Sub Contracted, Eh? [Archive]

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by John.

Student on team Hoppers from Monadnock Regional.

Posted on 3/20/2000 5:03 PM MST

At the Jersey Competition, I was told that Team 47 Sub Contracted their Chief Delphi Robot. This might just have been a rumor, but I wouldn't doubt it. Perhaps you can clarify that for me.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by Michael Martus.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central H.S. and Delphi Automotives Systems.

Posted on 3/20/2000 5:35 PM MST

In Reply to: Sub Contracted, Eh? posted by John on 3/20/2000 5:03 PM MST:

I am a teacher at the High School (team coordinator)and have the only shop in a school of 1200. We have like many high schools in america, limited equipment. We have a drill press and hand tools.

Delphi has a work room/shop where prototyping and assembly is done. Many days each week (after 4pm) and every Saturday students go to Delphi to work. We have a breakfast club that starts the day.

Some parts and welding is done at another location. Students shawdow the engineers and skilled trades in the construction of the machine that THEY DESIGNED! They go to the location and do what is allowed by safety standards and union rules.

When you say sub-contracting you need to define your use of the word. If you mean a person other than the engineers weld or do the complicated machining then yes it applies SOMETIMES. Many teams do not have all the resources and send items to be welded, fitted or shaped to other shops within their own company or outside. That also is subcontracting. Look at the sponsors, many teams have many small shops listed.

Subtracting can be defined as having another person or company provied a service to you that you cannot.

If you meant that we draw it in CAD and send the drawings to a shop for manufacture, then the answer is NO WE DO NOT SUB-CONTRACT. This is another definition, I think the one to which you are referencing. This will not apply to us because we do not do this.

Stop by our pit any time and ask the students what part they worked on or how the robot functions. I think you will see that they know the name of each part, the function and purpose. Add to this the instruction by the engineers on the principles of physics and you will see that this is a learning tool of the best kind.

Look around in the pit. I think you will see teams that use students to do most of the repairs. Then you will also see teams that there are NO students to be seen only adults. Who really built their robots.

Our pit crew (rotating team) work in the pit doing and helping what they are capable of. Its a learning experience that some enjoy more than others.

Remember this is not a science fair!
Students CAN learn by a combination of watching and doing. This is the process of getting excited about technology.

I hope that this has answered your questions. Have more, contact me and I will answer to the best of my ability.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by mike aubry.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chiefs, from Pontiac Central.

Posted on 3/20/2000 6:14 PM MST

In Reply to: Sub Contracted, Eh? posted by John on 3/20/2000 5:03 PM MST:

John,
You know John, I heard the same thing! It's amazing how these rumors get started. I've always found that whenever someone wants to get some stuff started they simply plant an idea in some poor unsuspecting souls head (usually it's someone that is most likely to repeat it) and walla - there it's started. So let's just get this out on the table for all to read and maybe it will help those folks understand how we do what we do. We, at Delphi Interior Systems, begin the robot building processes much like everyother team - brainstorm with the students, parents, teachers, engineers, and designers. We follow a pretty good process that leads us to developing design iterations that are rapidly assessed for capability in meeting our targetted criteria. This by the way is the most critical part of the process. Try to establish the robot capability based on the strategy by which you want to play the game. We don't (I don't allow them) to talk about the robot the first day - it's reserved for understanding the game and determining how we want to play it! The second and third day is reserved for translating 'how' we want to play the game into robot characteristics that are then evaluated for engineering and design realism. Can we really 'go multiple directions' or 'pick up multiple balls' with the identified characteristic? After establishing the list of robot characteristics, the Engineers and Designers go to work. We do this by divying the major components and sub-systems up and have 1, 2 or 3 people create the designs. We design the robot in Unigraphics by creating solid models of the components and assemblies, eventually melding them into one big assembly (the complete robot). As the components and sub-systems are being designed, we assign each a target 'not to exceed weight' and 'SPI dollar amount'. We usually all meet during our lunch break to evaluate the progress of the designs. Also, while progressing with the designs we make decisions on making vs. buying, assigning motors, kit material utilization, and assembly sequence. Once we have enough information together we start buying and modifying the purchased parts and making the 'make' parts. We utilize all the resources that we can get our hands on. Some is done 'inside' some is done 'outside' for free and some is purchased. Some is done at home, some is done by friends, but it all gets done. Since the building we work in is a union shop and for liability reasons, the engineers, designers, teachers, and students are not allowed to run the machinery and equipment on the shop floor. Hand tools are allowed back in the lab, where we do the finshing of components, sub-assembly bench work, final assembly of the robot mechanical systems, finish wiring and programming. We do send some specialty stuff outside to have done, whenever we don't have the resources available in our building to do. I don't think that this against any FIRST rules, after all how many times does Dean have to say that 'this is NOT a science project nor is it expected that students are to build the robot?' There are many teams (especially voc ed. type schools) that take this project as the opportunity to get their students some hands on experience - and I applaud them for that! In any case, we can debate this later if need be. As the components are completed, we do all of the assembly work as I earlier stated. The students meet us every Saturday morning for breakfast at a local eatery to talk and mingle, then we go to work doing everything we can from creating the chairmans award to animation to sawing, filing, wiring, drilling, wrenching, etc. So, hopefully you now have a better idea of what we do as a team. We are proud of our effort. We (Delphi Engineers and Designers), know we are successfully inspiring our partner schools students and even better we are making a difference in their lives. So, for anyone that wants to question the process by which our team builds our robot, maybe this message will end any and all speculation. We abide by ALL the rules when creatively designing and building the robot, period. And just for the record, many (very many) FIRST teams sub-contract parts of their robot component fabrication out - as they too, do not have the capability to do everything that is necessary to manufacture or modify the components that they use. I hope I haven't missed anything - and to my fellow teammates I hope that you are not offended by my frankness. I don't think that any of this giving away too much of our successful approach - it probably should be shared with everyone anyways.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by John.

