Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

If you assume random constraints that aren't stated you'll waste even more when a cleaner more elegant solution to solving a problem is possible.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

Then it is a good thing I don't intend on interviewing at a place that clearly has very bad and narrow definitions of words and doesn't evaluate all options for how to solve their clients needs.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

Honestly, I don't think it really matters. It is clear that you're supposed to be ON the bridge, not under it. I understand the rules are open for this sort of manipulation, however do you really think that the GDC would allow a game strategy not intended for use that breaks rules? I think a robot between the lexan and the bridge can "assist in balancing", which is illegal.

Furthermore, for those arguing it takes away "innovativeness", look at 179's robot. Perfectly legal, and is one of the most innovative robots I've seen in my life. I'm not saying you shouldn't go innovative and stick to the plain rules, but going as far as to say it's unfair you can't drive onto the lexan and call it balancing is just going too far.

Don't get me wrong, I want to make an innovative design and robot as much as the next guy, and like everyone else I spend my time reading through the rules, trying to find any possible loophole that will be viable for my team's advantage. However, one does not simply drive onto lexan and call it balanced.

These are just my views, and I understand others have their own views on these things, and I respect that.

-Andrew

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

I always evaluate all the options. I just don't take the risk of building something I might not get paid for. I make SURE the customer will accept and pay for my solution (the equivalent here is the GDC and the inspectors). And if the customer is not wise enough to know it will not work, I still will NOT build it because I want the customer to return.

We focus a lot on the mentor to student relationships in FIRST, rightfully so. But there are also older mentor to younger mentor relationships, both within teams and between teams. In that context (I'm an older successful engineer/manager/scientist/inventor) I'm advising younger mentors that troll-ish ideas (in FIRST and in the real world) do not merit a lot of consideration (notice I do not say zero) and certainly do not merit a lot of complaining when the GDC (or your boss someday) cuts one off. There are exceptions, some people get paid to entertain off-the-wall ideas and that is a great gig - but not most of us.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

If you needed a job, (with all due respect) does it matter what you think or intend?

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

I don't have access to official bridge or mathematical skills to figure it out, but is that ball ramp 5 degrees or less? If it is 6 degrees it wouldn't count. Just wondering.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

With all due respect, while Aren and Andrew are younger in age, both have a vast experienced within FIRST. Through listening to Andrew on the EWCP podcast and personal conversations with Aren, I can tell you they know their stuff. Both know what it takes to have a really sucessful robot and team. I think they could mentor the majority of mentors, young or old.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

You mean... like asking in Q&A what the definition of bridge is? Seems to me that was a pretty clear "is this a legitimate solution?". You see, unlike the real world the GDC refuses to answer questions about particular solutions. So I could not ask "Will a robot that is capable of going under the bridge and being fully supported by the plate underneath it be considered supported by the bridge?" We would have gotten back that they don't answer questions about specific designs.

My biggest question is, why on earth do we keep having Q&A answers and Team Updates being at odds with each other? Why not merely answer in the Q&A that the bridge is defined as the parts X,Y,Z from the drawing 123 and then follow that up with updating the manual to state that? I guess that is what I'm most angry about.


That being said, I am in the industry of getting paid to find the interesting solutions to problems. It is my job to think of different ways of doing things.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

I don't know either Aren or Andrew, I'll take you at your word. I certainly applaud and admire their dedication to FIRST. But it makes comments in this thread hard to reconcile - some people have to learn the hard way I reckon.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

Well, we can agree on this.

If somebody will pay you for that, that is great. But most of us have to engineer solutions within time and money budgets that can pass acceptance criteria of some sort. Thinking outside the box is great as long as the box has finite volume.

Good luck this year!

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

If I build to the spec and don't get paid my lawyer gets involved. I don't work without my specs and my pay written out.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

I think you are still basing your comments off the opinion that FRC is supposed to be a microcosm of the real world of engineering - I heartily disagree. I have a different opinion about what FRC allows students to learn before they may or may not have their creativity crushed by the corporate machine.

I'd rather learn about creativity and thinking outside the box in an environment that has little repercussions towards the safety or livelihood of another human (FRC) than come up with plain and safe solutions to problems or clients' needs in the real world where I have less opportunities to screw something up and possibly endanger a life (eg: Boeing engineer).

Not all of us think the same way you might about how to handle an FRC design because we think that this competition is probably one of the last times before entering the "real world" of engineering that we can take risks that won't really affect anyone but our own teams.

Hope you understand what I mean by that.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

We've decided to rebuild our robot to better reflect the GDC's intent. Since my team doesn't have any telepathic mentors -- at least, none that can read minds on the east coast -- our only insight into what they wanted us to build is the animation.

At this late stage, would anyone be willing to share what size boot your team is using to kick balls? Normally, we'd prototype this and try to find the very best boot for the job, but we have no time left and want to make sure we get it right this time.

Do members of the GDC prefer Doc Marten's or Red Wings?

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

Really? I like the the kids with attitude to out maneuver the competition. i would hire a driven and innovative engineer in a hot second.

Re: The Ultimate Game-Breaker Robot: 2012 Edition
 

Bazinga