STEVENS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY

RoboCup Soccer SSL Platform Design Final Report

“I pledge my honor that I have abided by the Stevens Honor System.” December 15, 2009

Patrick Alfonzo ________________________________________

Andrew Domicolo ________________________________________

Michael Fatovic ________________________________________

Amanda Goldman ________________________________________

Daniel Silva ________________________________________

2

Executive Summary

This final report for the Stevens Institute of Technology’s Mechanical Engineering

Department Robotic Senior Design Project will serve as a summation of the RoboCup SSL

Design Team’s Fall 2009 semester’s work ethic.

The ultimate goal of the team is to create a complete set of five autonomous robots to

compete in various RoboCup Soccer matches. The design engineers have strategized and

planned accordingly to design, manufacture, and fabricate a successful RoboCup Soccer team.

In addition to this, the robots must adhere to strict rules that regulate both the mechanical and

programming aspects of the overall project. In order for the team to compete victoriously, it is

vital that the chosen components set the Stevens design team ahead of the rest. The Stevens

team will want motors that turn faster, wheels that move in all directions, a visualization process

that is crystal-clear, and electronics that can communication instantaneously. A well developed

programming structure is yet another important factor when creating a successful RoboCup

team.

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team plans to achieve success by creating a mechanical

design and program that will complement each other, all the while complying with the rules and

regulations set forth by the RoboCup Regulatory Committee.

3

Table of Contents

Executive Summary ……………………………………………………………………………. 2

Introduction ……………………………………………………………………………………. 4

Summary of Phase I

Research and Development ……………………………………………………………. 6

Component Selection ……………………………………………………………………. 7

Summary of Phase II

Directional Control Analysis …………………………………………………………... 13

Driven Kick Plate Analysis …………………………………………………………... 14

Vision Recognition Analysis …………………………………………………………... 16

Power Consumption Analysis …………………………………………………………... 17

Summary of Phase III

Prototype Design Considerations …………………………………………………... 18

Preliminary Design …………………………………………………………………... 20

Detailed Final Design Configurations

Total Assembly …………………………………………………………... 23

Kicker Mechanisms …………………………………………………………... 25

Dribbling Device …………………………………………………………... 26

Budget Estimate …………………………………………………………………... 26

Supplemental Information

Social Issues …………………………………………………………………………... 27

Sustainability …………………………………………………………………………... 28

Standardization/Standards …………………………………………………………... 28

Conclusion …………………………………………………………………………………... 29

Gantt Chart ……………………………………………………………………...… Appendix A

Selected Component Datasheets ………………………………………………... Appendix B

Prototype Cutsheets ………………………………………………………………... Appendix C

Proposed Budget ………………………………………………………………... Appendix D

References ………………………………………………………………………... Appendix E

4

Introduction

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team has spent this past semester exploring all options to

design and fabricate the optimum autonomous soccer team. The team concentrated its efforts in

three separate phases—Phase I: Research and Development, Phase II: Technical Analysis, and

Phase III: Preliminary and Final Designs.

From the start of the project, the RoboCup Design Team has made significant strides in

its work. Phase I, the very beginning of the project, focused primarily on the research and

development aspect of the robots and the competition. The team analyzed the competition rules

and mandates to ensure compatibility with its initial design ideas. The group further investigated

previous competition winners’ designs to supplement its understanding of the inner workings and

overall systems engineering of a successful working team. The design engineers took this

acquired knowledge to explore the components available on the market today. By the end of

Phase I, the team selected a finalized set of components from which it desired to ultimately

construct its robots from.

Phase II consisted heavily of an in depth technical analysis which helped foster the

team’s understanding of the more complex features. Four simultaneous studies were conducted

in varying fields by the team. The Directional Control Analysis taught the team the difference

between holonomic and non-holonomic motion. When considering the team’s specialized three-

wheel drive train, this study proved to be very beneficial in calculating the team’s necessary

vector calculations for game play motion. The Drive Kick Plate Analysis was used to prove that

the provided constants and the in match measured variables can be utilized to instantaneously

output a set of commands to shoot the game ball over a defending player. The commands can

offer an option of solenoid power as well as kick plate angle to clear a defender with an aerial

maneuver. After the completion of the Vision Control Analysis, the team gained confidence that

their chosen hardware and software were not only compatible, but supreme for their intended

purpose. Lastly, the Power Consumption Analysis aided the team in their final selection of a

battery.

