Team Ratchet

Sarah Chartier, Kelly Arndt, Hayley Petit

Objective: To design and program a robot that has the ability to remove its opponent out of the rink. Day 1: Take inventory, and begin research on previously done robots, and begin programming lessons. Day 2: Research, brainstorm ideas and draw prototypes. Choose one prototype and begin programming and building. Day 3: Finish building original model and begin activity #2 and #5; continue brainstorming programming methods. Day 4: Add additional sensors and the front lever; continue working on activities; begin programming, starting with turning 180 degrees. Day 5: Finish activities and answer questions, and continue programming. Day 6: Discover any flaws in construction, and enhance programming if time allows.

Research Websites: http://firstlegoleague.org/sites/default/files/Challenge/TeamResources/SeniorSolutions/2012Pro gramming.pdf http://moodle.brandon.k12.mi.us/resources/STEM/roboticsengineering/index.html http://www.societyofrobots.com/mechanics_gears.shtml http://mindstorms.lego.com/en-us/history/default.aspx

After conducting research, we discovered various designs and programming tips to assist us in completing this challenge. As for design, we found information on different gear ratios, and their relationships to torque and speed. Generally, torque is sacrificed for speed and vice versa. We read that torque, in robotics, is often more beneficial than speed. However, we also found that more gears allows for less power, mainly due to friction, misalignment of pressure angles, lubrication, gear backlash (spacing between meshed gear teeth between two gears) and angular momentum, etc. In addition to gear design, we discovered several add-ons that could be used to facilitate the original robot in its mission. These consisted of an arm powered by a separate motor, which could be used to pick the opponent up and out of the rink, a lever attached to either the front or all around, allowing the robot to sweep its opponents out of the rink as well as protect the robot itself, and lastly, the usage of different sensors. The light sensor allows the robot to detect changes in light intensity and to act accordingly. For example, if the sensor were to hover over the white section of the rink, the robot may be programmed to stop, or turn back around to avoid running off the track. We learned how to calibrate the light sensor, as well. The touch sensor functions as it sounds. The robot may be programmed to react when it detects it is being touched or hit. And finally, the ultrasonic sensor allows the robot to stop at desired distances from another object. This could be used to halt the robot, so it can change direction, instead of charging at the opponent.

Brainstorming:

Sketches:

Initial gear ratio predictions: Gearing ratio 1:1 Less torque, more speed and power (efficiency) Gearing ratio 2:3 Torque * 2/3 = 6.7 lb-in Velocity * 3/2 = 150rps Best solution: We believe our best solution is to create a robot sized similar to the NXT robotics taskbot, with a 1:1 gear ratio to obtain more power efficiency. By being generous in size, we believe it will be more challenging for our opponent to push us out of the rink. In addition to this basic model, we will use a front, low lever, which will serve as protection from our opponent, as well as a method of removing our opponent by pushing the lever underneath its wheels. After observation of other robots, we believe that the speed and power obtained from our gear ratio will be efficient enough in sacrifice of torque. Our hypothesis has been proven to be true so far, as we have tested our robot against others whom sacrificed power and speed for torque. As far as sensors, we will use the ultrasonic sensor, to allow our robot to halt at certain distances from other objects, and we will attempt to use the light sensor, which determines light intensity and acts accordingly. Build Process:

Calculations: Circumference of wheel= Diameter x 3.14 2.2 x 3.14= 6.9 in Degrees traveled per inch, 360/6.9= 52 motor degrees 1 rotation= 7 inches Turn 180 degrees: 180x4.9= 882 motor degrees

Evaluation/Revision: After testing the light sensor on the sumo track, we realized that it was not necessary, due to the fact that by the time the light sensor had detected a change in light intensity (white part of track), the robot would already be out of the ring. After several testing runs, we decided that it would be more useful to continue adding more specifications, rather than spending most of our time on trying to program it efficiently. The same reasoning applied to the ultrasonic sensor. We originally attached the ultrasonic sensor to the back of the robot, rather than the front. At this time we had already constructed our front lever, which we did not have time to take off. So, instead, we simply removed the ultrasonic sensor. Final Solution: Our final decision is to create a robot sized similar to the NXT robotics taskbot, with a 1:1 gear ratio to obtain more power efficiency. By being generous in size, we believe it will be more challenging for our opponent to push us out of the rink. In addition to this basic model, we will use a front, low, lever, which will serve as protection from our opponent, as well as a method of removing our opponent by pushing the lever underneath its wheels. After observation of other robots, we believe that the speed and power obtained from our gear ratio will be efficient enough in sacrifice of torque. Our hypothesis has been proven to be true so far, as we have tested our robot against others whom sacrificed power and speed for torque. As far as sensors, we will not use any, due to the fact that we would rather sacrifice the small benefits of them than time.

Reflection: 1. What did you noticed about yourself and your team while building the Sumo Bot (e.g., interactions, making decisions, brainstorming, team roles)? During this project, we each noticed that it is important that everyone brainstorm separately, and then to later combine any ideas. Each of us seemed to take a different approach on the project, so initially, it was difficult deciding the order of action. We assigned each person a role. Sarah was in charge of constructing and designing the robot, Hayley was in charge of programming, and Kelly was in charge of any additional activities/worksheets, sketches, and prototyping. After the first few days, we discovered that the method of assigning roles would not be efficient, for we often found ourselves relying on each other in certain instances. For example, each of us experienced difficulty at some point with what we were working on, and needed assistance from the other group members.

2. What step of the design process could your team spend more time on? Why? Our team could have spent more time on the brainstorming part of the design process. As we began developing the actual robot and tested it against other opponents, we discovered changes that needed to be made, which easily could have been avoided if we had spent more time thoroughly brainstorming. Also, some of our original ideas, such as to add an arm, were not put into action due to poor planning and lack of time. 3. What was the most difficult part of this design challenge? Why? The most difficult part of this design challenge was determining the design of our robot, mainly because we were unaware of the amount of time certain things would take to build. There were several additions we could have made to our robot, but with the amount of time we had, we were forced to sacrifice those. This made it difficult to balance our other requirements as well. 4. How could you and your team have done prior to this challenge in order to be better prepared for the challenge? Why? In order to be better prepared for the challenge, we believe that we could have researched prior to the challenge, allowing us to begin brainstorming and building immediately. We also believe that gaining more knowledge with gear ratios, as well as torque, speed, power, ect., It wouldve not only sped up the process, but made it more efficient due to our better understanding of the essential physics.