Hey Everyone,
I was just wondering what type of bot people had for Elevation. Dont worry, after you vote, your name will not be displayed.
We have four Elevation bots:
one claw/belt/arm hybrid
two belts
one belt/elevator hybrid
I am in charge of 4 teams
All 4 robots have claw design since our teacher would not allow us to build conveyor design
Why wouldnt your teacher allow you to build a conveyor design?
I have 4 teams:
–One Vexplorer claw bot, with a slide extension, lift up and down, 8 motors
–One custom claw bot, turn and pivot, lift up and down, 7 motors 1 servo
–One conveyor with a fixed height. It picks up from the floor, can drop into a 15", 9" or 3" goal at the other end. 6 motors.
–One conveyor bot where the conveyor goes up/down/left/right. 10 motors
All are gear driven. All have two drivers, one for the base, one for the cubes. We’ve not had good success with chain driven things, and we don’t have any of the pneumatic parts.
Really ?!
I haven’t decided which one to use yet, but I’m either going use a claw or a device using the intake rollers - it can hold 3-4 cubes and seems to work pretty good.
I have an triple arm/conveyor/gripper that uses 9 motors and 1 servo. It can hold 9 blocks at one time to fill the 21" goal. i am still working on the programming to work out all the kinks but overall I think it will work pretty good.
my teacher said they were to heavy and are not fast
Have your teacher drop me a note. We have a twin-belt robot that weighs seven pounds and can load up six cubes just about as fast as it can drive.
Nothing wrong with claws, though. We have a claw robot that can descore any of the high goals (that is, the 3", 9", 15", and 21" goals). If you think through the scoring, removing an opponent’s cube that is on top of a goal and replacing it with one of yours is a 12-point swing. That’s six points off their score and six points onto yours. Remove and recap two goals and a 40-20 score becomes a 28-32 game in about 15 seconds with just two of your cubes. I believe it’s not about the mechanical approach, it’s how you play the game. Good luck!
i wanted to have at least 1 conveyor but my teacher said i cant
he wanted fast, small bots that could reach all the goal
why would your teacher do such a thing? true robotics is to try, sometimes fail, and learn to succeed. who knows, a conveyor could be the best, depending on how you designed it. a quick question…does your teacher have any knowledge at all about robotics? i am under the impression that your teacher is trying to steer you away from robotics. that’s pure evil.
This may be a little bit off topic and I am not part of a team, but isn’t it supposed to be up to the students making up the teams to decide what kind of robot them want to build?
I thought the teacher/mentor was suppose to provide help, advice, and guidance to the students - not tell them what they could or could not build. I thought that was the whole point of the VEX competitions - for students to work together to come up with a working robot design with the help of their teacher/mentor.
Maybe I’m wrong?
Just my thoughts,
This is my fifth year as a mentor. I’ve reduced my job to three primary components: my job is to get 1) prepared students with a 2) working robot to 3) a tournament. Everything else is optional. I steer students into workable designs and away from things that simply don’t work. That’s why I’m the mentor and they are they are the students – I (usually) know what’s best. Within the universe of “designs that might work” are lots of options. I try to make sure students stay within options that are workable and avoid too many blind alleys. Of course, this is a flexible approach. The closer we are to a tournament date the more likely I am to to simply say, “give it up, that won’t work.” If it’s August, I’ll let students try almost anything, knowing they can still change designs before the tournament.
In our club, though, it’s not a democracy. Within the guard rails of treating one another with respect and tackling technically feasible ideas, the students are in charge. If they get too close to the guard rails, the mentors will help. Students, just remember the three laws of mentoring, and you’ll understand our motivation.
First Law: Help the students prepare for the season/competition/tournament.
Second Law: Make sure the students build robots that can work.
Third Law: Provide logistical support to get the team, robots, and supplies to the tournament(s).
When we have thought up an mechanical concept and can’t to get it to move the way we want it to, then we ask for mentoring. Otherwise, we don’t get much else - all our designs, mechanisms, testing, programming, scoring strategies, and bolt-tightening is done by us and us alone. This doesn’t mean our mentor is incapable , but it’s his way of doing things. He’s proud to state that everything we accomplish is completely a result of our effort, and will frequently emphasize that he has “not laid a finger on your robots”.
I’m definitely not trying to make other mentors feel bad, but I can’t help but be proud to say that our robot is OUR robot.
i built a conveyor to so my teacher the potential of the robot but he still said no
i tried to convince him but it wouldn’t work
That’s unfortunate. Best of luck to you with your present design.
My teacher thinks he knows more than be me but he doesnt
i told that we have for teams that we should have a least one conveyor
i built one to show him and it was fast and light and it worked
but he said it would not work in competition
I recommend you try and get your teacher to watch this
There’s one claw there proving claw can be done but get your teacher to look at the tread bots. They are fast and their arms move almost as fast as the claw arm.
or you could show said teacher this thread, and how everybody seems to be supporting you on the tread matter