|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools |
Rating:
|
Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: FIRST's statement on Einstein
Quote:
|
|
#2
|
||||
|
||||
|
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. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
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. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|