Thread: Best Drivetrain
View Single Post
  #88   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 30-04-2008, 16:08
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is offline
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,599
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: Best Drivetrain

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nikhil Bajaj View Post
No corrections to be made, but I WOULD like to point out that taking the fact that there are more 6WD drive, etc. teams on this list as proof that it is a better way to drive and that there is no benefit to more exotic types is somewhat suspect logic and silly generalization.

The reason I say this is that lets say that in the data for 2005, there are what, 800 or 900 robots? Sure, hypothetically. But lets say there were 30 robots with crab drive built that season. Well, in that case, one could say that swerve drive is over-represented, and that obviously, building a swerve drive will afford you a better chance of doing well and getting in the finals, because while only 30 teams had swerve drives, one of them made it (1/30 odds) while then there were probably around 200 robots with 6WD, only two of them made it (1/100 odds.) I'm not saying this data doesn't have ANY merit, but come on guys, lets be responsible in our generalizations. In order to use this kind of analysis, you'd want to make it more statistically valid by either opening it up to all the regional and championship division winners of a particular year.
I was not trying to suggest that any drive-train was superior, I was just supplying facts. Notice how I didn't even post any conclusion, just raw data. Some may have drawn erroneous conclusions from this, and I apologize for that, but that was not my intention. It would be silly to judge this data without full numbers on the amount of teams, teams with each drive, and other data. But, sadly, most of that data either doesn't exist, or would be next to impossible to compile, and to make any assumptions about it could and would lead to equally erroneous conclusions. It would be plain stupid to ignore the manipulators, software, electrical reliability, drivers, strategy, and alliance formations of each of the champions as well.

Take it with a grain of salt. It isn't showing the relative superiority of any drive method, rather showing the drives that a handful of successful teams have selected and done well with, for whatever reason, since 2005. Strong teams with strong engineering principles selected these drive-trains for various reasons, that's all I'm saying.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.

Last edited by Lil' Lavery : 30-04-2008 at 16:13.