Go to Post Blame it on the programmer. - colt527 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Electrical > CAN
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #46   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 20-04-2012, 07:07
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
One of the motor controllers that I have used in the past had a language on it that you interfaced to it with. This allowed you to do the basic things like set voltage and stuff, or to do the crazy stuff like custom control loops. The language was basic-like, and pretty simple. This makes it so teams could do whatever they want at the lowest level (1khz custom control loop ftw!), but the kill signal would always be respected.
Easily achieved. If you use the module design initially one could make that by making a small rough PCB board with any BASIC Stamp like module and connecting it at the bottom of the stack to the 'custom circuit module' then putting the high power H-bridge module at the top.

You could decide the interface to your custom circuit. Perhaps you run some digital side car digital I/O to it, perhaps some PWM, perhaps I2C or SPI or a combination. As the BASIC language process would be entirely at your choice initially you could literally use a Parallax BASIC Stamp 2 (pBASIC) or for other flavors Parallax Javelin (Java), Parallax Propeller Spin Stamp (Assembly, Spin), Digi Rabbit Core (Dynamic C, plug your speed control in your Ethernet if they let you)...etc to infinity and restricted only by other FIRST rules for custom circuits for whatever year is in question.

The first year you use that your custom circuit (assuming FIRST approved the 'custom circuit module') would receive the FIRST level restrictions from the 'custom circuit module' (IE: enable/disable, current limits, etc). Then if wanted you could add the restrictions from the 'custom circuit module' yourself (with community help if you wish) to your custom circuit the next year and hand in your new module design to FIRST to approve for general use without the 'custom circuit module'. Keeping in mind that your new module will have to reach at least some production volume once FIRST approves it.

In this manner we provide a great deal of diversity. Assuming FIRST approved the 'custom circuit module' a team could make just enough custom circuits for themselves one year. Then if they don't like their end product they can toss it away the next year. If they love it they polish it up and let FIRST decide on it's acceptability as a module without the 'custom circuit module'.

I'm not sure how many of something like that you'd need to sell but that's also in your favor. You let the community handle the heavy lifting with all the other modules and you only need to produce enough to handle those people that really love your idea. If your custom circuit turns out to be fantastic I'm sure the community will advocate assisting handling the mass in-flux of orders to allow it to thrive. So you might need to make 10 or 25 or you might get a lot of hands to help you make hundreds (if all you needed was a few I'd help you make them).

Additionally at the moment there are rules in FIRST about reusing custom circuits the next year. So please be aware that if FIRST approves such a 'custom circuit module' so you could do this, unless FIRST alters the COTS rules, you'll have to either get your design approved to use it the next year or alter it sufficiently. Let's cross one bridge at a time (not all 3 LOL) and see if FIRST is willing to open this door. I suppose if FIRST approves the 'custom circuit module' they might tweak the rules if you make your custom circuit entirely public for all teams to use as a design, then you could just give it to the community and maybe use it over and over with the 'custom circuit module' but there is much speculation involved here. I'm just giving you my idea of how this could work out.

Just remember that FIRST is generally concerned that anything we create that's heavy on the electronics engineering is not just limited to a few teams with adequate expertise and resources. That would create an uneven playing field. To some extent the existing custom circuit rules risk an uneven playing field for basically one year at this time. So if FIRST allows you to reuse your custom circuit module as it was gifted to the public they risk that the other teams might not be able to actually assemble it themselves. Obviously a touchy problem.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 20-04-2012 at 11:35.
Reply With Quote
  #47   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2012, 11:14
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
One of the motor controllers that I have used in the past had a language on it that you interfaced to it with. This allowed you to do the basic things like set voltage and stuff, or to do the crazy stuff like custom control loops. The language was basic-like, and pretty simple. This makes it so teams could do whatever they want at the lowest level (1khz custom control loop ftw!), but the kill signal would always be respected.
It occured to me that you might have meant that it had a very simple proprietary motion control language.

My previous statement in reply remains the same. Except you might be able to entirely skip the custom circuit if you keep it simple.

What would need to be done is pick what processor or MCU that langauge would be written for, then create a 'custom control module' or go directly to the interface module design phase with the necessary hardware and a suitable interface(s).

