Go to Post One thing that FIRST has given me ... Friends who care. - Arefin Bari [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Events   CD-Media   CD-Spy   FRC-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
View Poll Results: WAM is a
Good idea! Keep on developing WAM. 5 33.33%
Bad idea! Forget WAM. 10 66.67%
Voters: 15. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-11-2005, 04:08 AM
Natchez Natchez is offline
Registered User
#0118 (Robonauts)
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Houston
Posts: 189
Natchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond reputeNatchez has a reputation beyond repute
Wolrd Triple Play Autonomous Mode (WAM) Standards

Our team came up with a concept have standards for the autonomy period of the game and wanted to see what the CD community thought of it. The World Triple Play Autonomous Mode (WAM) Standards would be developed to help teams decide their alliance's autonomous period strategy. We mainly started to develop WAM so teams would know the search sequence of the vision tetras thereby teams would be less likely to go after the same one. It continued to evolve into writing standards for many of the autonomous moves so all teams might find WAM useful.

This is how a strategy session might go with WAM implemented.

"Why don't we (#9453) do the BGS/Alpha/CVS move while you (#5843) do the BGS/Beta/RVS move and you (#7298) do the TOC move? Well, we (#7298) are certified in the Beta move so why don't we do BGS/Beta/RVS and you (#5843) do the TOC move. Perfect, we can do the TOC every time but we don't do the RVS very well."

Here are some standards that we sketched out

Note: All positions are relative to the drivers looking at the center of the field
Alpha Standard: Robot starting in the blue left position or red right position shall pick up the first vision tetra found in a starting location in the following order: 3-8-4-2-7-5-6-1
Beta Standard: Robot starting in blue right position or red left position shall pick up the first vision tetra found in a starting location in the following order: 1-6-5-7-2-4-8-3
Charlie Standard: Robot starting in center position shall pick up the first vision tetra found in a starting location in the following order: 2-7-4-3-8
Delta Standard: Robot starting in center position shall pick up the first vision tetra found in a starting location in the following order: 2-7-5-1-6
Auto-Loading-Zone Standard (ALZS): Robot starting in any position shall delay 3 seconds and then proceed to auto loading zone
Meet The Neighbor Standard (MTNS): Robot starting in any position shall "meet their neighbor" without regard to displacing vision tetras.
Left Vision Standard (LVS): Robot shall place vision tetra on top of Left Goal
Right Vision Standard (RVS): Robot shall place vision tetra on top of Right Goal
Center Vision Standard (CVS): Robot shall place vision tetra on top of Center Goal
Bump-n-go Standard (BGS): Robot shall bump the hanging tetra before leaving base
Tetra on Center Standard (TOC): Robot shall place loaded tetra onto back line center goal

(These standards are not necessarily logically correct and there are about 50 more "states" that I will let others propose & develop)

With the understanding that a team member came up with this idea and I'm just posting it, I think that this is a terrific idea. Here are some highlights
  • It allows the students along with engineers an opportunity to experience the development of standards and how they can be useful. As engineers, we use standards all the time (SAE, Military Specs, ANSI, NPT, ASME, IEEE, etc.).
  • It will hopefully make for good autonomous periods that look more like a ballet than the walkways during the end of a baseball game. With three teams in each alliance, good planning is going to be a must to avoid collisions that can destroy an alliance's autonomous period.
  • Teams could host certification sessions at the competitions by having teams attempt certain standards several times to see if they can accomplish the standard. Some guidelines could also be set up for self certification such as, "your robot must be able to accomplish a standard 5 of 6 times before claiming that the robot is certified in that standard." This could also be a good scouting tool.
  • It would help teams understand all their options because almost all of the autonomous scenarios would be captured in the standards.
Finally, I think it is appropriate to add a few words about collusion and standards. Standards can be a great help to society but they can also be used for exclusion and domination. Standards themselves do not typically lead to collusion in the real world; it is typically who is invited to write the standards and who has access to the standards that leads to collussion. For example, if General Motors, Texaco, Chevron, Auto Zone, and Goodyear got together to create automotive standards that they only have access resulting in all GM cars needing Texaco or Chevron gas, Auto Zone parts, and Goodyear tires, this would be bad for society (my opinion only ... yes, you could argue that this would be good for society but I'll leave that debate for another day.) On the other hand, if all the automakers, petroleum companies, parts distributors, tire manufacturers, along with other auto-related companies were invited to write automotive standards that everyone had access to, this would be great for society; this is fortunately how it is today (SAE, ANSI, ASME, etc.).

