Register To Comment
Page 2 of 10 FirstFirst 1234 ... LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 94

Thread: What is a walker?

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by typhoon_driver View Post
    I consider walkers any machine that exhibits the following,

    - The entire weight of the machine is supported at all time (no hoppers)
    - The legs are made of more than a single piece of metal, ie a leg like you have yourself made up of two separate sections
    - The upwards and forwards motions come from two separate mechanisms

    I don't like the mechanisms in scuttle as if you take off the legs, it could still in theory run along the ground on the gears
    In that case we would need a new category which is "runner", since running is a different gait performed by walking creatures for efficiency at higher speeds whereby the weight of the animal/bot is NOT supported at all times.

    Walking is controlled falling. Running is controlled bursts of flying and landing.



    I certainly think that if the running gear could perform as for wheels, then it's not a true walker.


    I think we should bear in mind that the regs were not put in place to prevent people from building walkers. They were there, along with the weight concession, to ENCOURAGE it. But we do need to make sure people are not exploiting loopholes just to get the extra weight "advantage" certainly.

  2. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by typhoon_driver View Post
    And that differs from scuttle how?
    By not being cam-driven at all, but with separate freedoms of motion.

  3. #13
    I'd need to see plans to make sense of it

    I wouldn't have an issue with a 25% increase in weight for a shuffler/hopper/pure non rotary. But for a 100% increase in weight I want to see a full on walker. Not something that just skirts around the rules

    Bear in mind that in a feather you are getting an additional 13.6kg. That is a huge weight increase and a good weight to allow you to build a rugged chassis and mechanism. Then you have the rest for a weapon!
    Last edited by typhoon_driver; 13th April 2013 at 19:59.

  4. #14
    Really good comments Guys,

    Now I want your interpretation on the rules as written in the book.

    My views so far.

    1/ A walker must employ moveable legs to support its weight.

    Dose this mean the only thing to touch the ground are the legs or feet? I would think so.

    2/ Each leg must have at least 2 degrees of freedom.

    There are 6 mechanical degrees of freedom available, how can you prove this on a robot? my test would be adjustment, the machine should have the capacity to, for instance adjust stride length or Height of any leg independent of each other.

    3/ Robots with rolling or sliding mechanisms will not be classified as walkers.
    4/ Walking such as linear actuator operated legs.

    I have grouped these together as at first they seem to contradict each other! A "linear actuator" IS "a sliding mechanism" the only way I can make sense of this is to assume the rolling or sliding is referring to the bit that touches the ground you can't have 12 boots stuck on a wheel and call it a walker, or have a foot that doesn't ever leave the ground. the "such as a linear actuator" seems to be an example of what they mean. Or dose it mean you have to use linear actuators?
    I can't think this is so for 2 reasons, Firstly if this is true this is the only time in the rules they dictate design. Secondly this rule would make combat robots too expensive for anyone to run in a combat environment. you would have to have a lot of spare linear actuators to make this work.

    remember we are trying to find a path through the rules that are there to encourage walkers in the community so lets keep this positive.
    Thanks

    Craig

  5. #15
    *nips off to go and check what it says for Number 4*

  6. #16
    Yeah, I'd agree with everything you've said there, Craig.

  7. #17

  8. #18
    Hi Gary
    That one looks great however to be a walker it has to walk. And to the best of my knowledge this one never did reliably, if it did it didn't turn corners!!!
    Find another one you like.

  9. #19
    How the heck did that thing walk! Surely it would topple over? Either that or Gary is having us on... hehe, wouldn't surprise me. If we look back at all the robots in RW then Millennium Bug, Anarchy, Stomp would all be illegal. In technogames then Scuttle wouldn't pass, Ulysses would fail to.
    The only true way it seems would be to make a machine like one of the 4 legged Mech-warriors... which would be dam expensive and difficult.
    Either that or someone bites the bullet and goes for something like Mechadon... but NST would have it in bits in seconds!
    I think it seems to be gravitating towards less that 100% extra for a cam walker, maybe 25% or 33%. That way most of the extra weight would be used in the walking mech and mean that you couldn't get an extra big weapon as a result.

  10. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by typhoon_driver View Post

    I wouldn't have an issue with a 25% increase in weight for a shuffler/hopper/pure non rotary. But for a 100% increase in weight I want to see a full on walker.

    This seems reasonable to me....

Register To Comment

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •