STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY. RoboCup Soccer SSL. Platform Design Phase VI Final Report

Transcription

1 STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY RoboCup Soccer SSL Platform Design Phase VI Final Report I pledge my honor that I have abided by the Stevens Honor System. May 3, 2010 Patrick Alfonzo Andrew Domicolo Michael Fatovic Amanda Goldman Daniel Silva

2 Executive Summary This is the final report for the Stevens Institute of Technology s Mechanical Engineering Department s RoboCup Soccer Small Size League (SSL) Platform Design Senior Design project. Based around the RoboCup Soccer SSL International Competition, the team took on the challenge to make a set of completely autonomous robots who participate in a soccer match. Divvied up into a total of six phases, the Stevens Mechanical Engineering Senior Design curriculum focused on the main constituents of any design process research and planning, technical analyses, finalizing designs, manufacturing and fabrication, subsystem testing and debugging, final testing and presentation. Over the past school year the RoboCup design team has completely utilized each phase to further the development of its project. In Phase I the team chose the RoboCup Soccer SSL as its project, did the proper research of the competition, designed the overall system network for the project as a whole, and selected the essential components necessary to construct a robot. The team further advanced its project in Phase II by performing pertinent technical analyses to determine whether or not the team s initial plans were physically possible. Phase III helped the team develop original design specifications which were then manufactured both by the team and by the Stevens Institute of Technology s Machine Shop as well as purchasing the final listing of necessary components. In Phase IV the design team fabricated the initial prototype and tested preliminary subsystems. Phase V the team concentrated its efforts on finalizing the prototype, programming the fundamental software modules, and performing a series of final tests. In this final stage, Phase VI, the team has continued its finalization of the robot prototype as well as producing several various presentations and demonstrations including Senior Design Expo, the Technical Communications Competition, and the Research and Entrepreneurship Day. This report is the compilation of the Stevens RoboCup Senior Design Team s yearlong effort towards the production of a RoboCup Soccer SSL prototype. The information presented here shows the advancement and growth of the design team as a whole while the project itself progressed. 2

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary 2 Introduction 5 Project Objectives 6 System Design Process Flowchart 7 Component Selection Motor Selection 9 Wheel Selection 9 Visualization.. 10 Wireless Communication.. 11 Motor Control.. 11 Kicker and Dribbler Assembly.. 11 Body and Chassis Preliminary Design Specifications.. 13 Budget Estimate.. 20 Technical Analysis Directional Control.. 21 Vision Recognition.. 22 Power Consumption.. 23 Driven Kick late.. 23 Prototype Manufacturing and Assembly Purchasing.. 25 In-house Manufacturing.. 26 Out-of-house Manufacturing Wheel Adapters.. 26 Dribbler Mechanism.. 28 Kicker Assembly.. 29 Final Design Specifications.. 30 Subsystem Testing Motor Speed.. 31 Dribbler Mechanism.. 35 Motor Mount Assembly.. 37 Software Development Strategic Loops.. 38 Final Program Challenges Encountered Laboratory Size Constraint

4 Electronics and Communications Incompatibilities.. 41 Future Plans.. 42 Senior Design Experience.. 43 Changes to Design.. 43 Conclusion.. 44 Gantt Chart... Appendix A Purchased Parts List... Appendix B Preliminary Budget.. Appendix C Finalized Budget.. Appendix D Nugget Charts (Phase I VI).. Appendix E Machine Shop Designs.. Appendix F Selected Component Datasheets... Appendix G RoboCup SSL 2010 Rules and Regulations... Appendix H 4

5 Introduction The Stevens RoboCup Design Team has made significant progressions throughout this past year. The team took on the immense challenge to design, create, and establish the first ever Steven Institute of Technology RoboCup team. The initial objective of the team was to model, manufacture, and program a complete set of autonomous robots capable of competing in the RoboCup Soccer World Cup. With prominent obstacles from the beginning the team was able to refocus its primary objective to create a working prototype of a singular RoboCup robot. The working prototype RoboCup robot would need to be able to navigate around a test field, determine its location and that of the ball in play, retain possession of the ball, and kick the ball just as a real soccer play would. Through a strong concentrated effort from all team members throughout the six design phases, the team s project propelled forward and set itself aside from the rest of the Senior Design groups. After a long year of planning, designing, purchasing, manufacturing, fabricating, programming, debugging, and testing the design team is ready to present its entire process from start to finish with an end result with which all members are pleased with. The team has seen many revisions of its original design concepts as seen in Phase I; however, its overall system design stayed the same. In the previous semester, the group relied on research and development to analyze the Official RoboCup Competition Rules and Regulations located in Appendix H and select a set of components to construct the robot from. The Stevens team then conducted several technical analyses which helped foster an understanding of the more complex features of the project as a whole as well as determine whether or not some of the team s design plans were physically plausible. The team then proceeded to solidify its design plans of the parts of the robot which were to be fabricated, both by the team and by the Stevens Machine Shop. The engineers also purchased, ordered, and received all necessary components to complete its one fully operational robotic soccer player. A complete listing of the team s purchased components can be seen attached in Appendix B. The team continued its diligent work this semester by successfully tackling Phases IV and V in the same manner that it approached Phases I-III. Once the team received all of its 5

6 purchased components, the engineers started with compatibility and subsystem testing. The project throughout this past semester was separated into two separate yet equal factions hardware/prototype assembly and electronics/programming/communications operation. The team set up a test field used to optimize the vision recognition software as well as perform various subsystem tests such as motor speed and dribbler/kicker assembly operation. After the each of the subsystem tests proved sufficient, the team assembled the entirety of the prototype. The design team was then able to focus on perfecting the LabVIEW program necessary to complete its primary objectives of traversing around the playing field, finding the ball, retaining possession of the ball, and kicking the ball. Lastly, during this last phase the team presented its prototype and overall design work in various demonstrations. The first was the Senior Design Expo in which all Senior Design groups of every major convened in the Canavan Arena in the Charles V. Schaefer, Jr. Athletic and Recreation Center on April 28, The team set up its test field and displayed the prototypes mechanical maneuverability via a manual control system. The reason behind this manual control was that the LabVIEW programming was not calibrated to the Design Expo s surroundings and the dimensions and tolerances built into the system were no longer applicable. The team also presented their project to a non-technical audience in the Technical Communications Competition held by the Stevens Office of Communication Professionals. At this competition the team had to present its overall project in a non-technical manner, emphasizing on presentation skills and delivery. The Stevens RoboCup Design Team took first place at this competition. Finally, the team was also requested to attend the Stevens Research and Entrepreneurship Day in which the team presented its overall project to a panel of various potential investors, professors, and business professionals. Project Objectives The Stevens RoboCup Design Team had many objectives which needed to be completed this past semester for their project to be successful. As previously stated, the group s primary object was to completely construct a working prototype of a singular RoboCup robot. Once the fabrication of the robot was completed, the team could assess the task of troubleshooting the 6

7 communications between the robot and the host computer. As soon as the robot and the central computer could communicate effectively, the group could then focus the center of its attention in amending and correcting the LabVIEW program which controls the movements of the robot around the playing field. In order to test the program and resultant movements of the robot accurately, the team constructed a test field in the Stevens Robotics and Controls Laboratory in Room 301 in the Edwin A. Stevens Building. This field was constructed from a green outdoor carpet and white athletic tape to ¾ scale of the dimensions provided by the RoboCup 2010 SSL Regulatory Committee. System Design This section pertains to most of the fundamental designs and organizational attributes found in Phase I. Topics covered in this section include the process flowchart, component selection, preliminary designs, and budget estimates. These issues helped the design team plan out its project accordingly and make the necessary initial steps towards a working prototype. Process Flowchart The first necessary task that the team needed to develop was a complete flowchart in which how the team spells out how its entire system will work. The team s entire process focuses around the globalization camera which is located above the field. The camera watches the entire field and can track all players on the field as well as the ball in play. The camera s image is processed on the main processing computer through a LabVIEW image recognition program. This program can track the location of the ball and the robot as well as its current angle of rotation. Using this information and specific algorithms coded into the program LabVIEW can communicate wirelessly through the XBee Module via the USB Hub. This broadcasts the commands to the receiving XBee Module located on the robot. The onboard XBee chip then communicates to the PIC and custom circuitry on the robot via a serial adapter. These electronics then delegate the proper commands to the appropriate Drive Motors, Dribbler Motors, and Solenoid Valve. While this functional loop is running, the camera is still capturing the physical actions of the robot and sending the information back to the host computer. This 7

8 capture feed then acts as a feedback control in order to make the necessary changes to fine-tune its strategic commands. This process is presented graphically in Figure 1 below. Figure 1: The Stevens RoboCup Design Team's Process Flowchart Component Selection This section briefly retouches upon the various components selected for the RoboCup prototype. In each section a short comparison of other possible choices is presented and the specific reasoning behind the chosen component. For more specific information on any of the chosen components the supplied datasheet has been attached in Appendix G. 8

9 Motor Selection The following chart illustrates several motors that were considered for the RoboCup application Motor Price/Unit Size Speed Peak Torque Peak Current Anaheim Automation BLWR17 Brushless DC Motor $ " long 1.65" diam rpm 8.5 oz/in - Premotec BL48 EB Brushless DC Motor - 3.7cm long 5.4cm diam rpm 43 mnm 2.13 A Maxon EC45 Flat Brushless DC Motor $60 1.6cm long 4.3cm diam rpm 260 mnm 2.30 A LynxMotion GHM01 DC Motor $22 4.8cm long 3.7cm diam. 200 rpm A Each of these motors was provided with a datasheet which listed all of the important specifications. The group weighed each of the motors designs against one another and ultimately went with the model that best fit the project s needs and fit within the budgetary constraint. The group decided to go with the LynxMotion GHM01 DC motor (highlighted) for its final design. This motor selection has been highlighted in highlighted in yellow in the chart above. Wheel Selection The team decided early in the project s life that something different than a conventional 4 wheel design will be needed. The robot will need to have maximum motor control flexibility and will need to allow the robot to move easily in two dimensions to both rotate and translate in place. The design engineers agreed that an omniwheel design meets all of their requirements. The following chart shows a compiled list of particular omniwheel designs that have been used by RoboCup teams of the past as well as several new models. 9

