I mean you should expect around 1000 eur for one robot because even basic robot with pololu motors, pololu drivers, pixy camera and some pcbs will alone get to somewhere around 600 eurs since you still need to consider the pcb cost and a lot of other small components like display, voltage convertor, batteries and compass. Now this is considering that the new team will never do anything wrong and wouldnt fry a single thing and every idea will be the perfect one used for the final robot. What i am trying to say is that production cost is also a huge factor when making a robot. This year our overall spending were almost double the combined cost of our robots
Also we already got 2 categories that can be utilized by new teams(light wieght and entry) i am not saying that you should from the get go dive into your own object detection done by camera and do your own drivers. But i am saying that there should be a room to improve to, since most of the teams that get into robocup stick with it. Also raising the voltage limit can help newer teams since there is a higher chance of finding some better motors lying around, in case the voltage limit would be higher. Also limiting teams from getting too good is just counter productive for the whole competition also i doubt there is a single team here without sponsors and if there is one money were never issue for them to begin with. So the money factor isnt really that big and i believe that acquiring sponsors is also a skill and if you are able to get more sponsors you should be able to utilize it to its potential.
Also the idea of new teams not having enough money is simply false and we cant really judge the economical states of new teams. The thing is that in my opinion new teams never stand a chance against a team doing it for 5 years since they had time to perfect their robots. Maybe it would be even better to raise the limits of what robots can do contradictorary to believe that there should be an upper cap for robots. This could prove to be a good idea since you have more room for improvements and are not that heavily limited which causes to sharpening the robots to the absolute perfection within the given restriction. What i am trying to say is that lets say that wehave a team that is doing soccer open for 5 years in first 2 years they made a robot that gone to the world robocup and were able to use succesfully maxon motors and now for their next 3 years are just polishing their robot to the outmost perfection meaning a little room for improvement and absolute domination with their robot over the newer teams.
To summarize my point I think that right now the starting point for the newer teams is quite okay saying this as a team that this year made our second no lego robot for open and was able to win almost half of our matches in world competition and the only thing unfair about soccer open is that there are teams with triple your experience. Which is quite understandable. And giving teams to make a little better robots just makes the competition more fun for everyone even the older teams.
@kovact - I see your point about doubling the budget to $1000/robot or more; good for others to read that and realize that things do fry. My suggestion of $500/bot was for very basic robots - no custom PCBs and simple 3D printed chassis from supplies they already have. Iām keeping it on the cheap side in part b/c Iām looking to have an example that will be on par with other robotics competitions that allow for 10 or more students per team and just one robot (i.e. RCJ soccer will be the foundation of this schoolās after school robotics program so budget needs to be tight).
Iād like to push back on your conclusions on the money issue; your evidence seems self selecting based on your experience and what you observed from existing rookie teams. My concerns are for the teams that may never exist if RCJ sets the bar too high. My push back on the rule change is to make sure we can still practically encourage new teams while balancing with better engineered robots.
I agree that it is good and right for a new team to consider gaining sponsorship and fund raising. However, Iām coming from the angle of trying to grow new teams. If a school, family, or any organization is going to make an investment into an RCJ team, theyād want to see some return on that investment. Yes, we can focus on the educational value but the sad truth is that the competition does matter too much to some. The more money (and time) invested, the more results are expected. Would you have performed as well as you did and have been as satisfied as you seem to be if those veteran teams you were up against not only had the experience but also motors allowed by this rule change? Would you as a rookie team have felt pressure to put more time into fund raising to get these more advanced drives? Would you be able to acquire the necessary skills to drive those motors effectively?
Since the rule change seems like a lock, perhaps we should now steer this discussion to how do we prepare potential new teams for this advancement. Do we now say āinvest in brushless or expect to get demolished!?ā Do we just skip over teaching h-bridges and go right into speed controllers?
The notes regarding this topic from our open discussion Zoom meeting last week:
Question: David: Is there anyone in the committee that has anything against moving to the 48V limit? [referencing thread on discussion so far].
No discussion. No opposition (silence)! Two thumbs up.
Looks like everyone is in favor of the rule change!
Sorry, I missed the first meeting; that was my fault. However, I disagree with the 48V voltage limit. If we want to implement this, we should introduce a power limitation somewhere. Obviously, voltage is not the only power source, but it is easier to obtain more power from motors with higher voltage. Too much power discourages strategy, and thereās a risk to come cack to a ābrutal forceā game.
Sorry, I have a question about this. Are you sure that brushless motors (or EC-Flat) are less expensive than brushed DC motors with their drivers? If you are sure, could you please name some of them? I checked a few, and they were a lot more expensive than brushed motors, which made me confused about how they could be affordable.
Hello
I think this topic has been discussed enough. However, my personal opinion is to keep the voltage limit (or create a speed limit instead of a voltage limit). If we donāt put any restrictions in this field, according to other rules, we will face robots that are engaged in destroying the way of playing competitors with only power and force and high speed.
Anyway, I request that whatever decision is taken be finalized soon. Teams need to prepare equipment for their robots. Therefore, I think the final decision should be announced soon.
Thank you all
Just for clarification :
in the draft rules there are 48V as maximum voltage for both 2vs2 leagues.
This was well discussed and agreed.
We should make clear, that we are talking about 48V DC !
Students in most countries are allowed to work with up to 48 or even 50V DV but only 24 or 25V AC.
With battery powered robots we usually do not deal with AC anyway, so there is no need for further discussion to restrict the 48V to DC only, I think.
So please include these two letters āDCā to the (draft) 2vs2 soccer rules.
Roland