Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

That is funny but look around at the limited number of Technic sets available in most stores these days.

I still have a 12 gallon tub of Technic pieces with pnuematics and the lot - all of it bought locally.

Lego has actually in some ways gone backwards.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

I really, really want to take apart my stand mixer now...

Anyway, I think you've made a very good point. The purpose of COTS parts is to streamline the design process. Instead of spending loads of time making small, individual aspects of the robot work, COTS parts enable you to skip the tiny details and go directly to the "big picture," that is, the design of the robot itself, as opposed to the design of its gearboxes, wheels, extrusion, etc. However, it cannot be denied that custom fabricated systems, if made properly, can usually do the job better than an off-the-shelf solution. Why? Because something made custom for the specific purpose it is going to fill will inherently perform better than a more general system of the same construction quality. There's nothing wrong with COTS parts, but putting the time and effort into a really good custom mechanism will (almost) always be worth it.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

Haha, no worries, I don't. I was just a little worried that the discussion would turn into a flame war before the _real_ discussion started, so I was a bit defensive (plus I'd just finished shoveling after the snowpacolypse so...) . Reading the discussion now (and holy cow it's exploded over the last day) I'm really stoked with where this discussion is going.

I'm seeing lots and lots of great opinions, and even a sort of consensus about COTS parts.

As I Read further, I'm starting to see my viewpoint change a bit too with the way people frame the issue.

This is one of my favorite replies so far

And I think that's the center of my worry too. Problem solving is important and you can't start problem solving by trying to design an airliner, you've got to start small. Where better to start that process than at the lowest (reasonble :) ) level possible?

For example, to jump into software-land. We're using Java now, and Java has a hozillion great libraries for everything under the sun, INCLUDING lots of fantastic FRC open-source projects that we could leverage. This is a LOT like COTS mech/electrical parts.

I let my students use these libraries, even if (and when) they do find them on their own, but under one condition. I get them to understand the concepts and reasons WHY that library existed.

NAVx MXP is a great example; No one is going to expect every student to understand sensor fusion, and kalman filtering, on top of a robust I/O protocol. That's Crazytown. I'm sure some particularly bright students might be able to get it. I don't expect them to reverse-engineer anything, but I do help them understand what a Filter is, and why it's important.

A yearly project for new students is to build a simple complementary filter that eats gyro data & a single magnetometer and produce a smoothed heading. This is a simple (mathematically too) project that helps them understand just what's happening under the hood. Once that project is done, the concepts are understood, I give the go-ahead and they pull in the NAVX libraries and navigate away! No re-designing the wheel, the guys at kauailabs did a fantastic job, better than we can expect to in 6 weeks, so by all means lets leverage that.

That is how I feel about larger COTS Parts. If you use them, that's great, just make sure the backup knowledge is there, the why, the question to the answer.

Thanks again guys for the fun discussion

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

Software is getting to the point where not much needs to be done to get it to work. GRIP is a fantastic example of that this year. It takes most of the effort in getting vision code down to a bare minimum. That being said, I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing. For many other non FRC projects, vision has always been a hassle. Whether it's getting libraries to be recognized correctly, installing OpenCV, or cluttering code, it's never been quite as straightforward as I would have liked. With GRIP though, I don't think I will ever have to worry about that again. Although it only supports exports to FRC network tables, it seems like it shouldn't be too difficult to modify the export so that it can be used in non FRC projects. Does it take a lot of the work out of getting vision code? Absolutely! Would I ever go back or tell students to go back to hard coding it for the sake of doing it manually? Probably not. Especially since it makes it easier to transition into more advanced concepts. As new platforms make things easier to code, new things will likely emerge to take it's place.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

http://www.wcproducts.net/mcc2016/

I wasn't going to comment on this thread, but this is just going way too far.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

How is it different from a robot in 3 days?

All of the parts are COTS parts, save for a few custom gussets.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

What? A bunch of COTS parts not directly designed for any game specific tasks built to play the game? I don't see what's wrong here. They aren't selling a robot in a box. They aren't even selling a climber or manipulator in a box. It's just raw products that can be modified to be useful.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

One of the Ri3D "rules" was to not release CAD drawings full CAD models.

According to that site:

I would regard their intent as completely different to Ri3D (even the AndyMark team, who use a lot of AM products).

That's not a criticism of WCP or this product, but I think it would be unfair to the Ri3D teams to group the two together. This is clearly one step beyond what they do, and what the KOP does.

EDITED: Apparently totally wrong, struck through comment

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

Not even close to true. Actually, thank you for reminding me to post the 'Snow Problem CAD model. You can find that here (or in my signature).

Ri3d teams are encouraged to release CAD what are you even saying.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

Apologies - I'll retract amend the statement. I swear I heard that referenced in one of the videos - I must have misheard.

EDIT: Found it. So what I heard was "full CAD model". Video

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

A lot of good discussion here. Thanks to everyone for being so respectful and for not getting devolving into name calling. I respect that in the Chief Delphi crowd. Thanks.

As to my views, listen, I design gearboxes for a living and I am SO GLAD to be out of the gearbox biz for FIRST. Having so many great gearboxes that we can just order lets the team focus on implementing their ideas rather than the details of involutes, center distances, ...

It is not just in the mechanical world that things are getting easier and better.

Coding:
What about compilers? Why should we steal the experience of writing in assembly from our kids?

Electronics:
What about MEMS sensors? Why back in my day, we didn't have none of these new fangled gyros telling us what our angular rate was, no sir e bob. We had to LOOK at our robots and tell THEM what direction they were headed.

Coding (again):
PID loops implemented in WPI libraries? What? and steal the experience of writing an anti-wind up integral term from the coding team? Are you nuts?

Design:
What about CAD? Why are we taking away the experience of hand drawing section views to discover interferences?

Electronics (again):
Beaglebones? Raspberry Pis? Teenseys? Arduinos? Bla! Why teams should layout their own 6808 boards. Puts hair on your chest!

The tools get easier and better in every field. These enable better and better solutions. For everyone. The top teams, the bottom teams, and the middle teams.

I think it is more inspirational. Period.

So, I'm all for them.

Dr. Joe J.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

Only Team Indiana doesn't release their CAD files.

2 years ago, Vex had Built Blitz, which had teams of some of the most brilliant minds in FIRST designing and building robots in 3 days for the 2014 game. There was a thread raising a stink about it here. The topic isn't new, but the MCC isn't as competitive as the Team JVN robot was in 2014(No offense to RC or any of the WCP team that worked on the MCC bot :) ). I don't understand why people will continue to say that ideas like WCP's MCC bot and Ri3D are going "too far". Being able to see cool ideas work early in the season is great for drawing inspiration from and building on top of. Sometimes we need to give our kids an idea of what's been done before so they can think beyond and better.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

The Ri3D teams can each obviously choose their own rules, but I've amended my comment to refer to what I heard:

For reference, I'm not saying WCP nor Ri3D are going "too far". I perceived that there was a difference in intent between WCP and Ri3D:

• Ri3D - to inspire prototyping, designing, strategizing
• WCP - to provide a (base) off-the-shelf robot solution

That may be my misinterpretation, but again, I don't personally see anything wrong with either intent.

EDIT: according to WCP, the MCC is more like Ri3D, intended to show how to effectively use their products.

Re: Opinion Poll: Proliferation of Prefbricated Parts
 

I think this string of posts may clear up the issue of the "kits". While the MCC robot is designed with mostly COTS parts I think it is to show what is possible, and not just to create a robot that you will see copies of on the FRC playing field