With WAM, we would have to be very careful. I think that it is okay for those that participate on CD to write the standards BUT the standards would have to be distributed to all of the teams in a timely manner. I believe that a FIRST E-mail Blast at the beginning of the fourth week would satisfy this timely manner requirement.

With all that said, I'll solicit Dave's (Lavery) advice to decide whether he thinks that WAM Standards would be too exclusionary or against the Spirit of FIRST. If Dave thinks that WAM is a bad idea, we will terminate this thread immediately.
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-11-2005, 07:04 AM
phrontist's Avatar
phrontist phrontist is offline
Proto-Engineer
AKA: Bjorn Westergard
FRC #1418 (Vae Victus)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Falls Church, VA
Posts: 828
phrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond reputephrontist has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to phrontist
Re: Wolrd Triple Play Autonomous Mode (WAM) Standards

I'm sorry, but how could anyone collude based around this? At the very worst some teams prepare more ahead of time and will reap the benefits...

That is not an unfair advantage, and I cannot see any unfair advantage come about as a result of this. What I do see is an overly complex naming system, but a good idea. This is a simple concept, lets not make it more complex than military drill orders.
__________________

University of Kentucky - Radio Free Lexington

"I would rather have a really big success or a really spectacular crash and failure then live out the warm eventual death of mediocrity" - Dean Kamen

Last edited by phrontist : 01-11-2005 at 07:08 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-11-2005, 10:16 AM
Ian W. Ian W. is offline
College? What?
no team (Gompei and the Herd)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Worcester, MA | Smithtown, NY
Posts: 1,464
Ian W. is a name known to allIan W. is a name known to allIan W. is a name known to allIan W. is a name known to allIan W. is a name known to allIan W. is a name known to all
Send a message via AIM to Ian W.
Re: Wolrd Triple Play Autonomous Mode (WAM) Standards

I don't like it.

In theory, it's a good idea, but it just doesn't sit right with me. I don't think that it's necessarily against the spirit of FIRST, if anything it might go right along with it to help teams out.

The problem is that I believe teams have enough trouble with one autonomous program. Sure, if everyone helps out, it could be done, but how well would they work? In the six weeks that we have, I think this idea takes a very low priority, one that many teams will not even get to.
__________________
AIM --> Woloi
Email --> ian@woloschin.com
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 01-11-2005, 02:52 PM
Kris Verdeyen's Avatar
Kris Verdeyen Kris Verdeyen is offline
LSR Emcee/Alamo Game Announcer
FRC #0118 (Robonauts)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 667
Kris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond reputeKris Verdeyen has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Wolrd Triple Play Autonomous Mode (WAM) Standards

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ian W.
I don't like it.

In theory, it's a good idea, but it just doesn't sit right with me. I don't think that it's necessarily against the spirit of FIRST, if anything it might go right along with it to help teams out.

The problem is that I believe teams have enough trouble with one autonomous program. Sure, if everyone helps out, it could be done, but how well would they work? In the six weeks that we have, I think this idea takes a very low priority, one that many teams will not even get to.
Where this has real value, I think, is not necessarily in having every team being able to do every possible auto mode, but in communicating those things that a specific team can do for an alliance.

Of course, there will be several teams with on-the-fly selectable auto modes, that can do everything from capturing and capping a vision tet to brewing a mean cappucino, but they will be the exception. What this type of system will do is to gice us all a nomenclature to discuss auto mode, strategize, and avoid the types of problems that were demonstrated during kickoff by the two "robots" who each grabbed the same tet.

It will also be valuable for scouting. Every team that scouts will have a similar list of possible functions, this system just tries to find a common list for all.
__________________
...Only a few people are awake and they live in a state of constant total amazement. -JP Shanley, Joe vs. the Volcano
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Future of Autonomous Mode FadyS. Programming 41 05-24-2004 06:45 PM
Next Years Game? Jeremy General Forum 49 04-27-2004 12:53 AM
Despite what IFI says, you can configure autonomous from OI... TedP Programming 19 03-31-2004 09:09 AM
autonomous mode problem on field Chris_C Programming 17 03-26-2003 06:11 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:03 AM.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi