[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson, Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.

Posted on 3/11/99 12:25 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Nah....! ready why: posted by Chris on 3/11/99 7:42 AM MST:



I am definitely NOT proposing that teams post their best solutions during the build cycle.

The way I envisioned it, it would be an after the fact sort of thing. By the time it gets to the general FIRST public, it would be too late (for that year that is).

Of course, we would keep up the site and make it available to all teams in the run up to next year's competition. There may even be a "Hall of Fame" type thing were certain best practices get to be so common that nearly every team uses them.

As to all robots looking alike, I don't think that the kind of things teams will submit will make for cookie cutter robots. Just because something is clever and worthy of some recognition does not mean that all teams will adopt those exact solutions. And, even if they did, that does not mean that the variety of robot designs will lesson.

For example, nearly every auto has an internal combusion engine, but that does not mean that every vehicle looks the same. Even within engines, there is still a lot of variation depending on the type of car that the designers are trying to build.

I think that we are a LONG way from worrying about this problem.

Joe J.

P.S. Here is another example of the kind of thing that a team may submit as an innovation worthy of note.

In past years, our robots had fasteners that just happened to either come to mind as we were drawing up our designs, or were handy during the build process. This has often caused us problems because we didn't have the right tools to tighten or remove a particular bolt or we didn't have a replacement fastener when the one we had in our hands dropped to the ground in the pits and rolled off into Never-Never Land.

So... This year we have an official thread and an official screw and an official washer for Chief Delphi 4. Unless there is a good reason, every thread in #10-24. We use a socket head screw if we can, then a button head screw if we can't, then a flat head screw if even a botton head won't work. As to the nuts, a nut with an integral nylon locking feature is numero uno, followed by a standard nut if that won't work. Alternatively, we drill and tap the part itself.

The point is that we have DRAMATICALLY reduced the number of tools we need have on hand to work on our robot. Also, we bought some Rubbermaid containers with a bunch of small cubbies for use as a fastener crib. If we drop a screw, we get another from the crib. It has been a wonderful improvement over previous years.

I think that it is an innovation that is not obvious to the casual observer. It may even be worthy of an award ;-)

My point in putting this example out there is for people to understand that it doesn't always have to be rocket science type stuff that teams submit for recognition. In fact, I don't know if other teams already do what I have proposed. If they do, nobody told me about it.

AND... THAT IS EXACTLY MY POINT.

By having some sort recognition mechanism tied to sharing good ideas and innovative engineering, teams may decide to put some of these best practices down in writing. In this way, all robots have the potential to improve.

End of sermon.