League Meet 1 Review

By Georgia, Aarav, Krish, Tanvi, Jai, Sol, Ren, Nalin, and Fernando

Task: Analyze our performance at the League Meet 1

Today, Iron Reign went to our first League Meet of the season. We made it to 7th place out of 29 teams, and improved heavily from the Screamage.

Match Recap

Match 1: 29 to 9 Win

Scored 1 sample into the low basket during Auton. 1 sample fell out of the claw because it went through the color sensor but we picked up a 2nd one from the spike marks and scored. Finally, we scored 1 sample from the submersible. However, we did get a penalty because while we were scoring, we pushed 1 sample into the net zone, resulting in a double control penalty.

Match 2: 46 to 35 Win

We scored 4 total samples, including 1 in Auton, including 2 from the submersible. However, the elbow seems to also be having a little bit of trouble.

Match 3: 31 to 21 Win

We scored 3 total samples, including 1 in Auton. Slow sensor response times limited how fast we could intake samples, and our linear slide was quick wobbly leading to poor accuracy at the basket.

Match 4: 48 to 70 Loss

In this match we forgot to adjust the alliance color we were on, so we could only intake yellow samples, but we still scored a couple including our preload.

Match 5: 73 to 75 Loss

We scored 4 samples, including in Auton and all 3 from the spike marks. However, at the end of the match, we got confused and tried to touch the first bar instead of going to the observation zone.

Game Analysis

Our Auton was very consistent throughout all 5 matches, and we scored a sample in the low basket each time without fail. However, while the Auton worked well, it only scored 4 points each time. Code-wise, our next steps for the upcoming League Meet involve scoring on the high basket and picking up neutral samples from the spike marks.

In Tele-op, our cycle times for the low basket varied from 15 to 33 seconds, with a mean of 23.2 seconds and a mean of 22.5 seconds. Oftentimes, the robot got the sample up to the low basket but the sample would end up outside the bucket. For our slower cycle times, we noticed that alignment between the robot and the sample was the biggest problem. Even though there was not an issue with picking up samples of the other color due to the color sensor, the alignment had to be somewhat accurate for the beater bar to intake the sample.

There were some outlier cycle times because in one of the matches, we forgot to change what color samples the beater bar picks up. This resulted in only letting the robot pick up yellow samples. Also, the beater bar is too slow, and we noticed that for yellow samples it took a longer time for the belt to stop rolling so that the sample would stay in place.

During the end game, we struggled with scoring points and deciding on a strategy. For two of the matches, the drive team was able to quickly maneuver the robot to the observation zone at the last few seconds to score parking points. Other times, we tried to touch the low bar to get the first level hanging points, but we were never able to. One of our limitations was that the robot needed to slowly approach the bar so the arm would not break.

Our strategy was also poor at times. In our last match, we were very close to touching the low bar, but the timer ran out once second to early. If we had been prepared and instead traveled to the observation zone, we would have won that last game by one point.That is why one of the biggest goals for our team before the second league meet is to give the code and drive teams about a week each to make sure simple mistakes like that don’t happen.