Student on team Hoppers from Monadnock Regional.

Posted on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by mike aubry on 3/20/2000 6:14 PM MST:

Basically, what I got out of your last post was the kids told you what they wanted the robot to do, then Delphi, using what it seemed to be infinite pocketbook (around a few hundred grand), and its expert engineers (which specialized in the field) AND Delphi’s connections made the robot work. I can't see how it was entirely necessary investing so much money into the project, seems how we made it to the finals using only a fraction of that amount.

I heard you guys have another Chief Delphi robot with more advanced and revised systems you are planning to use at the Nationals, rather than the one you used at the Jersey Competition. Well, if that’s true, I can’t see it being very fair. Perhaps you can clarify that for me.

I'd also like to know if the students actually played a key role in the construction of the robot, or if their hands on experience was more revolved around assembling the Chief Delphi after all the major components had been built.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by mike aubry.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chiefs, from Pontiac Central.

Posted on 3/20/2000 7:36 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

: Basically, what I got out of your last post was the kids told you what they wanted the robot to do, then Delphi, using what it seemed to be infinite pocketbook (around a few hundred grand), and its expert engineers (which specialized in the field) AND Delphi’s connections made the robot work. I can't see how it was entirely necessary investing so much money into the project, seems how we made it to the finals using only a fraction of that amount.

Johnny, Congrats on getting to the finals, but do you ask these questions because you want to learn something or just to satisfy some goofy thoughts about our 'pocket book'? I'm sure that you must have some preconceived notions regarding how much we invest in the robot, but believe me you are not even close! Why don't you come over to our pit in Florida I can set you straight on what we do, because it sounds like you are just trying to wind us up to get some sort of reaction. Or is this your way of rubbing it in? Please tell...

: I heard you guys have another Chief Delphi robot with more advanced and revised systems you are planning to use at the Nationals, rather than the one you used at the Jersey Competition. Well, if that’s true, I can’t see it being very fair. Perhaps you can clarify that for me.

This is even more of a joke than I can handle... Where do they dream this stuff up?

: I'd also like to know if the students actually played a key role in the construction of the robot, or if their hands on experience was more revolved around assembling the Chief Delphi after all the major components had been built.

I've already told you what involvement the students have. Are you suggesting that any, no let's make that ALL students - should have a certain amount of 'hands on' experience? You don't sound like you have ever listened to Dean Kamen or Woody Flowers, but then again .... maybe you can tell me - How much involvement you had in creating your robot. I believe that we can all learn from each other and since you must have had a 'great' robot (it made it to the finals) pray tell how'd you build yours? But if you just want to talk trash, take it some where else. This website is for sharing constructive ideas, not tearing down, or ripping on others.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by S. Krussell.

Coach on team #349, Robahamas, from International Academy and Ford Motor Co..

Posted on 3/20/2000 7:40 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

Hey John....you're coming across a little hostile. I think that Pontiac's people gave a full accounting of how they operate in the previous few messages. But more to the point, why should they or any other team have to defend themselves like this? Dean says repeatedly, that the point is not necessarily education, but inspiration. Pontiac and Delphi have been nothing but gracious and always willing to give assistance, parts, help in a crisis to any team who asks. They have bailed my team out on several occasions.

