![]() |
What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
For those that were around pre 2012, think back to the state of the average team's ability. What was it missing that is common today? Machine vision.
Then 2012 happened. 341 happened. They caught everyone's attention with their closed loop control for aiming at the high basket. They showed that it can be done, and done well at that. Fast forward to now. We have ni vision, we have grip, we have team 900 who used the same technology in self driving cars in 2016. While having some form of machine vision is not quite the norm, it is trending to be that way. So, what do you think the next technical leap frc will experience? |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
it wasn't so much a technical leap, but wide, varied, and inexpensive COTS gearboxes and the versa planetary are what has had the biggest impact in growth for teams. Very few teams use vision, EVERY team uses gearboxes.
The next technical growth aspect is going to be something that raises the floor for everyone, not just those with an interest. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I don't think this is a super accurate version of the events.
To some extent, machine vision has been a thing since 2006 - teams used cameras effectively that year for the high goal. The main reason camera tracking was not a thing in 2009 was the new control system combined with the moving, non-lit target. Teams certainly did use camera tracking to some extent, but often / usually, manual tracking was faster. In 2010 and 2011, your robot started in a known location facing a stationary goal, so what was the camera even for? In 2012, a similar argument applied, but when teams started moving around the camera got beneficial. The rules also opened up to start allowing coprocessors sometime before 2012 which was a big help. 341 was a notable, highly visible example of camera tracking, certainly, and they had an effect, but I think it's a bit simplifying and disingenuous to suggest that camera tracking wasn't taken seriously until 341 demonstrated it being used effectively. In 2013 and 2014, see 2010 and 2011. 2015 doesn't count. So 2016 was really the only opportunity since 2012 for camera tracking to be an advantage. You had to cross defenses before shooting which made the physical position of the robot on the field not nearly as certain. This is why you saw a lot more cameras for autonomous that year - as well as flashlights for teleop. So really, the use of cameras is much more driven by the game than by the coolest example of it from a particular year - and cameras have been an available option to FRC teams in one way or another for many, many years. There certainly was a dramatic shift in capability between the pre-2009 CMUcam and the 2009 NI system, as well as a shift in 2012 the first year coprocessors were allowed when a camera was a potential advantage. But camera use is really a response to the conditions of the game more than anything else. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
My guess is that soon, everyone will see the merit of a 4-axis self-controlled robot arm on their robot.
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I would agree with Chris's analysis of cameras. Camera use really does track with the benefit you get within each game. There's almost always something you can do with a camera, but many times the benefit just isn't big enough to justify the time investment.
And as Eric said, suppliers like AndyMark, Vex, WCP, and a few others have gone a very long way over the past 10 years or so. The floor for teams is so much higher now than it used to be because of the ability to purchase solutions to a lot of problems, mostly surrounding gearboxes, mounting solutions, and drive train options. That's not to discount other solutions (BaneBot's line of wheels for a while, AM's compliant wheels, linear servo's, etc) that make particular challenges easier, those solutions just aren't as universally applicable, depending on the particular game or strategy design. I think we'll see continued growth from our suppliers, as they add more and more out of the box solutions to problems teams often have. It's almost turning into a faceoff between the GDC and the suppliers - can the GDC stay one step ahead of the solutions suppliers are putting out, so the game remains a challenge? Already this year, you can build half of a robot from off the shelf systems from AndyMark alone. They have an intake system. They have a winch. They have a ton of different drive train and chassis options. I don't think I've seen anything from a supplier with a solution for a gear manipulator, a shooter, or an indexer, so there are still challenges for teams to solve. That's a huge advantage that wasn't even dreamed of by most teams 10 years ago. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Not quite a technical leap, but I think 3D printing is going to continue to grow in the FRC community. It's such a great resource for teams to have. A relatively cheap and convenient way to manufacture parts. Not all teams have access to machine shops, but for under 100$ they can start printing complex parts in their class rooms.