I would think that you'd need to run the language as an interpreter, reading the commands sent to it from the interface, parsing them, then performing the desired actions. Like a shell script (in point of fact if you used a 68k compatible or ARM CPU you could run Linux or ucLinux). This can be done in something as simple as a PIC 16F628 or the Atmel AVR AT90S2313.

Obviously this involves writing basically a new language unless you have specific information about the former language's structure.

At the most simplistic you could create commands like:

SET (BRAKING, RPM, VOLTAGE, CURRENT, PID, POSITION, DIRECTION, LIMITS, VARIABLE, OUTPUT)
READ (ENCODER, SWITCH, VARIABLE) - Note that the difference is one has units and one is raw
OVERRIDE (LIMIT, ENCODER)
RESET
GROUP (SWITCH, ENCODER, MOTOR, CODE BLOCK)
WRITE (CODE BLOCK, STATE, ALL)
UNGROUP (SWITCH, ENCODER, MOTOR)
RUN (CODE BLOCK, BACKGROUND, FOREGROUND)
DEFINE (CODE BLOCK) - Use a start and end delimiter to stream reset of command set
END (CODE BLOCK) - Ends a running code block
TRIGGER (#, CODE BLOCK) - Could trigger on a memory mapped input, encoder reading or event like reset

(20 minutes of dreaming up a new language of commands...200 hours of actually writing it...LOL)
Then you could instruct the system with those commands:
...Set it up so that an actuator performs an action on a trigger on it's own.
...Set it up so that an actuator just goes were you tell it at a fixed speed or with braking, or with a PID control).
...Even create a background process to watch an encoder while while you do other things.

Someone will quickly note that that language lacks decision making and loops. Not a problem because the interpreter is really more a command interpreter like a shell. Inside the processing it defines the common recipes for the loops you would otherwise define in a programming language.

That's quite a project but I wouldn't want to force everyone to use it. In an industrial setting it would be handy, but in an educational setting it would sort of reduce the amount of thought involved. Still obviously it's within the practical capability to achieve it. In some ways that would drag a lot of the functionality of the cRIO into this system.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 21-04-2012 at 12:28.
Reply With Quote
  #48   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-04-2012, 12:43
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

After some lunch I realized I should probably clarify why the motion control command interpreter I outlined above would have to have a module at all.

In theory with the open (non-FIRST) firmware for the Jaguar you could already implement that.

In theory you could write a library, a software module, a component for LabView, or even a converter for the command line that takes that more stylistically familar lanaguage and shorthand for grand motion control functions and breaks it down to something more practical to implement in existing languages.

In theory to conserve memory on the module you could also do what Java and Parallax pBASIC interpreters do and compile what you write down to simplier more compact form (byte-code) while checking it for errors. You could then upload that to the module.

Here's the thing, you could essentially take an existing CAN module for example (assuming it already existed any place accept our heads) and change out the software within it for this motion control language. Just like you could do with the Jaguar (in fact a great deal of what I described above is already in the Jaguar...so it's a short reach...the Jaguar is just a little less developed in language right now).

The problem that will crop up is that FIRST is going to want to approve something so they'll need to see something tangible in operation. If you create something for one or many existing modules on a PC and it doesn't change the possibly already approved software in that module then it shouldn't be a problem. However, if you alter the module's software you the open proverbial can of worms.

If you tried to create a piece of alternate firmware for existing modules you'd create quite a few new things FIRST would have to evaluate and possibly that would mean dragging you as the motion control langauge developer into the module designer's approval process. That's a lot more variable concerns for something otherwise simple.

So the fastest way I can figure you'd break that self-feeding complexity would be to make a module that is the exact hardware you desire so you don't have to worry about someone else using different processors or MCU and then you having to port your work to their changes and then getting everything approved again.

It's a lot more direct if you simply absorb someone's module design or make one yourself and bundle it with your motion control language (in programming terms fork their project). If you absorbed an existing module they are free to develop as they like and even change hardware. You are free to develop as you like and even tinker with the hardware. Unless of course FIRST will award you approval process coopertition points.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 21-04-2012 at 13:07.
Reply With Quote
  #49   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2012, 12:26
dsirovica's Avatar
dsirovica dsirovica is offline
Programming and Electrical Mentor
AKA: Dean Sirovica
FRC #1458 (Red Ties)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Alamo
Posts: 65
dsirovica is on a distinguished road
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Lets see if we can agree on a few observations (I don’t know if they are correct):
1. The volume of FIRST is too low for healthy commercial interest.
2. The motor controller for FIRST has no other significant market.