Your comments about their financial situation also comes across poorly. It was inappropriate for you to put comments in print like that, when I am fairly certain that you don't know the reality. THe kids at Pontiac Central spend the entire school year and beyond doing fundraising, writing newsletter, working on Chairman's awards activities, teaching middle school kids, running tournaments for them, learning about the machine, creating animations, in addition to working with Delphi.

FIRST has had a huge and major impact on both the big high schools in Pontiac, and has provided fabulous opportunities for a LOT of kids over the past 6 years or so. These kids are not living in an affluent area, and Delphi and the engineers and teachers have been true 'stand up' adults and mentors for these students.

So lighten up John. You don't even know these people.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:27

Posted by mike aubry.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chiefs, from Pontiac Central.

Posted on 3/20/2000 7:43 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by S. Krussell on 3/20/2000 7:40 PM MST:

Thanks for the kind words, we appreciate that others notice.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Michael Martus.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central H.S. and Delphi Automotives Systems.

Posted on 3/20/2000 8:53 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by S. Krussell on 3/20/2000 7:40 PM MST:

Sue you are so nice. I was not. I sent this young person a strong response that I hope he shares with his team.

He knows nothing about us. Why is he so angry?

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Bethany Dunning.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Coach on team #349, RoBahamas, from International Academy and Ford Motor Company.

Posted on 3/21/2000 6:12 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by Michael Martus on 3/20/2000 8:53 PM MST:

Mike - I really don't think it's anger. It's jealousy, or frustration, or something else. Like you said, he knows nothing about you. And if he was looking for info, he was going about it the wrong way. I could give him the names of several teams that Chief Delphi has been exceedingly gracious to, including the International Academy last year, when you guys went way out of your way to make sure our robot got to Ypsilanti when our ride dumped us last minute (fyi to everyone but Mike Martus - Brandon Martus, webmaster extraordinaire, took a day off of university to drive our robot in his truck.) I can't count the time that Joe Johnson and Mike Aubry spent in our pit trying to figure out what exactly was going on with our robot that it wouldn't run. The Delphi students are some of the most helpful and knowlegable out there. Delphi rocks, and I'm proud to say that we shared Great Lakes with them. :-)

:
: Sue you are so nice. I was not. I sent this young person a strong response that I hope he shares with his team.

: He knows nothing about us. Why is he so angry?

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Ron Hartman.

Coach on team #79, The Navigators, from Eastlake High School and Explorers Post 991 and Honeywell.

Posted on 3/20/2000 8:09 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

John,
I think you're being a bit harsh on Mike and the Delphi team. I've been involved with FIRST competitions for 3 years now and have had the pleasure to compete against and *alongside* Team #47. Few teams, in my opinion, better exemplify what FIRST is about than Chief Delphi. The idea is to inspire students, expose them to science and technology, make a difference in their lives, and eventually, little by little, make a difference in our society. The competition is the means, not the ends. It peaks the students interest and keeps them motivated and interested. The real measure of a team is not how well they do ON the field at the competitions, but OFF the field BEFORE and AFTER the competition. So what if Delphi has more financial backing than other teams? So what if they have 'expert engineers' (aren't ALL engineers 'experts'???), so what if they fabricate pieces of their robot in outside shops? What difference does that make? Does it give them an unfair advantage? No way. If it did, perhaps they would be National Champions every year.

As project leader on Team 79, I feel we are very generously funded, have some fantastically gifted engineers and technicians working the project and have the fortune to work with some very bright and talented students. We, like Delphi, sometimes send work to outside shops, sometimes for free, sometime for money, when our internal time/resources are exhausted. I doubt you'll hear anybody complaining about *our* unfair advantage this year. Fact is, as far as our robot goes, we're probably only in the middle of the pack this year. It takes a heck of lot more than funding, 'expert engineers' (I’m still chuckling over that one!), and “connections” to build a successful robot. It takes even MORE to build a successful TEAM. Delphi has both and I applaud them for their extraordinary efforts. When this year’s competition concludes at Epcot it’s very likely that we will not be the last robot standing (and perhaps not Team 47, or 16, or Heatwave, or some of the other outstanding robots out there), but guess what? When I go home, I can say with all confidence that we’ve made a positive impact on our students lives. I hope you can say the same thing.

And by the way, the fact that your team made it to the finals, but only spent a fraction of what you *think* Team 47 invested, is partly why this whole project works so well.

Good luck to all and let’s not forget what FIRST is REALLY about.

Ron

: Basically, what I got out of your last post was the kids told you what they wanted the robot to do, then Delphi, using what it seemed to be infinite pocketbook (around a few hundred grand), and its expert engineers (which specialized in the field) AND Delphi’s connections made the robot work. I can't see how it was entirely necessary investing so much money into the project, seems how we made it to the finals using only a fraction of that amount.

: I heard you guys have another Chief Delphi robot with more advanced and revised systems you are planning to use at the Nationals, rather than the one you used at the Jersey Competition. Well, if that’s true, I can’t see it being very fair. Perhaps you can clarify that for me.

: I'd also like to know if the students actually played a key role in the construction of the robot, or if their hands on experience was more revolved around assembling the Chief Delphi after all the major components had been built.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Scott Strickland.

Engineer on team #21, ComBBAT, from Astronaut & Titusville High School and Boeing/NASA.

Posted on 3/20/2000 8:16 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

I think many students and engineers miss the point about FIRST because they are unable to attend the NH kickoff. Dean wants this to be the biggest, most-exciting, technically-advanced, inspiratitional competition there is. period. As big as any sports contest.

The only way this will happen is when big companies open their pockets and hearts. When companies and communities understand the idea of a cooper-tition and strive to be the best. The best at inspiring young people. The best at sportsmanship. The best at building complex machines.

A team that built a robot that made it to the finals on a shoe string budget is great. A team that raised thousands, inspired their communities to support, and built a pretty good machine is OUTSTANDING!!!! Why do you think there is so much luck involved in winning the competitions. I submit that it is by design, to further emphasize the Chairman's Award.

I think there should be T-shirts printed for FIRST, 'It's about the Chairman's Award Stupid!!!!'

Every year our team is able to take a step closer to Chief Delphi, Bomb Squad, and a few other heavies... I am happy with the results, regardless of our standing in the 'robot' competition.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by michael ciavaglia.

Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Interior Systems.

Posted on 3/21/2000 6:33 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

: Basically, what I got out of your last post was the kids told you what they wanted the robot to do, then Delphi, using what it seemed to be infinite pocketbook (around a few hundred grand), and its expert engineers (which specialized in the field) AND Delphi’s connections made the robot work. I can't see how it was entirely necessary investing so much money into the project, seems how we made it to the finals using only a fraction of that amount.

FIRST OF ALL, 'WHAT IT SEEMED TO BE INFINITE POCKETBOOK (AROUND A FEW HUNDRED GRAND' AND IT'S EXPERT ENGINEERS...' BELIEVE ME, IT WAS FAR LESS THAN AN INFINITE POCKETBOOK. ACTUALLY, WE SPENT LESS THAN HALF THE AMOUNT FROM LAST YEARS MACHINE. WE PLANNED AND EXECUTED WELL.

THANKS FOR THE COMPLIMENT 'EXPERT ENGINEER'. I THINK I WILL USE THE QUOTE IN MY NEXT PERFORMANCE REVIEW.

NEXT, IS YOUR COMPANY SO VERTICALLY INTEGRATED THAT YOU DON'T GO OUTSIDE TO HAVE ANYTHING DONE.

: I heard you guys have another Chief Delphi robot with more advanced and revised systems you are planning to use at the Nationals, rather than the one you used at the Jersey Competition. Well, if that’s true, I can’t see it being very fair. Perhaps you can clarify that for me.

WE FOLLOW ALL THE RULES ALL THE TIME. THE RULES ARE MUCH DIFFERENT THAN YEARS PAST. THAT IS WHY WE PUSHED FOR A RUNNING ROBOT AT WEEK 4. THIS WOULD GIVE US TWO WEEKS TO DEBUG OUR MACHINE.

WHAT YOU DON'T SEE ARE (OR MAYBE YOU DO) THE HOURS THAT WE PUT INTO THE MACHINE. DO YOU SEE THE MULTIPLE 11:00 P.M. FRIDAY NIGHT SESSIONS? DO YOU SEE THE MULTIPLE 4:30 A.M. WORK BEFORE 'REAL WORK' STARTED. OR FINALLY, DO YOU SEE THE 36-HOUR DAY? WAIT, ISN'T THERE ONLY 24-HOURS IN A DAY?!? WE WENT BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY TO MAKE SURE OUR ROBOT WOULD PERFORM THE WAY WE ENVISIONED IT.

