Thread: Jaguars failing
View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 25-01-2010, 15:40
Trying to Help Trying to Help is offline
Registered User
FRC #1729 (Monadnock 4-H Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: Feb 2009
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: New Hampshire
Posts: 299
Trying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud ofTrying to Help has much to be proud of
Re: Jaguars failing
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricVanWyk View Post
FACT: The number of failed Jaguars is higher than what TI has reported. This is not attributable to malice; they simply are not psychic. I am at a loss as to why any team would choose to not tell LM/TI of a failure; why not get a free replacement?

FACT: The grey Jaguar has/had(?) a failure mode that silently disables one direction of motor control.

Jaguar failures that include emitting smoke are user induced.

Please note that clustered failures are much more likely to be indicative of the user than of the design. I did a lot of tech support last season, and almost all of the cases of multiple failures were user error. Most of these cases also featured the fabled line of "I've been doing FIRST for X years, of course I didn't read the documentation!" Actual Example:


Edit : The quote came from someone who plugged the battery in backwards.
We didn't send our failed and now failing Jags back to TI because we couldn't determine if they were user error or production error. For instance, we have one which has been slowly failing for about 6 months. Was it from being outside at outreach events? Humidity? I don't know. I think our original failed Jag was probably due to user error and I did talk with the TI rep at GSR. So there was some feedback.

Trying to Help
Reply With Quote