Team 254 Presents: Skyfire

[Peck]

They don't need a camera, they just use their brains. who cares if it takes 3 times as long for a lower quality.

looks good though i wonder is balls can fall in the electrical panel.

[Wetzel]

I'm looking forward to seeing this in person at Championship.

[connor.worley]

Looks great, can't wait to see it on Thursday!

[JABot67]

Originally Posted by Cory

We'll show you...

In two days

at any rate, it's our opinion that relying on technology to improve your driver is a bad thing. We utilize the camera, but it will not make or break us.

I like this attitude. My opinion on vision targeting is that it's something to do if your programmers have nothing else to do. Even so, most years it's a waste of time. This year I was so sure that vision targeting would be necessary, and it turns out it is not.

Originally Posted by JABot67

I like this attitude. My opinion on vision targeting is that it's something to do if your programmers have nothing else to do. Even so, most years it's a waste of time. This year I was so sure that vision targeting would be necessary, and it turns out it is not.

When do programmers have nothing to do???

Anyways, great robot 254! You never fail to impress me! This just makes me want SVR to come that much more.

See you, and Skyfire, in a few days!

Also....what's with the wedgetop tread? Going away from blue nitrile for some reason?

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by Cory

We'll show you...

In two days

at any rate, it's our opinion that relying on technology to improve your driver is a bad thing. We utilize the camera, but it will not make or break us.

Funny you say this. In the past, software augmentation of the driver seemed to be a large part of 254's success. For example, 2011's "90 degree turn" feature allowed the robot to turn under software control. A human driver simply wouldn't have been able to react as fast as the C-Rio, because of your drive train's crazy speed.

I do look forward to seeing you preform at SVR, camera software or no. As everyone's said, this looks like an extremely strong robot.

[NickE]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Funny you say this. In the past, software augmentation of the driver seemed to be a large part of 254's success. For example, 2011's "90 degree turn" feature allowed the robot to turn under software control. A human driver simply wouldn't have been able to react as fast as the C-Rio, because of your drive train's crazy speed.

In 2011, we did not have any drivetrain automation in teleoperated mode and our drivers had no issue turning under speed. The one exception is that the auto-score routine would back up the robot slightly after a tube was scored on the bottom rack (but scoring on the bottom rack was rare for us). We have advanced control software designed to make the drivers' lives easier but we avoid removing control from the driver.

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by NickE

In 2011, we did not have any drivetrain automation in teleoperated mode and our drivers had no issue turning under speed. The one exception is that the auto-score routine would back up the robot slightly after a tube was scored on the bottom rack (but scoring on the bottom rack was rare for us). We have advanced control software designed to make the drivers' lives easier but we avoid removing control from the driver.

Thank you for the correction. I guess I was mistaken.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Funny you say this. In the past, software augmentation of the driver seemed to be a large part of 254's success. For example, 2011's "90 degree turn" feature allowed the robot to turn under software control. A human driver simply wouldn't have been able to react as fast as the C-Rio, because of your drive train's crazy speed.

I do look forward to seeing you preform at SVR, camera software or no. As everyone's said, this looks like an extremely strong robot.

There's a difference between software that acts as a crutch and software that enables a good driver to do more things.

We prefer the latter.

[BHOP]

How many hours did cory spend on the CNC this year?

[AveryS]

Looking good

[ratdude747]

Originally Posted by NickE

We have advanced control software designed to make the drivers' lives easier but we avoid removing control from the driver.

Sounds like you are taking the "Boeing" approach to controls as opposed to the "Airbus" approach (in terms of who has ultimate control)... I like it.

Especially if the only shots are from the key and fender, to be resonably sucessful, all one needs is a good driver, a live camera feed with crosshairs (I wrote code for that last year), and decent shooter controls via a turret or super-fine drivetrain control and a decent combination of coarse and fine shoot trajectory controls. All in all, not that much compared to full auto camera code.

[Gray Adams]

I've spent the last 10 minutes trying to figure out if this picture is a render, a photo, or some kind of combination.

I still have no idea. Some parts just look too perfect to be a photo.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by ratdude747

Sounds like you are taking the "Boeing" approach to controls as opposed to the "Airbus" approach (in terms of who has ultimate control)... I like it.

Will those controls allow the driver to deliberately miss? That would be kind of analogous to how Boeings are more willing to let you depart controlled flight (with persistent warnings); Airbuses will just refuse those commands.

In truth, on both aircraft types, the computers are firmly in charge of the fly-by-wire controls. Boeings just provide tactile feedback through the yoke and throttles; Airbuses don't.

[Chickenonastick]

Originally Posted by Gray Adams

I've spent the last 10 minutes trying to figure out if this picture is a render, a photo, or some kind of combination.

I still have no idea. Some parts just look too perfect to be a photo.

254 isn't just good at building their robot. They're also good at taking pictures of it.