Quote:
Originally Posted by yank
Yes, I'm currently working on making clearly defined roles. Our team is especially builder-heavy (many people are only interested in building), which leads to overcrowding during our build sessions. What are your thoughts on clear;y splitting up the build team into smaller groups (chassis, arm, shooter, etc)? Thanks!
|
When we build, there are typically 1-2 students that focus on each mechanism, which leaves a few as "floaters" to help out where needed. That sort of focus helps to ensure the mechanism moves in a consistent, well defined direction - when you start swapping "ownership" between different people, it can cause chaos and significant rework as those people have different ideas about what the final product should look like.
Keep in mind that splitting up this way does require good communication within the team. There will be interface points between the mechanisms that have to be clearly defined so they work together. There will be space requirements to ensure different mechanisms don't interfere with each other. You need to ensure you meet your weight budget for each mechanism of your robot will be overweight. When you run into communication issues between the subgroups, you'll end up needing to do rework to make things workout properly!
We find it's helpful to have a wrap up, or show and tell, at the end of each meeting. It's not long (maybe 10 minutes out of a 2-3 hour meeting), but it gives each group a chance to talk about what they worked on, what issues they ran into, and what they anticipate needing from the other groups.