Robotics Question of the Day!

[Ether]

Originally Posted by RyanCahoon

According to the Wikipedia definition at least, gear ratio is the ratio of the input speed to the output speed,

So "low gear" in my car has a high gear ratio,

... and "high gear" has a low gear ratio.

That's probably where some of the confusion comes in.

[z_beeblebrox]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Also bear in mind, for discussion on cd, that 2010 was year of the horror ranking system. But for purposes of the op's post we can throw that out the window since rookies are highly unlikely to understand (I sure didn't) the system.

How did the 2010 ranking system work?

[CalTran]

9.3.4 Match Seeding Points
All teams on the winning ALLIANCE will receive a number of seeding points equal to the penalized score (the score with any assessed penalties) of the winning ALLIANCE plus 5 additional points for winning the match.
All teams on the losing ALLIANCE will receive a number of seeding points equal to un-penalized score (the score without any assessed penalties) of the winning ALLIANCE.
In the case of a tie, all participating teams will receive a number of seeding points equal to their ALLIANCE score (with any assessed penalties).

The seeding system led to the infamous Curie Match 100 where Simbotics catapulted themselves, legally, into first seed.

[connor.worley]

Originally Posted by CalTran

The seeding system led to the infamous Curie Match 100 where Simbotics catapulted themselves, legally, into first seed.

By losing the match, I might add. Props to them though, playing the metagame is just as important as playing the game.

[IKE]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

No, the second most important part of the robot is also the drivetrain.

So is the third.

Game piece manipulation is no higher than fourth on the list of robot priorities.

Does that mean that Bumpers on #1? Please tell me bumpers are not #1...

Discussing ranking systems is a really good idea. FIRST likes to switch them up and sometimes this will influence how you design your robot.

A fun hypothetical might be:
Originally matches were 1vs.1vs.1
Then FIRST improved to the 2vs.2 format.
Then FIRST improved (by most folks opinion) to the 3 vs. 3 format.
How would FIRST change if they went to 4vs.4?
What would be the benefits and what would be the disadvantages to 4 vs. 4?

[Starke]

Originally Posted by BJC

How about:

What is the most important part of the robot?
A.The drivetrain

What is the second most important part of the robot?
A. Game piece pick-up

Have to keep these in mind come design time, its easy to only think about scoring..

Regards, Bryan

Here are a couple that go along with what Brian mentioned. Being a teacher, I like to create discussion based questions:

Q: How many speeds/gears are necessary for the XXXX game?

Q: How many different ways could you pick up an innertube/basketball/other game piece?

Q: Where is the most important part of the field for the robot?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by IKE

Does that mean that Bumpers on #1? Please tell me bumpers are not #1...

Bumpers are #4, I think. The most important parts of the robot, in order:

Drivetrain, Drivetrain, Drivetrain, anything that makes the drivetrain legal (bumpers included), game object manipulation #1, game object manipulation #2, game object manipulation #3.

The difference in the game object manipulators: #1 is acquisition, #2 is delivery, #3 is either anything internal to the robot or working with any stationary field element. The reason they're game object manipulators is that it's quite possible that they may be dealing with stuff other than game pieces, like mobile goals or bridges or hanging bars.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by EricH

Bumpers are #4, I think. The most important parts of the robot, in order:

Drivetrain, Drivetrain, Drivetrain, anything that makes the drivetrain legal (bumpers included), game object manipulation #1, game object manipulation #2, game object manipulation #3.

The difference in the game object manipulators: #1 is acquisition, #2 is delivery, #3 is either anything internal to the robot or working with any stationary field element. The reason they're game object manipulators is that it's quite possible that they may be dealing with stuff other than game pieces, like mobile goals or bridges or hanging bars.

Objection: this puts non-object endgame work no higher than 8, when in several (but certainly not all) years, endgame was arguably more valuable than object (acquisition/delivery) scoring.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Siri

Objection: this puts non-object endgame work no higher than 8, when in several (but certainly not all) years, endgame was arguably more valuable than object (acquisition/delivery) scoring.

Does it? Game objects, as I noted, may include such items as towers and mobile goals. Towers--hmm, like maybe 2010 and 2011?