10 Name Price Diameter Max Load Image AcroName R76 $ cm diam. 15 lbs AcroName R129 $ cm diam. 50 lbs Vex OmniWheel $ cm diam. - The AcroName R76 omniwheel was selected because it was the most cost efficient solution that met all of the project s design requirements. Visualization The Stevens RoboCup Design team determined in Phase I that during game play a global position camera would be utilized to collect real time data. This visual data will be sent to a central PC and processed using LabVIEW. The camera that was selected needed to be a high quality color camera, compatible with LabVIEW s built in imaging software, and have a high enough frame refresh rate that it would be able to keep up with the high speed game. The team settled on the Prosilica GC750C Color Camera. The camera, shown in Figure 2, meets all of the team s requirements. Figure 2: Prosilica EC750C 10

11 Wireless Communication The main processing computer will need a way to communicate wirelessly with the robotics player on the field. The team came up with several solutions that could have been used to effectively transmit data and commands to the robots, such as Bluetooth and WiFi technologies. However, the optimal solution the team selected was the ZigBee Wireless Communication Protocol. This component provides the Stevens RoboCup team the required ease Figure 3: XBee Module of wireless communication, speed of data transmission, all the while staying within budget constraints. Of the various ZigBee units available, the team had decided to purchase the XBee Module, shown in Figure 3, for not only its size but its efficiency. This chip uses a serial communication protocol that is fully compatible with LabVIEW and will also provide the necessary high-speed data transfer. Motor Control The group investigated several options for motor control and on-board data processing boards. The most cost-efficient solution the team could develop was to use the PIC Interface Boards that were provided in the Stevens Institute of Technology s Engineering Design 1 and 2 Program. These PIC Boards have adequate processing capabilities as well as sufficient number of I/O channels to operate the robot s on-board motors and solenoid. These PIC boards are also compatible with the ZigBee Wireless Communication Protocol and the specific XBee Module that has been selected. Kicker and Dribbler Assembly The design team furthered their research by investigating and evaluating the effectiveness of previous winning school s Kicker and Dribbler Assembly mechanisms. The Stevens RoboCup team decided to select a simple DC motor for the dribbler mechanism (to keep the player in contact with the game ball) and an electric solenoid for the kicker mechanism (to shoot the ball during game play). The Dribbler motor selection considerations are displayed in the following chart. 11

12 Motor Price Size Speed Pros Cons MicroMo 2230F006S $ " long 0.85" diam. 8,000 rpm -High speeds -Small -Expensive MicroMo 1331T006SR $ " long 0.50" diam. -High speeds 12,000 rpm -Small -Expensive Lynxmotion Gear Head Motor - 7.2vdc 30:1 $ " long 1.5" diam. 291 rpm -Inexpensive -Small -Low speed The team decided to use the LynxMotion Gear Head Motor (highlighted yellow) because it met the speed requirements as well as being the most inexpensive solution. The considerations for the electric solenoid are shown in the following chart. The team s selection has been highlighted in yellow. Solenoid Price Size Power Pros Cons Bimba 0071 Pneumatic solenoid $ " long 17.5 psi (78N) -Relatively inexpensive -Complex air system Solenoidcity S H electric solenoid $45 2" long 125 oz-f (34.75N) -Easy installation -Less force than pneumatic -Expensive Body and Chassis After research material options and discussing manufacturability with Stevens Institute of Technology s Machine Shop staff, it was determined that the first prototype robot would be constructed out of an acrylic plastic material. This is a low cost solution that will provide durability, flexibility, as well as ease of machining. Eventually, an entire team of robots may be fabricated using aluminum components to increase strength and stability of the chassis. 12

13 Preliminary Design Specifications Let it be known that the designs represented in this section are the initial models of what the Stevens RoboCup Design Team intended to manufacture and fabricate. For the final design assembly please go to the Prototype Manufacturing and Assembly Section. Thank you. Throughout the Stevens RoboCup Design Team s beginning stages, the design team concentrated its efforts to come up with several design considerations for its prototype model. When the design engineers were creating a three dimensional model of the chassis and body of the robot, it was required to take the components and electronics into consideration. These elements included the motors, solenoid, and wheels attached to the chassis and the IC boards within the confines of the outer casing of the robot. The image in Figure 4 shows the specifications of the motor, LynxMotion GHM-01, the team had selected to move the wheels. Figure 5 shows the recommended mounting brackets that will be used to attach the motors to the chassis. Figure 4: Specifications of the LynxMotion GHM-01Motor Source: 13

14 Figure 5: Specifications for the LynxMotion GHM-01 Mounting Bracket Source: The last purchased material that is included in the operations of the robot was the solenoid valve which triggers the movement of the kicker plate and subsequently strikes the ball. Figure 6 shows a section of the provided specification sheet of the chosen solenoid, the Solenoid City S H Electric Solenoid. Figure 6: Specification of the Solenoid City S H Electric Solenoid Source: 14

15 The following images, Figures 7 11, are the components the design team had originally decided to be manufactured at the Stevens Institute of Technology s Machine Shop. As it has been mentioned before, these preliminary design components will be first machined out of aluminum for the prototype design stages. a. Kicker Plate attached to the solenoid valve, strikes the ball Figure 72: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Kicker Plate Design b. Dribbler creates a backspin on the ball which allows the robot to keep position whilst moving Figure 8: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Dribbler Design 15

16 c. Dribbler Brackets supports and affixes the dribbler mechanism to the chassis Figure 9: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Dribbler Bracket Design d. Solenoid Brackets stabilizes and secures the solenoid on the chassis Figure 30: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Solenoid Shaft Bracket Design Figure 11: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Solenoid Rear Bracket Design 16

17 The Stevens RoboCup Design Team then completed its initial design for the robot prototype. Using the previous modeled components to be manufactured the team was able to design a three dimensional view of the layout of the robot. The following images, Figures 12 17, are multiple views of the preliminary assembled design of the chassis complete with to scale components. All of the components that are colored red are the separate purchased items (motors, motor brackets, wheels, and solenoid). The elements which are blue and transparent grey are the parts which the design team will be fabricating in the Stevens Institute of Technology s Machine Shop (solenoid brackets, kicker plate, dribbler, dribbler brackets, and chassis). The orange sphere in the images represents the golf ball which will be functioning as the soccer ball during the competition. The height of the prototyped chassis, including the wheels is 4.24 inches, which leaves the team with an extra 1.67 inches available for on board electronics and circuitry. Figure 124: Top View of the Stevens Preliminary Assembled Prototype Design 17

18 Figure 13: Front View of the Stevens Preliminary Assembled Prototype Design Figure 14: Right View of the Stevens Preliminary Assembled Prototype Design 18

19 Figure 15: Isometric View of the Stevens Preliminary Assembled Prototype Design The kicker device will strike the ball away from the robot by a force which is provided by the electric solenoid system. In Figure 16, the solenoid, in red, is attached with the brackets, in blue. The kicker, the L-shaped device, is attached to the solenoid shaft and stopped by a washer at the end of the shaft before coming in contact with the dribbler mechanism. Figure 16: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Kicker Device 19

20 The dribbling mechanism, shown in Figure 17, is a simple mechanism made of a motor, modeled in red, and a simple roller shown in blue. The two elements are connected by a belt, which will be used to harness the rotation of the motor and transfer that to the dribbler. The dribbler is attached to the chassis by two L-brackets. The belt is driven by the motor in a counter clockwise direction this will in turn keep the ball in contact with the robot whenever it has possession, until the ball is kicked by the kicker device. Figure 5: Stevens RoboCup Design Team s Dribbling Device Budget Estimate Prior to purchasing all of the essential components for the team s prototype, the group created a detailed itemized budget. The preliminary budget, which can be found attached in Appendix C, contains documented retail prices and references for each component. The total amount cost to completely purchase, manufacture, and fabricate an entire team of RoboCup robots would be $2, The budget continues to show that the cost of just one complete robot is $285.44, which does not include the cost of the camera, and other miscellaneous materials (such as the practice field, practice game balls, etc.). This budget had been reviewed by the Director of the Stevens Mechanical Engineering Department and has preliminarily been approved. The RoboCup Design team had agreed to continue with their intent to purchase enough materials to fabricate one working prototype, then after a successful proof of concept the group will then continue with the fabrication of the remainder of the team time providing. 20

21 Technical Analysis This section of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team report reflects the work accomplished in Phase II by the group. These studies included Directional Control Analysis, Vision Recognition Analysis, Power Consumption Analysis, and Driven Kick Plate Analysis. Directional Control The team presented the benefits of using a three wheel omniwheel drive train as opposed to a traditional four wheel Akerman Steering drive system. As it can be seen in Figure 18 below, the omniwheel system allows for motion in both the x and y direction simultaneous, whilst the Akerman system only allows motion in the direction the front wheels are pointing. Figure 18: Traditional Akerman Steering Drive System vs. Omniwheel System Source: As it had been discussed in the Phase I proposal, the Steven RoboCup Design Team decided that the best solution for a wheel orientation and configuration would be a three omniwheel system. Although this helped reduce costs, the team is now required to design a much more complex motion control system. The second phase of the drive and directional control analysis calculated the power ratios which would be required to travel in any given direction. In theory, these ratios provide a vector calculation that would be required to complete in order to command the robot to travel in any direction. In order to increase response time, the team could place these ratios in a look up table which could later be utilized to quickly obtain the proper command for any specific direction. 21

22 Vision Recognition The vision recognition analysis presented the process which will be utilized by the group to track the location and orientation of the team s robotic player as well as the ball in play. The process uses LabVIEW s image processing to precisely locate and match a designated test image to that in the real-time image taken by the overhead global visualization camera. This image matching can be seen in Figure 19. Figure 19: Vision Recognition Analysis As the LabVIEW image shows, the image processing unit can differentiate colors and degrees of rotation and translation even when there are competing colors viewed. In Figure 20 the LabVIEW software s output is shown which shows the change in position, angle, and scale. It also tells the users how confident LabVIEW is in its image processing that it has located the test image in the area called Score. Figure 20: LabVIEW's image processing output 22

