Things to reconsider
If we were to do this project again, we would consider making a few changes.
1. The most important change would be to find a way to increase traction. In the final competition, the robots that performed the best were the ones who could push their opponents without slipping. State machine design and sensor performance were completely secondary to drivetrain performance. With the traction we had, our wheels slipped before we reached the stall torque on our motor, so our robot simply could not resist the stronger bots. To increase traction, we could either use stickier wheels, or add two motor/wheel assemblies to double the wheel-ground contact area. We believe that with these improvements, we could have been more competitive in the end.
2. Next, we would make an effort to test our robot against others before the competition. Although we tested our systems extensively against the brick, we had no idea how Pork Barrel would perform against a live target. We underestimated both the speed of a round, as well as how difficult it would be to push another robot that was pushing back. Had we done live testing, many of the problems that arose during the competition could have been flushed out beforehand.
3. Finally, we would have tried to get a moving robot much earlier than we actually did. We spent too much time playing with unnecessarily complex sensing circuits, wasting many hours that could have been spent improving our chassis and drivetrain design.
1. The most important change would be to find a way to increase traction. In the final competition, the robots that performed the best were the ones who could push their opponents without slipping. State machine design and sensor performance were completely secondary to drivetrain performance. With the traction we had, our wheels slipped before we reached the stall torque on our motor, so our robot simply could not resist the stronger bots. To increase traction, we could either use stickier wheels, or add two motor/wheel assemblies to double the wheel-ground contact area. We believe that with these improvements, we could have been more competitive in the end.
2. Next, we would make an effort to test our robot against others before the competition. Although we tested our systems extensively against the brick, we had no idea how Pork Barrel would perform against a live target. We underestimated both the speed of a round, as well as how difficult it would be to push another robot that was pushing back. Had we done live testing, many of the problems that arose during the competition could have been flushed out beforehand.
3. Finally, we would have tried to get a moving robot much earlier than we actually did. We spent too much time playing with unnecessarily complex sensing circuits, wasting many hours that could have been spent improving our chassis and drivetrain design.