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Next plausible leap is likely fire on the move robots that are making high percentage of shots. This is a good deal trickier than static shots teams are currently taking (and the moving shots teams made in 2014 were far easier than a 2016 or 2017 shot).
There is no technical reason why robots couldn't currently be doing that, just a lot of software to develop. We might see it this year, but probably not... |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
I believe the real leap in vision processing has come in the form of cheap Android phones that are incredible powerful with great cameras on them, props to 254 for leading the way. The tracking frame-rate and ease of development you can get from building vision in an Android app is way ahead of any other co-processor/on-board vision processing I've seen. I'd love to see some common tools develop around this, the communication between the App and the Rio can be tricky right now. It would be awesome to see every kit include a powerful $200 Android phone with some standard tools to do vision processing with. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
How about linear actuation? Of course pneumatics have been used forever, but these electric actuators are starting to pop up. They allow you linear motion without the weight of an entire pneumatics system.
The DART actuators last year and now REV has their hi power servos and AndyMark offers their linear servo. I'd like to see the VersaPlanetary adapted for linear motion. It would provide a smaller footprint than the DART actuators with sufficient power to do many things on FRC robots. The multiple gearing options would continue to make this versatile as well. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
I'm sure you'll see many robots that are mechanically capable of this feat this year (e.g. turrets and continuously variable shot ranges), but I will venture to say that this will be nobody's "Plan A"...the set of teams who I believe have the mechanical and software expertise necessary to pull it off are also competitive and pragmatic enough to choose a 99% solution that requires 10% as much work. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Smaller, inexpensive water jet cutters that can cut 48x48x.25in aluminum to .001 in accuracy at 100 in/min for less than $1000 and a tech grant to get one in KoP :)
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I'm going to be honest - the Versaplanetary.
When designing a mechanism it is really nice to be able to say "hmm, I'm going to need a reduction of between 3:1 and 100:1 and I'll put a Bag motor in there but maybe eventually I'll swap in a 775Pro if I need a little extra power" and just put the same hole pattern in and be done. I think a huge leap over the last 5 years was the relaxation of pneumatics rules. Letting teams use air for more things and not limiting them to 4 small tanks has changed how teams design. Ok, maybe I've just been talking to Foss too much. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I look at this a bit more philosophically...there is a great deal of technology out there that the average team knows about or has access to with ...(fill in your favorite search engine)...but the issue is and has always been how to replicate something on a team budget, max component value of $400, CAW max of $4000, or access to advanced manufacturing methods. I think the next leap forward will depend on whatever industry drives the price down on or whatever mass sponsorship resources start popping up.
I agree that the next most probable advance will be in motion control. We are already seeing integrated industrial linear and rotary servo motion falling below $400 and at power and load ratings useful to FRC teams. We are also seeing industrial and tech sponsors catching FIRST fever, from both philanthropic and smart leveraged marketing reasons, giving more manufacturing resources to local and global teams. Also, more teams are embracing CAD and modelling to accelerate the prototyping and design process. So, my prediction is that the next wave, though less obvious and harder to measure, will be that the average team will make big leaps in build-to-print or build-to-model robot designs. We will see more off-the-shelf technology being integrated into designs as prices fall, and more CNC, laser or water-jet cut parts on the average robot. With social media and the HUGE repository of robot designs, robot reveals and match play videos, the need for testing specifics will decrease. I already see all of this happening in our district, and suspect that this will continue to grow. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I'm with Andrew and others - the VP was a major advance that changed how easily our mechanisms could be iterated through in 2013 and onward.
Vendor proliferation of hex shaft -based COTS components was the next big leap IMO. It takes most of the design work of power transmission around a shaft, allowing us to focus on mechanism design rather than pouring effort into that particular detail. In the last 3 years, the mechanical technical leap seems to been many more options for intake wheels when interacting with non-compliant game pieces. Other than that, more DIY-based CNC's & 3D printers have helped more than a few teams increase their capabilities. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I want to be allowed to use hydraulic systems.
