FRC 2022
Rapid React
Our Robot
CAD Render
Robot at Smokey Mountains Regional
Our 2022 Robot is the result of nearly 4 years of an intense focus on learning both technical and leadership skills. Easily one of the most successful robots the team has fielded and only possible due to the tight integration of every step of the development process from design to controls and software. As a result of this integration this robot was completely unique when compared to the best robots in the world in every aspect except its ability to score cargo.
Competition
We earned the prestigious Chairman’s Award and won the Electric City Regional for a very strong start to our season. We then went on to earn the Excellence in Engineering award and win the Smokey Mountains Regional and finally earned the Autonomous Award at the world championship in the Roebling division.
Strategy and Approach
This season was a little different than those of the past due to there only being one championship event instead of two. This meant this season it was much more difficult to qualify for the championship and the championship itself was much more competitive. As a result of this and the relative point and ranking point relationship between scoring and climbing we decided to build the best cargo scoring bot possible with a super fast mid-rung climb as demonstrated in the video above. As a result, and unlike many other high performing robots, we did not compromise the range and functionality of our turret and shooter with our climber. This Allowed us to create a nearly un-defendable robot which proved to be super valuable on the open field of this years game.
Although I’d love to describe the technical details of this robot here, they are too numerous to give justice to in such a limited format. If you’d like more details you can check out our official technical binder.
Rapider Iteration
Although this robot has tons of distinctive features, the most unique part of it is the level of integration and the design philosophy behind it that allowed for mind boggling iteration times. Where top teams have the operations capacity of 50+ students to put together a robot with this level of complexity we had around 10. And not only did we prototype, design, manufacture, build, and program a super complex robot in 8 weeks before our first competition, we then did it again in only 2 weeks before our second competition, and then tore it apart again to make some more improvements in the 2 weeks before Champs.
The robot we took to our first regional event. We had major issues with drive controls and the robot flipping over due to its high center of mass. The climber was too rigid and broke frequently and the turret was slow to lock on. The intakes bowed over time and were too fragile.
— 2 Weeks —
New robot completely from scratch. Shrunk the entire robot by about 4 inches and improved the drive controls. Redesigned the climber to include gas shocks that helped with deployment and gave the arms enough compliance to be driven into the bars. The intakes were reinforced and manufactured using more impact resistant materials. We optimized everything for weight so we could add a traversal climber but unfortunately we were just a few hours and a few tenths of an inch (literally) short to package it.
After our second regional event we found that we had lost range and shot consistency due to the shorter ball path leading up to the shooter. The swerve modules were also too exposed and took some minor damage during finals.
— 2 weeks —
Stripped the robot down to the drivetrain and rebuilt. Used the extra weight to make guards for the swerve modules and add another “kicker” stage before the shooter to increase our range and shot consistency. Finally got some drive practice in and tuned everything in for Champs.
Lessons Learned
So after 12 weeks of perhaps the most concerted effort I will put into anything for the rest of my life, three blue banners, and a beautifully designed robot why do I consider this season a failure? For context my goal for this season was to win worlds and despite everything we didn’t even get picked during alliance selection in our division at worlds. I could accept that the multitude of reasons we didn’t get picked were outside my control and write about how important goal setting skills are or how to manage your own expectations. But to me this as the easy way out and there is more to learn. So instead of accepting this as a failure let’s analyze the process and figure out what things we had control over went wrong.
Elegant Design =/= Performant Design
This is one of those things that seems really obvious and simple in theory but in reality is very nuanced and difficult to grasp. Previously my entire design process revolved around producing the most elegant design, and I believe I succeeded in designing one of if not the most elegant robots in the world. However, the robot was frequently outperformed by much less engineered designs. Overall I have identified that when pursuing a more performant design it is beneficial to be less flexible when re-evaluating initial design constraints even if doing so may result in more indirect or complex solutions. This mistake shows most prevalently in the decision to use through the bumper intakes rather than over the bumper intakes. Initially full width intakes were on my list of design constraints for the robot as the game piece acquisition time is undeniably superior to that of through the bumper intakes. Although there were some other valid reasons we decided to use through the bumper, I ultimately made the decision on the basis that it would vastly simplify the indexer and handling of cargo inside the robot as well as the implementation of the dual sided intakes. And although this was true, in hindsight it would have been better to stick to this initial design constraint and work around over the bumper intakes even if it resulted in other, more convoluted solutions. So overall through the bumper intakes were a better design choice, but at the end of the day a wider intake is a wider intake.