SO, YOU WILL SEE THE SAME BATTLE-SCARED MACHINE EVERYWHERE. THE BUMPER WILL PROBABLY BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE IT WAS BEAT UP PRETTY BAD IN NEW JERSEY. IT IS BEING FABRICATED RIGHT NOW. ALL WORK WILL STOP TODAY AT 4:00 P.M. SO DON'T BE SURPRISED TO SEE A NEW BUMPER.

: I'd also like to know if the students actually played a key role in the construction of the robot, or if their hands on experience was more revolved around assembling the Chief Delphi after all the major components had been built.

WE BUILD SUB-ASSEMBLYS FOR QUICK REPLACEMENT AND THE ABILITY TO HAVE MULTIPLE PEOPLE DESIGNING THE MACHINE. THEY ARE VERY USEFUL. WHERE DOES THE SUB-ASSEMBLY END AND THE ASSEMBLY BEGIN. I KNOW FOR A FACT THAT STUDENTS LOOK TO CERTAIN SUB-ASSEMBLYS AND SAY 'THAT IS MY CANNON', 'THAT IS MY BOOM', 'WE DESIGNED THIS IN CAD','WE DESIGNED THAT IN CAD'. THEY DO AND DID ALL THE THINGS THAT WE DO IN OUR EVERYDAY JOB.

PLEASE REMEMBER, WE ARE JUST TRYING TO PROMOTE FIRST. FROM THIS WEBSITE, TO THE ROOKIE CAMP, TO THE ADDITIONAL PARTS THAT JOE J. HAS ADDED TO THE KIT, TO THE CHIEF DELPHI INVITATIONAL, TO THE CADET PROGRAM, TO THE SUMMER STUDENT INTERNS, TO THE ...

WE WANT PONTIAC CENTRAL STUDENTS TO FOLLOW IN OUR FOOTSTEPS.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Brett R..

Student on team #201, Viste-Feds, from Rochester High School and Visteon Automotive Systems.

Posted on 3/25/2000 9:59 PM MST

In Reply to: JUST PROMOTING FIRST! posted by michael ciavaglia on 3/21/2000 6:33 AM MST:

n/t

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Lora Knepper.

Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.

Posted on 3/21/2000 8:24 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by John on 3/20/2000 7:03 PM MST:

John,

Please just give it a rest. You have no reason, nor basis to rip upon a fellow team like this, and it is offensive to why we are all in FIRST to begin with! Chief Delphi has made some magnificent bots year after year, and I am in awe for each of their creations. Even more than that, I look at the students from Pontiac Central, and I am amazed. They have a passion, a drive, that is incredible. Team 47 goes out of their way to help and support all of us in FIRST, and you have no right to tear them down. We are one team...a FIRST team. If you cannot see that, then I honestly can say I pity you. Everyone is entitiled to his/her own opinions, but that was nothing but pure slander. Do not accuse when you cannot back up your statements, and if you feel the need to carry this disscussion further, come to pit 69 and look me up in the Nationals. I will show you what FIRST is. From the faces of the team on little to no funding, cheering for a bot that barely runs...to the team like Delphi, who spends time helping them repair that bot when something is wrong. The teams that cheer in the stands, becasue their own bot is not there, but because there is a team with 5 students, (all on the field), is all they could bring...and everyone should have a cheering squad. If that is not FIRST to you, fine. But do not rip into my fellow teams, and simply keep that opinion to yourself.

Lora Knepper
Driver/Team Leader
Team HYPER

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by colleen.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Other on team #246, a FIRST-aholic, from John D. O'Byrant High School/Boston Latin Academy and NSTAR/Boston University/Wentworth Institute of Technology/MassPEP.

Posted on 3/20/2000 8:58 PM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by mike aubry on 3/20/2000 6:14 PM MST:

basically, all that's being argued is a matter of opinion.. some teams see FIRST as a project to be done solely by the kids, others see it as a process like Delphi runs, and others see it as a solely engineer thing.. the fact of the matter is, mike's right, there are no rules on how it should be done, and therefore their process is in no way wrong..

personally, (and this is only personally), i have no issues/bad thoughts about the way Delphi's team is run.. for the last 5 years, i've been throughly impressed by the team and the robot 47 brings to competition.. however, i would never really want to be on a team run that way because i see FIRST as something different.. i joined FIRST my freshman year because when i was in 8th, my dad drraaaaaaagged unwilling me to the competition and i was awestruck just to think 'hey- these kids built these robots, they work, and i can do that too?!?!' fortunately for my busy hands, my old team Nypro runs a team in which the students directly brainstorm, mockup, design, manufacture the robot... was i not allowed that opportunity my freshman year, i can guarantee that i never would have returned my sophomore year or every year so after...

basically- we are all in FIRST for the same core reason, to inspire kids. I was once the student, now i'm a mentor and work my hardest to afford the kids on my new team the same chances to learn as i had, because i think there is a lot to be said about the 'hands-on' approach.. afterall, it's the sole reason i'm studying engineering now...

what my long-winded nutshell means is: i think we should all respect the fact that we are all in FIRST for the same reason, and all the right reasons, and we are doing something positive for the world no matter how we all feel the process should be completed.. some sponsors, some companies, engineers, teachers, students want to give more, do more, learn more and do it in different ways - and we should respect that..

after all- like dean said in jersey, we're all one big FIRST family... so we may not do it the same, but remember are goals are the same, and we should be proud of every team who's working towards that goal..

Congrats to everyone :-)

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Justin Ridley.

Engineer on team #221, MI Roboworks, from Michigan Technological University.

Posted on 3/20/2000 10:34 PM MST

In Reply to: A matter of opinion.. posted by colleen on 3/20/2000 8:58 PM MST:

I just have to say that I whole heartedly agree with you. There are lots of different types of FIRST teams doing things in lots of different ways. And I also have been on ones where the kids play larger roles in the construction of the robot. I like this kind of team, and this is the type I would want to be a part of. I learned an incredible amount the time I spent working with engineers building the bot, and I wouldn't personally have wanted it any other way. I think it's absolutely great when the students are deeply involved in the design and construction of robots. And I think it's awsome that many teams are able to build competitive robots on shoestring budgets. But, you know what, kids on other types of teams enjoy FIRST just as much. The big thing all teams do is introduce students to the world of engineering, and I think this is one of the major goals of FIRST. As for team 47, I think they do this and much more. They do a lot of good things for the school, the community, and most of all the students on their team. Just because their kids might not be spending hours milling out parts doesn't mean they arn't learning and gaining a lot from the FIRST experience. I know I would absolutley love to sit down with their engineers in one of thier brainstorming sessions. They are obviously incredibly brilliant to design and build the robots we've seen year after year. I know they inspire me and members of my team to keep striving, trying to reach their level. I'm sure they inspire their students in much the same way, and that's what matters. I look forward to trying to compete with teams like ChiefDelphi, and nickel and dime basement builders, this year and the years to come.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Ken Wilson.

Engineer on team #248, FEMEX, from Philadelphia Girls High and PECO Energy Company.

Posted on 3/21/2000 7:06 AM MST

In Reply to: Re: Sub Contracted ? posted by mike aubry on 3/20/2000 6:14 PM MST:

Mike - you don't have to justify you're team efforts. FIRST is about inspiration and recognition. Your (teams) creation should inspire anyone who is lucky enough to see it in action. My 3 year old son (apprentice robot builder) was one who marveled at its performance this past weekend. We saw it in the pits and were equally impressed. I was personally impressed with your team's sportmanship when the tide turned against you. You guys raise the bar each year and we all benefit. Winning is nice, but its not the goal. Besides, FIRST competitions reveal that there are many different ways to 'win'. In my book, TEAM 47 deserves much recognition. KUDOS FROM TEAM 248.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Joe Johnson.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 3/20/2000 8:42 PM MST

In Reply to: Sub Contracted, Eh? posted by John on 3/20/2000 5:03 PM MST:

Let's all take a step back and take a deep breath.

There is no need to be hostile in any case either by my own friend and colleage, Mike Aubry, or by others whom I am less familiar with.

John, you being up a lot of important issues. Your voice is welcome on these forums.

I have much to say, but I will try to address it in a civil manner. I look for civility in return.

Deal?

Joe J.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Greg Mills.

Engineer on team #16, Baxter Bomb Squad, from Mountain Home and Baxter Healthcare.

Posted on 3/21/2000 6:19 AM MST

In Reply to: #1 Engineers do not run lathes, mills, etc. posted by Joe Johnson on 3/20/2000 9:02 PM MST:

Joe,
I have found that the best way to get the idea across is to mention what Dean said one night a few years ago - If you want to inspire a student to be a great basketball player, is it better to give him a basketball and tell him how to do it or take him to watch Michael Jordan play (maybe that should be Vince Carter now)? The answer is a little of both. We try to combine as much drilling and tapping by the students as possible with them watching a five axis CNC magically turn out a sprocket. We let them see what we can do - and what they can do with a little hard work over the next few years.

