[jman4747]

Originally Posted by artK

Iteration isn't always about saving weight, even on a drive base. In my four years with 254, we never used the same drivetrain twice. In 2012, we attached pistons and small levers to help push us over the bump. In 2013, we developed a PTO in the gearbox to climb the pyramid. In 2014, we had to make the gearbox have a low profile so the balls could fit inside the robot.



Personally, I would want to know what quintic hermite spline interpolation is, but I always liked polynomials more than trigonometry.



As a developer of a boring robot, I feel so awful about winning the championship, because our robot was so boring and uninspiring to watch.

It's literally the difference between looking at the spec for a car engine vs taking apart like 4 of them.
That's more of a general statement in response to the notion that winning is the metric of doing your best and that someone should build a subsystem because it wins and is easy for them rather than because it is the best they can do. It's not about what you make it's why. I am not putting down 254 or anyone else for doing well with a specific system. I'm also not saying you really have to be original you should however push your own envelope as much as possible.

To the weight thing... I mean make an example of a situation where a team would become comfortable with building something to the point where the only new thing done with it from year to year would be minor optimizations that don't generally teach anything new to those working on it precisely because they are so comfortable with it. What you described were tangible optimizations and upgrades made to better complete the game.