Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

I think it is very obvious that the inclusion of FTC parts is a direct shot at the massive growth VEX has seen over the last couple years, and FTC's inability to gain the same traction. Its pretty disappointing that they are limiting the design challenge of the end game to force FTC onto FRC teams mainly for political reasons. As powerful of a program as FIRST is for inspiring students, playing politics like this sours my view of the organization.

I can tell you here in Canada there are many times more VEX teams then FTC teams...

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

I really do not like the adjustment of the Minibot rules in Team Update #1. Honestly, just when I thought FIRST had finally created an FRC game without any near universally-hated rules, they went ahead and made one in TM 1.

We were an early adopter of the FIRST Vex Challenge, and subsequently bought a lot of Vex parts. When FIRST pulled the rug out from underneath us and switched from Vex to Tetrix, we stayed with our investment and stopped competing in the then renamed FTC and started doing VRC. There was no reason to drop our large-investment in Vex to stick with the FIRST brand name. If FIRST hadn't dropped Vex, our team would definitely still be involved with FVC/FTC, and I'm sure they wouldn't be having any issues trying to grow the program.

We were planning on using a stored-energy (via surgical tubing) Minibot launcher to avoid having to buy any FTC parts other than those we got from FIRST Choice. We even started prototyping ideas, and our first prototype showed much promise with times faster than the theoretical minimum time for ascent powered by FTC motors. Then TM #1 ruins all of that, and forces a large unplanned expense onto our build season (We have the budget to absorb it, but are still irate we're being coerced to buy something that otherwise is not needed for our goals of inspiring students).

And as a result of this update forcing all Minibots to be propelled exactly the same (good bye innovative ideas and inspiration, hello clone bots), I expect ~90% of Minibot teams to reach the trigger within 0.25 sec of each other. Now the Minibot bonuses will literally be decided each match by statistical luck more than anything else.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

The minibot component is almost completely taken out of the minibot race, it becomes a race of who can deploy their minibot faster. Which I'm sure is not what FIRST intended.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

This exactly. I was very much looking forward to all the neat methods of mechanical energy storage teams were going to use to power their minibots.

It seems like a little bit of a snub to not allow Tetrix components, but I suppose I understand the logic. Either you use their components, or you build your own. Requiring teams to use the the FTC controllers and not providing them to every team seems rather silly to me...

(This is the case correct -- every team is not guaranteed the FTC stuff with their kit?)

The real question is, just how many VEX stickers will Team IFI plaster on their Tetrix minibots? :cool:

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

Waitwaitwaitwaitwait

Did I miss something or did you just say we can use the Lego NXT brick? Our school has tons of those.

EDIT: Dumb question. I never did anything with FTC though, is that really what they use to control their robots?!?!
Im thinking of the big brick with 3 inputs and 3 outputs and the display, I think it comes with lego mindstorms.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

::rtm:: See rules <R92-E and -BB> ::rtm::

Personally I don't think we're going to be using the NXT brick. So much weight for something that can just be a simple motor-switch-battery setup

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

A Fair is a place you take your kids to.

I didn't vote because I don't "like" having to use Tetrix motors and batteries, but I understand WHY they would do it this way.

My advice is to write to Bill Miller and ask him to speak about this at Championships.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

ding ding ding! we have a winner! :-) That is exactly what FTC teams use to control the robots. The only thing you have to add is the motor controller (~50 bucks).

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

And... When you add the number of VRC team students to the number of FTC team students, you (not surprisingly) find that together they are inspiring a population of students larger than either inspires alone.

Big Grin!

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

Oh how I wish that FTC used Vex instead of Tetrix. 1727 has a strong thriving Vex program and has even integrated Vex into our school system's curriculum, and host Vex tournaments regularly, but we get virtually no recognition for this because it is Vex and not FTC. If the minibot could use Vex pieces we would be done in a snap.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

Where can an FTC-unaffiliated team such as 3626 get a complete FTC starter kit? We picked up the kit off of FIRST choice, but I dont see that it includes any motors. We do have an FLL team at the school, so could they provide the NXT?

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

The NXT has 4 "inputs". But one is used for the daisy-chained motor and servo controllers. The other three are the only ones really used for sensors.
on top of this, FTC has a 40 second Auto period.
The reason why this works is because of Hitechnic sensor multiplexers and prototype sensor boards which can be hooked up to multiple custom sensors.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

Check your local FLL teams. They use the same brick.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

I am not sure that everyone has the proper perspective on this. The only Tetrix parts that are required are the battery (this has a 20A fuse in line) and the up to two motors. From team update #1 the allowable aluminum parts are:
Sheet
90 degree angle
U channel
Tube
Bar

So you are not forced to use the tetrix metal parts.

Further you are allowed Polycarbonate, and any mechanical hardware you wish.
so in the building materials respect the project is very similar to the way FRC was before about 2002.


As for the innovation part of things, I see this like a race where every car has the same engine. You have a maximum amount of power available to you, just like all the others. However the chassis you put it in is up to you. Personally I think you will see a big difference between the teams that just build a mini bot with the tetrix system, and ones that do a lot of engineering on their mini bot.
By a lot of engineering I mean using materials in a smart manner, using the design software given to the teams to lighten the bot. Choosing proper gear ratios to draw the maximum power from the motors as the robot climbs.

I foresee the fastest bot being only the two motors, the battery, and a polycarbonate frame with custom polycarbonate gears and shafts that uses the household light switches for motor control.

Think of this as an opportunity to show the students more involved engineering skills such as FEA and design optimization.

Re: Mini Bot - displeasure
 

I cannot agree with you more. Making an investment in a new system just simply isn't in the financial cards right now. Sorry FIRST, I'd love to support your programs but I'd rather compete next year and inspire another generation of students. I'm sure Tetrix is grand but I have thousands of dollars of Vex stuff, I'm gonna use that.

Art, sorry you wasted design time. We had a hunch that FIRST would clarify that rule and wanted to wait for it. Sadly it wasted 4 days of our season but we had other things to work on then anyway.

I had hoped the minibots could be some sort of vertical mousetrap car competition. THAT would have been awesome. Now I feel it will look more like a bunch of rodents scurrying up a drain pipe. (Who will be the first team to put their minibot in a mouse trap?)

It has soured my opinion of this game, I guess I'll have to wait until it is played to pass judgement though.

Edit: Mr Martus, I don't think it is unfair. This is FIRST's ball, field, bats, gloves, umps, and game. They can do whatever the heck they want, they could say that all HoF teams always get +50 points and that would be completely within their rights. Do I think it is a restriction made with political motives? Nah, but the road to hell was paved with good intentions and I definitely think this is not the direction I feel is best for FIRST. It is a divisive move with purely symbolical benefits that most of the audience won't even recognize (though the announcers will harp on it almost as much as they did the 1/6th gravity thing in Lunacy). Fair isn't the right word, I think this is outright political and the mere implication of that does more damage to many people's opinions.

And to anyone who says that if I don't like it I can go away (because I know someone will say it eventually) I have to strongly disagree. I do this because FRC made me who I am today and I hate to see the program lose mentors over something as silly as the stupid perception of a contest between two companies who used to work hand in hand. Every mentor we lose is potentially dozens of students lost and when that happens we are all just facing into the wind.