Difference between revisions of "DEWBOT IX Caterpillar Drive"

Revision as of 14:30, 17 March 2013 (view source) MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) ← Older edit		Revision as of 14:44, 17 March 2013 (view source) MaiKangWei (talk | contribs) Newer edit →
Line 1:		Line 1:
−	{{#ev:youtube|JAu3nY1088Y|300|right|Climb at SCH}}Achieving a 30 point climb was a key aspect of 1640's game strategy for	+	{{#ev:youtube|JAu3nY1088Y|300|right|Climb at SCH}}Achieving a 30 point climb was a key aspect of 1640's game strategy for [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ultimate_Ascent ''Ultimate Ascent<sup>SM</SUP>''], with a strong bias towards climbing on the pyramid outside (thereby enabling other alliance robots to also score 30 points).
		+
		+	A number of concepts were considered and evaluated.  The Caterpillar Drive approach was selected because it was perceived that:
		+	:# The climb time could be relatively short, allowing significant scoring with Frisbees;
		+	:# the climbing mechanisms would not interfere with a shooter; and
		+	:# the concept was consistent with a low center-of-mass robot.
	----		----
	[[Category:Robot]][[Category:DEWBOT IX]][[Category:Drive-train]]		[[Category:Robot]][[Category:DEWBOT IX]][[Category:Drive-train]]

---

Revision as of 14:44, 17 March 2013

Achieving a 30 point climb was a key aspect of 1640's game strategy for Ultimate Ascent^SM, with a strong bias towards climbing on the pyramid outside (thereby enabling other alliance robots to also score 30 points).

A number of concepts were considered and evaluated. The Caterpillar Drive approach was selected because it was perceived that:

1. The climb time could be relatively short, allowing significant scoring with Frisbees;
2. the climbing mechanisms would not interfere with a shooter; and
3. the concept was consistent with a low center-of-mass robot.

---