The reason I specified game object (NOT game piece) is that there are often multiple objects that it is helpful to interact with by using a specialized mechanism. Say, the bridge or the towers mentioned. All game pieces are game objects, but not all game objects are game pieces.

I should also have mentioned that the #1, #2, and #3 designators can be shifted in priority--say, #3 comes first. (Though I don't suggest swapping #1 and #2; it's kind of hard to score a game object if you don't have one.)

In actuality, endgame work could be as high as #1 (iff it's done only with a drivetrain, like the 2006 ramps) or #5 (if it needs a manipulator to do).

[1502]

Lets keep the OP in mind guys..

[BJC]

Apparently I started something here..

Revised list of important robot related functions assuming legality:

1. Drivetrain
2. Drivetrain!
3. Drivetrain!!
4. Picking up the game piece.
5. Drivetrain!!!
6. Processing the game piece..
7. Drivetrain!!!!
8. Delivering the game piece...
9. Drivetrain!!!!!

*4-10 Endgame (depending on game)

Interestingly enough this follows gameplay rather closely.. Drive, pick up piece(s), drive while processing, score, repeat.


Another fun question:

-What are the three tightest constraints on the robot?
(IMHO)
1. Money
2. Time
3. Weight

However, this one is more up for argument.

Regards, Bryan

[daniel_dsouza]

Q: Who should you not instantly blame for errors when they happen?
A: Programmers. It's good to break this stereotype sooner than later.

Q: What must be worn at all times when working on the robot?
A: Safeties, closed toed shoes, etc.

Q: Where is the FIRST aid kit located?
A: "answers will vary"

Q: Where is the largest/smallest gauge wire used on the robot?
A: "answers will vary"

Q: When working with aluminum and nuts/bolts, how much should you tighten them?
A: not too tight

Q: Where is metric crescent wrench?
A: I have no clue what you are talking about...

Q: Should a chain be completely taut?
A: No.

Q: Should the robot frame have a charge?
A: No. This can be prevented by isolating motors, and checking wires.

Q: What is the best type of drivetrain/mechanism?
A: The best one we can build w. our resources.

Q: If the robot does not turn on, what is the first thing to do?
A: Check the battery.

Q: What is called when you lend a team some part at a competition?
A: Gracious Professionalism

[EricH]

What is the large PDF that everyone is supposed to read called?
A: The Manual.

Who needs to read the Manual at least once?
A: Everybody. Twice or thrice is preferred, though.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by EricH

Does it? Game objects, as I noted, may include such items as towers and mobile goals. Towers--hmm, like maybe 2010 and 2011?

The reason I specified game object (NOT game piece) is that there are often multiple objects that it is helpful to interact with by using a specialized mechanism. Say, the bridge or the towers mentioned. All game pieces are game objects, but not all game objects are game pieces.

I should also have mentioned that the #1, #2, and #3 designators can be shifted in priority--say, #3 comes first. (Though I don't suggest swapping #1 and #2; it's kind of hard to score a game object if you don't have one.)

In actuality, endgame work could be as high as #1 (iff it's done only with a drivetrain, like the 2006 ramps) or #5 (if it needs a manipulator to do).

Ok, I get the object vs piece distinction, but how can you indicate that #n is acquisition and #m is delivery? Are you referring to chronological steps in general (how do you deliver a bridge)?

Remember that {endgame} ⊂ #1 IFF endgame is done only with drivetrain functionality ⊂ standard movement. (The endgame may involve only the drivetrain, but well above and beyond standard movement.)

From the perspective of the OP, these questions are important. One of the worst mistakes you can make early in the design strategy process is mis-prioritize or used overly-constrained verbiage (thereby constraining minds). Look at the teams that ignored the minibot or constrained themselves to hanging on the horizontal bar in Breakaway [not that that didn't work for some also]. Given that Ryan's looking for ways to get kids minds going and inspire them to want to try it, such an open-ended "what's a good structure for determining the top priorities of a FIRST robot" question is actually a pretty valuable discussion of the day.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by daniel_dsouza

Q: Where is metric crescent wrench?
A: I have no clue what you are talking about...

http://www.walmart.com/ip/Vise-Grip-...rench/15720337

Free clue for the still-confused: The "metric" refers to the scale on the jaws that lets you know what size nut or bolt head you're rounding off when you use it.