build it right, you are golden, except for when 6 motor drives with locking clamps who can double park with another bot comes along.
Not many turrets in TP, but lots of teams had adjustable hoods to change the trajectory of the balls. Similar features this year could adjust the lateral angle of launch within some range.
I think putting a spin on the disk with two flywheels might make it easier for some turrets to avoid having to turn fully.
If it flies like a Frisbee, you can shoot it like a Frisbee.
I don’t doubt the versatility of turrets but one thing i have been stuck on is how to load and fire the disc’s with the turret. The first thing i thought of was loading them from the bottom but how? How do we load the discs into the turret?
I feel like turrets if done correctly are going to be quite strong.
The way I see the meta going is rushing to fill the high goals as early as possible and then either playing defence with a blocker in the small extension limit, or playing for possession of the rollers (like ppl have mentioned in other threads, it’s an 80 point swing, so going to be quite important)
I think if someone can design a good turret that can intake directly into the turret and shoot into the high goal, it would be very strong compared to a fixed flywheel where you intake the discs, face the goal and shoot, or the turret from the video above, where you pick up the discs, aim the turret and shoot.
I think having that time save of intake and shoot straight into the high goal is going to be very important in high level games.
My team doesn’t have a strong programmer, we can program basics, but I don’t know if we’ll get odometry properly. I think having a secondary driver constantly aiming the turret manually should still work fine as long as that secondary driver is fully focused on that.