Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Yes, Victors were $120 if I recall.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The Victor was not $120 when the Talon came out. It was $115 when the Jaguar came out in 2009.

It was reduced when the Jaguar was introduced in 2009 to $79, then reduced again when the Talon was introduced in 2013.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Sorry, bad recollection.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

We're very happy about the new speed controllers and also VERY happy we have a huge stock of the current old ones. Thank God!

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I thought the Victor was reduced at the start of the 2010 competition season and to $90

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=80576

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I made the decision in 2009:)

The price actually changed in December, 2009.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The blog say that "A selection of [the old] controllers will be available in the 2015 Kickoff Kits and/or through FIRST Choice".

Were there motor controllers in the KOP this past year? Looking at the old FIRST Choice site, it looks like only one type of controller (Talons) were available through there.

Basically this makes me nervous on the availability of old Talon SRs come January. I have been wanting to move our team to all Talon SRs for next year (or the new Victor SPs) if they are available, but this lack of surety has me worried. Right now there is no guarantee that Talon SRs will be available through FIRST channels, and there is no guarantee that Victor SP will be available through private channels.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

If I remember correctly Victors/Jags were in the KOP through a voucher to IFI/VexPRO.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Paul,

Since you are watching this thread can you post more details about the feedback available on the Talon SRX?

I would love to see an outline on what features would be available, ie encoder, limit switches, analog?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

That sounds familiar. I wasn't the one on the team doing the ordering so I wasn't entirely sure.

Based on the nature of those vouchers I'm assuming that in 2015 they would be used on the new Victors/Talons which would really be fantastic.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I agree with Alan. The Wago lever nuts are made in Germany, where engineers are famously conservative about ratings. Their 32A rating should be sufficient for FRC connections between the new pigtail controllers and CIM motors. Recall that the CIM's own "normal" load is only 27A -- pretty conservative when you consider how hard they are routinely worked in FRC.

I also agree with D. Allred -- an official Q&A response would be helpful to teams (like mine) that have historically used 45A APP connectors between motors and controllers.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

My common sense doesn't matter. I'm just cautioning against applying thermal paste/grease to motor controllers since the (2014) rule against modifying control system components specifically mentions gluing as an illegal modification.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Correct but the adhesive on velcro was readily viewed as okay, so there is a line. Placing that line can be challenging for some teams.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I'd be curious if/when they will reveal distributors. It's unclear to me (probably on purpose since it isn't finalized) whether or not VEXpro will be selling both exclusively to teams and its authorized resellers, AndyMark will be selling at least the Talon SRX exclusively, or if everybody is selling both.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The point I was making is that "common sense" often does not lead to the same conclusion.

For example, my common sense tells me that non-curing thermal grease is *not* glue and therefore the gluing rule is not applicable.

But if the common sense of others differs, it's not "lawyering" to ask Q&A for clarification.

Then if Q&A doesn't answer (it happens), give it your best honest shot. Ask around and see what other respected teams are doing.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I would really like to see producers of these new produces comment on the stock levels they intend to have available on or before January 3rd, 2015. The only comment I have seen from Vex on this thread is correcting how much a Jag cost a few years ago.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Attn Paul and friends at IFI and CTRE.

How long are the wires on these things?

I'd pay an extra $10 per unit if the wires were something like 4 feet long, at least on the input and especially PWM wires. Can we make this an option?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

On the parts we got for beta testing, the power and motor leads are 5.5" and the PWM wire is about 18" long.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

5.5 inches and 17.8 inches per the drawing: http://content.vexrobotics.com/vexpr...g-20140818.PDF

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The high strand count Power Input/Motor Output leads appear to be 400 strand.
Nice and flexible.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Team 254 has the same feelings. While we will likely put it nice and close to the PDB, it never hurts to have extra wire just in case. We do NOT want to have to splice in a wire to go to the PDB ever. The longer PWM would also allow us some breathing room when we inevitably re-terminate the ends once installed on the robot.

On the whole though, seriously no complaints on the form factor. Lots of awesome changes here.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Now that we don't really need access to them anymore, other than the lights. I'm pretty sure we're going to find a way to mount a lot of them directly under the PD panel and just run the short wires right up to the panel. Having a little more wire would be nice though.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

That's a huge bonus for people trying to thread it around stuff. It's a shame that small rolls are so expensive.

Some other posts about Andersen power poles, I've used them for years in all sorts of conditions and never had a failure on properly crimped connections. Just buy the tool and use it. And there is a ton of connector colors. You can still meet the black /red wires that the inspectors like, but color code the connections.

I'm not sure on the request for 4 foot leads, but 1 foot on the power side would let you make a neat install with the new PDU. 5 inches isn't much to work with.

Thanks FIRST, it's August and we all know about a change, love this new open info flow!!

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I know it would double the number of SKUs but I would pay another $5 to have the option of 3ft wires on them. Splicing all those wires doesn't seem like a swell idea from a reliability standpoint.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

You'll still want access to the pushbutton to calibrate and change braking mode.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I don't think we have had to recalibrate or change the braking mode on any of our speed controllers once we have installed them and they are working. We make the brake/coast decision early on and don't change it. With CAN I believe you will be able to do this in software anyway.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Are there CAD models without the wires? I tried downloading them myself and taking them out but it took forever for Solidworks to recognize features from the imported bodies and eventually crashed.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

You could just thicken the surfaces and then cut the wires off.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I noticed that both the Victor 888 and Jaguar are no longer purchasable on the vex pro website. Does this mean that all stock has been depleted, or do you need to do a phone order?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I am a little surprised no one has pointed out the main advantage of the new controllers. Not even the most inapt can fill the controllers with hot melt while trying to secure the PWM cable. :]

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

All stock has been depleted of both products.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Yeah. You're almost NEVER going to get recognize features to work with surface models.

I cleaned up a model of the new victor (removed interior surfaces), and removed the wires. I have attached a Solidworks model and a step file. The step file should actually come in as a solid (because there aren't as many gaps/overlapping geometry, I think I got all of them). There might be minor loss of fidelity because it got re-saved into step before being re-imported.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Thank you very much!

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

You might need the buttons accessible for the CAN models, depending on how they work out the CAN addressing. To address the Jaguars, you theoretically chained them together, then sent an address set command and pressed a button on the Jaguar you wanted to set. In practice, you usually had to individually connect to a Jag to set its address. Or to read its address, for that matter.

I'm hoping the Talon SRX will have a better system for this. I'd be super happy if they decided to go the typical industry route and have a pair of rotary switches for setting the address, so you can set/read-off IDs without power or connectivity. Software addressing is theoretically nice until you have to figure out which devices on your network have conflicting IDs through said malfunctioning network.

EDIT: Found the detailed drawings of the Talon SRX, and there aren't any addressing switches on there at the moment, alas.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Here is a height comparison shot.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Wait. You mean to tell me these new speed controllers AREN'T two-dimensional? I take back everything I said about how ridiculously small these are compared to all previous FRC controllers.

Seriously though, these things are even smaller than Spikes. I can see why you would only bother with 4 relay ports on the roboRIO if you knew these were in the pipeline. Why bother with a 20A max relay with a fuse you have to replace when you can have a 40A speed controller in the same footprint?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

There are 24.04 reasons why, but none of them are very good.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Cost and Complexity for the end user? A relay is a lot easier to use than an ESC if all you need is forward/stop/reverse.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Driving solenoid valves, driving solenoid actuators, powering lights, saving money, and using parts you already have.

I still don't like the 4 relay ports on the roboRIO because we've used more than four relays multiple times. It seems kind of silly to me that we downgraded from a maximum of 16 relays to 4 on the new controller, considering the driving circuitry for the relays is probably not too complicated.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

In my opinion, the spike is only useful for the compressor where you are allowed a self resetting breaker & very small motors like a window motors. With the mid size & larger motors, the least stall will blow the fuse.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

With the 2015 control system, the Pneumatics Control Module (PCM) drives the compressor directly. That accounts for 90% of the uses of spikes we've had over the years.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Yay.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I'll grant you cost, with the Victor SR being $25 more than the Spike. I'm pretty doubtful on complexity of the robot itself. (A Victor SR is obviously internally more complex than a Spike.) The Spike is somewhat different from all the speed controllers mechanically, programmatically, and electrically (with that 20A fuse to think about). So I disagree with your position that a robot with two rather different kinds of motor controllers on it is simpler than a robot with only one type of motor controller. Especially since I've seen our novice programmers get somewhat confused by the difference between relays and speed controllers in C++.

See below. With the Pneumatics Control Module, all your solenoid valves and compressors are taken care of. That leaves solenoid actuators and lights. And I wouldn't be surprised if the GDC treated the PCM like the solenoid breakout and let you power solenoid actuators from it. So lights. Which you could drive from a Victor SR if you wanted, actually.

I'll ditto this. We've only used Spikes for compressors or really small loads that I just didn't want to find room for a Jaguar for. Now it's a Spike that I'd have to find room for.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

To me not allowing that seems mildly ridiculous. It's the equivalent of putting a label on a CIM and having it count as a modification.
Grease would be a safety feature IMO. Nobody wants the robot to go up in flames.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Labeling is a listed exemption in the relevant 2014 robot rules regarding modifying electronics; adding thermal paste isn't.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Is there a drawing for the new Talon CAN controller available? What kind of connector will there be for CAN? Will we have to buy a special crimping tool?

I like the zip tie options for fastening, and the small form factor.

In 2013 we hit a limit with 8 CAN controllers. Anything after 8 was sporadic, so we had to back off down to 8. Will the new Talon have a similar limit, or is that more a function of the controller or bus?

I sense another FIRST Choice-esqu meltdown coming as 3000 teams attempt to order 30000 controllers on the first day of availability. :) Every year we are in the 8 - 10 range of controllers on our robot, in addition to several for testing.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Here's your drawing.
CAN wires are permanent pigtails just like the power and motor wires. There's two twisted pairs. Based on the roboRIO, the new CAN bus is two wire, not four, so each pair is a leg of the bus. I'm guessing wago lever nuts or something will be the preferred solution for tying all those pigtails together.

Also, we had no problems with 12 jags on the old CAN bus, so something must have been odd about your setup.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I talked to CTRE at CMP and he said he was considering using a 2 row 20 pin 2mm pitch connector for CAN, limit switch, and encoder inputs in order to fit on the small body of the motor controller. The same type of connector commonly used for JTAG debugging on ARM microcontrollers. Based on the drawing, 2mm pitch looks about right, but went down to 10 pins for limit switches and encoders and moved CAN to dedicated pigtails.

Also, I've just mounted 2 prototype Victor SP on a testbot. The wires are very supple and flexible. "Noodley", good stuff.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Since I don't speak for the Cross the Road people, this is based on what I know about CAN. CAN is a two wire bus. It is intended to be daisy chained. That would be the reason for two pairs. One in & one out. The legs of the pairs would be connected together in the Talon. I know some people use the star configuration for CAN & get away with it. It is not to the standard & it in not a best practice.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

My only problem with the daisy-chain configuration is that it greatly exacerbates the failure mode. It's rather annoying to lose half of your motor controllers instead of just one of them.

It would be nice if there were a supported alternative.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

There is an alternate: PWM's

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

While in the past I would have wholeheartedly agreed, this is a far less-appealing alternative with the new control system.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Do you mean with the robotRIO, or because CAN benefits are now available. If the former, why is everyone so down on using PWMs with the roboRIO?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The former.

AFAIK, in order to use solenoids, you must use CAN.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that the system is still plug and play with the modules. There is nothing extra needed to make the solenoid module work, the CAN implementation is in the background.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Sorry Frank, but I'm really not sure where you are getting this from... In fact, you said it yourself, CAN is a two-wire BUS. Daisy chaining is just an easy method to accomplish it. There is nothing stopping you from putting terminating resistors at each one of your end points and then running everything back to a central hub rather than daisy chaining.

To my knowledge (and I haven't looked at all of the ISO standards and heaven only knows I could be wrong) there is nothing prohibiting the use of a star topology with a CAN network rather than a daisy chain topology.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

This may not be entirely true. While the new system does have a PCM module that automatically controls the compressor/pressure switch and has support for 8 solenoid channels.

Nothing stops you from using the 4 relay ports on the RoboRio to drive solenoids. Without needing to have a PCM.*

You can use One relay for the compressor, and 3 other relays for double acting solenoids. In fact, this is how we were running our pneumatics system using the RoboRio during Alpha testing when the PCM modules weren't supported yet. Only if you exceed 3 double solenoids, would you need to venture to use the CAN PCM module.

And even if you use the CAN module for pneumatics, that doesn't mean you can't or shouldn't use PWM. In fact, I believe most veteran teams will continue to use PWM on their drive train as a minimum despite the new control system, due to PWMs proven reliability and known failure modes. I believe this will be true even if they choose to use CAN motors elsewhere on their robot. Nothing currently prevents a mix use of CAN and PWM on the Robot.

*This is true as long as the 2015 rules do not prohibit this. Doing this is perfectly legal under 2014 rules.

Regards,
Kevin

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

(Passive) star topologies are more susceptible to reflections and fan-out problems than traditional bus topologies and are best avoided for CAN networks in my experience.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

This is not accurate. CAN can not be wired like any other network.

The protocol is named CAN Bus because it should only be used in a bus as it was intented, a bus is a type of topology. CAN can not be used in a STAR or Ring topology or Hub type topology natively without having additional CAN modules, or increasing the complexity of the layout, and even so, in the end, the Ring or Star implementation will only be a cosmetic one, and will not be more efficient then the original Bus topology. You will also loose a lot of link speed.

The current CAN products we have available in the FRC control system, including 2015, are internally hardwired, such that if a device fails, only the device fails, it does not bring down the entire physical bus. The device CANs act as pass-through so you can communicate beyond a failed device. How the software reacts to an ID that does not exist because it failed is a different story. WPI is currently working on implementing a NON-blocking CAN implementation for 2015, which should help teams have more graceful software failures.

Saying that if one CAN module goes down the entire bus goes down, or saying anything beyond the failed device is unreachable after that module goes down is not correct and shouldn't be perpetuated. However, it is a true statement that if you were to CUT the wires on the CAN BUS, you would loose all communication beyond the cut. This is where PWM differs marginally. If you wired every motor to an individual PWM channel, then you would have to cut every PWM cable to have the same effect, making PWM more robust. However, the reason I said marginally is because most teams I have encountered in my FIRST decade use PWM Y cable or even tri cables to drive up to 3 motors off one PWM channel. In this scenario if you cut the one cable, you loose all downstream communication making it very similar to the CAN problem, although you do not need to worry about what the software does if you loose the PWM connection. (Maybe this will be true for CAN in 2015 as well, I haven't beta tested the new CAN implementation yet).

I am not trying to say one is better than the other, I am just trying to clarify the rumors around these technologies so that teams can have all the proper information when choosing which one best suits their needs, based on robot design criteria and experience.

Regards,
Kevin

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Very useful. Thanks for clarifying.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Again, as Ether pointed out, thermal paste IS NOT GLUE. Glue is an adhesive, thermal paste is not.

