Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo
OK, if a "neat thing" meet's your customer's (professor/engineering department) needs, then carry on. Everything I remember hearing from engineering students when I was in college, reinforced by a few current engineering students (team alumni for the most part) seem to stress that an engineering project should fill a real need. Maybe it's just a Louisiana state colleges thing.
|
I probably have a slightly orthogonal view of engineering to yours, since I'm not a "real" engineer (I'm a computer science guy). From that perspective, I've always seen a value in pushing what one thinks is possible from oneself. I suppose I see innovation as a key part of it, and sometimes that means pushing the boundaries of what might be possible without knowing what the gains might be.
As in many things, my opinions on this subject aren't entirely formed yet. I can see how my ideas might seem a bit odd or immature to you, given your perhaps more extensive experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jon Stratis
Personally... I think you have enough inspection experience sticking your head in robots to have a feel for something more teams have trouble with. Sure, swerve is cool and an interesting engineering problem, but if your goal is to benefit teams, go for the 90% of teams, not the 10% (or less) that will attempt swerve in the next few years!
|
Love this tack on it. Of course, perhaps the greater challenge is figuring out how to help those teams benefit from your work.