Scioly.org

Idk rn about our BB.

We are at 4.53 seconds, with a consistent <4 cm away first run, and < 1cm away second. Any faster, we might have to compensate for skid.

My partner and I are redoing some measurements, but we have a 3 second car and we average <7 cm 1st run, <=3 cm second. It isn't as consistent as we would like it to be after some unfortunate events but yea. Work in progress still, but we believe/hope we can cement it to <2 cm every time. How do you think scores like that would fare in competition?

shrewdPanther46 wrote:My partner and I are redoing some measurements, but we have a 3 second car and we average <7 cm 1st run, <=3 cm second. It isn't as consistent as we would like it to be after some unfortunate events but yea. Work in progress still, but we believe/hope we can cement it to <2 cm every time. How do you think scores like that would fare in competition?

I think that is top 12 for sure but I haven’t been keeping up with battery buggy as much. But it sounds pretty good. If you get it less than 1 cm I’m sure that may be a possible medal.

Yeah that should probably be top 15, and with some luck I think that could medal.

Based on predictions that under 5 cm is top 10 or 15, I've decided to test to get every 10cm mark within a half cm, and if it's in between take an average of the wingnut turns

M017 wrote:Based on predictions that under 5 cm is top 10 or 15, I've decided to test to get every 10cm mark within a half cm, and if it's in between take an average of the wingnut turns

You shouldnt need to test every 10cm mark. Every 50cm should be plenty sufficient and obtain you the same amount of accuracy by using a linear regression to find marks in between

windu34 wrote:

M017 wrote:Based on predictions that under 5 cm is top 10 or 15, I've decided to test to get every 10cm mark within a half cm, and if it's in between take an average of the wingnut turns

You shouldnt need to test every 10cm mark. Every 50cm should be plenty sufficient and obtain you the same amount of accuracy by using a linear regression to find marks in between

Yeah we do that, and then use siri to pick a random number between 900 and 1200 and do those just for practice.

As long as, you can get to a few points consistently, a linear regression should be able to figure out the rest of the possible distances.
Also, asking siri is actually ingenious, even though it's hilarious at the same time.

hippo9 wrote:As long as, you can get to a few points consistently, a linear regression should be able to figure out the rest of the possible distances.
Also, asking siri is actually ingenious, even though it's hilarious at the same time.

While this is a cool idea, it is probably more beneficial to pick points yourself that you think your vehicle may struggle with. I always picked a close point (9.0-9.3m) and a far point (11.7-12.0m) whenever I finished implementing something new on my device because if the device performs well at the extremes, it will perform well in the middle and this method saves a lot more time

yea that same 30 cm interval at each extreme is kinda sketchy for us even w/our current car
the closer one gives us more consistency issues than the farther one. The farther one is more an issue w/alignment (we dont use a rifle scope, we just line up some stuff)