This is really nice, the only real problem I can identify is the possible difficulty that can be found on trying to fit in two stacks, which can be fixed relatively easily
I had always figured that since you aren't allowed to modify any motor parts per the rules you can't use the internal gears from the motors anywhere else on the robot but I guess the rules do only say you can't modify them for motor usage so props to you for finding an innovative way to use the gearing.
Hey, quick question: I assume you're using Blender for animating. How do you do it? Do you CAD in another software and then import the whole assembly to Blender with Blender maintaining all the part relations and constraints from before? Or do you have to make it in Blender?
This is a great idea! I don't think it would violate any rules either. G16 states that your robot cannot intentionally grasp onto any field elements, and it obviously can't damage the field. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you built the clamp big enough, it would technically clamp AROUND the field element, not ON the field element. As far as damaging the field, you can take measures to prevent that, like turning the threaded end of the screws to the inside, so they don't puncture the field.
Sweet! Wonder if the spider thread will get difficult in real play. What did you use to make this video? Reading other comments, it sounds like blender.org. Maybe for lockdown you could do some video making tutorials for beginner teams :)
Yeah they animate everything in blender. I'm sort of curious about the string too. I saw a few reveals last year which had tether bots, but I haven't really seen one in an actual match. People seem to think nothing will get tangled, but I'm still skeptical.
It is difficult to determine as the rule defines clamping as grasping on multiple surfaces to prohibit movement and this type of cage only grasps one so the rulings could be very discretionary.
The issue you will have with the cage though is the fact that the rope used to keep it attached to your robot could be deemed as an intentional entangling device
@A Person The problem with the forcing someone into the penalty is that they are intentionally laying the cage down and the string along with it in order to play defense. The refs would classify the string as part of the defense and therefore the robot is now a defensive robot. The other team that drives over it and gets entangled in turn would must likely be an offensive robot and because of vex rules offensive robots get the benefit of the doubt. The refs wouldn’t call it in favor of the defense on this because the rule states that they can’t.
I'll give you this - it's the most interesting concept I've seen so far. I could only wish to be that good with blender. It's a cool design but I still think I'm going to build an offensive wallbot. Spider bot, Spider Bot, does whatever a Spider Bot does!
nice transmission but I'm p sure double rachets have lower frictional losses if built right this just seems to have too many downsides and the anti-chamber LMD differential would have been much better suited for this application Edit: that's not to say I don't think this is cool I think this is very cool just noting practicality seems low
I hope designs are more varied this year. Tower Takeover was awesome, but most robots had the same basic design. This looks epic though, so I’m hoping this is up in the meta this year
G 16 states that the robot can not clamp into the field, what he has just flipes around and locks onto itself, while just sidding on the ground around the goal... He is not gripping, it is just setting there, on the floor
@@MW-dl5jt "Strategies with mechanisms that react against multiple sides of a Field Element in an effort to latch or clamp onto said Field Element are prohibited." I think it's clear that it latches around the goal to prevent being shoved away. I really wanted this design to be viable the first 2 days after the game reveal, but it's unfortunately a clear rule violation.
The full G16 "" Don't clamp your robot to the field. Robots may not initially grasp, grapple or attach to any field elements. Strategies with mechanisms that react agents multiple sides of a feild element in an effort to latch or clamp onto said field element are prohibited. The intent of this rule is to prevent teams from both unintentionally damaging the field and/or from ancoring themselves to the field. So if you built a robot that could make a circle all the way around the center tower with a 12" gap all the way around, would that be laching or grasping onto the field element? If not then the same would go for this mecinism, it is not touching the field element, it is a wall that is resting on the ground, preventing access to the field element. If this mecinism wraped around the center tower, touching it all around, then that would deffently be classified as a violation . It also says that the mechanism has to react with many sides of the object, this would be true only if it is being pushed around, which would be done by an opponent, theyby by G 14 which says you can not force your opponent into a penalty, that would be void. It also is not anchoring for the same reason. Example is like in tower takeover, if someone pushed you into a tower, that does not mean that you are anchoring yourself to the tower... See what I mean?
M W Note G16 encompasses strategies, which an opponent cannot force. Additionally, G14 (the opponent forcing rule) has be interpreted by the Q&A every single game to not apply to an offensive bot aiming to score (why it was not illegal to push a defending bot into the inner protected zone when going to place a stack).
@Kyle Miller when you deploy the cicular wall you are not meeting the defenetion of grasping and locking. The robot piece is directly setting on the floor not touching the goal on multiple sides. Theyby by being pushed around would be an opponet acting on it. There is one tower takeover match where there is a wall bot that traps both opponets in the goal zone. But one robot gets away by folding the arm back on the robot, like that video the wall bot was pushed into the towers, which stopped it from being pushed out, but it was not classified as anchoring. For this macinism to reach with multiple sides to opposing team has to push it in multiple direction untill it hits the goal zone in multiple directions.. I thinkthe rule is more of have a claw that grabs the tower,and grasp it and holds it, not a loop around the tower. Using your logic if you drove up to the tower and have your intakes up so you bassiclyy are around three sides of the tower without touching, that then would be considered grasping and locking. I dont think that is what the rule means... I mean do you see what I am meaning? How can you hold something without accually touching it?
These animations shouldn't be used to design your bot or use the idea. They don't show you the problems and such, it just shows an idea that might work
