Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

See below

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

While I somewhat agree with the sentiment that, "Hey, maybe we should encourage kids who are making these CAD drawings to learn how to do some of the math, too..." I do have some reservations about some of the ideas here.

First of all, as mentors, it is our job to encourage students to pursue these avenues. Anyone who can think logically and do multiplication and division can do gear ratio calculations. I don't know why we're making such a big deal about this, because they are pretty trivial. There's no calculus involved, and the physics typically utilized by most FRC teams to make such decisions are really simple. That's fine--that's all the math it requires. Any high school student with a geometry/trigonometry background and encouragement and support from a mentor should be able to do it. So we can just tell them that the math is easy to do for these things, and give them an idea of how to do it. Then they will think for other systems that the math may be similarly easy, and give it a shot themselves.

In fact, I'd argue, as someone who has been involved in solid and structural mechanics over the past few years, that those who CAD chassis, etc. and put them up for review could be the wiser ones. Structural systems are much harder to "do the math" for. I would not expect someone without three or four semesters of engineering/technology college education to do much more than get an intuitive understanding, much less "run the numbers" or "do the math." It would be difficult to teach this material to high school students, and it is unlikely that even the minority of mentors in FRC would be able to do a good job of much more than an intuitive understanding. Sure, Inventor/Solidworks/Pro\E etc. do supply finite element method capability, but the variability in those results is so great when in the hands of a novice that one should give those factors of safety a wide berth. They should still be performed though, but the factors of safety should be held a little suspect.

The students who are posting these things here are probably not from teams where their mentors have proclaimed an aversion to "not doing the numbers" or whatever, and probably have not been directly encouraged to "do the math first." So why be snarky or sarcastic about it? I know it is well-meaning, but it is pretty off-putting, especially for me as a fellow mentor. Instead just encourage them to "do the numbers," post up a white paper and refer people to it every so often, and that's it. I liked IKE's idea of the paper compilation, and especially that he restricted the scope to 6+WDs, so that the topic wouldn't get diluted and people could get a lot of detail out of it. You could even just give a horror story of when someone didn't use the numbers, and tell them to be careful. But there's no need for snarkiness/sarcasm, especially in a public forum.

CAD is a useful tool, and those who post their designs and work here are pretty brave to do so. I'm just glad they are learning something, and trying to learn from others in the forums. We can be snarky and off-putting in the way we respond to them in an attempt to improve their designs and methods, or we can...just tell them directly and be nice about it.

You catch more flies with honey...

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

If the math is so easy why do so many people not do it? I agree it is easy but I also feel it is easy to fall into the trap of it being so trivial that you assume your gut instincts are satisfactory. Just because something is easy doesn't mean it isn't still important.

I disagree that there is no need for sarcasm. I can either be nice and try to be subtle in getting people to think through what they are doing instead of posting "me-too" cads and some of them might pick up on it or I could be sarcastic. They could join me in a laugh at the anonymous person I am making fun of and realize how stupid it is not to do some simple thinking about your design.

I see too much form over function on these boards. Last year I saw a robot that didn't move much of its first competition but gosh darn it was painted pretty! If that is supposed to be inspiring then we all must have some pretty low standards. I guess I just hold a higher opinion of people, I assume they can take some criticism and I don't have to always tell them what a wonderful job they did even if it is a complete and utter lie.


Yeah, I'll tone down the sarcasm in the future. No I will not lie to a student telling them to keep up the good work if they are doing crap work. No I will not stop asking people not to post things until they are at a point where community criticism will help make it better. (And yes, I consider a napkin drawing that point in some cases) And there is no way that I will stop criticizing people for making pretty renders of things they didn't think through.

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

I don't think laughing at people, even if they are anonymous, is a very constructive way to mentor students. Since when was publicly making fun of people in FIRST, even if they are anonymous, an okay thing to do?

I understand the point of this thread, but it could have been handled in a way more constructive manner.

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

I would recommend shying away from can't, won't, and never... and save those for morals and beliefs rather than mentoring techniques.

Different students (and mentors) require different techniques. While some really need a firm hand (that sarcasm may actually be the best tool), others need support and guidance and tons of encouragement.

While I agree that you can't inspire greatness with Mediocrity, we are not always looking for greatness (initially). Every great runner begins life taking baby-steps.

CAD/drawing and Speed Ratio calcs are basis/foundation from which you can build upon. Essentially they are math and geometry. Once they have a strong foundation, ask the student to continue to explore. For drivetrains, it is torque and traction and learning to estimate "static" loads anlong with geometry based stiffness techniques. Once they have a firm grasp of that, you can begin to discuss dynamic loading and structural analysis (Most teams never get this far). You can also discuss system and power constraints and short-term vs. long term current draws.