The most recent activities the RoboCup Design Team has taken part in have been in

Phase III. The engineers revised their initial plans and came up with preliminary designs. The

5

team used specifications for its selected motors, solenoid, and wheels to map out a prototype

model to be created. Detailed cutsheets have been made of the chassis, kicker and dribbler

mechanisms to be used in the Stevens Machine Shop to fabricate one working prototype.

Throughout Phase III the team requested and ordered enough components to produce one

complete robot. After the final designs had been chosen, the group created a finalized budget

which has been approved for extension.

6

Summary of Phase I

Phase I acted as a proposal for the Stevens RoboCup Design project. The main purpose

of the proposal was to introduce those unfamiliar with the project to the main objectives and

basic guidelines presented in accordance with the Senior Design course requirements. Because

the RoboCup Soccer League is overseen by a third party regulatory committee, all rules and

regulations of the competition were presented in an appendix that can be reviewed periodically.

Research and Development

Phase I consisted largely as a time for the design team to research and develop its process

in which it planned to successfully design, fabricate, and compete in the RoboCup competition.

For a short period of time, the team as a whole gathered information made available on the

internet from past RoboCup winning teams such as the Carnegie Mellon CMDragons and the

Georgia Tech. RoboJackets. Both of these teams, after winning the RoboCup competitions in

different years, have published their designs on the internet. To get a correct understanding of

the breadth and scope of the task that lay ahead of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team, the

engineers read through this information to ensure their initial design aspirations were complete

and that they were not overlooking an important facet of a successful and working team.

Much of the research was presented in the proposal written at the end of Phase I. This

document included the design team’s plan of action, process flowchart, and Gant chart. The

group also presented budgetary and design considerations for several of the robot’s subsystems

and components. These components were separated and researched by the individual team

members and included: motors, wheels, visualization, wireless communication, motor control,

kicker and dribbler assemblies, body and chassis, and programming.

7

Component Selection

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 $50

1.18" long

1.65" diam. 5000 rpm 8.5 oz/in -

Premotec BL48 EB Brushless DC Motor

- 3.7cm long

5.4cm diam. 4600 rpm 43 mNm 2.13 A

Maxon EC45 Flat Brushless DC Motor

$60 1.6cm long

4.3cm diam. 4400 rpm 260 mNm 2.30 A

LynxMotion GHM01 DC Motor

$22 4.8cm long

3.7cm diam. 200 rpm - 2.30 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. Also, the

supplied datasheet has been attached in Appendix B.

Wheel Selection

The team decided early in the project’s life that something different than a conventional 4

wheel design will be needed. Each 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.

8

Name Price Diameter Max Load Image

AcroName R76 $12.75 4cm diam. 15 lbs

AcroName R129 $26.25 6cm diam. 50 lbs

Vex OmniWheel $19.99 7cm 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 1, meets all of the team’s

requirements. The detailed specifications for the

camera have been included in Appendix B.

Figure 1: Prosilica EC750C

9

Wireless Communication

The main processing computer will need a way to communicate wirelessly with each of

the robotics players during the game. 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 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 2, for not

only its size but its efficiency. The individual datasheet for the

xBee Module has been included in Appendix B. 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 I

Program. These PIC Board have adequate processing capabilities as well as sufficient number of

I/O channels to operate each of the robots on-board motors and solenoids. 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

Figure 2: xBee Module

10

the ball during game play). The Dribbler motor selection considerations are displayed in the

following chart.

Motor Price Size Speed Pros Cons

MicroMo 2230F006S $35.00 1.75" long

0.85" diam. 8,000 rpm

-High speeds

-Small -Expensive

MicroMo 1331T006SR $40.00 1.75" long

0.50" diam. 12,000 rpm

-High speeds

-Small -Expensive

Lynxmotion Gear Head Motor - 7.2vdc

30:1 $22.00

1.75" 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 complete datasheet

for this motor has been included in Appendix B.

The considerations for the electric solenoid are shown in the following chart. The team’s

selection has been highlighted in yellow, and the corresponding datasheets have been attached in

Appendix B.

Solenoid Price Size Power Pros Cons

Bimba 0071

Pneumatic solenoid $12.00 2" long

17.5 psi (78N)

-Relatively inexpensive -Complex air system

Solenoidcity S-20-100-H electric

solenoid $45 2" long

125 oz-f

(34.75N) -Easy installation

-Less force than pneumatic

-Expensive

11

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 robots 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, the robots may be fabricated

using aluminum components to increase strength and stability of the chassis.

