|
Re: Simplicity Vs. Complexity
Let's add in another dimension to the discussion.
Consistency and predictability, in the sense of doing what the driver/software tell it to do, without unpredictable variation will make either a simple or complex more successful in FRC.
The most sophisticated and valuable part of the FRC system you deploy on the field, is the drivers and coaches. When they know what the machine will/won't do, then they can wring its full potential out of it. If not, its a mess - sometimes a complex mess, sometimes a simple mess.
All other things being equal, it is generally easier to create a consistent and predictable simple robot than it is to create a consistent and predictable complex robot. However, don't mistake simplicity for consistency and predictability.
Blake
PS: To say this another way, in many important senses, I don't care one bit whether a design/implementation for accomplishing some task is simple or complex, so long as I can rely on it to do what I tell it to do, when I tell it to do it, every time I tell it to do it. Simple vs complex might be the wrong question.
__________________
Blake Ross, For emailing me, in the verizon.net domain, I am blake
VRC Team Mentor, FTC volunteer, 5th Gear Developer, Husband, Father, Triangle Fraternity Alumnus (ky 76), U Ky BSEE, Tau Beta Pi, Eta Kappa Nu, Kentucky Colonel
Words/phrases  I avoid: basis, mitigate, leveraging, transitioning, impact (instead of affect/effect), facilitate, programmatic, problematic, issue (instead of problem), latency (instead of delay), dependency (instead of prerequisite), connectivity, usage & utilize (instead of use), downed, functionality, functional, power on, descore, alumni (instead of alumnus/alumna), the enterprise, methodology, nomenclature, form factor (instead of size or shape), competency, modality, provided(with), provision(ing), irregardless/irrespective, signage, colorized, pulsating, ideate
Last edited by gblake : 21-11-2011 at 11:05.
|