Don't sweat the comments Delphi - in fact I have come to take those as a complement to our program. Except for two minutes at a time this is really a celebration more than a competition - it takes a few years for that to sink it.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Kate.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Mass Academy of Math and Science and Worcester Polytechnic Institute.

Posted on 3/22/2000 5:10 PM MST

In Reply to: #2 FIRST does not make students engineers posted by Joe Johnson on 3/20/2000 9:24 PM MST:

engineer n 1: a person who uses scientific knowledge to solve practical problems

I'll mostly agree with you.. It's just the title of your post that I'll disagree with.. I believe that participants in the FIRST competition are engineers.. No matter how far they've come in school.. The difference is that not everyone is on the same level of being an engineer.. Those who have degrees in engineering are obviously on a higher level than those that are in high school.. Everyone that does FIRST solves problems in a usually pratical manner..

I'll even call my camp kids engineers.. I had them for camp over the summer for the Lego Mindstorms camp at FIRST.. They solved the problem basically on their own.. Just with a little bit of mentoring and guidance.. There are different levels of engineering.. Because if there wasn't, then you would go from being nothing so suddenly being an engineer.. And that isn't the case.. It takes time and practice.. But some of that engineering magic is even found in the young kids..

Kate

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Joe Johnson.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;[PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]

Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 3/20/2000 9:55 PM MST

In Reply to: More light less heat... posted by Joe Johnson on 3/20/2000 8:42 PM MST:

Having defended the right of a team to totally farm out their design, this is not what the Chief Delphi team does.

We do work on the robot. Quite a lot actually.

Cutting, drilling, tapping, dremelling, wiring, bending, shearing, assembling, bolting, bleeding, etc.

These are just a few of the 'ing' words that we did a lot of.

Why? When Chief Delphi is obviously able to hire out the entire process or even to build several robots while we are at it (sarcasm alert ;-)

Because it is part of the inspiration process in our opinion.

We do plenty of work on that machine (We in this case being engineers, students and teachers).

If it is not enough to suit some teams or if the balance of what is done by this group or that group does not match the ratio set by your team's internal standards. What can I say?

We are trying to inspire our students using our best judgement.

I find it singularly uninspiring that some teams come to competition with robots that cannot drive, move their arms or do much of anything. Many times this is done in the name of inspiring students by letting them design and build XXX% of the robot.

Am I to complain that this is a great unfairness to other teams and should not be allowed?

I think not.

FIRST has not made a rule about what percentage of a robot must be built by any one group (including so-called sub-contractors).

FIRST has (wisely, in my opinion) allowed teams to use their best judgement about what balance is best to maximize the inspirational aspect of their FIRST programs.

I think this is part of the richness of FIRST and what makes it such a dynamic community.

Joe J.

P.S. As to rumors that Chief Delphi has built more than one robot. This is totally false. In my rookie year, I strongly advocated this strategy as a means of gaining drive time. It was a total and complete failure. I swore that we would never again waste such energy chasing down a 2nd robot that never did manage to get completed. It is a vow that I repeat often. In my opinion these are the keys to success:
Make ONE robot.
Pick a strategy early.
Design it in CAD before you cut ANYTHING.
Pull the all nighters in week 4 to finish it early rather than in week 5 to put it in the box.
Give your drivers time behind the wheel.

Building multiple robots hurts many of these efforts and only potentially helps the last one.
Overall, I feel strongly that it is a huge net loss to build more than one robot.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Dan.

Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret's and Banner Engineering.

Posted on 3/20/2000 10:53 PM MST

In Reply to: #3 Chief Delphi Builds Its Robot posted by Joe Johnson on 3/20/2000 9:55 PM MST:

It's a shame that every year (or at least the last 3) Chief Delphi does very well, and every year you have to defend your program. If only for the sake of time (and your wrists, one notices it is far more time and energy consuming to DEFEND than to ATTACK) you should consider posting a 'Mission Statement' to once and for all clear up why and how you do this. There are obviously many misconceptions about FIRST and especially about Chief Delphi; it would be to everyone's benefit if these misconceptions could be cleared up once and for all.
Of course, this is just one lowly student's opinion and Lord knows you guys already have your time filled.
:-Dan

PS I'm not trying to attack John, who posed the question. I think he's got valid points IF one looks at this competition as simply and engineering education. But as Dean, Woodie, and everyone else in here has mentioned there is more to it than that. It should also be noted that FIRST really allows you to determine your own mission. For John's team it may be an engineering education. No goal is really better than another, but different schools use FIRST for different purposes.

archiver

23-06-2002, 22:28

Posted by Scott Vierstra.