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
With the number of leaks I see in pneumatics I'd rather nobody shoot Lincoln[1] on an FRC field. [1] Disney had a leak in their hydraulic system on an Abe Lincoln model. The fluid was red, it looked like he'd been shot. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I'll echo what several others have already mentioned in that the biggest difference for the most amount of teams is made by available COTS items. The hex shaft system makes a subtle but monumental difference. I don't even want to think about having to use keyways or interference fits or clamping hubs or tapers or set screws every time I want to transfer torque on a robot. I'd love to see hex shafts adopted by real-world industries, but I'm not holding my breath.
As for the next big technological advancement that will impact teams? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say mid-scale advanced manufacturing services. Already we're seeing things like the Wazer or other small scale CNC machines. While I don't think these are viable for anyone just yet, within 5 to 10 years, affordable CNC manufacturing on an FRC-esque scale could be a thing. Also, mid-scale additive manufacturing is a possibility. A vast amount of teams already have small desktop 3D Printers. There's lots of research and development being done all over the world with large scale additive manufacturing. *ahem* But to the best of my knowledge, there's barely any work being done to create printers in between the extremes. So I think we'll start seeing additive manufacturing machines much more on the FRC scale start coming from industry R&D, and then we'll swoop in to reap the benefits. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
It would be a lot of fun. I like fun! |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I tend to look at this question from a mechanical perspective. Agree with Jesse that the last big step forward was the standardization of interchangeable parts for hex shafting. That single change allowed us to devote our time iterating on mechanisms instead of wasting time fiddling with shafting fitment issues.
#2 has been the availability of COTS drive train solutions. This allows teams to focus their build season time developing and building scoring mechanisms instead of struggling to get a drive train up and running. I think the next major technological leap will be when someone puts an affordable COTS swerve module on the market. We've wanted to run a swerve drive for years, but can't justify the ridiculous cost of COTS swerve modules. And, without advanced CNC manufacturing capability, we don't have the resources to make them ourselves. In the fall, someone posted a design for a swerve module made completely from waterjet cut parts. We'll be looking at that design this summer to perhaps become the basis for an in-house swerve module. But, we'd MUCH rather just buy the parts COTS. I'm betting there are a lot of other teams out there that are itching to go swerve who are in the same boat. Just look at how quickly West Coast Drive trains spread, once we had a few affordable options for COTS shifting gear boxes. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Re: Cameras: 192 had a *fantastic* student-built vision tracking system for variable-distance shots off a 270-degree turret in 2009, making 80%+ of our "sniper-type" shots. Not enough ball storage & rate of fire to win a regional that year, got wrecked by 254's crazy dump at both we attended.
Did win the Innovation in Controls award at every regional we attended that year. Did not win any regionals. 100% agree that 1/2" hex products with VersaPlanetaries feeding them is the recent "sea change" of capability available to the average team. Having 3+ medium size high-quality suppliers (VexPro, AM, WCP, many more) competing to bring the best possible components and products to FRC is what enabled that. Back when we were picking between AM, Banebots, and in-house, in-house won most of the time and we'd spend the most time figuring out how to get torque off a shaft and second-most figuring out how to not smoke the Banebot. Since then AM has stepped up it's game to compete with VexPro and WCP, there's been a ton of standardization (to 1/2 hex), and every supplier is coming out with fantastic new products every year. I don't know what's coming next, but I know it'll come a heckuvalot more quickly than 1/2 hex did. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Personally, I'm eager to see what happens with COTS computing devices, solid state LIDAR, encoders, IMUs, and batteries in the next two-ish years. Prices are going to keep falling and the technology will become more accessible to your average team with better UIs and easier integration as it becomes used and documented. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
HOVERCRAFTS!!!!
