
23-08-2015, 10:46
|
 |
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
 FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,713
|
|
|
Re: aesthetic robots
A lot of elegance and beauty in robotics comes from the design concept itself. In general, mechanically simpler robots with more attention paid to detail tend to look the best. Complexity can also be pretty, but it tends to add a "clunkiness" of sorts that can be hard to overcome. Oftentimes when coming up with concepts, you can almost use this as a gauge for whether or not you're going too complex. If it doesn't look elegant on paper, it may not perform elegantly either.
I also don't think elegance starts and stops with powdercoating. Paint really helps, don't get me wrong, and I'm a big fan of it. But a quality robot will look great without it, and an ugly robot won't look that much better with it.
Something that isn't necessarily easy to do, but helps a lot with the appearance of any robot, is sandblasting parts. It adds a nice look to even non powdercoated robots and it helps everything look more professional.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
|