FRC Blogged - The 2015 Control System Request for Proposa

[AllenGregoryIV]

A couple interesting requests for the new controller that I noticed

MRC7. USB 2.0 host port
MRC10.Onboard non-volatile storage sufficient for storing user code and logging data (up to 3 event-days) with no perceptible performance issues by the user
MRC11.Ability for user to remove storage is preferred, but not required
MRC14.A display providing basic diagnostics is preferred, but not required.

Examples of such diagnostics include, but are not limited to:
a) team number,
b) IP address; Page 14 of 23
c) Link status
d) Enable disable state
e) Teleoperated/autonomous state
f) Common error codes

Those would all be nice improvements to our current robot controller.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV

A couple interesting requests for the new controller that I noticed

...

Those would all be nice improvements to our current robot controller.

The current cRIO does have user accessible flash memory.

The current cRIO can send all that information via visual means connected to GPIO or I2C on the robot even when disabled.
Someone would just have to make something to do it. Display devices could easily include: LEDs, a backlit LCD, light bulbs, low voltage electro-florescent displays.

There is no USB 2.0 Host support on the cRIO but you could put a COTS device on the robot like a laptop. However, I'm not sure that part is really a slam dunk. USB has 3 common modes: Human Interface Device (HID), mass storage, and CDC (serial communications). Each mode is rather complicated. Generally when you plug devices into a host port there needs to be a driver for that device. No driver means no support. So even if you could make a USB 2.0 Host port you'd need software support in the control system to make it work with devices. That's *a whole lot of devices*. Usually things that don't run Windows/Linux/BSD/Mac OSX have to be selective about the USB hardware that actually works. After all what's the benefit to the device manufacturer to make drivers for your unusual low sale volume platform (<10,000 teams...Microsoft can give that away and basically did with the Kinectx).

[Racer26]

Ought to be interesting to see if IFI is interested in once again being our control system supplier.

I'm sure many FRC mentors would rejoice at that concept. Sadly, I have a feeling that wont happen, either because IFI isn't interested anymore, or because FIRST might categorically reject a proposal from them. The old IFI systems were much faster to boot than even the 2009 cRIO-based system, which was the best one yet.

I also wonder if FIRST will be transparent with the FRC community about who is proposing?

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

Ought to be interesting to see if IFI is interested in once again being our control system supplier.

I'm sure many FRC mentors would rejoice at that concept. Sadly, I have a feeling that wont happen, either because IFI isn't interested anymore, or because FIRST might categorically reject a proposal from them. The old IFI systems were much faster to boot than even the 2009 cRIO-based system, which was the best one yet.

I also wonder if FIRST will be transparent with the FRC community about who is proposing?

I really can't see them being transparent in the process. I can't imagine the "you know what storm" that might erupt when a few thousand FIRST volunteer engineers each with their own pet companies and ideas debating this on CD.

Think Mac vs. Windows debate to the 10th power!

Things like this must be done with a limited committee of dedicated individuals.

[techhelpbb]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I can't imagine the "you know what storm" that might erupt when a few thousand FIRST volunteer engineers each with their own pet companies and ideas debating this on CD.

Why imagine:
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ntrol+proposal
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=105531

I'll be selling shovels ring side...