If #1 & #2 are true then we are stuck and we have to beg a vendor for charity.

I am not sure (though this is not my field) that #2 needs to be true. Maybe it is true for the Jags but the Victors seems are used elsewhere too. So maybe what we need to do is to find something that is close (eg. Victor) and ask/beg that vendor to augment their controller for FIRST and hopefully encourage them to find other applications too. Who makes the Vics – maybe we can ask them – I read somewhere FIRST consumed 60K Vics so far. However, my team and many others it seems burn a few Vics every season so there is probably no incentive to change the design 

I think Techhelpbb said that in industry people don’t use generic speed controller like a Jaguar but custom design things for each application. I wonder why that is, and maybe a generic speed controller needs to hit a price point for that to change?

Dean
Reply With Quote
  #50   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2012, 12:46
Mr V's Avatar
Mr V Mr V is offline
FIRST Senior Mentor Washington
FRC #5588 (Reign)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Maple Valley Wa
Posts: 997
Mr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond reputeMr V has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsirovica View Post
Lets see if we can agree on a few observations (I don’t know if they are correct):
1. The volume of FIRST is too low for healthy commercial interest.
2. The motor controller for FIRST has no other significant market.

If #1 & #2 are true then we are stuck and we have to beg a vendor for charity.

Dean
I think you are correct, otherwise TI would not be willing to essentially donate an entire business unit, they just recently acquired, to FIRST. I understand that the reason they acquired Luminary was likely for other parts of the operation and they got "stuck" with Jaguar business unit. However even if they didn't want it why wouldn't they try to sell that business unit, or continue the existing contract, they inherited, to supply FIRST till it ends then not renew it? The logical answer is that it looses too much money as is and they determined that selling that business unit would not bring much in today's market if they could even find a suitor.
__________________
All statements made on Chief Delphi by me are my own opinions and are not official FIRST rulings or opinions and should not be construed as such.




https://www.facebook.com/pages/Team-...77508782410839
Reply With Quote
  #51   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 22-04-2012, 14:48
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by dsirovica View Post
Lets see if we can agree on a few observations (I don’t know if they are correct):
1. The volume of FIRST is too low for healthy commercial interest.
2. The motor controller for FIRST has no other significant market.

If #1 & #2 are true then we are stuck and we have to beg a vendor for charity.

I am not sure (though this is not my field) that #2 needs to be true. Maybe it is true for the Jags but the Victors seems are used elsewhere too. So maybe what we need to do is to find something that is close (eg. Victor) and ask/beg that vendor to augment their controller for FIRST and hopefully encourage them to find other applications too. Who makes the Vics – maybe we can ask them – I read somewhere FIRST consumed 60K Vics so far. However, my team and many others it seems burn a few Vics every season so there is probably no incentive to change the design 

I think Techhelpbb said that in industry people don’t use generic speed controller like a Jaguar but custom design things for each application. I wonder why that is, and maybe a generic speed controller needs to hit a price point for that to change?

Dean
Let me be clear about what I'm really saying. If one wants to sell a lot of something you must be fast enough on your feet to realize just how to make it appealing enough to the situations where it might not be a perfect fit and how to make it fit well enough in the few tough situations where it must be a fit (unless you have a captive market or you don't mind lying possibly a lot).

Take the PC. Using a full blown PC for a FIRST robot is entirely possible. FIRST chooses to use a PLC because it's really more designed for industrial setting (so it's vocationally intelligent for future training) and because they don't have to narrow the hardware down so they get more predictable platforms. However quite obviously a massive number of PCs have been sold into lots of non-FIRST applications where maybe they aren't a perfect fit, but with a few alterations they'll work out. That's how you sell stuff by the truck and train load.

A FIRST specific speed control might be a perfect fit for FIRST (and in the case of the Jaguar it's not even really that because it's specifications limit it's usage to not every system generally) but a terrible fit for a linear positioning company like Intelligent Actuator.

You might be able to sell someone a Jaguar to build a CNC machine with CIMs. However, you'd need to make something to convert from G-code to the different instruction context of the Jaguar.

