|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
I remember one match where both 1717 and 330 were immobile at the same time. Both came back later in the match, but I want to say that 1717 dropped again shortly afterwards.
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Our scouters were bellowing "1717'S DEAD! 1717'S DEAD!" in the quarters and the semis. I'm pretty certain 1717 was dead for most of both semifinal matches, and I remember Beachbots dying in a match as well.
|
|
#3
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
I wonder why these issues only surface in eliminations? I can't remember another time 1717 wasn't working. Makes me think back to Leeland's comments in other threads, proposing something to do with the increased network bandwidth of highly capable teams (image processing, cameras, etc...)
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
Essentially, we noticed that bandwidth usage could be a problem and we tried to optimize our robot's bandwidth usage down to the minimum. Still, I don't think it can explain 118 sitting completely dead for the whole match. That was a truly tragic thing to see and I sincerely hope this problem is solved for good by next year. |
|
#6
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
It is up to each team to ensure they design their robot to work under all relevant conditions. However, a team should not need to have five other high performance robots with high data demands and a full field to test their robot. Such system level issues should be addressed by whoever provides the FMS.
We were in a match at Alamo where 148 sat dead throughout. The probability that they made the kind of mistake that would cause this is extremely small. It is unfortunate that it took causing so much pain to an outstanding group of teams, in such a public way, to get FIRST's attention. I hope that FIRST does fix these problems before next year to make their pain worth something. |
|
#7
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
As far as I know we didn't turn down any of the video quality settings for the video stream to the driver's station. We had: 1 camera 3 encoders 2 breakbeam sensors 2 pots But all of the processing was left to the cRIO, we didn't offload any of the processing to the driver's station. The only thing that was being output to the driver's station would be the video feed and whatever is the normal packets for sending/receiving joystick inputs. |
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
An interesting question is whether the combination of so many 'bots using so much band width was higher than in a typical regional. |
|
#9
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
As many of you know, the real reason for 1717 going dead was deliberate wifi jamming by a rogue mentor. This was the same person who disrupted the Einstein matches.
|
|
#10
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Is there any proof of this? If I remember correctly from FIRST's statement and team 548's statement that this was never said. Also, REALLY old thread revival.
|
|
#11
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
What FIRST or Team 548 said officially doesn't mean that they covered all of the issues. I've discussed this directly with an individual who has direct knowledge and stated that the disruption began with 1717 and then moved on to Einstein. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|