Team 103 Robot

[Robert Thacker-]

Here's the highligts of our submission:









And here's the link to look at our portfolio: 103 Inventor website

Let me know what you think about it.

[Gene Williams]

Nicely done! My son who uses Autodesk too needs to check this out. I'm impressed.

[Adam Shapiro]

That really does look terrific. I am thoroughly impressed with the fine details you put in the renderings, including linked chains and indivudial wires/cable ties. Amazing work guys.

[Crebb]

how many man-hours do you estimate it took?

[Francis-134]

Wow, looks like the Cybersonics are up for another Inventor award this year. Great job guys!

[Dan Petrovic]

*picks jaw back up from the floor*

[Chris Marra]

Originally Posted by Crebb

how many man-hours do you estimate it took?

On that note, how many people are on your CAD team all season?

As usual, very impressive work. Did you use the CAD drawings in the shop for specifications while machining parts, or did the CAD team based its drawings off of parts? Our team did the latter, but the intention was the former.

[negfrequency]

wow thats incredible work. points. i have to say that your wiring IS pretty amazing. It looks like you have a team that can fully appreciate CAD for its potential. Good job.

[petek]

Originally Posted by Chris Marra

On that note, how many people are on your CAD team all season?

This year we had two people working full-time on Inventor (Rob and Mike), and one person (Didzis) did a little of the Inventor and a lot of manufacturing parts on the CNC router table. I helped them out with setting up the website page templates and suggestions for how to divide the assembly models, etc., but all of the Inventor work was theirs. I was pretty amazed at their attention to detail myself - like when I saw Mike putting the zip-ties on the wiring! There may be such a thing as too much of a good thing...

Did you use the CAD drawings in the shop for specifications while machining parts, or did the CAD team based its drawings off of parts? Our team did the latter, but the intention was the former.

Most of the parts were made first and the team documented them, but this year quite a few parts were done in CAD for the router table - mostly using AutoCAD, but a couple were done in Inventor.

[Eric Scheuing]

Originally Posted by petek

This year we had two people working full-time on Inventor (Rob and Mike), and one person (Didzis) did a little of the Inventor and a lot of manufacturing parts on the CNC router table.

Three people!?! We had about 6 on average working, and around 10 total who were "part of the CAD team." You guys hav amazing inventor skills.

[Chris Marra]

Originally Posted by Eric Scheuing

Three people!?! We had about 6 on average working, and around 10 total who were "part of the CAD team." You guys hav amazing inventor skills.

Keep in mind that a lot of you were still learning Inventor, and no one was completely knowlegable in the most advanced features. Plus, with all the redesigning of shooters and other parts on our robot, you guys couldn't get much of a head start on designing things.

[rappo]

Awesome! I love the materials and reflections.

[rangersteve]

Wow. I wish I was that good. I can get it good enough but that far exceeds my skill. Great work guys.

[JasJ002]

Guys looks good as always, even less manpower then last year and you guys still pulled off an excellent entry, proud of you guys. Can't wait to see what you three can pull off next year when each of you have a whole nother year of experience under your belt.

[FourPenguins]

Originally Posted by Eric Scheuing

Three people!?! We had about 6 on average working, and around 10 total who were "part of the CAD team." You guys hav amazing inventor skills.

I know this post's been around a bit, but I just thought about it a little, so here goes:
For many situations, three is the perfect number for a team. Three is a low enough number that everyone can operate on an equal level, without the need for a "captain" to oversee them. This also eliminates the need for someone to find work for the underlings, which was a huge problem on our CAD team (3 Seniors, 1 Jr. in his 2nd year on CAD, and three utter n00bs (myself included) with mechanical (me), architectural CAD, or no experience). The new kids were often forced to sit on their hands because the leadership couldn't spend all of their time giving us work to do. If they had, they couldn't have accomplished anything themselves.
On the other hand, three people eliminate the power struggles that are inevitable in a two-man/woman team. The third person acts as the check and balance in a disagreement, weighing in to support the sensible side.
The result of all of this is that a three person team seems just about right for a task of this size. I'm sure that many teams have had ample success with larger teams and better organization, but my point is not to count out the smaller teams.