The Victor is basically a great big RC car speed control. That means it automatically taps the hobby market which is massively familiar with PWM and has an existing supply of PWM equipped control systems (some of which cost a sizable amount of money). The Victor works well for BattleBots where the idea is to scale up the basic RC car, while retaining similar designs. FIRST differs from BattleBots in the educational motivation (we don't just need quick and dirty robots to wreck, we need to be able to provide a positive educational experience).

The Victor isn't an ideal fit for FIRST either. It's advantage in FIRST starts with the fact that I suspect AndyMark tested all it's gear boxes with Victors driving the CIMs. It's really easy to build a drive train with AndyMark gear boxes that will hit the overloads on the Jaguar so the Victor often wins that contest of market by legacy placement and appeal (the 'older timers' saying: "We always did it with Victors and it worked so why do I need these Jaguars that seem to be a problem?"). Then there's the fact that the Victors are so simple and their reset cycle so graceful that most people didn't realize the Victors were reseting on them from overload for some time. Put a Jaguar in there where the monitoring of the system is much more evolved and suddenly you see the failure you never noticed before. Again lucky for FIRST our usage is infrequent or I suspect we'd destroy a lot more Victors with some of these robot designs. Then there's the lack of sensor inputs which is something the Victor design doesn't include because you'd have to decide what extra parts you want to stick users with that just want a big RC car speed control. The lack of sensors is a problem if you're trying to intimately control that motor through that Victor, obviously we work it out, but we pay for it with direct control and responsiveness.

The point I'm making? I am picking the one common demoninator that you've repeatedly noted in your comments to this topic. The FIRST speed control fits a specific power range of a specific style of electric motor. By putting the part of the electronic speed control that dictates the power it handles into a common module, mostly all by itself, we create a single part essentially common to almost all users in all fields. There is your 'big seller'. Everything beyond that? Everything beyond that in the interface modules and the 'custom circuit module' is up for grabs depending on what your priority is as the end user. If you're FIRST you want your limits imposed. If you're not FIRST you probably need almost the same circuit minus those FIRST limits. If you're building an RC car you probably don't need limit switches and encoders you just need PWM. If you're building a CNC servo controller you probably do need encoders and/or limit switches. If you're FIRST putting those sensors on that interface offloads your work load on the control system whether it's the cRIO, the IFI system or the original Parallax BASIC Stamp 2 system.

Heck you don't even need to limit yourself to just the power requirements of FIRST. You can make a high power 'front-end' module that acccepts an interface we made for one thing, but can drive a 48V 1HP or larger commutated induction motor with a few minor tweeks. Do you want to control the drive motor on a golf cart with the same interface module you used in FIRST...you certainly could! However, that size 'front-end' for this electronic motor control would be physically larger and need more cooling than a Victor that's for sure.

You are trying to find the business case for a FIRST product, but what I've actually described in this topic was a electronic motor controller with enough diversity in design to have multiple business cases in a variety of markets (I thought of more than 20 to date in other private conversations about this).

So if you're talking about tossing some funding and resources at something that in production might expand well beyond FIRST might I suggest that when the community project starts churning prototype hardware you consider helping us getting some donated funding? Consider that effectively you'd be getting in on the ground floor of a virtual startup that the community members basically boot strapped. Just keep in mind with that donation we would be churning community hardware that feeds diversity and creates expertise that other businesses could create commercial parts to. It's like donating money to MySQL, Linux or obviously FIRST. It's a donation that might pay back to a commercial enterpise it's weight in gold.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 22-04-2012 at 17:39.
Reply With Quote
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 01:39
AustinSchuh AustinSchuh is offline
Registered User
FRC #0971 (Spartan Robotics) #254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Los Altos, CA
Posts: 803
AustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond reputeAustinSchuh has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by techhelpbb View Post
The problem that will crop up is that FIRST is going to want to approve something so they'll need to see something tangible in operation. If you create something for one or many existing modules on a PC and it doesn't change the possibly already approved software in that module then it shouldn't be a problem. However, if you alter the module's software you the open proverbial can of worms.
That is definitely an issue. Though once again, you could do what they did for the Jaguars, and add it in after a year as a firmware upgrade. And who says that the interpreter has to be fancy or anything? Forth, basic, scheme(!)... There has to be a simple interpreter already out there. Scheme would be really easy to write, too. There is very little to no syntax. Or something like Logo, or ...

