Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

This.

Teams have to work HARD to get the sort of sponsorship that gives them "deep pockets," and, in many cases, students are the ones taking the initiative, making calls, and giving presentations in attempts to get sponsorships. You can't possibly begrudge a team for having lots of money; companies don't just throw money at teams.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Take the blinders off.

Without pointing fingers, I spoke with enough mentors and students over the years to know first hand that many of the "studs" are mentor built. The quality of the work proves that students did not do the fabricating. These teams inspire students by bringing them into their company to watch them build the robot.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

I'll handle these two sentences separately.

1) So what? If I had a nickel for every hole our kids had to walk with a drill bit, I could probably bankroll our next season. We relied on the USC College of Engineering and Computing's machine shop for a few tasks (mostly involving press fits and a little bit of lathing), and we intended to send our arm tower plates out to Colite International for cutting.

(An aside: we botched some crucial measurements on those plates and didn't catch them until too late in the process, hence we used the box tubing on our robot. But even though we're obviously rolling in cash, we cut down the plates and used them as cross-bracing.)

Drilling a hole straight is a useful skill...but being able to know where to drill the hole is more important to a budding engineer (which is what we're trying to develop here). Next year, I would love to get back to where we were in 2009 and 2010, making much better use of the machining resources that USC and Colite have made available to us. Time our kids don't have to spend fixing fabrication errors because we involved mentors and professionals is time they can spend on a dozen other things to perfect the robot. (Heck, maybe we won't even need the racing tape.)

2) So what? If the students are inspired at the end of the day, the team is doing their job and doing it well. How they go about it is none of my business, nor yours. (That said, a team where the students do positively nothing is highly unlikely to be inspiring to others as every team on this list that I've encountered is.)

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/35999

That is a multibody hex shaft machined from solid roundstock,by a student, on crappy machines.

I also made a lot of parts (still less than the students). It's a fun rivalry from over who can make the more difficult and ridiculous parts on our crappy machines.

We also get a lot of parts outsourced, both designed by students, and designed by mentors.

There is a difference from students working with mentors, and mentor built. All the elite level teams I have first hand experience with are a collaboration, and the students seem to get the best experience that way.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

I've always been amazed at the number of students who have egos so big as to demand they're the ones who need to do everything, yet in the exact same breath insist that they themselves are incompetent designers and builders.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

We have a CNC mill in house, with which we machined our drive tubes this year, along with our arm uprights. All of the machining and machine programing was done by a HIGH SCHOOL Senior who taught himself the machine.

That being said, the parts machined in house are of the same quality that they would have been if we would've had them machined by our sponsor.

Interestingly enough, I've seen a few Mentor Built robots that were of a lower overall quality level (Both Performance and Construction) then robots built by students.

In any case, it doesn't really matter who does the fabrication. Lets look at Vex for an example: The kids don't make the parts, yes the do modify them, but for the most part they're working with pre-fabricated components. The Students still "build" their Vex Robot...

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

HAHAHA

Wow, I have never met a mentor in FIRST who doesn't belong here, until now. Congratulations sir.

You are ignorant beyond belief.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

I can't say that a college student calling a mentor out on a public forum like Chief Delphi makes the said student any better.

---

Please maintain a sense of who is always watching what you post on Chief Delphi. I'm not implying there is some big FRC brother watching what you post, but other teams, existing and potential sponsors, your school or other organization, regional FIRST boards, and most importantly, the children you work to inspire may read what you print and they can be affected, positively or negatively, by what you say.

---

This old drum has been beaten many a time: FIRST provides intentionally vague guidelines on mentor-student relations. Simply because, at the end of the all-too-short time period a kid has on an FRC team, you want them to see how awesome your profession is. You want them to recognize how important pursuing STEM careers are compared to the shady financial industries and potentially corrupt political positions in the world.

---

I can't stress enough how important it is to carefully walk (or type) the fine, honest line between passive and aggressive speech on CD. While honesty is something that is appreciated and well received here and anywhere else in the world, attempts at self-righteous statements or condescending, black-and-white interpretations of FIRST are not meant to be shared anywhere, especially here. When you link your team number into the boards, you become a spokesperson for the team, whether you like it or not.

Whether you are 14 or 41, please think before you type (and feel free to read over it a couple of times)

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Really? You're going to say he doesn't belong here because he thinks differently than you? Real classy.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Although I come from a team where students and mentors work in tandem on the robot, I can see where his argument comes from; through his eyes, the purpose of a FIRST team is solely to build engineers that are not dependent on their mentors. There are many teams like this; teams with little resources becoming frustrated at the older, established teams because of the amount of resources and students they have. A lot of students on these established teams appear to do nothing during competitions, which looks like dead weight to members of these "everybody is an engineer" teams. But FIRST is so much more than engineering; FIRST teams are fully functioning businesses. So all that "dead weight" is really what keeps that team afloat so they can continue to inspire

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Maybe the part where he bashed the skill and workmanship of every student in FRC was the part that set him off.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

So, you're saying I never spent weeks in front of a computer CADing and giving part prints to STUDENTS to read and make parts from?

Coming to champs? I cordially invite you to come to our pit at any point during the event and you will find only students working on our robot. Also, have a look at photos from http://picasaweb.google.com/patfair

That's our public gallery. Have a look.

What do you see? Students working hand in hand WITH mentors, in OUR SCHOOL machine shop.

I rest my case, again.

-Nick

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Akash's words may have been a bit harsh, but not totally unjustified.

The poster above essentially insulted any team that has won multiple events, and any student who took part in the construction of a professional looking robot.

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and this is the place to share it. That being said, CD isn't the place to belittle teams, and team members for the hard work they've put in.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Our robot is not exceptional quality.. We just hide our mistakes under black honeycomb.

As a student who has spent the last dozen weeks working in Chrysler (Yes, the work doesn't stop after build season ends) I resent your comment.

If you're going to be in St. Louis I invite you to check out our pits.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

None of us appreciate this sentiment. The implication of your post is that students are not competent enough to build a winning robot, and that anyone who thinks that these students ARE capable is delusional. I'm sure that's something that nobody likes to hear, especially since I think overwhelming opinion is that this is the other way around.

Whether you consider our team one of those "studs" or not, I invite you to come take a look at OUR pits. Mentors and students work side-by-side to make repairs on the robot. And I can tell you for a fact that our robot was mostly student designed: I personally tended to the CAD and some of the fabrication of our gripper. A good friend of mine was responsible for the arm. I will admit that our minibot and deployment this year were built mostly be mentors, but with student support, and our recently redesigned minibot and deployment are 100% student designed.

Please, let me ask you again, to not make such polarizing generalizations. But also remember that even mentor-built robots are not illegal: FIRST allows teams to design and build their robots in whatever way they feel best allows them to Inspire.

Re: Multiple Event Winners
 

Let's keep this civil, folks.

1) Bringing baseless accusations up after they've been shown to be baseless does nothing except make people mad.
2) Saying that those who don't agree with you are ignoring evidence does nothing except make people mad.
3) Not presenting evidence to back up 1) and 2) does nothing except entrench opinions against you.
4) Calling someone unfit to be a mentor does nothing except make people mad.

I was extremely steamed when I first looked at this thread today (I hadn't looked for the best part of a day). There's a reason I waited to post--posting when you want to bite someone's head off isn't exactly a great idea.

I have already stated my piece on the whole "these teams have no student involvement" thing a few posts back. I now only have one more thing to add:

Moderators, please close this thread. Leaving it open can serve little to no useful purpose, in my opinion.