Engineer on team #128, Cold Fusion (TOGA PARTY), from Grandview Heights and American Electric Power.

Posted on 3/22/2000 6:51 AM MST

In Reply to: #3 Chief Delphi Builds Its Robot posted by Joe Johnson on 3/20/2000 9:55 PM MST:

:I agree that engineers do not often have the opportunity to run equipment and machinery, but this is mostly due to the economic impact and the relative cost of engineering services. However, there are a lot of engineers who without the experience or with limited experience of getting their hands dirty struggle to truly understand how things work. By excluding students fromany part of the building phase of the FIRST competition, it is my opinion that they are robbed of a very valuable aspect of the overall process and an appreciation for the artistry of building things. I've felt that the purpose of FIRST was to introduce high school students to technically oriented fields, including being machinists, welders, mechanics, electricians, technicians, etc. An engineer without the support and valuable input from these other related fields would have a very lonely and unproductive existence.
I was fortunate to have experienced Woody's Introductory Design Course at MIT, and I remember that one of the neat aspects of that competition, as well as FIRST, was the attempt to start with a level playing field. Winning the competition is nice, but at what price? If we place too much emphasis on winning the competition, we take away some of what it's all about for the rest of the competitors. Only one team can win the competition, but all can be winners. When a group of students who join a FIRST team with little experience, find that they can actually build a robot themselves in just 6 weeks time and have it survive the rigors of competition, they have truly learned something about technology and themselves. They realize that given the kind of resources that some teams have at their disposal, they can easily make an impact in this world. More importantly, they have pushed themselves to levels they previously thought they were not capable of. They go away with the knowledge that they can exceed their own expectations and overcome obstacles in the process.
Don't get me wrong. I believe that the engineers play a vital roll in guiding the students, helping them to avoid pitfalls, and providing some level of assurance that the robot will do what it was intended to do. Chief Delphi is to be commended on their continued success in developing sound designs and competitive robots. I simply think that the students gain more by owning more of the process and doing the work. With team Cold Fusion (TOGA PARTY), we are fortunate to be able to start early in the fall and can develop student skills as welders, electricians, programers, etc. allowing them to feel more comfortable in applying these skills in the robot building phase.
Good Luck to All at Nationals

: Having defended the right of a team to totally farm out their design, this is not what the Chief Delphi team does.

: We do work on the robot. Quite a lot actually.

: Cutting, drilling, tapping, dremelling, wiring, bending, shearing, assembling, bolting, bleeding, etc.

: These are just a few of the 'ing' words that we did a lot of.

: Why? When Chief Delphi is obviously able to hire out the entire process or even to build several robots while we are at it (sarcasm alert ;-)

: Because it is part of the inspiration process in our opinion.

: We do plenty of work on that machine (We in this case being engineers, students and teachers).

: If it is not enough to suit some teams or if the balance of what is done by this group or that group does not match the ratio set by your team's internal standards. What can I say?

: We are trying to inspire our students using our best judgement.

: I find it singularly uninspiring that some teams come to competition with robots that cannot drive, move their arms or do much of anything. Many times this is done in the name of inspiring students by letting them design and build XXX% of the robot.

: Am I to complain that this is a great unfairness to other teams and should not be allowed?

: I think not.

: FIRST has not made a rule about what percentage of a robot must be built by any one group (including so-called sub-contractors).

: FIRST has (wisely, in my opinion) allowed teams to use their best judgement about what balance is best to maximize the inspirational aspect of their FIRST programs.

: I think this is part of the richness of FIRST and what makes it such a dynamic community.

: Joe J.

: P.S. As to rumors that Chief Delphi has built more than one robot. This is totally false. In my rookie year, I strongly advocated this strategy as a means of gaining drive time. It was a total and complete failure. I swore that we would never again waste such energy chasing down a 2nd robot that never did manage to get completed. It is a vow that I repeat often. In my opinion these are the keys to success:
: Make ONE robot.
: Pick a strategy early.
: Design it in CAD before you cut ANYTHING.
: Pull the all nighters in week 4 to finish it early rather than in week 5 to put it in the box.
: Give your drivers time behind the wheel.

: Building multiple robots hurts many of these efforts and only potentially helps the last one.
: Overall, I feel strongly that it is a huge net loss to build more than one robot.