Webster defines glue as : a substance used to stick things tightly together
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/glue
Even if you change glue to adhesive, thermal paste is not there to retain anything. It usually has a very weak bond, and often never sets, remaining a very thick liquid/gel.

Velcro is attached by adhesive or glue, but is legal. Please stop beating the dead horse :deadhorse: and move on. I know at least a few teams will have the thermal paste on these speed controllers, if its explicitly allowed or not. It would be almost impossible for a robot inspector to see the thermal paste in place anyway. Im sure as soon as the Q&A opens, there will be more than one person who asks this. No need to keep dragging up the same ridiculous argument.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Will you be able to use all PWM's for your speed controllers and just do a very simple can run to your PCM? I am not a programmer or heavy into electrical beside powers wires so don't kill me haha. Thanks.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

You should be able to.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Ty Bryce! We have ran CAN for the last few years and really am ready to throw these $@#$@#$@#$@# jags away. But cost wise, the new victors are a lot more appealing and lending towards PWM use

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

The caution about thermal paste is due to a plausible analogy between substances, rather than a mere dictionary definition. Like glue, it doesn't fall off the surface, so some phenomenon must be holding it there; is that adhesion significantly different from the adhesion provided by glue? If so, why, and how will you convince the officials of that?

If it's an argument of magnitude of adhesion, would you have the officials permit weak glue as well? If it's an argument of function, would you have the officials permit glue whose adhesion is redundant due to additional fasteners? If it's because thermal paste doesn't set, would that make uncured glue legal? If it's because thermal paste is pretty much inert and can't chemically harm anything, would mostly-inert glue (like mucilage) be allowed? Or if it's a combination of these factors, how should they be weighted when making a determination?

As for Velcro, isn't it (usually) covered by exception G in R64? Its legality is not a very strong argument for thermal paste.

Best to let the Q&A sort it out, but by all means let FIRST know now that you anticipate it being an issue during the season.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Regarding the CAN bus, to some extent, there's always an aspect of star topology on the bus—but traditionally the stub length is short, possibly on the order of a couple of millimetres (in the case of a direct connection to an integrated CAN transceiver). Barring any strange internal arrangement on these controllers, if you leave one pair unconnected, you should still be able to make the connection downstream to the remaining pair, but your stub length will increase.

Here are some general suggestions for optimizing stub length, given other parameters.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I think of a star topology as the line length being short (or 0) relative to the stub length. Very different than what the CAN spec recommends. Without doing the math, I think you can get away with something approaching a star topology in FRC because the entire bus length is short. I have also run just one terminating resistor without issues. But if I were to start having problems, one of the steps would be to make the bus wiring completely to spec.

Here is what the CIA-- the organization that maintains the CAN standard, not the American government entity with the same name has to say.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Quoting the 2014 rules, NO exception for Velcro, any team who used it violated the modifying motor controllers rule. I wonder if we should check every robot, and overturn matches from this past season? :yikes:

4.9.11 R64

The Driver Station software, cRIO, Power Distribution Board, Digital Sidecars, Analog Breakouts, Solenoid Breakouts,
RSL, 120A breaker, motor controllers, relay modules, Wireless Bridge, 12VDC-5VDC converter, and batteries shall not
be tampered with, modified, or adjusted in any way (tampering includes drilling, cutting, machining, gluing, rewiring,
disassembling, etc.), with the following exceptions:
Please note that the Driver Station application is a separate application from the
Dashboard. The Driver Station software may not be modified, while teams are expected
to customize their Dashboard code.
A. User programmable code in the cRIO may be customized.
B. DIP switches on the cRIO may be set (applies to cRIO-FRC only).
C. Motor controllers may be calibrated as described in owner's manuals.
D. Fans may be attached to motor controllers and may be powered from the power input terminals.
E. If powering the compressor, the fuse on a Spike H-Bridge Relay may be replaced with a 20A Snap-Action
circuit breaker.
F. Wires, cables, and signal lines may be connected via the standard connection points provided on the devices.
G. Fasteners may be used to attach the device to the OPERATOR CONSOLE or ROBOT.
H. Labeling may be applied to indicate device purpose, connectivity, functional performance, etc.
I. Brake/Coast jumpers on motor controllers may be changed from their default location.
J. Limit switch jumpers may be removed from a Jaguar motor controller and a custom limit switch circuit may be
page 63 / 93
substituted.
K. If CAN-bus functionality is used, the Jaguar firmware must be updated as required by FIRST (see Rule R67-D).
L. Devices may be repaired, provided the performance and specifications of the device after the repair are
identical to those before the repair.


Again, im saying that it should be left to the Q&A, and that lawyering rules to this point isnt what FIRST is about, and as I said in my first post in this thread

The tape that many many teams had used for years to fabricate clean tidy bumpers was technically illegal, almost impossible to detect, and spawned a long thread on chief, only to be explicitly allowed by first. Why people keep dragging up the ridiculous argument against thermal paste (replace thermal paste with tape and your back in last years thread) is beyond me, just let the Q&A make the final call.