23 Power Consumption After selecting the majority of the components needed to assemble a robot, the Stevens RoboCup Design Team needed to ensure that it had a battery capable of running every process simultaneously. A power consumption analysis helped determine the size of the battery required to run all of the electrical systems on board of the robot. Taking into consideration the length of the soccer match (20 minutes) and the power consumed the by the drive motors, dribbler motor, and solenoid, the group determined that a 2000mAh battery was required. Ultimately, the team decided to purchase a 12V, 2000mAh Nickel Metal Hydride battery (NiMH). This battery and its charger can be seen in Figure 21. Figure 21: 12V, 2000mAh NiMH Battery and its charger Driven Kick Plate The Stevens RoboCup Design Team wanted to devise a new way to elude the defending team s robot. Some teams have been known to have one designated player with an angle kicker plate used to chip the game ball over the field. During the Phase II analyses, the group decided to investigate to automate this angled kick plate so that not only could every robot have the ability to chip the ball, but also so the height and the distance the ball is chipped can be adjusted in each situation. This would surely set the Stevens team aside from the rest. There are a particular set of constants that can be assumed to be universal throughout the RoboCup Competition teams. The maximum height (150 mm) and maximum diameter (180 mm) for each competing robot have been assumed. Using this information, along with the realtime measured center to center distance from the offensive to the defensive players (made 23

24 available by the global visualization camera and LabVIEW), the team can program the computer to calculate the correct angle and initial velocity to clear the opposing player. To calculate the correct angle, the dimensions were input into projectile motion equations. The angle was the determined using an Excel spreadsheet which outputs the necessary angle and initial velocity, both of which can be sent as commands for the robot to carry out. The physics mechanics behind this theory can be seen in Figure 22. An example of the Excel spreadsheet follows after the picture. The yellow row represents the real time measured data, the green row represents a pre-game determined variable which designates the percentage of the height which the ball will clear the defender, and the red row represents the output required angle of attack. Figure 22: Driven Kick Plate Analysis 24

25 Center to Center Distance: m = ft Distance to Defender: m = 0.41 ft Buffer Zone (Leading Edge): 25% Distance to top of curve: m = ft Time to top of curve: s Gravitational Acceleration: m/s² = ft/s² Initial Velocity (y-axis): m/s = ft/s Initial Velocity (x-axis): m/s = ft/s Initial Velocity (magnitude): m/s = ft/s Angle of Attack: = rad Prototype Manufacturing and Assembly This section of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team s report deals primarily with the work completed in the spring semester. These actions include, but are not limited to, purchasing, inhouse manufacturing, out-of-house manufacturing, final design specifications, and assembly. Purchasing At the beginning of the spring semester the team had already put in the appropriate paper work to order the approved components that were selected and solidified over the previous semester. After a conversation with the Director of the Stevens Mechanical Engineering Department regarding a budget extension, the group was allowed to purchase enough material to make one prototype model, as previously discussed. The group scaled back its original quantities desired and developed a finalized budget which accurately depicts the team s expenditures over the school year. The purchased components can be seen in the Parts List in Appendix B and the final itemized budget list can be seen in Appendix D. 25

26 In-house Manufacturing Although technically all of the RoboCup Design Team s manufacturing was done inhouse in terms of being completed at Stevens, there were a few components that were made by the team itself. The entire chassis structure was designed and cut by the team utilizing the laser cutter made available in the Robotics and Control Laboratory, in which the team did all of its testing and fabrication. The main chassis base plate was designed to allow the drive motors to be mounted 180 apart and equidistant from the edges of the circle. The front face of the circle was cut out in an attempt to comply with the RoboCup Rules and Regulations regarding covering the ball in play. The base plate also needed to have a clearance hole which allowed the kicker plate s extension arm to travel without disrupting the dribbler mechanism which was located in its own clearance hole in the front of the chassis. The chassis was designed to be modular in the sense that with the addition of standoffs various tiers could be stacks on top of one another allowing numerous layers to be created for electronics and other onboard components. A three dimensional view of these pieces can be seen in the Final Designs Specifications section of this report. The parts that are shown clear and/or gray are the chassis tiers that were manufacture in-house. Out-of-house Manufacturing The components discussed in this section that have been referred to manufactured outof-house are parts that have been designed by the team yet created by the Stevens Machine Shop. The majority of these designed parts drawings have been included in Appendix F. Wheel Adapters An issue that arouse for the design team after the purchased items arrived was that the omniwheels did not come equipped with a way to affix them to the drive motor shafts. After researching various options and conferring with the Stevens Machine Shop Staff the best fix for this problem was to manufacture a set screw adapter that is press fit onto the wheel itself. This press fit adapter can be seen in Figure 23 below. 26

27 Figure 23: The Design Team's Press Fit Omniwheel Adapter Basically, a collar is held tightly snug inside the wheel s opening. The outside collar then surrounds the motor shaft and is locked on by a set screw. Although this remedied the initial problem, it created another one. With the added distance between the wheel and the shaft, now the wheels extend past the maximum outside diameter allowed by the RoboCup Regulatory Committee. For the Stevens RoboCup Design Team this issue could easily be fixed; however, due to time and budgetary constraints the team kept the oversized model. The team could solve this problem in two ways one, design a smaller wheel adapter and two, select smaller drive motors which allow for more space under the chassis. An image of this assembly can be seen in Figure 24 below. 27

28 Figure 24: The Design Team s Drive Motor and Omniwheel Assembly with the manufactured wheel adapter Dribbler Mechanism As discussed previously, this system operates as the robot s way to keep possession of the ball. By creating a backspin upon the ball, the robot would be able to retain control of the ball during game play maneuvers. The team s dribbler mechanism is a part that changed very slightly since the beginning of the project; however, the overall design did not change. The parts that needed to be designed and manufactured by the Stevens Machine Shop were the dribbler motor mount, the dribbler motor shaft, the dribbler itself, and the dribbler brackets. The operation of this mechanism works like this the dribbler motor is mounted to the chassis, as it turns it spins the dribbler motor shaft which is locked onto the original shaft with a set screw, attached by a belt this turns the dribbler itself, which spins freely in the dribbler brackets which are mounted on another tier of the chassis. This mechanism can be seen modeled in the Final Design Specifications section and explained how the design changed from its original placement. A photo of this assembly can be seen in Figure 25, in which the placement of the kicker can also be seen. 28

29 Figure 25: The Design Team's dribbler mechanism Kicker Assembly This system operates as the robot s foot. At any point in time if the computer should tell the robot to shoot or pass the electric solenoid would engage, which in turn would cause the shaft to travel in the positive direction. The design team kept its original design concept for this assembly; however, it only slightly modified the way to attach the kicker plate itself. Much like the wheel adapter, the kicker assembly has a collar that attaches to the solenoid s shaft via a set screw. This then gets screwed into a long aluminum piece which travels through the chassis clearance hole, affixed to two standoffs which have the kicker plate mounted on the opposite side. This allows for the optimal kicker plate location directly underneath the dribbler mechanism. This optimal location can be seen in Figure 25 above, and the solenoid collar can be seen in Figure 26 below. 29

30 Figure 26: The Design Team's Electric Solenoid Valve with Kicker Assembly Collar and Extension Final Design Specifications As previously discussed, this final design differs from the preliminary design proposed at the end of fall semester due to extended placement of the wheels, dribbler and kicker subsystems placements and different dimensions. Throughout the spring semester the design team found a few things that needed to be adjusted on the complete assembly and chassis support. The chassis in the final design only contains three support screws versus the preliminary design that has five supports screw between the two plates on the chassis. This is due to the space constraints when adding the batteries and electrical systems. There were also few open cuts to the chassis that are discussed in the following two subsystems, as well as horizontal cut across the front of all plates on the chassis. This cut allows the camera to see the ball from directly above the robot if needed. The following two images are the preliminary design (Figure 27) versus the complete final design (Figure 28). 30

31 Figure 27: Preliminary Design Figure 28: Final Design The following images, Figures 29 31, display multiple views of the final assembled prototype scaled and designed on SolidWorks. Figure 29: Top View of the Stevens RoboCup Final Design 31

32 Figure 29: Side View of the Stevens RoboCup Final Design Figure 29: Front View of the Stevens RoboCup Final Design The first subsystem that greatly influences the ball in motion during the game is the dribbler mechanism. The dribbler mechanism became a little simpler due to the smaller dimensions and easier placement of the motor directly above the dribbler. The final design creates a shorter and tighter belt; easing the drive speed of the dribbler. The following two 32

33 images show the preliminary design of the dribbler subsystem (Figure 30) versus the simpler final design (Figure 31). Figure 30: Original Dribbler Design Figure 31: Final Dribbler Design The second subsystem that affects the performance of the robot is the kicker. The size of the kicker plate is smaller to create a simpler design. The space in the chassis for the kicker is cut smaller to create a stopping motion forcing the solenoid to stop at certain duration of its stroke length. The solenoid is mounted on the bottom plate of the chassis for support needed for the force created in the movement of the kicker. The following two images show the preliminary design of the kicker subsystem (Figure 32) versus the final kicker design (Figure 33). Figure 32: Original Kicker Design Figure 33: Final Kicker Design 33

34 Subsystem Testing This section of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team s report was done intermittently throughout the prototype manufacturing and assembly stage. The team would take the purchased components, assemble them into it the desired configurations and run several tests on them to prove that the physical component operated in the ideal manner that it was selected for. Some of these subsystem tests include Motor Speed, Dribbler Mechanism, and Kicker Assembly. Motor Speed The main focus of the design team s testing and experimentation revolved around the system s motor specifications and performance. In order to provide efficient and accurate motor control, the performance curves and voltage vs. RPM relations needed to be understood. This is of high importance because the robot s directional control is dependent on power and speed ratios between three independent drive motors. The main objective of motor testing was to determine what input voltages would provide optimal motor speeds. In order to evaluate the voltage vs. RPM curves of the drive motors, the team executed a series of tests using a variable power supply and handheld tachometer. The experimental setup is illustrated in Figure 34 below. Multi-Meter Variable Power Supply Handheld Tachometer Dribbler/Drive Motor Figure 34: Motor Speed Test Experimental Setup 34

35 Motor Speed (RP Motor Speed (RP Varying voltages were provided to the drive motors, and the resulting RPM readings were recorded. The results are summarized in the provided graph: Drive Motor (Lynxmotion GHM01) - Speed Test y = x R 2 = Voltage (Volts) This graph shows the linear relation between input voltage and the drive motor RPM. The information gathered and analyzed in this experiment was later used when considering the robots motor control and directions control logic. Dribbler Mechanism Similar to the drive motors, the group conducted a series of tests to evaluate the performance of the dribbler motor. As illustrated in the graph below, a linear relationship exists between input voltage and RPM of the dribbler motor. Dribbler Motor - Speed Test Voltage (Volts) 35