Programming

Basic game play strategy and programming logic was mapped out by the RoboCup

Design Team using flowcharts. The group fashioned its logic into two separate loops that will be

later used to map out LabVIEW functionality – Offense and Defense. These flowcharts can be

seen in the following Figures 3 and 4, respectively.

Figure 3: Offensive Loop

12

Figure 4: Defensive Loop

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team’s Phase I proposal was based on extensive research

efforts. Previous projects were evaluated and considered in an effort to improve upon other

teams’ designs and address issues encountered. Much of the research revolved around

communication with other universities who are simultaneously involved in the design and

development of RoboCup Soccer Robots. This allowed the team to develop a basic

understanding of key areas in the development process, most notably the programming logic and

hardware selection.

13

Summary of Phase II

The primary object of the Stevens RoboCup Design Team’s Phase II initiative was to

present various technical analyses performed. These studies included Directional Control

Analysis, Driven Kick Plate Analysis, Vision Recognition Analysis, and Power Consumption

Analysis.

Directional Control Analysis

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 5 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 5: Traditional Akerman Steering Drive System vs. Omniwheel System

Source: http://www.societyofrobots.com/robot_omni_wheel.shtml

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

14

team placed these ratios in a look up table which will later be utilized to quickly obtain the

proper command for any specific direction.

Driven Kick Plate Analysis

The team had been confronted with a proposition by one of the panel members of the

Stevens Mechanical Engineering Senior Design Course. The instructor asked how the team

could possibly design a new robotic team that did not just seem to mimic teams of the past. One

option that the Stevens RoboCup Design Team suggested was 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.

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 real-

time measured center to center distance from the offensive to the defensive players (made

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 6. 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.

15

Figure 6: Driven Kick Plate Analysis

Center to Center Distance: 0.305 m = 1.001 ft

Distance to Defender: 0.125 m = 0.41 ft

Buffer Zone (Leading Edge): 25%

Distance to top of curve: 0.1875 m = 0.615 ft

Time to top of curve: 0.081 s

Gravitational Acceleration: 9.8067 m/s² = 32.17 ft/s²

Initial Velocity (y-axis): 1.9177 m/s = 6.292 ft/s

Initial Velocity (x-axis): 1.5432 m/s = 5.063 ft/s

Initial Velocity (magnitude): 2.4615 m/s = 8.076 ft/s

Angle of Attack: 0.8932 ° = 0.016 rad

16

Vision Recognition Analysis

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 players. 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 7.

Figure 7: 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 8 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 8: LabVIEW's image processing output

17

Power Consumption Analysis

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 batter required

to run all of the electrical systems on board of the robot. Taking into consideration the length of

the soccer match 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 9.

Figure 9: 12V, 2000mAh NiMH Battery and its charger

18

Summary of Phase III

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team most recently finished Phase III in its project. Phase

III consisted of a many diversified facets which have only furthered the team’s progress. First

and foremost, after the successful completion of Phases I and II, in which the design engineers

selected the final appropriate components, the team has ordered its parts. Secondly, the group

had concentrated its efforts to come up with several design considerations for a prototype model.

Lastly, the group had finalized its decisions with a chosen design and configuration layout for its

robotic soccer players.

Prototype Design Considerations

While design team was creating a three dimensional model of the chassis and body of the

robots, it was required to take the components and electronics into consideration. These

elements included the motors, gearing, and wheels attached to the chassis and PIC boards within

the confines of the outer casing of the robot. The image in Figure 10 shows the specifications of

the motor, LynxMotion GHM-01, the team had selected to move the wheels. Figure 11 shows

the recommended mounting brackets that will used to attach the motors to the chassis.

Figure 10: Specifications of the LynxMotion GHM-01 Motor

Source: http://www.lynxmotion.com/images/data/ghm01.pdf

19

Figure 11: Specifications for the LynxMotion GHM-01 Mounting Bracket

Source: http://www.lynxmotion.com/images/data/mmt-02.pdf

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 12

shows a section of the provided specification sheet of the chosen solenoid, the Solenoid City S-

20-100-H Electric Solenoid.

Figure 12: Specification of the Solenoid City S-20-100-H Electric Solenoid

Source: http://www.solenoidcity.com/solenoid/tubular/s-20-100hp1.htm

20

Preliminary Design

The following images, Figures 13 – 18, are the components the design team has 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 an acrylic

plastic material for the prototype design stages. Later these units will be assessed and most

likely will be constructed out of aluminum. A more detailed and clearer view or the component

cutsheets and their dimensions are located in Appendix C.

a. Chassis – the body and support structure of the functioning components of the robots

Figure 13: Stevens Chassis Design

b. Kicker Plate – attached to the solenoid valve, strikes the ball

Figure 14: Stevens Kicker Plate Design

21

c. Dribbler – creates a backspin on the ball which allows the robot to keep position whilst moving

Figure 15: Stevens Dribbler Design

d. Dribbler Brackets – supports and affixes the dribbler mechanism to the chassis

Figure 16: Stevens Dribbler Bracket Design

22

e. Solenoid Brackets – stabilizes and secures the solenoid on the chassis

Figure 17: Stevens Solenoid Shaft Bracket Design

Figure 18: Stevens Solenoid Rear Bracket Design

23

Detailed Final Design Configurations

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team completed its final design for the first robot which

will be constructed within the first few weeks of the spring semester.

Total Assembly

The following images, Figures 19 – 22, are multiple views of the assembled final 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 a corollary to 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 19: Top View of the Stevens Assembled Prototype Design

24

Figure 20: Front View of the Stevens Assembled Prototype Design

Figure 21: Right View of the Stevens Assembled Prototype Design

25

Figure 22: Isometric View of the Stevens Assembled Prototype Design

Kicker Mechanisms

The kicker device will strike the ball away from the robot by a force which is provided by

the electric solenoid system. In Figure 23, 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 23: Stevens Kicker Device

26

Dribbling Device

The dribbling mechanism, shown in Figure 24, 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 24: Stevens Dribbling Device

Budget Estimate

Prior to purchasing all of the essential components for the team’s first robot, the group

created a detailed itemized budget. The preliminary budget, which can be found attached in

Appendix D, contains documented retail prices and references for each component. The budget

shows that the cost of 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 has been reviewed by the Director of the Stevens Mechanical Engineering

Department and has preliminarily been approved. The RoboCup Design team has agreed to

purchase enough materials to fabricate one working robot, then after a successful proof of

concept the group will then continue with the fabrication of the remainder of the robotic team.

27

Supplemental Information

The Stevens Institute of Technology’s Mechanical Engineering Department has set in

course for this semester’s Senior Design Final Reports a section in which the various design

groups can speak on behalf of their project in terms of some specific issues. These topics are as

follows: Ethical Issues, Environmental Impact, Social Issues, Political Issues, Health and Safety

Issues, Sustainability, and Standardization/Standards. Due to the various projects that are under

the Mechanical Engineering docket, many of these concerns can be fully related to many design

groups; however, the RoboCup Design Team does not have many implications on these topics.

The next few paragraphs will address the few issues that distantly can be affected by the

RoboCup.

Social Issues

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team has come to a conclusion that of all the issues

presented this one may have the largest impact caused by the project. When the team states that

it believes its project has a substantial social impact, it is not saying that their product will

revolutionize the modern idea of society and social awareness, but instead the project fosters a

sense of social adeptness. Not only has the project brought the team closer together as a tight

knit community relying on each other to perform their mandated tasks above and beyond

proficiency, but the team has also learned of a social networking neighborhood never before

known.

The RoboCup Soccer community is such a large and diverse system that spans the world.

With teams located all over the Earth, it is easy to find a local team. In the case of the Stevens

RoboCup Team, the group has been successful in engaging in a regular correspondence with

local American East Coast teams such as Carnegie Mellon and Georgia Tech. Both team have

been more than friendly and beyond helpful for the new and upcoming Stevens RoboCup Team.

For instance, the Stevens Team, upon the realization that the RoboCup 2010 World Cup is a bit

of a stretch for a first year, have been welcomed with open arms to numerous American

RoboCup League US Opens and various collegiate scrimmages.

Although, the RoboCup Competition is mainly geared around a team of five fully

autonomous robots that are capable of playing the human sport of soccer completely by

28

themselves, it does not mean that the RoboCup does not cultivate and encourage a social

atmosphere. In fact, the RoboCup Competition has opened its social doors to the Stevens

community from the very start.

Sustainability

In terms of sustainability, the Stevens RoboCup Design Team has very high hopes. One

leading proponent for each of the team members is that this is the first year that this specific

project has been offered and made available to the Stevens Institute of Technology Mechanical

Engineering Department community. The team, which is made up of five Mechanical Engineers

who are each concentrating in Robotics and Automation, has such a drive to make this project an

annual event. The group would love to see in years to come that Stevens is leading contender for

the RoboCup World Cup Competition. The team could not be more proud than to eventually

think that it all started with its drive, compassion, and desire for a successful robotic team.

As far as the physical components of the project, the design engineers have planned

accordingly to make this wish for successor design groups come true. The members understand

that a large amount of the elements that need to be purchased are a onetime expenditure, for

example the global visualization camera. This device, along with others like it, will be able to be

used for many years to come. The same can be understood for the motors, wheels, and solenoids

alike. Yes, future teams may want to go with a different concept and/or there might be some

new hardware selection that can certainly trump the current design team’s components; however,

the overall design and types of elements will be the same. Maybe not the physical units, but the

original Stevens RoboCup Design Team’s ideas and creations will live on.

Standardization / Standards

Lastly, the Stevens RoboCup Design Team has its own definition of Standardization and

Standards it would like to define. Assuming there will be many future Stevens RoboCup

Competitors to come, the current design team will make readily available all drawings,

conceptual designs, models, and physical components to the new team. However, parts will

break, components will be outdated, new designs will be created. The Stevens team does not

wish to set a standard of copying and mimicking previous years. No, the Stevens team has, and

will forever set the standard of its work ethic. Just as demanded by the regular rigorous

29

coursework, the Stevens Institute of Technology’s Mechanical Engineering Department holds its

students to a higher standard of quality of work. Alike these standardizations, the RoboCup

Design Team has now made standard the mission to better the previous year’s product.

Conclusion

The Stevens RoboCup Design Team has spent this past fall semester making significant

strides in its design and creation of a fully autonomous robotic soccer team. The team utilized a

three phase process in order to efficiently complete all tasks up to the point of fabrication.

Phase I led the team to research the competition at hand. Investigating previous

competition winners, corresponding with other competing schools, and exploring all options the

group developed a selection of the major and essential components for its robotic team.

Phase II let the design engineers analyze their system in several different ways to

corroborate numerous initial ideas. Directional Control showed the effectiveness of a three

omniwheel drive train; Driven Kick Plate demonstrated the team’s original idea of having an

automated kick plate capable of eluding a defending robot with an aerial maneuver; Vision

Control solidified the group’s selection of LabVIEW as its imaging processing software; and

Power Consumption helped make the selection of an effective battery.

Phase III helped the team purchase its selected materials, and configure a prototype. The

designs created will be used to machine and fabricate a working prototype to ensure a proof of

concept. Once the concept has been proven, the designs of the entire system—chassis, kicker

mechanism, and dribbling device—can be made into a final aluminum product

As stated before, the team believes firmly in its work up to this point. It will use this

complete set of drawings, models, and concepts to start next semester still ahead of schedule.

The purchased components have been delivered, the models have been designed, and the Stevens

RoboCup Design Team is ready to start its fabrication process.

Appendix A

Gantt Chart

Appendix B

Selected Component Datasheets

II. DRAWING OF CURVES

Pout3.0

2.7

2.4

2.1

1.8

1.5

1.2

0.9

0.6

0.3

0.00

Kgcm1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0

Amp2.0

1.8

1.6

1.4

1.2

1.0

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0

Eff1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

kRPM0.30

0.27

0.24

0.21

0.18

0.15

0.12

0.09

0.06

0.03

0.00

kRPM

Pout

Amp

Eff

I. OUTER DIMENSIONS

III. SPECIFICATIONS

Type: HN-GH35GMAModel: HN-GH12-2217Y - 30:1

1. Testing Conditions:Temp: 25° CelsiusHumidity: 60%Motor Orientation: Horizontal

2. Rated Voltage: 12vdc3. Voltage Operating Range: 6-12vdc4. Rated Load at 12vdc: 620g-cm

Do not exceed rated load. Damage may occur!5. No Load Speed at 12vdc: 200 RPM +/- 10%

6. Speed at Rated Load (620g-cm): 177 RPM +/- 10%7. No Load Current at 12vdc: < 113mA8. Current at Rated Load (620g-cm): < 233mA9. Shaft End-Play: Maximum 0.8m/m10. Insulation Resistance: 10M ohm at 300vdc11. Withstand Voltage: 300vdc for 1 Second12. The gear motor is not intended for instant reverse.The gear motor must be stopped before reversing.13. The gear motor does not include protection fromwater or dust etc.

Data sheet for:GHM-0112vdc 30:1 200rpm6mm shaft

www.lynxmotion.com

18.5

4.6 18

12

29.5

48

4-M3

7

Prosilica Advantage

Prosilica’s EC-Series cameras are ultra-compact, high-performance CCD and CMOS cameras for machine vision and industrial applications. The EC-Series include fast frame-rate 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

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

ultrA-comPAct firEwirE ccd & cmoS

High-performance CCD & CMOS Cameras for Machine Vision and Digital Imaging

Prosilica Inc. Tel: 604.875.8855 Fax: 604.875.8856 E-mail: info@prosilica.com

EC SeriesFirewire (IEEE 1394)

Prosilica Inc. Suite 110, 8988 Fraserton Courtinfo@prosilica.com • www.prosilica.com Burnaby, BC Canada V5J 5H8 © Prosilica Inc. (09) 2006 All Rights Reserved Tel: 604.875.8855 • Fax: 604.875.8856

EC640 EC640C

EC650 EC650C

EC655 EC655C

EC750 EC750C

EC1020 EC1020C EC1280 EC1350

EC1350CEC1380

EC1380CEC1600

EC1600C

Resolution 659 × 480 659 × 493 659 × 493 752 × 480 1024 × 768 1280 × 1024 1360 × 1024 1360 × 1024 1620 × 1220

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) 9.9 × 9.9 7.4 × 7.4 9.9 × 9.9 6.0 × 6.0 4.65 × 4.65 6.7 × 6.7 4.65 × 4.65 6.45 × 6.45 4.4 × 4.4

Readout Progressive Scan

Interface Type IEEE-1394 (Firewire)

Digital Interface DCAM (IIDC 1.31)

Mono/Color Yes/Yes Yes/No Yes/Yes

Color ModesMono8, 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 Free-running, External trigger, Fixed frame rate, Software trigger

External Trigger Modes Rising edge, Falling edge, Level high, Level low

External Sync Modes Trigger ready, Trigger input, Exposing, GPO

Region of Interest 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 CE, FCC, RoHS

SDK Free of charge - includes driver

Specifications subject to change without notice.Please refer to Prosilica’s website for information on other camera models.

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.

EC Series

XBee Product FamilyThe XBee family of embedded RF modules provides OEMs with a common footprint shared bymultiple platforms, including multipoint and ZigBee/Mesh topologies, and both 2.4 GHz and900 MHz solutions. OEMs deploying the XBee can substitute one XBee for another, dependingupon dynamic application needs, with minimal development, reduced risk and shorter time-to-market.

Why XBee Multipoint RF Modules?XBee multipoint RF modules are ideal for applications requiring low latency and predictablecommunication timing. Providing quick, robust communication in point-to-point, peer-to-peer,and multipoint/star configurations, XBee multipoint products enable robust end-pointconnectivity with ease. Whether deployed as a pure cable replacement for simple serialcommunication, 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 ConnectivityXBee OEM RF modules are part of Digi’s Drop-in Networking family of end-to-end connectivitysolutions. By seamlessly interfacing with compatible gateways, device adapters and extenders,XBee embedded RF modules provide developers with true beyond-the-horizon connectivity.

Providing critical end-point connectivity toDigi’s Drop-in Networking product family,XBee multipoint RF modules are low-cost andeasy to deploy.

Features/Benefits

www.digi.com

• 802.15.4/Multipoint network topologies

• 2.4 GHz for worldwidedeployment

• 900 MHz for long-rangedeployment

• Fully interoperable with other Digi Drop-in Networkingproducts, 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

Embedded RF Modules for OEMs

Product Datasheet

Overview

XBee® Multipoint RF Modules

Central FacilitiesManagement

Ethernet

ConnectPort™ XGatewayGaaatetetetewawawaw yy

9-30VDC

1A MAX

LINK

ACT

STATUS

POWER

RESET

PRIMARY

ANTENNA

SECONDARY

ANTENNA

SIGNAL STRENGTH

ConnectPort X4

WirelessTelco Network

Warehouse

Internet/Frame Relay/

VPN

Meter

Meter

PRO

PRO

Meter

PRO

XBee®

Module

802.15.4/Multipoint Wireless Networks

91001412B1/308

© 2006-2008 Digi International Inc.All rights reserved. Digi, Digi International, the Digi logo, the When Reliability Matters logo, XBee and XBee-PRO are trademarks or registeredtrademarks of Digi International Inc. in the United States and other countries worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of theirrespective owners.