Come on guys, use some common sense, If adding fans is legal for the purposes of cooling, do you really think first wouldn't allow thermal paste for the same reason?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Velcro is a brand of hook-and-loop fastener.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Properly applied, the thermal paste will not be visible to the inspector so it shouldn't come up for discussion. If it does come up & in the inspector's judgement against the rules, it is easily removed. Unlike the thermal paste that is likely on the inside of the motor controller. Please note: I am not suggesting that anybody cheat. Hiding something from the inspector does not make it legal.

Remember it was response to a Q&A question that got bumper tape banned in the First place. After considered discussion, they wisely amended their position. Silliness abounds on all sides. :]

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Not to be stupid, but isnt it an adhesive or glue that attaches each side of the hook and loop to the speed controller? Essentially the same as gluing a nut onto the bottom of a speed controller. It IS a fastener, but its not attached with a fastener, its attached with an adhesive.

I do understand your point though.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I would love to hear what procedures IRI and CTRE have in place for assessing demand and reacting quickly to the supply of the new motor controllers. Using the initial Talon release and the shortages that ensued along with IFI's struggles to match inventory with demand, motor controllers could be scarce this season. Vex shows no stock of the old Jaguar and Victor controllers to supplement. AndyMark appears to have some Talons.

I expect demand to be high for both of the newly designed controllers!

What will the restocking time frame look like? Is anyone else concerned?

I am looking forward to the new controllers!!!!!!!

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I'm not concerned for a few reasons.

I imagine all parties involved have learned well from the previous events.

Another reason is essentially they are the only speed controller on the market for FRC. Predicted demand should be easier. It's not them predicting how many teams will reuse speed controllers, how many will buy the competitors, and how many will buy theirs. It's just them predicting how many teams will buy versus reuse.

When you compare this to the mechanical items it's not even fair. The purchase of mechanical components aren't an A or B or C thing, they're A1.... Z1242123. Even though Hex bearings are popular in FRC, I doubt anyone on chief would be able to accurately predict the amount purchased even IF they had access to all of the sales numbers from all of the venders (other than a lucky guess).

I don't think they owe a public explanation to us on HOW they plan to do it (such information is propriety and the kind of knowledge that is worth good money).

I'm pretty confidant it will be handled well.

Edit. Since the parties involved represent the combined only source for speed controllers for the last few years, they now have exact numbers for how many teams purchase versus reuse. Plus margin for teams upgrading.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I agree with Adam - I think they'll probably do alright with speed controllers. All the same, I personally would encourage veteran teams to hold off on purchasing new ones a little bit so that rookies can get what they need - Veterans simply have more options than rookies do, as we are fortunate enough to have controllers we can pull off old robots.

It's really something when you think about what sort of inventory they might have for this upcoming season. If we just estimate about 5 new speed controllers for every team (some teams won't get any, some teams will buy 20), then that's ~15,000 new speed controllers. With an average price of $70 (assuming even distribution between Talon and Victor), that's over $1,000,000 worth of speed controller stock for just one season!

Obviously, some major assumptions there. How many veteran teams will decide to use the "tried and true" speed controllers and avoid the new ones for at least 1 season? How many teams will decide to use all new ones? What will the mix be between PWM and CAN use with speed controllers and the new control system?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I find it a bit curious that they chose to utilize a single button to calibrate the speed controller, as well as switch between brake and coast modes.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

For reference. We plan to order 40 or so.

That's a good deal of our budget but we're at the point where we need more anyway and it's a good time to switch.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

That's the very unfortunate aspect of what is going on with the new speed controls. In the short 2 year time that the Talon came on the market, we saw an upgraded 888 and a price cut of around 50%.

I hope some creative FIRSTer can get involved and bring another competitive product to market. A single-source supplier for such a critical component usually isn't a good thing from a consumer's point of view. Alternatives are important.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

While I agree with you as a general rule I'm not sure much can be done here. In FRC these are the only games in town but even if you look at other brands that aren't FRC legal they are fairly close in price once you're comparing feature sets. (12V, 40A continuous, R/C control, Reversible) and I'd gladly pay the SMALL premium to get a brand that has a reputation for solid ESCs.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Tom, isn't the entire control system single source? There's only one source for a RoboRio. There's only one company that makes the required PCM and PDP. We can only use one specific brand/model of router.

The competition comes in, I think, when FIRST put out the RFP for the new control system - companies had a chance to come in, show off what they had for everything (including speed controllers, if I remember correctly) and get themselves chosen to supply things for the next few years.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Yep - the control system is singled sourced. That makes perfect sense from a complexity and safety standpoint - those components work together in a number of ways.

A PWM driven speed controller is stand-alone enough that competition can still be created though. The rest of the control system, not so much, except possibly the VRM.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

To be clear, last year there were three speed controllers made by two companies. This year there are two speed controllers made by the same TWO companies, not one. We decided to work together to better be able to meet the demand and have the absolute best products for the market.

This is a small market and the cost to enter this market is very high. Instead of competing all the time, we decided to work together for the greater good of the FRC community. IFI believes this is a win-win-win-win for all parties involved.