36 In addition to analyzing the relationship between input voltage and RPM, the team conducted functionality testing to determine the optimal speed of the dribbler motor. In order to complete this test, a test fixture was constructed. The entire ball dribbler subsystem was set up on the test fixture shown below in Figure 35. Drive Belt Mount Dribbler Motor Dribbler Dribbler Belt Mount Ball Rotating Figure 35: Dribbler Mechanism Test Fixture Drive Belt By analyzing the theoretical and functional testing, the team was able to determine the optimal dribbler motor input voltage and speed to be in the ranges of 3.5 volts 4.2 volts and RPM. If the dribbler rotates too slowly, it is unable to put enough backspin on the ball to retain possession during game play. If the dribbler spins too fast, the ball spins and bounces erratically. In addition to this, running the dribbler motor at high voltage/speeds for extended periods of time may cause overheating. 36

37 Motor Mount Assembly One of the last simplistic tests the Stevens RoboCup Design Team ran was the motor mount assembly test. Basically the team needed to ensure that the drive motors were mounted exactly 120 apart and equidistant from the edges of the circular chassis. These parameters needed be to met otherwise the vector calculations and power ratios of the drive motors will not produce accurate results when trying to move the robot in a particular manner. The very simple test to ensure that these constraints were met was that the motors were wired in series with the battery. If the motors were mounted correctly the robot would spin exactly in its place, whereas if the motors were slightly off their mark the robot would spin erratically in non-concentric circles. The test went off without a hitch and proved that the motor indeed were mounted correctly. Figure 36 shows the correctly mounted drive motors on the under carriage of the chassis. Figure 36: The correctly mounted drive motors 37

38 Software Development This section of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team s report deals with the LabVIEW programming of the prototype robot. The team ran into several issues with this section; however, ultimately the team prevailed. Most of these problems would entirely disappear with more time allotment but for the team s proof of concept prototype these issues do not discount the impressive milestones it reached. Strategy Loops Basically the way the team planned for the programming to be coded was all based in various if/then/while loops. The team would utilize the globalization camera to determine whether or not the ball was in its possession or not. Based upon this realization the team s robot would either enter a defensive or offensive loop. After the particular strategic loop had been entered the camera would continue to evaluate the robot s situation to make the next decision is another robot open? (when playing with a team), is there a clear shot at the goal?, am I in the way of the other team scoring?, can I steal the ball?, etc. Using the visual programming in LabVIEW these programming loops can become rather straightforward; however, they depend heavily on the motor control section of the program which could be exceedingly confusing. This motor control section is discussed further in the following sections. Final Program One of the major obstacles that the team has overcome involves programming the robot to autonomously interact with the ball. The team decided to use LabVIEW to program primarily due to its built in vision system and flowchart style programming. The team was able to have the vision system track the robot and ball with relative ease, the challenge was to interpret the robot and ball positions into something that the robot can use to drive towards the ball. LabVIEW outputs the x and y position and angle of the robot, and only the x and y position of the ball. Since the overhead globalization camera is in a fixed position over the field, the x and y location of the field can also be easily determined. This x and y position of the field will never change, and can be used to determine the location of the robot and ball on the actual field itself. 38

39 While the x and y position of the robot and ball is key, the robot must also know where the ball is in reference to itself. The way this was accomplished was, the area around the robot was divided into four quadrants, upper left right, and lower left right. In order to determine which quadrant the ball is located in reference to the robot, trigonometry was used. The angle of the ball in reference to the field is determined, and then the angle of the robot in reference to the ball can be determined using this information. This angle that is then determined will output a value that will be either positive or negative depending on which quadrant the ball is in reference to the robot. This enables the robot to determine that the ball might be in two quadrants. In order to narrow this information down to the correct quadrant that the ball is in, a comparison must be made. A simple comparison of the x and y location of the ball and robot can determine if the ball is on the left or right side of the robot. This information together with the sign of the angle value can determine precisely which quadrant the ball is in reference to the robot. In addition to this, the angle in which the robot must turn to be in line with the ball is also known. Figure 37 below shows the code that was written to determine the quadrant the ball is in as well as the angle between the robot and the ball. Figure 37: A Sample of the Design Team's LabVIEW program which determines the quandrant of the ball in relation to the robot's location 39

40 With all this information in hand programming became fairly straightforward. Once the quadrant the ball is in is known the robot will then orient itself to be in line with the ball, and drive towards it. Once the robot is in possession of the ball it can then proceed to the location of the goal, and then shoot the ball into the goal. Many subvi s were created to make the program easy to follow. There was a subvi for each drive motion, one was made to move forward, move in reverse, shimmy left, rotate in place, and so on. Figure 38 below displays the code that was used to move the robot once the known positions and angles were determined. Figure 38: A sample of the Design Team's LabVIEW program which moves the robot towards the calculated position of the ball in relation to the robot 40

41 Challenges Encountered This section of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team s report deals with the various challenges and problems that the group ran into throughout the project. Some of these issues have already been discussed in previous sections, such as wheel mountings and robot size constraints. Other issues that arouse were laboratory size constraints, electronic incompatibility, and communications issues these problems are discussed here. Laboratory Size Constraints In the process of constructing the team s robot there were many obstacles that were encountered along the way. The first problem encountered revolved around the test field. There was a severe size constraint in the workspace area, the robotics lab. The team planned on constructing half of the regulation sized field; however due to the size constraints, the test field constructed is actually three quarters smaller than half of the regulation field. Once the test field was constructed, the next step in the field setup was mounting the overhead vision camera. In a RoboCup competition, the globalization camera is mounted 13 feet above the playing field. Due to the low ceilings in the robotics lab the globalization camera was mounted 9 feet above the test field, not the standard 13 feet. Although the pictures taken from the camera were distorted on the edges due to the wide angle lens required, the image processing software was still able to track the required images. Electronics and Communications Incompatibilities One major hurdle in the development of the robot was with the electronics and communication systems. The team has determined that the design 1 basic stamp boards will be used in conjunction with the ZigBee wireless system. The first problem involved interfacing the basic stamp boards together with the ZigBee wireless chips. The ZigBee wireless chips can only accept a voltage of no more than 3.3 volts, whereas the basic stamp boards only outputted 5 volts. While this was a major problem, the team was able to overcome this by obtaining a ZigBee to RS-232 adaptor. With this adaptor, the team was able to connect the ZigBee chip to the serial port on the basic stamp board. 41

42 One major problem encountered with the basic stamp board was interfacing it with LabVIEW. This was one of the first major problems, because the team will be using LabVIEW to program the robot. LabVIEW was unable to send any commands that the basic stamp board would recognize. Due to this, the team was able to acquire a PIC microcontroller board that is currently being used in the design 1 and 2 courses. This new PIC board is compatible with LabVIEW, thus solving this problem. While the PIC board was ideal for programming, it is less than optimal for controlling the motors and solenoid on the robot. The PIC board only outputs 5 volts, whereas the drive motors and solenoid require 12 volts. In order to control the motors with 12 volts, a H-bridge was used to drive each motor. The H-bridge required 3 digital outputs from the PIC board to operate, 2 outputs determined the motor direction and one output determined if the motor was either enabled or disabled. With this configuration, given the amount of motors on the robot, the PIC board did not have enough digital outputs to drive every motor on the robot. In order to solve this problem, a custom circuit utilizing an inverter chip was implemented. This inverter chip decreased the amount of digital outputs required to control the direction of the motors, from 2 down to one output. With this custom circuit the PIC board is successfully able to control all of the motors and solenoid on the robot. During initial testing the motors were only able to rotate in one direction, they were not able to reverse. However, it was determined that the inverter chips were faulty, and thus promptly replaced, resolving this issue. Future Plans The future of the RoboCup SSL project is a bright one. This year s design team has designed and developed a functioning platform as a proof of concept. This platform can be utilized by future Senior Design teams to further refine the design and functionality of the robot. Once the mechanical, electrical, and software systems are perfected, future design teams may consider assembling additional robots to create a functioning team. The ultimate goal of the RoboCup team should be to enter a sanctioned competition and test their system against a working opponent. However, further testing, design, and development is strongly suggested. In order to be competitive, the Stevens Design team must advance the performance of the robots to be on par with prospective opponents who have been conducting 42

43 research and development for much longer. Hardware improvements should be considered by any future RoboCup teams. By installing more advanced mechanical systems (motors, solenoids, etc.) future design teams will be able to overcome many of the obstacles encountered by the 2010 team. In addition to this, future teams may benefit greatly by including interdisciplinary members. Because the robotic system relies on several complex electrical and software systems, the addition of an Electrical Engineer and/or Computer Engineer would facilitate greater advances in the designs process. By building on the platform designed by the 2010 RoboCup team, future design groups will be able to apply mechanical, electrical, and control theory in the development of a more robust and functional robot. Senior Design Experience What did you learn during the Senior Design Experience? Senior Design has been a yearlong learning experience which can be reflected upon and one day be applied to future projects in the design team members various careers. The group has learned a several things from this experience; communication with fellow teammates is essential and following advice from superiors is very affective and important. Not only is it important to follow an advisors suggestions and instructions, but in the senior design process it may affect your grade if you do not try. A team s advisor undoubtedly proves time and time again to be invaluable. Whether it is giving step by step instructions or quietly overseeing the team s work, the advisor will always be able to help and further the team s progress instead of sitting at a halt. Communication with group members is very essential because of the progress that comes out of working as a team. Changes to Design How would what you've learned during this project affect a 'Phase 2' version of the project if you were to work on this project again? There are a few things that the Stevens RoboCup Design Team would change if it were to start the project over and redo Phase II; better communication between teammates, advisor, and other competing schools, better time commitment, and more dedicated research. As a whole the team does not feel there was enough communication between each member in the group, either 43

44 responses to s, phone calls, etc, or scheduling a time to meet together. If the team was to redo Phase II, it would encourage each member to communicate with one another better, as well as keep each other informed on what they have done in research, construction, design, etc. The team also feels that as a group we did not dedicate enough time to the project. This inhibited the team s success in building more than one robot. When redoing Phase II, the group would need to keep Senior Design as a priority to complete all tasks ahead of time, to be able to catch what needs to be fixed before needing to go back and fix something without appropriate time. The team feels that communication between itself and other teams at different competing schools could have been better. These other teams may have had advice about creating their teams which would have helped the Stevens team create a more successful product by the end of Senior Design. Conclusion As the year comes to an end the Stevens RoboCup Design Team truly believes it can look back upon all the work it has done and consider the project a success. The group came together and chose a project that has never been done before at Stevens Institute of Technology and began with a splash. Breaking new ground for the Institute, the design team carefully planned accordingly for its monumental task at hand. After developing an overall systems process, the five members of the design group researched various components to do the selected operations the team wanted to achieve. After performing specific technical analyses and purchasing the appropriate equipment, the team was able to further its project by designing several configurations of the components to make up the actual robot prototype. The team then was able manufacture the necessary parts and incorporate them with the purchased components to assemble several subsystems which were then also tested by the group for their functionality. After testing the subsystems, the group completely assembled the prototype with various alterations from the original design. All the while this is happening, the design team made up of five mechanical engineers was able to select electronic and communications equipment to operate the robot in the way it was originally planned. Although the group ran in numerous problems and obstacles the RoboCup Design Team was able to counter each challenge with a solution. 44

