Quote:
Originally Posted by MysterE
While the article is interesting in general, one quote stood out to me: " The push-button ignition isn't perfect, but we know electrical trumps mechanical more often than not."
This peaked my curiosity. As robot builders, engineers, designers, etc, do you agree or disagree with the authors statement? Why or why not?
|
As written, the statement has no meaning, at least to an engineer. From the context, it seems that the author is saying that a pushbutton switch is a better way to start a car than a rotary key switch. Neither of these choices is inherently more or less mechanical or electrical than the other. Both are a method of closing mechanical contacts which allow electricity to flow through the switch.
In general, robots are interconnected, complex systems which rely on Software, Electrical, and Mechanical disciplines. None of these is any more or less important than any of the others. They ALL have to work in order for the robot to function properly. The best robot engineers, though they often specialize in one discipline, are familiar with and can troubleshoot problems with each of these disciplines.
That said, for nearly every electrical problem I've come across (not all), in FRC robots, cars, power tools, household appliances, automated machinery, etc., can be traced back to a mechanical root cause. For example, people on the mechanical subteam love to blame wiring and connector issues on the electricals, and take a "not my job" attitude. But wires and connectors are just the mechanical devices whose job it is to get the electricity from one place to another. Similarly, I've seen electricals say they are just responsible from the wiring diagram, and think that physical implementation of the design is someone else's problem. Neither of these exclusionary attitudes is correct. It is everyone's job to be sure that the end result not only functions properly, but is reliable and serviceable.