Sumo Robot Project

Hayley Petit, Kelly Arndt, and Sarah Chartier

Objective

To design and program a robot that has the ability to remove its opponent out of the rink.

Research

Generally, torque is sacrificed for speed and vice versa. 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 addons that could be used to facilitate the original robot in its mission (different sensors, "arms" powered by different motors, etc.).

Research
Websites used: http://firstlegoleague.org/sites/default/files/C hallenge/TeamResources/SeniorSolutions/2 012Programming.pdf http://moodle.brandon.k12.mi.us/resources/S TEM/roboticsengineering/index.html http://www.societyofrobots.com/mechanics_ gears.shtml http://mindstorms.lego.com/enus/history/default.aspx

Brainstorming

Sketches

Best 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. 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. 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

Build Process

Build Process

Calculations
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 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

Reflection

What did you noticed about yourself and your team while building the Sumo Bot (e.g., interactions, making decisions, brainstorming, team roles)? o During this project, we each noticed that it is important that everyone brainstorm separately, and then to later combine any ideas. 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. What step of the design process could your team spend more time on? Why? o 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.

Reflection cont.

What was the most difficult part of this design challenge? Why? o 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. How could you and your team have done prior to this challenge in order to be better prepared for the challenge? Why? o 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 comfortability and knowledge with gear ratios, as well as torque, speed, power, ect., wouldve not only sped up the process, but made it more efficient due to our better understanding of the essential physics.