View Single Post
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-07-2014, 01:20
AustinSchuh AustinSchuh is offline
Registered User
FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics) #254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 803
AustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Hypothetical auto proggraming method

While this sounds great in theory, robots don't do the same thing twice without software support.

For example, different batteries have different internal resistances and hold different charges, resulting in different amounts of power being supplied to the wheels. This results in them responding differently.

When you drive a robot, as the tread and carpet wear, it responds differently when turning, and will coast different amounts when power is cut.

Different starting positions will run the robot over different carpet (the floor isn't flat), or the robot will rock a different way at critical points in the path, resulting in the wheels catching on the carpet differently, resulting in different motion.

It is really hard to control every last variable so that the robot responds the exact same way each time. This is typically solved by implementing feedback loops to correct for deviations in the response. You could implement all your driver controls so that they provide inputs to feedback loops. That would make replaying the driver commands during auto mode work like you imagined, assuming that the error left over from your feedback loops is low enough to achieve the goal.
Reply With Quote