While sarcasm can be a good motivator and build bonds with some students, it can be off-putting to someone with lower self esteem or thinner skin. In a public forum, we should probably err towards the Kindest Common Denominator. This doesn't mean lying or coddling, but it does mean deburring the edges and rounding the corners on your support pieces.

*************
Even Woodie Flowers has given talks on "False Engineering", so Schreiber's thread is really quite important, he just forgot the KCD function.

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

What part of getting people to join you in a laugh at someone that you are making fun of has anything to do with mentoring or with the purpose of Chief Delphi?

A person, anonymous or not, may or may not realize how stupid it is not to do some simple thinking about a design, whether sarcasm is used or not. That's what is so special about the mentoring process - is being a part of the development of thinking and decision-making of a team and encouraging team members to pay attention to those areas of the process. Same thing when participating in discussions in Chief Delphi. There's no guarantee that there will be development but it is always very cool when there is. Madison's post reflects the value of what can be gained here in Chief Delphi and how it will impact an education and a career.

Mentors gather and collect mentoring tools during their time as FIRST mentors. The toolbox where they keep their mentoring tools varies in size, shape, and depth. The condition the tools are in varies depending on the mentor. The tools can be somewhat rusty or can be very clean and prepared for immediate use, as needed. The tools can be in need of some polishing or refurbishing, depending on where the mentor is on the journey of mentoring. In toolboxes, there can be a lot of organization and order or there can be a messy collection/mix of different tools all thrown together. In a mentoring toolbox, sometimes the search for the right set of tools for the job takes a while to sort out when making the wisest selection. The wisdom of continuing to keep the mentoring toolbox updated and organized allows for all of the different possibilities and opportunities of achieving the goal. If a mentor only makes use of one skill that he or she perceives to be a mentoring tool, such as sarcasm, then the possibilities and opportunities become limited and the tool loses its proper use.

.02,
Jane

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

So you admit it is stupid :p

Isn't that exactly what this thread is doing? While the methods are not conventional whose to say they are not effective.

Sarcasm CAN be a great mentoring skill if applied to the right students who have self confidence and can take a joke. No one is using ONLY sarcasm. It was used in this case because that's what was believed to be the most effective. Yes, not every mentoring technique works on every student and I don't believe anyone would disagree with that. I prefer an organized toolbox where I can find what I'm looking for quickly and use the correct tool for the job.

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

I'm not a fan of the word, stupid. It is a heavy word that has been lobbed at many young people's heads over time and I've been around to see the resulting effect, beginning in an elementary math class. I'll never forget the look on my classmate's face when our teacher used it on him, followed by a ruler to the palms.

This is a good thread. The topic is excellent and it is wonderful to listen in and find nuggets of wisdom in the posts. Some of the responses have triggered another topic and that is regarding the use of sarcasm when mentoring. I've found that those who use it, defend and support it. I've also found that sarcasm can create misunderstandings and defensive stances. If that is the goal of the mentor, then I ask why? If the use of sarcasm as a mentoring tool opens up thought processes and encourages development in the area of thinking and using common sense, then the mentor who wields the tool is wise and careful with its use.

One of the skills that I do appreciate is the use of humor as a mentoring tool. It, too, can be applied in a heavy-handed manner that shuts down communication or, it can be applied with a deftness and skill that leaves an impression much like an, 'aha, why didn't I think of that', moment.

Regarding the word, stupid. I like the word, awareness. Lack of awareness and understanding moving towards becoming more aware and working towards a deeper understanding. This thread is creating that opportunity.

Jane

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

Stupid is a harsh word. Calling a specific student (who does not know me well) stupid is something I strive not to do. Sarcasm, however, is a tool I tend to employ when working with students. I think sometimes students need that humorous response to take criticism. Yes, sometimes students can't handle the sarcasm because they think I am mocking them rather than showing them to laugh at their own mistakes and then move on. Those students need to learn that lesson most of all.

Additionally, sometimes a defensive stance is a good thing. A student should be able to defend their design. More often than not I will tell a student to prove that something will work. I make them defend their logic and explain their thought process. Even if I know they are right or wrong they usually discover the answer to the question, "will this work" on their own. My sarcastic response of "prove it" usually leads to a much better understanding of a concept than me taking the time to explain.


(Obviously, this does not work on all students all of the time. There is a fine line between educating and frustrating.)

Re: pic: Schreiber Take on West Coast Drive
 

you should see my sketch books from FIRST, i had more pages of gear calculations, BOMs, and math than i did sketches of actual parts. i ended up sketching out my gearboxes with a compass before i even touched solidworks.
HOWEVER.....
using SW to put hard numbers on your designs, and figure out the nitty gritty is much more work than the napkin sketches you use to jot down ideas. to go from sketch to product (especially in real world engineering) takes a lot more professionalism, thoroughness, and precision than a napkin can provide.

BOTH the innovation for a elegant design and the know-how to make it work are required to make ideas reality. Otherwise your just a drafter or a dreamer