One of the really valuable parts of having a control language is that you can run things that matter and are custom at very high frequencies (1khz), and it can be sandboxed so that FIRST is always in control. Without having to mess with extra hardware which adds significant development and manufacturing challenges.
Reply With Quote
  #53   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 03:06
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinSchuh View Post
That is definitely an issue. Though once again, you could do what they did for the Jaguars, and add it in after a year as a firmware upgrade. And who says that the interpreter has to be fancy or anything? Forth, basic, scheme(!)... There has to be a simple interpreter already out there. Scheme would be really easy to write, too. There is very little to no syntax. Or something like Logo, or ...

One of the really valuable parts of having a control language is that you can run things that matter and are custom at very high frequencies (1khz), and it can be sandboxed so that FIRST is always in control. Without having to mess with extra hardware which adds significant development and manufacturing challenges.
I'm not saying it can't be done. With enough cooperation between the module development before the language and the people that develop the alternate firmware they add to the interface module later in the lifecycle of the module it could be done. I just encourage you to consider that you'd be linking the life of your additional project to the lifecycle of the interface module you added it to.

For example of what concerns me:

Let's say we have a CAN equipped interface module. It's appoved and we as a community have a supply process to satisfy FIRST as part of the approval. You decide to work with the people that made that CAN equipped interface module to make your custom firmware. Great, no problem yet. Then the next year you help the CAN equipped group offer your extra firmware for the same CAN equipped interface module for FIRST to review and approve. Still no issue.

Let's say the next year the folks making that CAN equipped interface module decide they need to alter that hardware in such a way that it still performs their original specifications, but it tweaks your additional firmware. Well now you'd have to play along with their change. You may have the language stable and working and suddenly you've got to change it because they decided to change.

I propose to fork the project to avoid you dragging each other with restrictions or schedules. You can certainly absorb their module as it already exists. So just make your firmware and make it work then take it for approval. If that module project decides to make hardware changes later you can just keep making the original module with the same community resources. The community shouldn't look at it like being asked to make old hardware for the original project. They should look at it as making the hardware to support your language. Nothing would stop you later from later making the upgrade to match the original interface module again. However, you could each operate freely of each other in the mean time.

It's mostly just an issue of logistics. Not a way to make the language developer stuck to making hardware. I suspect most interface modules will rely on community resources for manufacturing anyway so I'm not sure it's much impact except to change some part numbers.

Outside of those mostly bureaucratic concerns I think it's a valuable idea for the same reasons you've stated.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 24-04-2012 at 03:22.
Reply With Quote
  #54   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 07:58
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Generally speaking:

I should think that most production manufacturing for a project like this is going to be done by community resources. I don't think many teams that might contribute to the project are going to want to turn production quantites of units. I think it's important to insure such a project's commitment to FIRST that whatever we make that is approved by FIRST is made from the greater pool of resources.

Otherwise I worry that we'd limit contribution because someone that might offer up a design would worry they'd have to carry the burden themselves. We might also make FIRST uncomfortable that there isn't really a commitment to deliver if the demand of quantity is there.

From a business educational perspective probably the most education for the students comes up to the certain point of commitment and then beyond that it's repetition and distracting. So it'll be important that the community have the resources to handle those logistics. Probably need to compile lists of friendly assembly houses. Lists of friendly suppliers. Lists of people willing to donate production resources like myself.
Reply With Quote
  #55   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 11:16
Tom Bottiglieri Tom Bottiglieri is offline
Registered User
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,189
Tom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

All of these features sound cool, but in my opinion before any new feature is introduced we need to really take a stab at making the current offerings more robust. Jaguar failures have bit a number of teams I have associations with and probably many others.

Here's what another speed controller would need to do to make the Cheesy Poofs stop using Victors:
- Proven reliability
- A unit just as small, if not smaller.
- The ability to deliver ridiculously high amounts of current and withstand low voltages. We have popped the main breaker before our Victors stop working.
- Faster, asynchronous motor drive PWM (I hate the sound of crunching CIMs)
- A closed case would be nice. Metal chips are abundant.
- Proven reliability
- Proven reliability
... Repeat 100 times ...
- Proven reliability

As far as control signals go, CAN is a "nice to have". The first rev of CAN in FRC had some major bugs and for me the first impression there was enough to write it off. On top of that, these interfaces are very highly abstracted out at the software level. I don't see how a student benefits any more from writing (-1,1) into an abstracted CAN interface than they do with an abstracted PWM interface.
Reply With Quote
  #56   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 11:35
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri View Post
As far as control signals go, CAN is a "nice to have". The first rev of CAN in FRC had some major bugs and for me the first impression there was enough to write it off. On top of that, these interfaces are very highly abstracted out at the software level. I don't see how a student benefits any more from writing (-1,1) into an abstracted CAN interface than they do with an abstracted PWM interface.
As to everything else you ask for it's all quite reasonable and I feel quite doable. Perhaps not in the first prototype PCB but I'd like to think we test till we are sure that reliability is the prime concern.

One thing that does concern me personally is the issue of size. I've used the horizontal surface footprint of the Victors as sort of my idea of a guide. So I want to keep that surface foot print as much as possible. My idea of stacking modules would risk increasing the height from the top surface of the fan to the surface the unit sits on. To me, increasing that height in some cases by 0.5" doesn't seem a lot to ask. I may be wrong and others have a different opinion.

You are correct that when one merely uses the CAN bus like a glorified PWM that the amount of information basically communicated is similar. The real advantage of CAN for communications would come when you can really use the sensors, the fault detections and possibly a motion control environment on the electronic motor control. Then PWM and CAN are quite different. PWM doesn't give you a lot of choices to even upgrade the electronic motor control firmware through it.

Also there's a potential difference in performance. PWM needs to transit several cycles for a PWM interfaced electronic motor control to operate. It's possible that a single byte at high speed communicated down a CAN bus could start a series of events that's intricate on the electronic motor control.

Obviously any general purpose communications bus has an advantage of flexibility over strait binary I/O on a single wire. Whether that binary I/O happens to look like PWM or whether it's a classic digital I/O port ON/OFF state from the FIRST digital sidecar.

I seriously take your concerns about reliability to heart. I hope that the community will police itself about quality and not merely rely on FIRST approval as the cardinal level of achievement. Many of us are professional engineers here and I'm sure we know how to address this responsibility and can fix issues that effect it.

To help insure this I've been working on a website idea where anyone with a quality issue can report it without necessarily having to return the item. Obviously some errors will get induced with reporting like that, but I think we can statistically pull the information about any quality issues out of the noise. With all the flexibility it's important to me that if we have a bad module we know where they are, we see any reports of it quickly and hopefully can offer quick response to deal with it. I don't want to hide from any issues I want to deal with them straight on till the thing is very hard to break.

Also as I'm putting my personal money into this, if my choice were to ship something marginally unreliable for next year or wait till the year after. Even if it cost me more time and money I put reliability first when it comes to something like this. I won't let this be a rush. There's no need. There's still plenty of existing Jaguar stock at DigiKey and floating between teams that if we wait till next year for approval it shouldn't be a crushing problem.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 24-04-2012 at 11:46.
Reply With Quote
  #57   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 12:18
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Alternate website work update:

I've created a virtual hosting environment using WebMin and VirtualMin on my VPS running CentOS 6.2 (Linux).

As stated before I registered those 9 domains.

I've pointed the DNS and it's propogated for those domains from the registrar to a the DNS host and then to the static IP of my VPS.

I have done some shopping for suitable SSL certificates in case we want to create some public, some semi-public and some private forums. Also in case we want to use it for securing e-mail I can host on that site. It looks like a good place to start would be a wildcard SSL certificate from Comodo as it'll set me back $89 per year to secure one domain with lots of sub-domain choices.

I'm not sure if the community has a favorite in the domain names I offered before (post #35, page #3). If anyone has any preference feel free to speak up. What I think is most cost effective is to pick one of the 9 root domain names and host the website with that as the primary domain then use redirects to push traffic from the others to that domain. Then we only need to secure one root domain for SSL. We could also put other things at the other domains that don't need to be secured. I'd hate to spend $900 on SSL.

I also think the wildcard SSL is a good idea if we start using some mobile devices because sometimes you need a WAP version of something or a SOAP application.

Input or some help with this is always welcome.