But more seriously, as someone mentioned before, manufacturing servicing available to everyone including rookies. (yes, I know it's already available, but many younger teams don't have the right resources to get the right resources right away) |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
USAC once experimented with hydraulic 4WD sprint cars with the tubular frame as the reservoir. Perhaps someone thought that was a technical leap...well...until that first crash. But don't worry, things like that rarely happen in FRC, and especially not this year. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
From a software perspective, I would like to see vision targets that don't use reflective tape come back in order to push teams to make more advanced vision software. Or maybe design a game that uses reflective for one task and non reflective for another. As basic tracking becomes more and more accessible, it seems like adding harder and more complex vision tasks would be the next step.
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Two years (3 years?) ago was the NavX. Then the Spartan board, and many others with extremely high quality gyros. That allowed for much better navigation and vibration rejection - just look at crossing the barriers last year. I'd add in versa planetaries too. The current 'revolution' going on is thanks to CTRE. The can-bus system seamlessly integrated into the control system was a huge step. Built in current monitoring. Pneumatic control integration. The motor controllers that implemented easy speed control, and now motion control, have been transformative. Many, many teams struggled mightily with speed control for years. It was never a simple thing. Just look at the discussions about sampling rates versus rpm, the correct sensors to use, etc. Last year for many teams it was as simple as plug-and-play. The next true revolution? I suspect it will be brushless DC motors. They allow for lighter weight in a smaller package, etc. The minute they are allowed, they will become ubiquitous among top flight teams. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
There is also a subtle revolution taking place as more districts are formed. North Carolina took one huge step forward last year, their first year in districts, in terms of qualification and OPR rankings at Worlds over previous years, and is looking to repeat that this year. The average team now has at least two events with 12 qualification rounds and more time to grow, improve and be inspired. The district model also seems to have brought more teams together to collaborate and share technology and resources, as regional alliances form within the district. This year we will have two full practice fields that should further the advancement of skills and tech exchange. An interesting stat claimed by the one full practice field last year is that every team that came to practice and/or utilize the space earned a blue banner. Granted, those who recognize the value of practice and take advantage of it are more likely to perform better, but it is interesting none the less. "Chance favors the prepared". Clearly, success is motivating, inspiring and contagious.
And finally, as a district we are granted 15 spots at worlds this year. That means more teams are playing in an environment with elite and above average teams and experiencing a new way of thinking. That definitely leaves a mark and brings that experience back to the district for others to consume. Not everyone on CD would agree, but I think FIRST HQ knows what they are doing with creating growth. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
The general pattern for these things tends to be:
1. Innovation - Some enterprising team develops some technical innovation on their robot and has at least modest success with it (and often the most visible team to have success with something isn't the first team to try). Often this involves crossing some barrier to entry (overcoming manufacturing challenges, creative sourcing of a non-standard FRC material, advanced software expertise, lots of iteration, etc.) that keeps most other teams from being able to do the same thing immediately. 2. Early adoption - Other teams (whether nearby, of similar expertise, and/or related to the somehow through the diaspora of alumni and mentors) are inspired, and adopt a similar innovation and add their own twists to it. Whitepapers are released, code/CAD is open-sourced, etc. 3. Commoditization - Vendors take note...the AndyMarks, Vex's, West Coast Products, REVs, WPIlibs, etc., of the world begin to offer partial or complete solutions that significantly lower the barrier to entry for the average team. New companies spring up around the new products (Kauai Labs, CTRE, 221, etc). FRC "standards" emerge to allow for modularity in design and avoid vendor lock-in. Teams of "average" means and expertise can now utilize the idea. (This is the standard lifecycle of adoption of a new idea...) ![]() I've watched this all unfold time and time again. I can remember a time when each of the following had not yet attained ubiquity among "average" FRC teams...15 years ago there were entire regionals which would not have featured a single instance of:
All of the above are now basically ubiquitous (and I'm sure there's a bunch more I missed); I can't remember the last time I saw a robot with none of these features. To get back to the OP's question, I think there are a handful of ideas currently in the "Innovation" or "Early Adoption" phase. Yes, these are mostly on the software side (partially because I'm heavily biased, but also because FRC is far more mature mechanically than in software).
...as well as a few capabilities that have not yet been widely featured on an FRC field, but might in the next couple of years. In most cases here, I think the real opportunity for innovation is from the commoditization of robotics technologies from consumer products and early-stage robotics industries ramping up capability while driving down cost:
|
What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I think in the next 4 years, lidar technology will get cheaper and more teams will pick it up, hopefully spurred on by a game that is designed to have a longer auto with less uniform targets.
I think the next big hardware leap would be Brushless motors. I think we're ready for that now, just need someone to make a proposal that satisfies the powers that be. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
GPS. All you need is a few sources of signal.
The FMS system provides one signal source. Being able to lock onto a few more (cell phones?), and you could have a pretty good estimation of where you are on the field. Working around R68 would be needed - no form of wireless communication to, from, or within the robot. Visible spectrum and non-RF sensors are allowed. With RF being 3 kHz to 300 GHz, you could try to make something outside of that range to send a time mark. For this year's Airship, we are working on Doppler Radar, however, we don't see that as being useful for future games. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
YESSssssssss! |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
The three biggest advances in the last six years or so are:
Swerve-in-a-box for less than $100/module, requiring nothing other than attachment to standard VF to make a drivebase, would change mobility. I think that's coming. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
The next big step is going to be the continued development of consumer-grade machine tools. Additive manufacturing capability is already percolating down to the hobbyist and prosumer levels, and teams have adopted that technology already. As we see similar developments in affordable CNC mills/routers/lathes/combo machines, I suspect we'll see significant strides in machinery capabilities of teams who work out of classrooms and garages.
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Quote:
I think localization is going to get there sooner rather than later. I know a few teams that have been experimenting with it in FTC using the image targets and Vuforia, and I could imagine a similar scheme being used in FRC. FRC/competition robotics fields already have a number of features that make them much better for this than "real-world" scenarios, so it's really a matter of either the commoditization effect that you mentioned or FIRST making things a little easier for teams. As a side note, I would love to see a challenge eventually, once localization becomes more mainstream, where mapping is a significant challenge in a longer autonomous period. Perhaps a semi-randomized field, not quite like Stronghold, but similar. Something else that might become more of a mainstream over the next few years is roller-sized mecanum / "vectored intake" wheels. We aren't quite at the point where they're commodity for FRC (given most of the teams that use them like this are using 4" versions), but I think that will get here soon too. Not quite as far out as anything you've mentioned, but I also don't think they're really highly accessible to average teams yet. I suppose that isn't a leap so much as a step forward, though. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Code:
import swerve from _future_There's still UX issues with them but, tbh, there's similar UX issues with most drive systems in FIRST. That'd be a great place to see some innovation - the UX of the operator control. CheezyDrive (SplitArcade) seems to be a good solution for tank drives in that it discourages the Drive, Turn, Drive, Turn approach that is brutal to drive systems. I'd really like to see some dev on similar things for mecanum to address the fact that sideways motion is expensive and as you are driving it auto rotates you drive wheels into position. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
The next advancement will not be technological, it will be cultural.
With permanent full FRC fields becoming more and more prolific, access to events, both official and unofficial, will increase dramatically. This will create demand for mass media coverage, switching from "aren't these cute kids and their cute robots cute?" to actual game reviews, results, and prognostication. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
In 2006, the high goal featured the lit target, which was excellent because the color was constant by angle, and surrounding lighting. The CMU camera wasn't very advanced either, and while the PIC based control system was darn near bullet proof, the setup (and possibly the rules?) didn't allow much if any co-processing capabilities. |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
It was during the same era that Formula 1 was experimenting with 6 wheel cars...4 wheel steer. Yes, that was outlawed too, and documented. Moral of the story - some technical leaps fall into deep deep holes. http://jalopnik.com/5530175/the-life...eeled-race-car |
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Maybe not the biggest 'technological leap' but the kit drivetrains are vastly impoved even over the last 4 years.
Also, the FIRST alumni that have become mentors. Over the years the numbers have only increased. Experiance is extremely valuable. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:12. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi