Skip to content

Passive Intake or Claw

Use this page as a deeper follow-up to the quick reference, not as a full build guide.

Still deciding? Start with the Intake Quick Reference.

Start Here

  • Pick this style when the gamepiece is awkward, large, fragile, or easier to place directly than to pull through rollers.
  • Its biggest strength is simple direct control of one piece.
  • Its biggest tradeoff is slower pickup and a bigger demand on driver alignment.
  • Rough build difficulty: low.
  • Rough maintenance difficulty: low to medium.

Why Teams Pick This Intake

GM0 describes passive intakes as mechanisms where the driver picks up individual items, usually with a gripper. Claws are the most common passive intake style in FTC.

Teams usually pick this style when they need direct one-piece control, when the object shape is hard to manage with an active intake, or when they need a simpler mechanism they can finish early and trust.

This is also a strong option when the same mechanism can both collect and score, because that removes the need for a separate transfer path.

What a Good Version Looks Like

  • The driver can line it up quickly without fighting awkward approach angles.
  • The claw, scoop, or gripper holds the piece securely without crushing it.
  • The mechanism opens and closes reliably every time.
  • The piece stays controlled while the robot turns, accelerates, or stops.
  • The collection and scoring motions are simple enough for students to repeat under match pressure.

Good public examples:

GM0 also shows 13075 Coram Deo Academy Robotics as a reminder that a claw can be a weaker fit when the game really rewards faster intake cycles.

What to Watch Out For

  • Passive pickup is usually slower because the driver must aim at one object and close the mechanism deliberately.
  • Claws can be more fragile than they first appear, especially if they take side hits.
  • A passive intake can become frustrating if it needs perfect alignment every time.
  • If the game rewards repeated floor cycles, this style can lose too much time.
  • If a claw grabs well but scores awkwardly, the overall mechanism may still be the wrong choice.

Build Difficulty

Overall build complexity is usually low.

  • Many passive intakes can be built with servos and simple brackets instead of dedicated motors.
  • They usually have fewer moving parts than an active intake plus transfer.
  • They are often a good first mechanism for newer teams or teams short on time.

That said, simple does not mean automatically good. If the gamepiece or scoring task punishes slow pickup, the simpler mechanism may still be the worse robot choice.

Maintenance and Reliability

Overall maintenance complexity is usually low to medium.

  • Fewer moving parts usually means fewer things to fail.
  • Check pivots, servo horns, and mounting points often.
  • Watch for bent arms, cracked grippers, or loosened fasteners after impacts.
  • Make sure students can replace the gripper tips, elastic parts, or worn contact surfaces quickly.

Good Starting Point

  • Start with the simplest geometry that securely captures the actual gamepiece.
  • Prototype around the real object first, not just dimensions on paper.
  • If the same mechanism can collect and score without a separate transfer, that is often the best passive starting point.
  • If your team is deciding between a simple passive design and a complicated active one it may never finish, the passive option can be the smarter first robot.

Compare It to Other Intake Options

What Still Needs Confirmation

  • Confirm that the current season's gamepiece and scoring tasks really reward direct control enough to justify slower pickup.
  • Confirm the current season rules, legal parts, and any possession limits.
  • Re-check whether a passive intake still leaves enough match time for the number of cycles your strategy needs.

Learn More