Digi International11001 Bren Road E.Minnetonka, MN 55343U.S.A.PH: 877-912-3444

952-912-3444FX: 952-912-4952email: info@digi.com

Digi InternationalFrance31 rue des Poissonniers92200 Neuilly sur Seine PH: +33-1-55-61-98-98 FX: +33-1-55-61-98-99www.digi.fr

Digi InternationalKKNES Building South 8F22-14 Sakuragaoka-cho,Shibuya-kuTokyo 150-0031, JapanPH: +81-3-5428-0261FX: +81-3-5428-0262www.digi-intl.co.jp

Digi International(HK) LimitedSuite 1703-05, 17/F.,K Wah Centre191 Java RoadNorth Point, Hong KongPH: +852-2833-1008FX: +852-2572-9989www.digi.cn

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. www.digi.com/support

Digi International, the leader in device networking for business, develops reliable products and technologies to connect and securely manage local or remote electronicdevices over the network or via the web. With over 20 million ports shipped worldwidesince 1985, Digi offers the highest levels of performance, flexibility and quality.

www.digi.com

WHEN

MATTERS™

* XBee-PRO 802.15.4 TX Power restricted to 10 mW in Europe and Japan.

Platform XBee® 802.15.4 (Series 1) XBee-PRO® 802.15.4 (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)

Confi guration 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 - 250 kbps 1200 bps - 250 kbps 1200 bps - 57.6 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 2.8 - 3.4VDC 2.8 - 3.4VDC 3.0 - 3.6VDC

Transmit Current 45 mA @ 3.3VDC 215 mA @ 3.3VDC 265 mA typical

Receive Current 50 mA @ 3.3VDC 55 mA @ 3.3VDC 65 mA typical

Power-Down Current <10 uA @ 25º C <10 uA @ 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

Please visit www.digi.com for part numbers.

802.15.4 – Star

(top view) (top view)

0.866”(22.00mm)

0.960”(24.38mm)

PIN 1

PIN 10 PIN 11

PIN 20 PIN 1

PIN 10 PIN 11

PIN 20

1.087”(27.61mm)

0.257”(6.53mm)

0.866”(22.00mm)

0.960”

1.297”(32.94mm)

0.299”(7.59mm)

(side views)

0.020”(0.51mm)

shield-to-PCB0.080” ±0.020(2.03mm ±0.51)

0.079”(2.00mm)

0.050”(1.27mm)

0.031”(0.79mm)

0.110”(2.79mm)

0.160”(4.06mm)

XBee XBee-PRO

II. DRAWING OF CURVES

Pout5.0

4.5

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5

2.0

1.5

1.0

0.5

0.00

Kgcm1.8 3.6 5.4 7.2 9.0

Amp4.0

3.6

3.2

2.8

2.4

2.0

1.6

1.2

0.8

0.4

0.0

Eff1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

0.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

0.0

kRPM0.20

0.18

0.16

0.14

0.12

0.10

0.08

0.06

0.04

0.02

0.00

kRPM

Pout

Amp

Eff

I. OUTER DIMENSIONS

III. SPECIFICATIONS

Type: HN-GH35GMBModel: HN-GH7.2-2414T - 50:1

1. Testing Conditions:Temp: 25° CelsiusHumidity: 60%Motor Orientation: Horizontal

2. Rated Voltage: 7.2vdc3. Voltage Operating Range: 6-7.2vdc4. Rated Load at 7.2vdc: 1.0Kg-cm

Do not exceed rated load. Damage may occur!5. No Load Speed at 7.2vdc: 175 RPM +/- 10%

6. Speed at Rated Load (1.0Kg-cm): 146 RPM +/- 10%7. No Load Current at 7.2vdc: < 221mA8. Current at Rated Load (1.0Kg-cm): < 556mA9. Shaft End-Play: Maximum 0.8m/m10. Insulation Resistance: 10M ohm at 300vdc11. Withstand Voltage: 300vdc for 1 Second12. The gear motor is not intended for instant reverse.The gear motor must be stopped before reversing.13. The gear motor does not include protection fromwater or dust etc.

Data sheet for:GHM-047.2vdc 50:1 175rpm6mm shaft

www.lynxmotion.com

1812

313.5±1

4.6

42 22.6 4-M3

7

Appendix C

Prototype Cutsheets

Appendix D

dD Proposed Budget

Preliminary Budget

RoboCup Small Size League Senior Design Project Stevens Institute of Technology, Department of Mechanical Engineering

PRELIMINARY BUDGET DATE: DECEMBER 15, 2009

Members: Patrick Alfonzo, Andrew Domicolo, Michael Fatovic, Amanda Goldman, Daniel Silva Advisor: Dr. David Cappelleri Email: stevens-robotic-senior-design@googlegroups.com

TO Dr. Constantin Chassapis Stevens Institute of Technology Department of Mechanical Engineering 1 Castle Point on the Hudson Hoboken, NJ 07030

QTY ITEM TAG DESCRIPTION UNIT PRICE LINE TOTAL

15 Driver Motor Gear Head Motor – 12VDC, 200RPM $21.95 $329.25

5 Omni Wheels R77-4CM-ROLLER-3 Omni Wheels (pack of 3) $33.75 $168.75

5 Dribbler Motor GWS RS-777 Brushed DC Motor – 7.2V, 16000RPM $6.86 $34.30

5 Solenoid Valve SOTUH025051 Solenoid – Tubular, Push Type $39.19 $195.95

5 XBee Module XB24-AWI-001-ND ZigBee Module $19.00 $95.00

5 XBee USB Hub RB-Spa-145 SFE XBee Explorer USB $19.95 $99.75

5 XBee Transceiver AC163028-MRF24J40MA PICDEM Z 2.4GHz RF Board $18.95 $94.75

5 PIC Motor Control PIC18F4321 Motor Controller –E/ML $3.72 $18.60

5 On-board Sensor VT43N1 LDR Photocell Resistor $2.99 $14.95

7 NiMH Battery 11606 12V, 2000mAh NiMH Battery Pack $15.19 $106.33

5 NiMH Charger 01020 Universal Charger for NiMH Battery Pack $19.99 $99.95

1 Miscellaneous Body/Chassis Material, Wiring Supplies, Test Field $200.00 $200.00*

1 Global Camera Prosilica GC750C GigE Camera 752x480 Resolution $750.00 $750.00*

TOTAL per Robot $285.44

TOTAL $2,207.58

TOTAL Requested

$2,500.00

The RoboCup SSL Design Team appreciates your consideration. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME!

* Denotes 1 time expenditure

ITEM TAG REFERENCE

Driver Motor http://www.lynxmotion.com/Product.aspx?productID=93&CategoryID=11

Omni Wheels http://acroname.com/robotics/parts/R77-4CM-ROLLER-3.html

Dribbler Motor http://www.robotshop.ca/gws-rs-777-dc-motor.html

Solenoid Valve http://www.electromechanicsonline.com/products/SOTUH025051.asp

XBee Module http://search.digikey.com/scripts/DkSearch/dksus.dll?WT.z_header=search_go&lang=en&site=us&keywords=XB24-AWI-001-ND&x=14&y=23

XBee USB Hub http://www.robotshop.us/sfe-xbee-explorer-usb.html

XBee Transceiver http://www.microchipdirect.com/ProductSearch.aspx?Keywords=AC163028

PIC Motor Control http://www.microchipdirect.com/ProductSearch.aspx?Keywords=PIC18F4321

On-board Sensor http://www.virtualvillage.com/vt43n1-ldr-photocell-resistor/sku001493-018?utm_source=googlebase&utm_medium=shcomp&utm_campaign=VT43N1%20LDR%20Photocell%20Resistor

NiMH Battery http://www.all-battery.com/12v2000mahnimhbatterypack11606.aspx

NiMH Charger http://www.all-battery.com/smartuniversalchargerfornimhnicdbatterypack7-2v-12v-01020.aspx

Global Camera http://1stvision.com/cameras/Prosilica/GC750-GC750C.html (with educational discount)

Appendix E

References

`In order to obtain a greater understanding of the various aspects involved in RoboCup

Soccer, the Stevens Design Team contacted other groups currently involved in the competition.

Two teams which were contacted were the Georgia Tech Robojackets and the Carnegie Mellon

Dragons. These two teams provided invaluable insight regarding the logistics of the

competition, as well as the general robot design options available regarding the allotted

restrictions put in place by the RoboCup Regulatory Committee. In addition to these two teams,

many online resources were consulted. Aside from the official RoboCup Competition website,

the Society of Robots provided a great deal of information regarding an omni-directional drive

system.

Web Sources

Georgia Tech Robojackets – http://www.robojackets.org/

Carnegie Mellon Dragons – http://www-2.cs.cmu.edu/~robosoccer/small/

Official RoboCup Competition – http://www.robocup.org/

Society of Robots – http://www.societyofrobots.com/