It actually missed quite a few. I count seven that it missed (you can’t see some of them, but the setup is supposed to have them, and he didn’t pick them up). I’ve highlighted in red the ones that he missed.
While I agree that this design has a lot of potential, I am not too sure that the robot in the video could max out the field. Even with a faster drivetrain and more driver practice, my point is that I don’t know if it has the capacity to hold 7 more 3" diameter balls. It looked pretty full when it went to hang, and I’m not sure it had room for ~33% more balls. I’m not saying that it can’t be done (with this design), I’m just saying that I’m not sure this robot could do it.
This isn’t a surprise, but surprised how quickly the game was maxed out. It seems a rule that balls can’t be scored from within the upward volume of the goal could force more shooting. However, I am not sure that is what the GDC wants. Guess we’ll see!
One more thing that I noticed is this robot is well out of sizebox when it climbs. Before I go on, I do want to say that it is a cool design, and it could very well have potential. Back to my point, if you look at 0:48, it is obvious that the robot reacts off of the bottom bar as well as the top bar. Additionally, the fact that the plastic sheet doesn’t deflect or bend at all, something that would certainty happen if it was reacting off of it. My point is that since the robot is reacting off the bottom bar too, it has not a whole lot of room past the top of the goal to fit 15 balls, a drivetrain, and more (~6" to be more clear). So if you look at 0:54, the robot (~19" long for reference) is quite a bit more than the allowable ~6" above the top rim of the goal. Again, while it is a cool design, this particular robot is illegal. So while I do this it is a viable design, this implementation of it isn’t quite so.
Next, I’d like to say that I was wrong, and the robot can potentially hold 22 balls, as seen in this video (the video only shows 21), albeit with a few popping out the top and with some careful indexing. But the video also shows that the robot does react off of the bottom bar.
I’ve pointed this out and some coaches think that the sizing box and requirements should “rotate” with the robot. So, if the robot can do all of the motions while in the size box, it should be good to go. My initial read is the same as yours. There is an open Q&A question on this.
There is also an open question to see if the teams are allowed to react against the plastic. I had some ambitious students damage the plastic this summer and I would prefer for robots to not do so, given that the only “official” fix is a $120 investment in another kit.
Sorry, the wording in my post was unclear. What I meant was that it was out of sizebox whether the sizebox rotates with the robot or not. If you imagine the robot inside a 19" long x 11" wide x 19" tall cube where the base 19" of the cube is the bottom of the robot, the part where the robot extends down to the bottom bar is well outside of the cube, meaning out of sizebox too. This is what I meant by that you only have a few inches of room past the top if you react off the bottom bar. Another thing I’d like to point out is that, if the sizebox rotates wit the robot, it’s going to be very hard for inspectors to correctly measure the robot.
I totally agree with you here. I have also noticed the same thing, and when I am running events, I am considering cutting 1/8 polycarb to the right shape so it won’t break (so long as the teams are okay with it).
More thoughts about high hanging
I have noticed the same thing when trying to react against it with a robot because if you want more room past the top to dump, you can’t react on the bottom bar. But if it turns out that using the plastic would potentially damage the field (and therefore be illegal), the only thing left (besides the upright supports) is the bottom bar, which severely limits how high you can go above the top. Even if you can use the plastic, it’s a bit of a gamble because your match might be the one where it breaks, and you’ll probably get next to no points, potentially seriously damaging your ranking score or your finals match. So the only thing left is the side supports, and if you react off of one of those, you aren’t centered. This makes dumping into the high goal very difficult.
I reported it, but it was useless, which made me very depressed.
In addition, I am also very concerned about the issues discussed, especially whether the size box can rotate. To solve this problem, I have solved that the horizontal direction will not exceed 19 "at any time, but the vertical direction will exceed (unless the dimension box can be rotated). So I’ll study the ejection robot next, just in case.
At present, my folding robot is basically like this. When folded, it can hold 11 balls and can easily walk through the low bar. After deployment, 25 balls can be loaded (although not necessary). It only takes 8 seconds to hang the high pole. Complete the full score of the whole game, about 50 seconds.
That is a very clever use of using your two motors on the front arm of your bot. The lower motor solves two problems, getting under the low bar and keeping it tight against the wall to avoid the width problem. If you programmed it appropriately, it would even go way faster but not even needed. That’s slick. I had to watch it three times.
I assume the height problem would happen right here:
With this bot, a 1 person team is OK. Clear your half of the field, park and hope your alliance partner can do well on their half of the field.
The bar really makes this a ‘my half’ and ‘your half’ kind of game.
Some teams will be able to cross over and help weaker teams, but others won’t. It will be interesting to see which strategy pays off in terms of getting a high qualifying spot for finals partners.
@775039934 has an expanding hopper so the high hang dump robots (which are starting to remind me of the bankshot dump robots ) can go on both sides of the field. I really like the idea.
I tried the expanding hopper idea for one of my first models, but it didnt really work, although i used rubber bands to do it, so maybe another design would work.
I 100% agree, although I’m not sure which way I’d want them to rule. On the one hand, if they ruled this legal, the game would be broken and no fun to play at the high level because it’d be like Change Up skills. On the other hand, if they make it illegal, they are putting down all these teams’ hard work that went into a robot like this. But then the game would still (hopefully) have some room for variety and improvement with the robots.
I’m with you on this one. I’ve done some experimenting with this style of robot and haven’t gotten it to fit in sizebox (provided it rotates with the robot) although I’m not convinced it can’t be done.
Soon we’ll have our version of the “What does and doesn’t score in autonomous?”
) can go on both sides of the field. I really like the idea.
