|
Re: why blame the programmers??
Quote:
Originally Posted by riptide
Like the real world, this person (usually only one) has the least amount of time to do their job because the hardware team went way over schedule to do the build.
|
Technically, if you are actually doing it like an actual control engineer would do things you have plenty of time. In all seriouness you shouldn't need the hardware to program the software. You do need the hardware to actually verify the programing is right but that should come after the robot is built.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wireties
And because the mechanical guys can't get it through their head that the robot itself is part of the servo feedback. The software can't be fully tested w/o working hardware - the gyro does not work while the robot is shaking itself apart - etc, etc, etc Classic comment: It works perfectly on the stand but not on the ground!! It has to be a software problem. Hehehe...
|
Once again. You should be able to figure out if the robot is going to shake itself apart long before it was actually built. Its a bad design process because you are risking having the robot rip itself apart to pieces. I always wonder why this sort of behavior gets by in a competition that is mentored by engineers. There isn't a single field of engineering that doesn't actually design their control systems like this.
__________________
If either a public officer or any one else saw a person attempting to cross a bridge which had been ascertained to be unsafe, and there were no time to warn him of his danger, they might seize him and turn him back without any real infringement of his liberty; for liberty consists in doing what one desires, and he does not desire to fall into the river. -Mill
Last edited by Adam Y. : 24-01-2011 at 12:35.
|
Mentors can never receive enough thanks from us students, who don't know even half of what they put into our teams. - Katie_UPS [more] 
24-01-2011, 11:51
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode