Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2090
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby chalker » May 27th, 2011, 9:31 am

Actually, you could get 15 points under the trial rules with no motors. Any inert object that fit in the robot square got the 15 points for not knocking down the scoring jugs under the trial rules. That WILL be changed for next year.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

yeah, we learned our lesson on that one when a team at the Ohio State tournament this year submitted an old shoe with a rolled up magazine stuck in it as their 'arm' and almost won the event because of this and the way the tiebreakers were setup.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

User avatar
illusionist
Member
Member
Posts: 942
Joined: March 20th, 2010, 4:13 pm
Division: C
State: MI

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby illusionist » May 27th, 2011, 12:11 pm

Hahahaha, our team did a very similar thing in Michigan as well :P
2012-2013 Building Event Captain
Rule 7d. "Event Supervisors are allowed to break any competitors' devices" -bearasauras

austinfhs
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 7:51 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby austinfhs » May 27th, 2011, 4:31 pm

You guys think a system like this would fly? Not a very efficient use of motors, but you could complete the tasks incredibly quickly and accurately, I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XChu20hTxU

User avatar
Sunshine Ninja
Member
Member
Posts: 47
Joined: April 23rd, 2011, 4:12 pm
Division: B
State: NC
Location: Under my freaking cloak of invisibility!

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby Sunshine Ninja » May 27th, 2011, 4:44 pm

You guys think a system like this would fly? Not a very efficient use of motors, but you could complete the tasks incredibly quickly and accurately, I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XChu20hTxU
um.... u know it is fake..... the guys arm is way out of sync w/ the robotsss :lol:
2012 stats:
Mousetrap vehicle: reg. 4th,
Heredity: reg. 2nd,
Forestry: reg.1st :),
Team: reg. 1st!!!,

Past events: Ornithology (2), Food science, Elevated bridge, Optics, Junkyard Challenge

States in two days....kill me now

austinfhs
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 7:51 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby austinfhs » May 27th, 2011, 4:49 pm

Alright, it looks a little delayed, but it could always be lag/motors. How about this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=58DIp7Nb ... re=related

jander14indoor
Member
Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby jander14indoor » May 27th, 2011, 4:51 pm

You guys think a system like this would fly? Not a very efficient use of motors, but you could complete the tasks incredibly quickly and accurately, I think.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-XChu20hTxU
Not sure why you think its not efficient in terms of motors. Think of it as a method of control, not a specific design and you'll realize it works with any number of motors.

I saw one like this at the national tournament, except the controller was a model of the robot with position sensors, not tied to the person's arm. Did OK, user needed more practice, a little better scoring strategy and a remote arm. His had trouble following the control inputs accurately.

From my observations at the national, users need to work on the robots stiffness for accuracy. Uncontrolled bouncing/overshooting makes it hard NOT to knock things over or out of bounds. I saw a lot of that. And on the robots speed. Three minutes is NOT a lot of time to complete the task. The cheap kits mentioned earlier on this thread besides being to short are also to SLOW. Students didn't have time to pick up more than a couple of objects and move them to the goal boxes.

Faruh's top score this year didn't seem to be the result of anything special in the robot (though it wasn't bad) but a result of LOTS of practice on the task with the robot and a laser like focus. We actually had trouble getting his attention when the five minute set up time was complete. Amazing concentration.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

austinfhs
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 7:51 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby austinfhs » May 27th, 2011, 4:55 pm

Oops I meant with the efficiency thing, that it looks like it used 4 motors. Although this event promises to be very challenging (as demonstrated by even the top national teams), I fully expect that by next year, we can see perfect scores coming out, and cutting down the number of motors will be very important.

I completely agree with your accuracy/speed comment, however.

User avatar
illusionist
Member
Member
Posts: 942
Joined: March 20th, 2010, 4:13 pm
Division: C
State: MI

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby illusionist » May 27th, 2011, 5:34 pm

I was actually thinking about using this system next year. (although i would definetly need some mentoring with the programming; it also looks like it could get a little expensive).
In the second link Austin posted, the guy used servos as potentiometers. Would the servos on the master/control arm be considered "motors"? Also, I don't have this years trial event rules, but based on the draft rules for next year, could something like this be legal?
2012-2013 Building Event Captain
Rule 7d. "Event Supervisors are allowed to break any competitors' devices" -bearasauras

austinfhs
Member
Member
Posts: 63
Joined: November 29th, 2010, 7:51 pm
Division: C
State: CA

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby austinfhs » May 27th, 2011, 6:52 pm

I was actually thinking about using this system next year. (although i would definetly need some mentoring with the programming; it also looks like it could get a little expensive).
In the second link Austin posted, the guy used servos as potentiometers. Would the servos on the master/control arm be considered "motors"? Also, I don't have this years trial event rules, but based on the draft rules for next year, could something like this be legal?
http://soinc.org/sites/default/files/up ... rm11v7.pdf
Under 2f, it states:
All robot motion must be powered only by electrical, elastic, fluidics, gravitational energy, hydraulics or
pneumatics.
I think that the master/slave system is electrical and should qualify, but I didn't think about the motors counting doubly (on the control/master systems) so that might not be the best idea ...

User avatar
illusionist
Member
Member
Posts: 942
Joined: March 20th, 2010, 4:13 pm
Division: C
State: MI

Re: Robot Arm B/C [Trial]

Postby illusionist » May 27th, 2011, 6:56 pm

But, if potentiometers are used instead of motors, then it'll be all good right?
You would just have the 4 or so motors on the slave arm.
2012-2013 Building Event Captain
Rule 7d. "Event Supervisors are allowed to break any competitors' devices" -bearasauras


Return to “2011 Build Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests