[dtengineering]

Good point, Ken... yes, I was talking about using a PS2/Xbox 360/etc. style game pad. We've been using them for three years now and find that they offer more flexibility for the driver than the joysticks did.

The primary benefit is that the driver is able to move around freely while driving... an advantage when something is blocking his or her view, or... as in Overdrive, when reflections make it difficult to see parts of the floor. It is also useful for testing in the shop as it is easy to pass control from one driver to the next and to position the control board on surfaces of differing heights, or even on the floor, while allowing drivers of different heights to drive comfortably. It also makes it easier to design a compact control board, as the game pads don't need to be fixed in place and can easily stow inside the control board (we build ours as a wooden box with a hinged lid) as opposed to being exposed on the outside of the board. Minor benefits, perhaps, and ones that could be duplicated with joysticks with some effort, but benefits nonetheless.

We've experimented with tank drive, and while it definitely offers some advantages when it comes to turning about one side of the robot or the other, our drivers have preferred "arcade" style with the turning and forward/reverse functions seperated. I wouldn't say that it could be proven to be, objectively, the very best way for everyone to drive their robot, but it has worked well for us.

I guess the main point that I was making was that once a team gets a drive train that is mechanically capable of moving and turning that there are still optimizations to be had through sensors, software and driver interface in order to maximize the "successfulness" of the drivetrain, even for the relatively simple 6wd/8wd layout.

Jason