With that said, I don't understand why people think it is ok to have a single source for the robot controller and power distribution but is such an "unfortunate" thing to have two FRC suppliers work together on two completely different speed controllers.

Paul

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I don't think that's going to happen. The economics just don't work out.

Let's take a look at what would happen if I (yes, me personally) were to try to get into the speed controller market.

Let's say that I haven't found the "killer app" for speed controllers, I just want to make something that's cheap, reliable, fairly linear, small, etc. Basically, I want to clone the new Vic. Maybe I adapt the package to the requests people have made in this thread, but nothing too out of the box.

First of all, I'd have to invest in commercial CAD software. Eagle (ECAD) runs ~$200 per license, and SolidWorks is probably several thousand dollars, without a whole lot of bells and whistles. Now, I can actually start designing. I'd estimate that it would take me about two weeks working part time to get a solid first revision of a speed controller.

Once I've got a first rev ECAD and MechCAD, I send it around to a few friends to take a look at, make revisions, and start to order prototypes. I can get a run of probably 15-20 speed controller boards at something like $300 for the lot (you don't usually pay per board for prototype PCBs, it's essentially a fixed price for a board of a given size of parts). FETs are going to run about $10 per H-bridge, plus annother $15 for other components, assuming we don't put anything too too fancy on the board. Some basic logic chips, LEDs, caps, etc. Now, let's say that I beg some machine time from a local team I'm friends with rather than pay probably ~$1000 for a run of 15 prototype aluminuim enclosures. Still, I have to pay for material, and maybe some tooling, so let's say that that adds annother $150.

I just paid around $825 assuming I make 15 prototype boards and assemble them myself (and not including the price of the CAD software!). This is just a broad estimate, without doing the research, it's my best guess, but in reality the real number could be anywhere between $500 and $1200. That's around $55 per prototype board, assuming $825 total in prototyping costs. Maybe I give these controllers to some teams to run at offseasons, and make updates to the product as requested for the regular season.

Alright, we've just invested some money in prototype speed controllers, now let's take a look at what kinds of costs well incur from the real production run. In order to make any money on these things, I'm going to get them made offshore, and assembled and tested there as well. We can probably get the board costs down to ~$5 a board for a large run, and let's also say we can bring component costs down, to $15 per board. Assembly is probably going to add $2-3 per board, so with board MFG, components, assembly, and testing, let's say that were paying $25 per board. I'd expect VP to be paying something similar, maybe as low as $15 per board, and certainly no higher than $30 per board. Then I have to pay to get the enclosure made. The Vic casings are aluminuim molded, so that means high startup costs, and low unit costs, so I'm not really sure what that would end up costing per unit. I'll just estimate $10 per unit, including ano. None of this includes the probably ~$1500 trip I have to take to make sure all of this stuff is getting made to my specifications.

Let's ship all this stuff over to the US for, let's say, $5 per unit, assuming we don't break the bank for air shipping. We paid about $40 for each unit. Now, we have to pay some guy to assemble the PCB in the casing, and put it in a nice little cardboard box. Maybe that adds annother $5 per unit, maybe a little less. Were looking at a total cost of $45 per unit. Maybe my estimates too high, but I'm guessing even for VP, they must be paying over $30 per unit that they can actually sell.

So, how do we price them then? Well, even if we assume we have a slightly better product in terms of features than VP, we definitely can't price them any higher $60. No one would buy a new unproved product from a completely new company unless they got some really awesome features or a really awesome price. Let's say I price them at $49.99 per unit in the hopes that I can undercut VP.

Ok, I cross my fingers that the things work well (they do), people like the product (they do), that China doesn't screw up (they don't), and I actually get them in stock in time (I also do). These are really big gambles, but let's just roll with it. Let's also say that I am really confident these guys will sell and order a run of 500. That's probably 3-5% of the FRC market. At $45 in costs per, that's $22,500 invested just in inventory. Finally, imagine these guys do sell like the dickens (again, a big gamble), I've just made $2500. That might, just might, be enough to pay off my development costs.

So, after a season of hard work, big investments, big gambles, and a lot of luck, how much dough did I rake in? Well, if I'm lucky, I didn't lose anything. This is for a probably $20,000 investment from my personal savings (not that I have that much!), and hundreds of hours of work.

I could have made probably $1200 from my actual job, coaching swimming, instead of working on this project, and to earn that money, I wouldn't have had to put up such a crazy amount of money with such a crazy amount of risk. I could have probably make even more money if I got a paid technical internship (designing speed controllers for example).

Basically, my point is that the speed controller market requires a lot of capital, and if you don't have the experience and established reputation like VP and CTRE do, it just becomes really, really risky to get a product that works well at a price that could sell well. While I don't agree with all of VP or CTRE's decisions, I don't think they're putting out a bad product or gouging us. They're probably making a big of money off of speed controllers, but I don't blame them. They've got full time engineers to pay, and a business to run. They're selling good, reliable products, and as a consumer, I feel like I'm getting my money's worth.

But anyway, given the costs and risks involved, it doesn't make that much sense to get into the speed controller market at this point.