Last edited by techhelpbb : 24-04-2012 at 12:21.
Reply With Quote
  #58   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 20:48
Tom Bottiglieri Tom Bottiglieri is offline
Registered User
FRC #0254 (The Cheesy Poofs)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 3,189
Tom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond reputeTom Bottiglieri has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by techhelpbb View Post
Alternate website work update:

I've created a virtual hosting environment using WebMin and VirtualMin on my VPS running CentOS 6.2 (Linux).

As stated before I registered those 9 domains.

I've pointed the DNS and it's propogated for those domains from the registrar to a the DNS host and then to the static IP of my VPS.

I have done some shopping for suitable SSL certificates in case we want to create some public, some semi-public and some private forums. Also in case we want to use it for securing e-mail I can host on that site. It looks like a good place to start would be a wildcard SSL certificate from Comodo as it'll set me back $89 per year to secure one domain with lots of sub-domain choices.

I'm not sure if the community has a favorite in the domain names I offered before (post #35, page #3). If anyone has any preference feel free to speak up. What I think is most cost effective is to pick one of the 9 root domain names and host the website with that as the primary domain then use redirects to push traffic from the others to that domain. Then we only need to secure one root domain for SSL. We could also put other things at the other domains that don't need to be secured. I'd hate to spend $900 on SSL.

I also think the wildcard SSL is a good idea if we start using some mobile devices because sometimes you need a WAP version of something or a SOAP application.

Input or some help with this is always welcome.
Github. It has a private mode for designated contributors, public wiki, and an issue reporting system. Also, it's free.
Reply With Quote
  #59   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-04-2012, 21:27
techhelpbb's Avatar
techhelpbb techhelpbb is offline
Registered User
FRC #0011 (MORT - Team 11)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Rookie Year: 1997
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 1,624
techhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond reputetechhelpbb has a reputation beyond repute
Re: TI and future Jaguars

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri View Post
Github. It has a private mode for designated contributors, public wiki, and an issue reporting system. Also, it's free.
I'm not so worried about the money at this point. I budgeted several thousand dollars of my money to work into this effort regardless of the website maintenace costs. I don't mind bearing that hosting cost for a few years at least and I'm not looking to exert any sort of ownership rights for doing it.

I'm even okay with subfolder hosting for other projects or community members if it's wanted so people can put up their own content. Might be able to further the usage of the root domain's SSL certificate like that.

I'll give Github another look as I recall when I helped start another project there was monthly fee for it. I'm not sure how the licensing issues and other issues might work into their model (see earlier in the topic).

This said hosting this ourselves most of these features we can get from other open source projects. Plus we'll have utter control over the bandwidth, the storage, the databases and whatever web applications we put into the space. Of course many projects use SourceForge but retain their own hosting as well. I do worry, however, that often times when a project uses both SourceForge and their own hosting it's hard to know how the site operations prioritize the usage of the resources and search engine hits can get confusing.

Is there a particular specific function of the services of Github that you think is unique and would be important to this project?

Last edited by techhelpbb : 24-04-2012 at 21:34.
Reply With Quote
  #60   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-05-2012, 10:05
dsirovica's Avatar
dsirovica dsirovica is offline
Programming and Electrical Mentor
AKA: Dean Sirovica
FRC #1458 (Red Ties)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Alamo
Posts: 65
dsirovica is on a distinguished road
Re: TI and future Jaguars

World was fun! Must have walked several miles back and forth between the arena and the pits – really unnecessary people flow problems created by the staff.

I talked to TI at the event. Basically they want out f the Jag business due to its lack of business. The are donating everything except their silicon (Stellaris and a few other chips on-board). They are aware of current issues but clearly have no motivation to fix anything.

They also don't see who would want this business with the exception of the manufacturer if Victors whom they think/hope will bid on the RFP. They did not think an open-source program would have the industrial strength to be successful in the long run.

They have some Jaguars in stock, but they didn't think it was enough to carry FIRST through the next season.

I do think the the Victor manufacturer makes most sense to take this and produce a super-vic a fusion of a Vic & Jag. However from a business perspective I do not see them doing it with any resulting benefit to FIRST. As all business people know, if you have a monopoly you jack up the prices and stop further innovation... If you take the current Vic and just add the Stellaris processor to it their margins will take a hit.

At the end of the day for a successful solution we need a product that has other markets than the 2000 teams at FRC. The Vic is the only contender at this time.

This is just sad.
Dean
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 00:28.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi