Robo-Cross B

[akfackenthal00]

We have a question: how detailed does the written portion ( or the documents) have to be?
thanks!

[Skink]

About that...the rules say to read the samples on the National site, but I haven't been able to find them.

[jander14indoor]

As usual, not official.

The rules are pretty explicit about what you HAVE to have. Para 3.a illustrations must show ALL motors, ALL energy sources, etc. Para 3.c log must have so many trials, so many parameters, etc.

The only kind of open thing is the Proposed Plan of Movement. Guess I'd make sure I explicitly said what I'd do with each of the objects and the bonus jug. Note it is specifically labeled as tentative/proposed so you don't have to follow it closely, there' no requirement, penalty or bonus for exactly following the plan.

I'd say don't obsess over these You certainly don't want the 5% penalty or the lost points but you don't need more than described to avoid that.

I would recommend your documentation be as clear as you can make it, not as large as you can make it. It should be obvious to the ES that you meet the requirement. Be organized, be neat. That doesn't mean a fancy, CAD drawn, computer printed, bound package (though that's not a bad thing if it helps YOU). But a hand drawing should look like the robot itself. Labels should be legible. Pictures should be clear with good contrast. Make sure YOU, the competitor, can point out each element called out in the rules to the ES (in case they miss something, has happend to me multiple times, I always ask the student if I missed something, not sure every ES does). If you are competing with a tech package prepared by a team mate, study and understand it!

Hope that helps some
Jeff Anderson
Livonia MI

[akfackenthal00]

Thank you so much! that helped a ton

[jander14indoor]

I'm not sure if I commented earlier about using master-slave controller system for robocross, but that was THE ticket last year with robot arm to success at reasonable cost. I didn't think it would work so well with robo cross, but I just saw a youtube video of a 2008 robocross that use one very effectively. Search youtube for robo cross extreme

I'm not sure it will beat a shovel/bucket approach, but was definitely the ticket for effective control of the arm.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[riceman]

There has been some feedback from our regional event captain regarding the type of jug that will be used. He originally specified he would be using a milk jug but when questioned about the irregularity due to the handle he switched to a water jug. Now someone stated that they designed robots to use the remaining handle on the milk jug to place it upright. I still don't think we have an official decision so we are practicing with both. I would be interested to hear if anyone else is going through this.

[hogger]

My take on the rule and obviously not the official ruling is that the specification of the jug is left ambiguous as part of the challenge and that your device should be designed to handle as much as you can many kinds of gallon jug cut to the specified height.

[bob doyson]

There has been some feedback from our regional event captain regarding the type of jug that will be used. He originally specified he would be using a milk jug but when questioned about the irregularity due to the handle he switched to a water jug. Now someone stated that they designed robots to use the remaining handle on the milk jug to place it upright. I still don't think we have an official decision so we are practicing with both. I would be interested to hear if anyone else is going through this.

We did the same thing as in the picture above, but we cut off the remainder of the handle.

[jander14indoor]

Unofficial, etc

But,

I'd suggest you take hogger's comment to heart:

My take on the rule and obviously not the official ruling is that the specification of the jug is left ambiguous as part of the challenge and that your device should be designed to handle as much as you can many kinds of gallon jug cut to the specified height.

There has already been a clarification on the NSO website about the jug being squarish. Pretty open. And keep in mind there is at least one more squarish jug out there, the new plastic jug some of the mega discount stores are going to. Not even sure if it is the same size from the point of view of how wide it is.

As an example of the current national event supervisors biases, note that the rules this year explicitly allow variation in the surface type(prior rules specified smooth hardboard) variation in the quarter round size that surrounds zone D, and gaps/steps between the zones. There are limits on the variation in the playing field, but don't expect to know everything perfectly!

Unknowns are a fact of life in real world engineering. You can estimate them, gather data on them, maybe but bounds on them, etc. But in the end you cannot eliminate them. So you must consider them in your design.

Now the ES has been over ruled as he is only one member of a committee, so feel free to send in those FAQs.

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[riceman]

Unknowns are a fact of life in real world engineering. You can estimate them, gather data on them, maybe but bounds on them, etc. But in the end you cannot eliminate them. So you must consider them in your design.

I totally agree - We tried to set up a course that would be a worst case scenario. Tallest quarter round obstacle, smooth hard board surface providing least traction and practicing with two types of containers. Prepare for the worst and hopefully you won't get any surprises the day of the event.