45 As a whole, the end result of the Stevens RoboCup SSL Senior Design Team project was not the initial project that set out upon; however, what the group developed and the process by which it arrived at it with were more of a outcome than the team could have originally hoped for. 45

46 Appendix A Gantt Chart 46

47 47

48 Appendix B Purchased Parts List 48

49 Part Description Drive Motors Wheels Dribbler Motor Solenoid ZigBee Module Light Sensor Battery Pack Battery Charger Global Camera PIC Board Golf Balls Playing Field Felt Chassis Part Name Gear Head Motor - 12VDC, 200RPM 4cm Omni Wheel GWS RS-777 Brushed DC Motor - 7.2V, 16000RPM SOTUH Tubular, Push Type Solenoid XB24-AW1-001-ND Zigbee Module VT43N1 LDR Photcell Resistor 12V, 2000mAh NiMH Battery Pack Universal Charger for NiMH Battery Pack Prosilica GC750C Camera 752x480 Resolution Design 1 PIC Board Orange Golf Balls Green Felt Robot Acrylic Chassis 49

50 Appendix C Preliminary Budget 50

51 51

52 52

53 Appendix D Finalized Budget 53

54 54

55 55

56 Appendix E Nugget Charts 56

57 57

58 58

59 59

60 60

61 61

62 Appendix F Machine Shop Designs 62

63 0.750 in in in in UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A SCALE: 1:1 DWG. NO. beltdrive WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

64 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A solenoidbracket SCALE: 1:1 DWG. NO. WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

65 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A kickplatedropdown SCALE: 1:1 DWG. NO. WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

66 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A SCALE: 2:1 DWG. NO. kickplate WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

67 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A kickermount SCALE: 2:1 DWG. NO. WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

68 UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A dribblermount SCALE: 1:1 DWG. NO. WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

69 0.125 in in in in in in in in in in in in in UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A dribbleraxelmount SCALE: 2:1 DWG. NO. WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

70 1.000 in in in in in in UNLESS OTHERWISE SPECIFIED: NAME DATE DIMENSIONS ARE IN INCHES TOLERANCES: FRACTIONAL ANGULAR: MACH BEND TWO PLACE DECIMAL THREE PLACE DECIMAL DRAWN CHECKED ENG APPR. MFG APPR. TITLE: PROPRIETARY AND CONFIDENTIAL THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF <INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS PROHIBITED. NEXT ASSY APPLICATION USED ON INTERPRET GEOMETRIC TOLERANCING PER: MATERIAL FINISH DO NOT SCALE DRAWING Q.A. COMMENTS: SIZE A SCALE: 1:1 DWG. NO. dribbler WEIGHT: REV SHEET 1 OF 1

71 Appendix G Selected Component Datasheets 63

72 Datasheetfor: GHM-01 12vdc 30:1 200rpm 6mmshaft I.OUTER DIMENSIONS M II.DRAWINGOFCURVES Pout 3.0 Amp 2.0 Eff 1.0 krpm Pout Eff krpm Amp Kgcm III.SPECIFICATIONS Type:HN-GH35GMA Model:HN-GH Y-30:1 1.TestingConditions: Temp:25 Celsius Humidity: 60% MotorOrientation:Horizontal 2.RatedVoltage:12vdc 3.VoltageOperatingRange:6-12vdc 4.RatedLoadat 12vdc:620g-cm Do not exceedratedload.damagemay occur! 5.No LoadSpeedat 12vdc:200 RPM+/-10% 6.SpeedatRatedLoad(620g-cm):177 RPM+/-10% 7.NoLoadCurrentat12vdc:<113mA 8.Current atratedload(620g-cm):<233ma 9.ShaftEnd-Play:Maximum 0.8m/m 10.Insulation Resistance:10Mohmat 300vdc 11.Withstand Voltage:300vdc for1second 12.Thegearmotoris notintendedforinstant reverse. The gearmotormustbestoppedbefore reversing. 13.Thegearmotordoes notincludeprotectionfrom waterordust etc.

73 EC Series Firewire (IEEE 1394) High-performance CCD & CMOS Cameras for Machine Vision and Digital Imaging ultra-compact firewire ccd & cmos Features Ultra-compact size and light weight Firewire interface DCAM compliant (IIDC 1.31) Region of interest readout Snapshot shutter External trigger and sync Color and monochrome models High-performance CCD and CMOS Fast framerates SDK and driver included Color and monochrome Binning Rugged design On-camera color interpolation Prosilica Advantage Prosilica s EC-Series cameras are ultracompact, high-performance CCD and CMOS cameras for machine vision and industrial applications. The EC-Series include fast framerate cameras in megapixel, 2-megapixel, and standard resolution models. Applications for the EC-Series cameras include machine vision, industrial inspection, character recognition, robotics, surveillance and OEM applications. Excellent Products Advanced Engineering Great Software Excellent Support Prosilica Inc. Tel: Fax: info@prosilica.com

74 EC Series Prosilica s EC Series ultra-compact Firewire cameras incorporate the latest interface technology and advanced camera features. These IIDC 1.31 compliant cameras are available in a wide range of resolutions, frame rates, and sensor formats. EC640 EC640C EC650 EC650C EC655 EC655C EC750 EC750C EC1020 EC1020C EC1280 EC1350 EC1350C EC1380 EC1380C EC1600 EC1600C Resolution Frame Rate 97 fps 90 fps 90 fps 60 fps 30 fps 24 fps 18 fps 20 fps 15 fps Sensor Type 1/2" CMOS 1 3" CCD 1/2" CCD 1 3" CMOS 1 3" CCD 2 3" CMOS 1/2" CCD 2 3" CCD 1 1.8" CCD Sensor MT9V403 ICX424 ICX414 MT9V022 ICX204 IBIS5A ICX205 ICX285 ICX274 Pixel Size (um) Readout Interface Type Progressive Scan IEEE-1394 (Firewire) Digital Interface DCAM (IIDC 1.31) Mono/Color Yes/Yes Yes/No Yes/Yes Color Modes Mono8, Mono16, Bayer8, Bayer16, RGB24, YUV4:1:1, YUV4:2:2 N/A Mono8, Mono16, Bayer8, Bayer16, RGB24, YUV4:1:1, YUV4:2:2 Mono8, Mono16, Bayer8, Bayer16 Imaging Modes External Trigger Modes External Sync Modes Region of Interest Free-running, External trigger, Fixed frame rate, Software trigger Rising edge, Falling edge, Level high, Level low Trigger ready, Trigger input, Exposing, GPO Independent x, y control from 1 1 to full resolution Binning N/A 2 2 N/A 2x2 Power Requirements 1.8 W 2.5 W 1.8 W 2.5 W 1.8 W 2.5 W 3 W Conformity SDK CE, FCC, RoHS Free of charge - includes driver Specifications subject to change without notice. Please refer to Prosilica s website for information on other camera models. Prosilica Inc. Suite 110, 8988 Fraserton Court info@prosilica.com Burnaby, BC Canada V5J 5H8 Prosilica Inc. (09) 2006 All Rights Reserved Tel: Fax:

75 PRIMARY ANTENNA SIGNAL STRENGTH RESET SECONDARY ANTENNA POWER 9-30VDC 1A MAX Product Datasheet XBee Multipoint RF Modules Embedded RF Modules for OEMs Providing critical end-point connectivity to Digi s Drop-in Networking product family, XBee multipoint RF modules are low-cost and easy to deploy. Ethernet Internet/ Frame Relay/ VPN Wireless Telco Network Central Facilities Management ConnectPort X Gateway Warehouse ConnectPort X4 LINK ACT STATUS PRO Meter PRO XBee Module / Multipoint Wireless Networks Meter PRO Meter Features/Benefits /Multipoint network topologies 2.4 GHz for worldwide deployment 900 MHz for long-range deployment Fully interoperable with other Digi Drop-in Networking products, including gateways, device adapters and extenders Common XBee footprint for a variety of RF modules Low-power sleep modes Multiple antenna options Industrial temperature rating (-40º C to 85º C) Low power and long range variants available Overview XBee Product Family The XBee family of embedded RF modules provides OEMs with a common footprint shared by multiple platforms, including multipoint and ZigBee/Mesh topologies, and both 2.4 GHz and 900 MHz solutions. OEMs deploying the XBee can substitute one XBee for another, depending upon dynamic application needs, with minimal development, reduced risk and shorter time-tomarket. Why XBee Multipoint RF Modules? XBee multipoint RF modules are ideal for applications requiring low latency and predictable communication timing. Providing quick, robust communication in point-to-point, peer-to-peer, and multipoint/star configurations, XBee multipoint products enable robust end-point connectivity with ease. Whether deployed as a pure cable replacement for simple serial communication, or as part of a more complex hub-and-spoke network of sensors, XBee multipoint RF modules maximize wireless performance and ease of development. Drop-in Networking End-Point Connectivity XBee OEM RF modules are part of Digi s Drop-in Networking family of end-to-end connectivity solutions. By seamlessly interfacing with compatible gateways, device adapters and extenders, XBee embedded RF modules provide developers with true beyond-the-horizon connectivity.