Edit: Paul beat me.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Can you comment on what your projected stock levels will be by January, 2nd 2015?

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

He doesn't have to. Like I said above such information is generally closely guarded.

It's in the best interest of vex to fulfill everyone's order.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

This is not something we typically do.

By the way, VEX has NEVER run out of Speed Controllers during the FRC season since I have been the President.

Instead of looking at the perceived negatives of CTRE and VEX working together, I urge the community to look at it from a different perspective.

Consider the things VEX has historically been good at and the things CTRE has been good at and combine them. That is what the teams will get out of this partnership.


**And before anyone goes there again, comparing 2 SKUs for a product that there are limited supplier choices to 300 new SKUs in an environment where there is an established company and a completely unknown use case is just silly.**

Paul

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I do believe that meeting supply is possible, and that if anyone can do it, it's VEX, but people have the right to be a little concerned.

Historically, these sorts of things have sometimes been poorly executed, like everything BaneBots (remember CIM-u-lators in 2012?), game piece availibility (poof balls, orbit balls), VEX gearboxes (2 years), VEX/AM hex bearings, FIRST Choice (twice, and they knew the exact number of teams both times...), and a few others.

IMO, the biggest possible issues wouldn't be stock, but possible issues with the products themselves. They've gone through beta testing and I'm sure they've been designed really well (a group project between Talon and Victor engineers), but issues that pop up during production can be hard to spot.

That said, I really don't think there will be an issue. All companies/people involved know what they're doing, and I have faith in them. Even if something does go wrong, complaining about it on the internet won't solve anything.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I created a new thread here to share a recent experience with TIM (Thermal Interface Material).

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Thank you for the reply, Paul. The more transparent you are with this situation, the better your customers will feel about this. Please, excuse my bluntness, but I do I have a concern. Essentially, the two producers of FIRST approved motor controllers have joined forces to create an great new product. I am excited about the form factor. I am worried about supply. This is a rational concern considering that it seems every year something is in short supply in the FIRST community. Will there be a limit on the amount a team can order at one time. If folk order 40 at a time (yeah 40! read the thread) can you guarantee that all customers will have access to this new product?

I have a small supply of new motor controllers on hand from last year and a stock of used ones. If replacements are hard to come by, I am worried I will not have access to this new source of material when i need them for the build season.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

You have every right to be concerned.

Let me try to put you at ease. IFI has 14 years of FRC speed controller history. Unlike gearboxes, wheels, and motors; This history has proven to be very predictable. Our data, combined with CTRE's data from the last two years has kept that predictable trend going.

We are manufacturing enough speed controllers for even the most optimistic of forecasts. Now, getting the mix between the two may take a season to get right but we have accounted for that in our forecast model.

Again, unlike other products for this market, the historical data has proven very reliable. VEX has never run out of speed controllers during the FRC Season in the past and we aren't going to start now.

Paul

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

That sounds like a challenge. ;-)

EDIT: Seriously Paul, thank you for commenting and talking to the community. I know I'm not alone in having an appreciation for manufacturers that take the time to reach out like you are.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I feel like I have to ask, how much benefit are you going to see in a 3-4 month period by ordering 40 of these? Would it be any additional burden on your team to order maybe 15 or so for the season, and then order an additional 25 next summer?

While I think we are probably not going to see dire shortages, I don't really get the rationale of purchasing so many at a time. If this is something that a lot of financially able teams do, it may actually have a small effect on supply.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I'm not Adam, but I think I know where he's going based on past posting history. I would guess that only about 30 will see use during build, the rest are spares. Those 30 are for characteristics testing, a practice robot or two or three, and the competition robot, maybe a couple to loan to other teams. Due to the speed controllers being an unknown quantity* as far as shaving resistance, heat tolerance, I would guess extra spares as well. I'd also hazard a guess that many of those will end up on next year's robot as well, meaning fewer purchased next year.

For perspective, let's assume that a "typical" robot has about 10 motors of various types--minimum 4, maximum 22 not that anybody ever uses that many. 10 seems to be fairly consistent for a medium-complexity robot. All 10 motors need speed controllers--also typical, though occasionally someone'll use a Spike on one or two. Of course, you want some spares--raiding last year's 10-controller robot isn't always a practical option--so let's say 15 for competition. (See, they're already at your proposed quantity, and I haven't even finished.) Now, let's factor in the practice robot that many teams build--that's another 10 controllers; share the spare pool. 25 controllers and counting. And then you throw in that they like to build a full offseason robot after the season, just kind of testing new tricks, and still show up with primary and practice to offseasons. 10 more controllers, so 35. I'm sure I can come up with a good reason for another 5. And I'm not on the team.

See, that wasn't so hard--40 speed controllers, including spares, covers one year for 'em. More, if they reuse the ones off the practice and offseason robots. And it's a lot easier to just cut one check for a bunch than to cut two for the same item several months apart, particularly if it's a "non-consumable" type of item.


