Quote:
Originally Posted by adciv
I can agree consistency is only part of being a great team, but from an engineering design standpoint consistency is the first thing you need. Edward Deming taught manufacturers to drive variation out of the system. Only once you do that can you truly control where you are at and drive the system to where you want it to be. If you're inconsistent, you can't say if something worked because it works or if it was just a one time event.
|
Getting the process that can help breed consistency on your team is just like learning how to walk before you can run. You're almost never getting anywhere with an inconsistent robot. You're getting somewhere when you hit a consistent walking pace. Figure out how to add complexity without sacrificing your consistency? You're running laps around everyone else.
Build up some good, old-fashioned hate for your robot when you first start working on it. Try to break everything! We built our drivetrain in a week and spent the rest of the season running it over defenses trying to break it (we couldn't). Hold your core functions (driving, primary scoring acquisition, and primary scoring delivery are usually the core functions of a competitive robot) to incredibly high standards. Accept you will never get them perfect, but never hesitate at investigating any possible changes. As a team hones the ability to master these core functions, you can add complexity to these and other functions and create a stratospheric machine (I hope).