76 Platform XBee (Series 1) XBee-PRO (Series 1) XBee-PRO XSC Performance RF Data Rate 250 kbps 250 kbps 10 kbps / 9.6 kbps Indor/Urban Range 100 ft (30 m) 300 ft (100 m) Up to 1200 ft (370 m) Outdoor/RF Line-of-Sight Range 300 ft (100 m) 1 mi (1.6 km) Up to 6 mi (9.6 km) Transmit Power 1 mw (+0 dbm) 60 mw (+18 dbm)* 100 mw (+20 dbm) Receiver Sensitivity (1% PER) -92 dbm -100 dbm -106 dbm Features Serial Data Interface 3.3V CMOS UART 3.3V CMOS UART 3.3V CMOS UART (5V Tolerant) Configuration Method API or AT Commands, local or over-the-air API or AT Commands, local or over-the-air AT Commands Frequency Band 2.4 GHz 2.4 GHz 902 MHz to 928 MHz Interference Immunity DSSS (Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum) DSSS (Direct Sequence Spread Spectrum) FHSS (Frequency Hopping Spread Spectrum) Serial Data Rate 1200 bps kbps 1200 bps kbps 1200 bps kbps ADC Inputs (6) 10-bit ADC inputs (6) 10-bit ADC inputs None Digital I/O 8 8 None Antenna Options Chip, Wire Whip, U.FL, & RPSMA Chip, Wire Whip, U.FL, & RPSMA Wire Whip, U.FL, RPSMA Networking & Security Encryption 128-bit AES 128-bit AES No Reliable Packet Delivery Retries/Acknowledgments Retries/Acknowledgments Retries/Acknowledgements IDs and Channels PAN ID, 64-bit IEEE MAC, 16 Channels PAN ID, 64-bit IEEE MAC, 12 Channels PAN ID, 32-bit Address, 7 Channels Power Requirements Supply Voltage VDC VDC VDC Transmit Current VDC VDC 265 ma typical Receive Current VDC VDC 65 ma typical Power-Down Current <10 25º C <10 25º C 45 ua pin Sleep Regulatory Approvals FCC (USA) OUR-XBEE OUR-XBEEPRO MCQ-XBEEXSC IC (Canada) 4214A-XBEE 4214A-XBEEPRO 1846A-XBEEXSC ETSI (Europe) Yes Yes* Max TX 10 mw No C-TICK Australia Yes Yes No Telec (Japan) Yes Yes* No * XBee-PRO TX Power restricted to 10 mw in Europe and Japan Star XBee (0.51mm) shield-to-pcb ±0.020 (2.03mm ±0.51) (side views) (0.79mm) (2.79mm) (1.27mm) XBee-PRO (7.59mm) PIN 1 (top view) (27.61mm) (6.53mm) PIN 20 PIN 1 (top view) PIN (32.94mm) (2.00mm) (4.06mm) PIN 10 PIN (22.00mm) (24.38mm) PIN 10 PIN (22.00mm) Please visit for part numbers. DIGI SERVICE AND SUPPORT - You can purchase with confidence knowing that Digi is here to support you with expert technical support and a one-year warranty. WHEN Digi International Bren Road E. Minnetonka, MN U.S.A. PH: FX: info@digi.com Digi International France 31 rue des Poissonniers Neuilly sur Seine PH: FX: Digi International KK NES Building South 8F Sakuragaoka-cho, Shibuya-ku Tokyo , Japan PH: FX: Digi International (HK) Limited Suite , 17/F., K Wah Centre 191 Java Road North Point, Hong Kong PH: FX: Digi International Inc. All rights reserved. Digi, Digi International, the Digi logo, the When Reliability Matters logo, XBee and XBee-PRO are trademarks or registered trademarks of Digi International Inc. in the United States and other countries worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. Digi International, the leader in device networking for business, develops reliable products and technologies to connect and securely manage local or remote electronic devices over the network or via the web. With over 20 million ports shipped worldwide since 1985, Digi offers the highest levels of performance, flexibility and quality B1/308 MATTERS

77 Datasheetfor: GHM vdc 50:1 175rpm 6mmshaft I.OUTER DIMENSIONS M ± II.DRAWINGOFCURVES Pout 5.0 Amp 4.0 Eff 1.0 krpm krpm Amp Pout Eff Kgcm III.SPECIFICATIONS Type:HN-GH35GMB Model:HN-GH T-50:1 1.TestingConditions: Temp:25 Celsius Humidity: 60% MotorOrientation:Horizontal 2.RatedVoltage:7.2vdc 3.VoltageOperatingRange:6-7.2vdc 4.RatedLoadat 7.2vdc:1.0Kg-cm Do not exceedratedload.damagemay occur! 5.No LoadSpeedat 7.2vdc:175 RPM+/-10% 6.SpeedatRatedLoad(1.0Kg-cm):146 RPM+/-10% 7.NoLoadCurrentat7.2vdc:<221mA 8.Current atratedload(1.0kg-cm): <556mA 9.ShaftEnd-Play:Maximum 0.8m/m 10.Insulation Resistance:10Mohmat 300vdc 11.Withstand Voltage:300vdc for1second 12.Thegearmotoris notintendedforinstant reverse. The gearmotormustbestoppedbefore reversing. 13.Thegearmotordoes notincludeprotectionfrom waterordust etc.

78

79

80 Appendix H RoboCup SSL 2010 Rules and Regulations 64

81 Laws of the F180 League 2009 LAW 1 - The Field of Play LAW 2 - The Ball LAW 3 - The Number of Robots LAW 4 - The Robotic Equipment LAW 5 - The Referee LAW 6 - The Assistant Referee LAW 7 - The Duration of the Match LAW 8 - The Start and Restart of Play LAW 9 - The Ball In and Out of Play LAW 10 - The Method of Scoring LAW 11 - Offside LAW 12 - Fouls and Misconduct LAW 13 - Free Kicks LAW 14 - The Penalty Kick LAW 15 - The Throw-In LAW 16 - The Goal Kick LAW 17 - The Corner Kick Appendix A - The Competition Rules Male and Female Notes References to the male gender in the Laws with respect to referees, assistant referees, team members and officials are for simplification and apply to both males and females.

82 Dimensions LAW 1 - The Field of Play The field of play must be rectangular. The dimensions include boundary lines. Length: 6050mm Width: 4050mm Field Surface Figure 1: The field dimensions The playing surface is green felt mat or carpet. The floor under the carpet is level, flat and hard. The field surface will continue for 675 mm beyond the boundary lines on all sides. The outer 425mm of this runoff area are used as a designated referee walking area (see LAW 5). At the edge of the field surface, a 100 mm tall wall will prevent the ball and robots from running off the edge. Field Markings The field of play is marked with lines. Lines belong to the areas of which they are boundaries. The two longer sides are called touch boundaries. The two shorter sides are called goal boundaries. All lines are 10 mm wide and painted white.

83 The field of play is divided into two halves by a halfway line. The centre mark is indicated at the midpoint of the halfway line. A circle with a diameter of 1000 mm is marked around it. The Defence Area A defence area is defined at each end of the field as follows: Two quarter circles with a radius of 500 mm are drawn on the field of play. These quarter circles are connected by a line parallel to the goal line. The exact configuration is depicted in Fig. 1. The area bounded by this arc and the goal line is the defence area. Penalty Mark Goals Within each defence area a penalty mark is made 450 mm from the midpoint between the goalposts and equidistant to them. The mark is a 10 mm diameter circle of white paint. Goals must be placed on the centre of each goal boundary. They consist of two 160 mm vertical side walls joined at the back by a 160 mm vertical rear wall. The inner face of the goal has to be covered with an energy absorbing material such as foam to help absorb ball impacts and lessen the speed of deflections. The goal walls, edges, and tops are white in color. There is a round steel cross bar that runs across the top of the goalmouth and parallel to the goal line. It is no larger than 10 mm in diameter, but is sufficiently strong to deflect the ball. The bottom of the bar is 155 mm from the field surface, and the bar is dark in color to minimise interference with vision systems. The top of the goal is covered in a thin net to prevent the ball from entering the goal from above. It is attached securely to the cross bar and goal walls. The distance between the side walls is 700 mm. The goal is 180 mm deep. The distance from the lower edge of the crosswire to the playing surface is 150 mm. The floor inside the goalmouth is the same as the rest of the playing surface. The goal walls are 20 mm thick. Goals must be anchored securely to field surface. Figure 2: The Goal in detail

84 Equipment Mounting Bar A mounting bar will be provided 4 m above the field. The bar will run above the midline of the field from goal to goal. The bar should mounted securely so that it does not swing or sway under a small external force, and it should not bend or twist significantly when the weight of typical video equipment is added. Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 The local organising committee should aim to provide uniform, diffuse lighting conditions of approximately 500 LUX or brighter. No special lighting equipment will necessarily be used to provide these conditions. The brightness is not guaranteed nor expected to be fully uniform across the field surface. Teams are thus expected to cope with the variations that will occur when using ambient lighting. The organising committee will release details of the lighting arrangements to the competitors as early as practical. Decision 2 No kind of commercial advertising, whether real or virtual, is permitted on the field of play and field equipment (including the goal nets and the areas they enclose) from the time the teams enter the field of play until they have left it at half-time and from the time the teams re-enter the field of play until the end of the match. In particular, no advertising material of any kind may be displayed inside the goals or walls. No extraneous equipment (cameras, microphones, etc.) may be attached to these items. Decision 3 The specific colour and texture of the surface is not specified and may vary from competition to competition (just as real soccer fields vary). The surface underneath the carpet will be level and hard. Examples of approved surfaces include: cement, linoleum, hardwood flooring, plywood, ping-pong tables and particle board; carpeted or cushioned surfaces are not allowed. Every effort shall be made to ensure that the surface is flat; however, it is up to individual teams to design their robots to cope with slight curvatures of the surface.

85 Qualities and Measurements The ball is a standard orange golf ball. It is: spherical orange in colour approximately 46 g in mass approximately 43 mm in diameter LAW 2 - The Ball Replacement of a Defective Ball If the ball becomes defective during the course of a match: the match is stopped the match is restarted by placing the replacement ball at the place where the first ball became defective If the ball becomes defective whilst not in play at a kick-off, goal kick, corner kick, free kick, penalty kick or throw-in: the match is restarted accordingly The ball may not be changed during the match without the authority of the referee.

86 Robots LAW 3 - The Number of Robots A match is played by two teams, each consisting of not more than five robots, one of which may be the goalkeeper. Each robot must be clearly numbered so that the referee can identify them during the match. The goalkeeper must be designated before the match starts. A match may not start unless both teams have at least one robot. Interchange Robots may be interchanged. There is no limit on the number of interchanges. Interchange Procedure To interchange a robot, the following conditions must be observed: interchange can only be made during a stoppage in play, the referee is informed before the proposed interchange is made, the interchange robot enters the field of play after the robot being replaced has been removed, interchange robot enters the field of play at the halfway line. Changing the Goalkeeper Any of the other robots may change places with the goalkeeper, provided that: the referee is informed before the change is made the change is made during a stoppage in the match Robots Sent Off A robot that has been sent off may interchange for another robot that leaves the field. Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 Each team must have a single designated robot handler to perform interchange and robot placing when required. No other team members can encroach upon the area immediately surrounding the field. Movement of robots by the handler is not allowed.