*As in, so far so good, no mass complaining yet--but the suppliers' reputation is very good. OTOH, robotics teams are very creative in finding ways to fry speed controllers for some reason.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

If I didn't care how much I was spending but I wasn't completely oblivious to cost (only mostly oblivious), I'd probably order something like 48, because then I'd have 12 of each controller for a regular bot and practice robot, and I wouldn't have to decide which controller to use right now. I can understand the number 40 from a team that is well established and has the means to raise a reasonable amount of funding.

At this point I'm thinking 8-12 Talons for our team. Ideally I'd want 20-24 talons, but I think we will end up mixing and matching and building up our stock of these controllers over a period of about 3 years.

Even if we ended up strapped for cash and unable to buy a single new controller, I wouldn't feel too bad about life. We have enough to get us through next year, because prices on controllers have been good in the last two years, plus we have been able to get some donated controllers through the IFI voucher, AndyMark product donation voucher, and FIRST Choice. And best of all, Talons and Victors are reliable. The motor controller situation has been better than ever in 2013-2014; 2015 looks even better.

Note to IFI / CTRE: if you make a DC motor controller for FTC to compete with the overpriced / unreliable HiTechnic controllers, I promise to order a bunch of them. Seriously.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Sonic, the drive in chain, advertises itself as the Ultimate Drink Stop (or at least they did), similar to VEXpro, the ultimate FRC gearbox stop. Sonic also is in the business of selling tots. People LOVE tater tots even though they're allegedly terrible for your long term health, but that's irrelevant. VEX has been in the business of selling motor controllers for what feels like as long as this year's group of incoming high school freshmen have been alive.

Sonic, while specializing in hundreds of thousands of possible combinations for drinks, may find it difficult to predict sales of some of the niche mixes. However, the tater tots are obvious, consistent, and easy to predict sellers because of a lack of outside competition (no other chain restaurant sells tots) and little to no change in the base product.

VEXpro, while making dozens and dozens of different ways to get FRC motors to work the way teams want them to through some sweet, high-performing gearboxes, may find it hard to predict sales for some of the niche mixes. However, the motor controllers are obvious, consistent, and easy to predict sellers because of a lack of outside competition and little to no change in the base product.

What I'm trying to say is that I'm in a Sonic drive thru right now before a robotics meeting.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I can certainly see why a team would use 40 controllers or more in a year. I still don't see the need to purchase all 40 at one time, when demand is at it's peak and supply is still an unknown.

To large teams' credit, I'm many of them would re-sell or donate spare controllers to in-need teams if there was a shortage, but I don't see the need to contribute to a potential shortage.

This is probably all useless conjecture, though. Like I said, I doubt there will be a shortage like there was with the Talons from CTRE. I'm just keeping the possibility in mind.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

Way down under in New Zealand, where it costs even more to buy FTC stuff, we're working on this right now.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

To all those talking about thermal paste, I'm not sure how exactly you intend on applying it. Contrary to the popular belief, thermal paste is a much less successful conductor of heat than Aluminium. The purpose of thermal paste in computers is because nothing is ever perfectly flat, and when you put an aluminium or copper heatsink on a processor, you get small airgaps between the heatsink and the processor. These airgaps are not very good at conducting heat (because air isn't very good at conducting heat), and therefore thermal paste is used to replace those gaps with a more conductive than air material.

Now, unless you plan on using a heatsink on your robot for your speed controllers, or plan on making your entire mounting surface a huge heatsink(which I don't think is a good idea if there is a heating issue, with wires and other things on it) I wouldn't recommend the use of thermal paste. Covering the speed controllers with thermal paste would actually reduce their heat dissipation abilities.

I seriously doubt that any usage within FIRST would require thermal paste. I might mount a large fan in a way that causes airflow in the areas where speed controllers are mounted, that would probably increase heat dissipation capabilities.


NOTE: I'm not an engineer with experience in heat management or anything like that, but one of the sponsors my team had when I was in high school made air conditioning units for aerospace purposes (cooling engines and things like that) - many of the mentors worked there and they liked to give us a little bit of a view into their work

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

I too am not too worried about heat, but if the Victors do end up with a lot of heat, thermal paste could be really useful. Your robot's big aluminum frame has a ton more heat capacity than the little aluminum casing. If the Victors heat up enough to get uncomfortably hot, you could dissipate all of that heat into the robot's frame without raising the frame's temperature by more than a few degrees.
For the purpose of a single speed controller, the robot's frame will be able to absorb most of heat the controller can generate about as fast as it can be generated. The air around the controller is much worse than the frame, and can't possibly keep up with the controller.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

A bit of scarification. You don't cover your your speed controllers with thermal paste. You put a thin layer between the heat sink & the metal frame you are trying to transfer heat to.. If the internal design of the controller does not use the part of the controller that would attach to the frame as a heat sink then there is not much point in it. The current crop of controllers are a good example of that.

Sonic tater tots don't compare to the supply model of the new controller. If Sonic is out of tater tots, you can order french fries or onion rings. Sonic makes really good onion rings. You can also go to the grocery store & get your own. Or go down to Zestos.

Re: blog; Motor Controller Options for 2015
 

What's a Zestos?

To interject into this heat discussion, we have run tallons for our drive speed controllers for two years without fans and have never had a problem. I think the whole paste thing is pretty moot.