Competition Description
The final competition took place on, Saturday April 8, 2017 and was held in the lower gym at the Recreation and Physical Activity Center (RPAC). The final competition consisted of several components, including three round robins and the tournament. In each of the three round robins, four teams competed against each other at once and the results were used to determine if anything would need to be changed for the tournament. In the tournament, 81 teams competed against each other to declare which team had the best robot. Four teams competed on each course and only the one with the best score in the fastest time would move on.
The scoring of the competition was divided into two sections: primary tasks and secondary tasks. The total amount of possible primary points was 75 while the total amount of possible secondary points was 25. The primary tasks, secondary tasks, and point distribution for each task are shown below in the Results table.
The final competition consisted of several different aspects. Four robots performed simultaneously. There were three rounds of round robin play, as well as a single–elimination tournament. For each single–elimination run, the robot that earned the most points was declared the winner. In the case of a numerical tie, the robot with the shorter run time was declared the winner. If two or more robots are tied in both points and time, the match was re–run from the beginning with only the tied robots.
The schedule for the final competition was as follows:
10:00 – 10:30 am: team arrival and check–in
12:00 pm: round robin begins
short break
4:00 pm: head–to–head begins
5:30 pm: prize and award ceremony
Competition Strategy
The strategy executed by the team for the final competition was similar to the strategy utilized for the individual competition. The diagram is located below. Click here to learn more about process and benefits of the Individual Competition Strategy.
One of the major changes from the initial strategy was the decision to not deposit the core. This decision was made because the core could not properly slide out of the forklift when it was being deposited into the bin. This change was beneficial to the overall strategy because it reduced the amount of time that the robot spent on the course and it did not affect the primary scoring. The second major change was the decision to rotate the satellite 5 degrees rather than 90 degrees. This strategy was determined because the robot required nearly 30 seconds to properly position itself near the satellite. In conservation of time, the team decided that the robot should only partially turn it. This also didn’t affect the primary scoring because turning the satellite 90 degrees was a secondary task.
Results
The robot received its greatest score of 82 in the third round robin. The robot accomplished all of the primary tasks and accomplished one secondary task. The secondary task that the robot was able to complete was holding the seismograph button down for five seconds. In the head to head competition, the robot earned a score of 57 points. The robot was not able to touch the core, control the core, or turn the satellite in the head-to-head competition because of incorrect placement before the run. Before each run, the robot was placed at certain positions and the proteus was pressed to record the exact RPS coordinates of that position. The incorrect positioning before the run caused the robot to miss the core and then miss the satellite.
Click to view the Final Competition Testing Log