87 Safety Shape LAW 4 - The Robotic Equipment A robot must not have in its construction anything that is dangerous to itself, another robot or humans. A robot must fit inside a 180 mm diameter cylinder and have a height of 150 mm or less. Colours and Markers Figure 3: The maximum robot dimensions Before a game, each of the two teams has a colour assigned, namely yellow or blue. Each team must be able to use yellow and blue markers. Circular markers of the assigned colour must be mounted on top of the robots. The centre of the marker must be located in the visual centre of the robot when viewed from above. The markers must have a diameter of 50 mm. Robots may use black and white colouring without restriction. Robots may also use light green, light pink and cyan markers. Locomotion Robot wheels (or other surfaces that contact the playing surface) must be made of a material that does not harm the playing surface. Wireless Communication Robots can use wireless communication to computers or networks located off the field. Global Vision System The use of a global vision system or external distributed vision systems are permitted, but not required, to identify and track the position of robots and ball. This is achieved by using one or more cameras. Cameras may not protrude more than 150 mm below the bottom of the mounting beam provided above the field (Law 1). Autonomy The robotic equipment is to be fully autonomous. Human operators are not permitted to enter any information into the equipment during a match, except at half time or during a time-out. Dribbling

88 Dribbling devices that actively exert backspin on the ball, which keep the ball in contact with the robot are permitted under certain conditions. The spin exerted on the ball must be perpendicular to the plane of the field. Vertical or partially vertical dribbling bars, also known as side dribblers, are not permitted. The use of dribbling devices is also restricted as per Law 12, Indirect Free Kicks. Figure 4: How a dribbler may work (check figure 5 for further detail on the 20% rule) Infringements/Sanctions For any infringement of this Law: play need not be stopped the robot at fault is instructed by the referee to leave the field of play to correct its equipment the robot leaves the field of play when the ball next ceases to be in play any robot required to leave the field of play to correct its equipment does not re-enter without the referee's permission the referee checks that the robot's equipment is correct before allowing it to re-enter the field of play the robot is only allowed to re-enter the field of play when the ball is out of play A robot that has been required to leave the field of play because of an infringement of this Law and that enters (or re-enters) the field of play without the referee's permission is cautioned and shown the yellow card. Restart of Play If play is stopped by the referee to administer a caution: the match is restarted by an indirect free kick taken by a robot of the opposing side, from the place where the ball was located when the referee stopped the match Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 Participants using wireless communications shall notify the local organising committee of the

89 method of wireless communication, power, and frequency. The local organising committee shall be notified of any change after registration as soon as possible. In order to avoid interference, a team should be able to select from two carrier frequencies before the match. The type of wireless communication shall follow legal regulations of the country where the competition is held. Compliance with local laws is the responsibility of the competing teams, not the RoboCup Federation. The type of wireless communication may also be restricted by the local organising committee. The local organising committee will announce any restrictions to the community as early as possible. Decision 2 Kicking devices are permitted. Decision 3 Metal spikes and Velcro are specifically prohibited for the purpose of locomotion. Decision 4 Bluetooth wireless communication is not allowed. Decision 5 Official colours will be provided by the organising committee. Teams must use the official colours unless both teams agree not to. Decision 6 Adhesives such as glue or tape may not be used for the purpose of ball control or to construct dribblers. Dribbling devices which use such an adhesive to affix the ball to a robot are considered a violation of Law 12, Decision 4, by "removing all of the degrees of freedom of the ball". In addition, the use of adhesives for any purpose on the robot which results in residue left on the ball or field, is considered as damage and sanctioned as per Law 12. Decision 7 A rules check will be performed on all robots at the competition prior to the first match. Any team's robot which is found to violate a rule must be modified to be compliant before it can participate in matches.

90 The Authority of the Referee LAW 5 - The Referee Each match is controlled by a referee who has full authority to enforce the Laws of the Game in connection with the match to which he has been appointed. Powers and Duties The Referee: enforces the Laws of the Game controls the match in co-operation with the assistant referees ensures that any ball used meets the requirements of Law 2 ensures that the robotic equipment meets the requirements of Law 4 informs the assistant referees when periods of time lost begin and end in accordance with Law 7 stops, suspends or terminates the match, at his discretion, for any infringements of the Laws stops, suspends or terminates the match because of outside interference of any kind stops the match if, in his opinion, a robot is likely to cause serious harm to humans, other robots or itself and ensures that it is removed from the field of play repositions the ball to a neutral position if it becomes stuck during play allows play to continue when the team against which an offence has been committed will benefit from such an advantage and penalises the original offence if the anticipated advantage does not ensue at that time punishes the more serious offence when a robot commits more than one offence at the same time takes disciplinary action against robots guilty of cautionable and sending-off offences. He is not obliged to take this action immediately but must do so when the ball next goes out of play takes action against team officials who fail to conduct themselves in a responsible manner and may at his discretion, expel them from the field of play and its immediate surrounds acts on the advice of assistant referees regarding incidents which he has not seen ensures that no unauthorised persons encroach the field of play restarts the match after it has been stopped provides the technical committee with a match report which includes information on any disciplinary action taken against team officials and any other incidents which occurred before, during or after the match Decisions of the Referee The decisions of the referee regarding facts connected with play are final. The referee may only change a decision on realising that it is incorrect or, at his discretion, on the advice of an assistant referee, provided that he has not restarted play. Referee's Signalling Equipment A device will be supplied to convert the referee's signals into both serial and ethernet communication signals that are transmitted to both teams. The equipment will be operated by the assistant referee. Details of the equipment are to be supplied by the local organising committee before the competition. Signals from the Referee

91 During a match the referee will signal the start and stop of play in the usual fashion. The assistant referee will send signals reflecting the referee's call over communication links to each team. No interpretation of the referee's signals by human operators is permitted. The whistle signal indicates that the referee has stopped play, and that all robots should move 500 mm from the ball to allow the referee to place the ball for a restart. All robots are required to remain 500 mm from the ball as the ball is moved to the restart position. For a goal (Law 10), or caution or send off (Law 12), an informational signal will be sent to indicate the referee's decision. The restart signal will indicate the type of restart. Robots should move into legal positions upon receipt of this signal. For restarts other than a kick-off (Law 8) or a penalty kick (Law 14), the kicker may kick the ball when ready without further signals from the referee. For a kick-off (Law 8) or a penalty kick (Law 14), a start signal will be sent to indicate that the kicker may proceed. This signal will not be sent for other types of restart. Signals indicating periods of time-out and time lost will also be sent when required. The referee will be deemed to have given a signal when the assistant referee has relayed that signal over the communications links. Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 A referee (or where applicable, an assistant referee) is not held liable for: any kind of injury suffered by an official or spectator any damage to property of any kind any other loss suffered by any individual, club, company, association or other body, which is due or which may be due to any decision which he may take under the terms of the Laws of the Game or in respect of the normal procedures required to hold, play and control a match. This may include: a decision that the condition of the field of play or its surrounds are such as to allow or not to allow a match to take place a decision to abandon a match for whatever reason a decision as to the condition of the fixtures or equipment used during a match including the field and the ball a decision to stop or not to stop a match due to spectator interference or any problem in the spectator area a decision to stop or not to stop play to allow a damaged robot to be removed from the field of play for repair a decision to request or insist that a damaged robot be removed from the field of play for repair a decision to allow or not to allow a robot to have certain colours a decision (in so far as this may be his responsibility) to allow or not to allow any persons (including team or stadium officials, security officers, photographers or other media representatives) to be present in the vicinity of the field of play any other decision which he may take in accordance with the Laws of the Game or in conformity with his duties under the terms of the RoboCup Federation or league rules or

92 regulations under which the match is played Decision 2 Facts connected with play shall include whether a goal is scored or not and the result of the match. Decision 3 The referee should use a black stick or some other device when repositioning the ball to reduce the chance of interference with vision systems. Decision 4 The referee may be assisted by an autonomous referee application provided by one or both of the competing teams, if both teams agree. The referee may also be assisted by an autonomous or semi-autonomous application provided by a team not participating in the current match, at the referee's own discretion, provided that the application is operated or monitored by a neutral party. Decision 5 The outer region of the field surface which is further than 250mm away from the boundary line is used as a designated walking area by the referee and/or assistant referee during gameplay. Teams should control their robots to stay out of this area to not interfere with the referees. Referees are not responsible for any obstructions to robots or vision systems within this area. Nevertheless, referees are requested to wear clothes and shoes which do not contain any color reserved for the ball or for robot markers.

93 Duties LAW 6 - The Assistant Referee The assistant referee is appointed whose duties, subject to the decision of the referee, are to: act as timekeeper and keep a record of the match to operate the communications equipment to relay the referee's signals over the communications links monitor the robot operators for illegal signals being sent to the robots indicate when an interchange is requested indicate when misconduct or any other incident has occurred out of the view of the referee indicate when offences have been committed whenever the assistants are closer to the action than the referee (this includes, in particular circumstances, offences committed in the defence area) indicate whether, at penalty kicks, the goalkeeper has moved forward before the ball has been kicked and if the ball has crossed the line Assistance The assistant referees also assist the referee to control the match in accordance with the Laws of the Game. In the event of undue interference or improper conduct, the referee will relieve an assistant referee of his duties and make a report to the organising committee. Decision 1 A second assistant referee will be used whenever possible. The second assistant referee will help the referee in ball placement on the field, as well as helping monitor compliance with all laws and procedures.

94 Periods of Play LAW 7 - The Duration of the Match The match lasts two equal periods of 10 minutes, unless otherwise mutually agreed between the referee and the two participating teams. Any agreement to alter the periods of play (for example, to reduce each half to 7 minutes because of a limited schedule) must be made before the start of play and must comply with competition rules. Half-Time Interval Teams are entitled to an interval at half time. The half-time interval must not exceed 5 minutes. Competition rules must state the duration of the half-time interval. The duration of the half-time interval may be altered only with the consent of both teams and the referee. Timeouts Each team is allocated four timeouts at the beginning of the match. A total of 5 minutes is allowed for all timeouts. For example, a team may take three timeouts of one-minute duration and thereafter have only one timeout of up to two minutes duration. Timeouts may only be taken during a game stoppage. The time is monitored and recorded by the assistant referee. Allowance for Time Lost Allowance is made in either period for all time lost through: substitution(s) assessment of damage to robots removal of damaged robots from the field of play for treatment wasting time any other cause The allowance for time lost is at the discretion of the referee. Extra Time Competition rules may provide for two further equal periods to be played. The conditions of Law 8 will apply. Abandoned Match An abandoned match is replayed unless the competition rules provide otherwise. Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 The local organising committee will make every effort to provide both teams access to the competition area at least two hours before the start of the competition. They will also strive to allow at least one hour of setup time before each match. Participants should be aware, however, that conditions may arise where this much time cannot be provided. Decision 2 Within these rules, the term "game stoppage" is used to describe the times when the gameplay is in a stopped state. Gameplay is not considered stopped when any robot is allowed to kick the ball. For example, gameplay is stopped after the "Kickoff" command has been issued, but it is

95 no longer stopped after the corresponding "Ready" command has been issued. Similarly, gameplay is no longer stopped after a "Freekick" has been issued.

