Its a very difficult one to decide. In the current rules there is no mention of not allowing shuffle bots let along defining what one is.
Printable View
Its a very difficult one to decide. In the current rules there is no mention of not allowing shuffle bots let along defining what one is.
Well there are in effect two forms of walking robots
- machines that use pistons to copy the motion of muscles in the animal kingdom
- machines that use a rotational motion (electric motor) and convert it through a cam system to actuate a leg
I think that no one would argue that the use of pneumatic or hydraulic pistons should qualify for the extra weight.
The problem comes with the rotational conversion machines and defining how they must convert the motion. The reason for the problems is because they can be just as quick as a machine using wheels with very little problem.
How about the rule dictates that if a cam is used, then the motion must travel through a further two mechanisms after the cam before it is used to transfer the motion to the ground? Ie cam followed by two straight sections, one of which can contact the ground. No mechanism after the cam can convert the motion back to rotary motion either :)
I think that it should be that if the input to the system turns continuously it's a shuffler regardless of what mechanism you use to walk.
Hence, only linear actuator based mechanisms (pneumatic, hydraulic and electric) or non continuous rotary mechanisms (like standard servos with some programming to sequence them to walk) get the weight bonus.
that would certainly make judging the difference far easier
hiya,
I had a long... and i mean very long discussion ( argument ) with derek foxwell about this subject. But in the end, actually agreed with him in the end!!
Neoteric, my 24kg walker feather weight for Robot Wars extreme was only allowed once, but banned afterwards as it was classed as a shuffler. It had 16 legs and the motion was like a wheel as it had so many.
http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?imgurl=h ... x=82&ty=87
I think that it should be that if the input to the system turns continuously it's a shuffler regardless of what mechanism you use to walk.
I agree with this... any cam motion isnt a walker in my opinion, its a shuffler. The extra weight should be given for hydraulics, pneumatics, anything which doesnt use rotation motion.
JOhn
Roaming Robots
Quote:
Originally Posted by roamingrobots
WAT this makes know sense (but I know what u mean :D ) (the: I agree with him bit)
You've got to look at what a step is before you can define what a walker is.
In a step the foot is placed on the floor, lifted and then moved in a linear motion and then placed on the floor again.
Trying to define this in terms of wether it used hydraulics or pneumatics is wrong, it's the movement which counts. Craigs walky thing is very definitely a wallker and powered by an electric motor.
The rules do need to be deliberately vague to stop inventive people being penalised but good enough to make sure that the movement is incorporated into the design.
true but that's not a combat robot. Currently there aren't any active walkers so defining the rules will affect no machines in operation and only those made in the future. An extra 50 % for a shuffle bot is still a good 6.3kg. Not a weight to be sniffed at. I'm pretty sure you could make the walking mechanism using cams for only a couple kilo giving you a great deal more weight for the rest of the machine.
Plus there has to be an easy distinction to be made. Purely to keep everything civil and easy to determine at an event.
lol just realised my maths was off there but you get the point :rofl:
Just a few comments on a previous entry.
An extra 50 % for a shuffle bot is still a good 6.3kg. Not a weight to be sniffed at.
I may be wrong but I don't think there is any weight advantage for shuffle bots now. :shock:
I'm pretty sure you could make the walking mechanism using cams for only a couple kilo.
A reliable combat walker, I don't want to appear rude, but after making Pilgrim I would like to see that.
Walking.......What are the feet doing? I have said before the mechanism dose not really matter too much,
if you track the foot what shape is the trace, round or oval dose it have some flat portions etc.
we can have arguments about what is a true walker for ever.
I say vote
have examples of machines from U-Tube from feet stuck on the drive wheels (not a walker in my opinion) to Big Dog (A walker in anyone's book) The majority decision wins the day.
How many walkers are out there?
How many walkers are fighting out there?
How many walkers have ever won a combat competition?
How many moving parts in Pilgrim's leg mechanism?........................................ .................................................. Over 500!!!
Lets not kill the idea before anyone has tried to make something,
Everyone was worried about spinners, but in the UK champs it was the box type robot that won.
Lets keep the rules open as much as possible if walkers start winning everything (like flippers in the HW section) then lets think again.