96 Preliminaries LAW 8 - The Start and Restart of Play If both teams have a common preferred frequency for wireless communications, the local organising committee will allocate that frequency for the first half of the match. If both teams have a common preferred color, the local organising committee will allocate the color for the first half of the match. A coin is tossed and the team which wins the toss decides which goal it will attack in the first half of the match. The other team takes the kick-off to start the match. The team that wins the toss takes the kick-off to start the second half of the match. In the second half of the match the teams change ends and attack the opposite goals. Teams may agree not to change ends and attack the opposite goals with the consent of the referee. If both teams have a common preferred frequency for wireless communications, the teams should swap the allocation of that frequency for the second half of the match. Teams may agree not to change the allocation of the preferred frequency with the consent of the referee. If both teams have a common preferred marker color, the teams should swap marker colors for the second half of the match. Teams may agree not to change the marker colors with the consent of the referee. Kick-off A kick-off is a way of starting or restarting play: at the start of the match after a goal has been scored at the start of the second half of the match at the start of each period of extra time, where applicable A goal may be scored directly from the kick-off. Procedure all robots are in their own half of the field the opponents of the team taking the kick-off are at least 500 mm from the ball until the ball is in play the ball is stationary on the centre mark the referee gives a signal the ball is in play when is kicked and moves forward the kicker does not touch the ball a second time until it has touched another robot After a team scores a goal, the kick-off is taken by the other team. Infringements/Sanctions Any infringement as listed in Law 9 is handled accordingly For any other infringement of the kick-off procedure: the kick-off is retaken

97 Placed Ball A placed ball is a way of restarting the match after a temporary stoppage which becomes necessary, while the ball is in play, for any reason not mentioned elsewhere in the Laws of the Game. Procedure The referee places the ball at the place where it was located when play was stopped. By Law 9, all robots are required to remain 500mm from the ball while the ball is being placed. Play restarts when the referee gives a signal. Infringements/Sanctions The ball is placed again: if a robot comes within 500 mm of the ball before the referee gives the signal Special Circumstances A free kick awarded to the defending team inside its own defence area is taken from a legal free kick position nearest to where the infringement occurred. A free kick awarded to the attacking team in its opponents' defence area is taken from a legal free kick position nearest to where the infringement occurred. A placed ball to restart the match after play has been temporarily stopped inside the defence area takes place on the a legal free kick position nearest to where the ball was located when play was stopped.

98 Ball Out of Play LAW 9 - The Ball In and Out of Play The ball is out of play when: it has wholly crossed the goal boundary or touch boundary whether on the ground or in the air play has been stopped by a signal from the referee When the ball goes out of play, robots should remain 500 mm from the ball as the ball is placed, until the restart signal is given by the referee. Ball In Play The ball is in play at all other times. Infringements/Sanctions If, at the time the ball enters play, a member of the kicker's team occupies the area closer than 200 mm to the opponent's defense area: an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team, the kick to be taken from the location of the ball when the infringement occurred * (see Law 13) If, after the ball enters play, the kicker touches the ball a second time (without holding the ball) before it has touched another robot: an indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team, the kick to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred * (see Law 13) If, after the ball enters play, the kicker deliberately holds the ball before it has touched another robot: a direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team, the kick to be taken from the place where the infringement occurred * (see Law 13) If, after a signal to restart play is given, the ball does not enter play within 10 seconds, or lack of progress clearly indicates that the ball will not enter play within 10 seconds: the play is stopped by a signal from the referee, all robots have to move 500 mm from the ball, and a neutral restart is indicated Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 For all restarts where the Laws stipulate that the ball is in play when it is kicked and moves, the robot must clearly tap or kick the ball to make it move. It is understood that the ball may remain in contact with the robot or be bumped by the robot multiple times over a short distance while the kick is being taken, but under no circumstances should the robot remain in contact or touch the ball after it has traveled 50 mm, unless the ball has previously touched another robot. Robots may use dribbling and kicking devices in taking the free kick. Decision 2 The exclusion zone closer than 200mm to the opponent's defense area during restarts is designed to allow defending teams to position a defense against a kick without interference from

99 the opponents. This change was added to help teams defend against corner kicks in which teams use elevated "chip kick" passes directly into the defense area.

100 Goal Scored LAW 10 - The Method of Scoring A goal is scored when the whole of the ball passes over the goal line, between the goal walls, below the cross bar, provided that no infringement of the Laws of the Game has been committed previously by the team scoring the goal. Winning Team The team scoring the greater number of goals during a match is the winner. If both teams score an equal number of goals, or if no goals are scored, the match is drawn. Competition Rules For matches ending in a draw, competition rules may state provisions involving extra time, or other procedures approved by the RoboCup Federation to determine the winner of a match. Offside Rule The offside rule is not adopted. LAW 11 - Offside

101 Fouls and misconduct are penalised as follows: Direct Free Kick LAW 12 - Fouls and Misconduct A direct free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a robot commits any of the following four offences: makes substantial contact with an opponent holds an opponent holds the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own defence area) is the second defending robot to simultaneously occupy the team's defence area in such a way to substantially affect game play A free kick is taken from where the offence occurred. Penalty Kick A penalty kick is awarded if any of the above four offences is committed by a robot inside his own defence area, irrespective of the position of the ball, provided it is in play. Indirect Free Kicks An indirect free kick is awarded to the opposing team if a goalkeeper, inside his own defence area, commits any of the following offences: takes more than fifteen seconds while holding the ball before releasing it from his possession holds the ball again after it has been released from his possession and has not touched any other robot An indirect free kick is also awarded to the opposing team if a robot: contacts the goalkeeper where the point of contact is in the defence area dribbles the ball over a distance greater than 500 mm touched the ball such that the top of the ball travels more than 150 mm from the ground, and the ball subsequently enters their opponent's goal, without having either touched a teammate (while below 150 mm) or remained in contact with the ground (stopped bouncing). kicks the ball such that it exceeds 10 m/s in speed commits any other offence, not previously mentioned in Law 12, for which play is stopped to caution or dismiss a robot The free kick is taken from where the offence occurred. Disciplinary Sanctions Cautionable Offences A team is cautioned and shown the yellow card if a robot on that team commits any of the following six offences: 1. is guilty of unsporting behaviour 2. is guilty of serious and violent contact 3. persistently infringes the Laws of the Game 4. delays the restart of play 5. fails to respect the required distance when play is restarted with a goal kick, corner kick or free kick

102 6. modifies or damages the field or ball 7. deliberately enters or travels within the referee walking area Upon receipt of a yellow card, one robot of the penalised team must immediately move off and be removed from the field. After two minutes of play (as measured by the assistant referee using the official game time) the robot may reenter the field at the next stoppage of play. Sending-Off Offences A team is shown a red card if one of the robots or the team is guilty of severe unsporting behaviour. The number of robots on the team is reduced by one after every red card. Decisions of the F180 Technical Committee Decision 1 Substantial contact is contact sufficient to dislodge the robot from its current orientation, position, or motion in the case where it is moving. When both robots are moving at similar speeds, and the cause of contact is not obvious, the referee will allow play to continue. This law is designed to protect robots which are slow moving or stationary at the time of the contact, and as such should be detected by obstacle avoidance systems. Decision 2 Cautions for serious and violent contact are a way to discourage teams from ignoring the spirit of the no-contact principle. Examples of cautionable offences include uncontrolled motion, poor obstacle avoidance, pushing, or rapid spinning while adjacent to an opponent. In a typical scenario, the referee would warn the team, and expect that they would modify their system to reduce the violence of their play. If the referee was still unsatisfied a caution would be issued. Decision 3 A robot that is placed on the field but is clearly not capable of movement will be sanctioned for unsporting behaviour. Decision 4 A robot is holding a ball if it takes full control of the ball by removing all of its degrees of freedom; typically, fixing a ball to the body or surrounding a ball using the body to prevent access by others. 80% of the area of the ball when viewed from above should be outside the convex hull around the robot. Another robot must be able to remove the ball from a robot with the ball. This limitation applies as well to all dribbling and kicking devices, even if such infringement is momentary.

103 Figure 5: The 80/20 ball covering/holding rule Decision 5 A robot begins dribbling when it makes contact with the ball and stops dribbling when there is an observable separation between the ball and the robot. The restriction on dribbling distance was added to prevent a robot with a mechanically superior dribbler having unchallenged control of the ball. The distance restriction still allows dribblers to be used to aim and receive passes, turn around with the ball, and stop with the ball. Dribblers can still be used to dribble large distances with the ball as long as the robot periodically loses possession, such as kicking the ball ahead of it as human soccer players often do. The technical committee expects the distance rule to be self-enforced, i.e., teams will insure their software complies beforehand and may be asked to demonstrate this prior to a competition. Referees, though, will still call fouls for violations and may give a caution (yellow card) for situations of repeated violations. Decision 6 The limitation to kicking speed was added to prevent a robot with a mechanically superior kicker from having too great of an advantage over opponents, or kicking the ball at speed unsafe for spectators. It is also believed that this will help encourage team play over single robot ability, in a similar way to the restrictions on dribbling. Decision 7 The current rule about scoring after chip kicks is defined in this section (subsection Indirect Free Kicks) only. During past competitions, some confusions occurred after robots chipped the ball and thereby caused own goals. For this reason, a strict interpretation of this rule is provided here: If a robot chips the ball (no matter at which height it travels) at a team mate and the ball subsequently enters the own goal, the opponent team scores. If a robot chips the ball at an opponent and the ball subsequently enters the own goal while staying below 150mm all the time after touching the opponent robot, the opponent team also scores. If a robot chips the ball at an opponent and the ball subsequently enters the own goal after having been above 150mm for some time (and not being in constant touch with the ground afterwards) after touching the opponent robot, the opponent team does not score.