Go to Post So when a team leader decides to give all their heart to a team, it is true love that they exhibit towards it. - Anton Abaya [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 11:34
Ben Martin's Avatar
Ben Martin Ben Martin is offline
Long Distance Mentor
FRC #0225 (TechFire)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: York, PA
Posts: 466
Ben Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond reputeBen Martin has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

I think a combination of things has contributed toward greater team success

1) 2013 had a game piece that was manufactured more consistently than 2012's was, thus making it easier for teams to shoot in a repeatable fashion, and thus it was easier to score points

2) More COTS components at cheaper prices at several "one-stop FRC shops" makes it easy for teams to find affordable components to build their robots

3) Besides RI3D, having more teams in FIRST means more testing videos uploaded to Youtube and other sites. Also, all the old videos from past games don't go away--the online resources for teams are expanding each year. Teams like 1114 have excellent resources about how to optimize your drive. By the end of week 2, a little searching of Chief Delphi could show that a balanced 8" pneumatic wheel or banebots wheels could be used to shoot discs. There were also videos showing passive 10-point hangs, and shortly after there were videos showing how a bucket could be used to index discs.

I like having examples available to make having a competitive robot accessible to all teams, and I think having COTS used (like RI3D did) in the examples makes it even easier for teams to recognize what they need to purchase to make the 'template' robot, without having everything necessarily laid out with instructions like the KOP drive is.

Is selling COTS subsystems outright, like a COTS shooter or COTS hanger, really the way we want to go, though? If we look at 2011, a COTS minibot? We already have COTS drives and COTS transmissions, which certainly have dramatically increased the performance level of many teams. A LOT of integration still certainly has to be done. At what point do the individual components become so few teams lose the 'fun' of designing and building it themselves? I'm not sure.
__________________
TechFire 225 -- Website -- Facebook
2015 & 2016 MAR Champions
Past teams: 234, 1747
Reply With Quote
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 12:53
Oblarg Oblarg is offline
Registered User
AKA: Eli Barnett
FRC #0449 (The Blair Robot Project)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 1,116
Oblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond reputeOblarg has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ben Martin View Post
Is selling COTS subsystems outright, like a COTS shooter or COTS hanger, really the way we want to go, though? If we look at 2011, a COTS minibot? We already have COTS drives and COTS transmissions, which certainly have dramatically increased the performance level of many teams. A LOT of integration still certainly has to be done. At what point do the individual components become so few teams lose the 'fun' of designing and building it themselves? I'm not sure.
I think this is a non-issue; I'd expect that FIRST would not condone FRC suppliers selling what essentially constitutes ready-made entire robots, and could trivially put an end to it by simply not giving them any information on the game prior to kickoff. To this end, I doubt we'll ever see COTS mechanisms that deal with year-specific game tasks.
__________________
"Mmmmm, chain grease and aluminum shavings..."
"The breakfast of champions!"

Member, FRC Team 449: 2007-2010
Drive Mechanics Lead, FRC Team 449: 2009-2010
Alumnus/Technical Mentor, FRC Team 449: 2010-Present
Lead Technical Mentor, FRC Team 4464: 2012-2015
Technical Mentor, FRC Team 5830: 2015-2016
Reply With Quote
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 13:19
Alan Anderson's Avatar
Alan Anderson Alan Anderson is offline
Software Architect
FRC #0045 (TechnoKats)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Kokomo, Indiana
Posts: 9,113
Alan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond reputeAlan Anderson has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Oblarg View Post
I think this is a non-issue; I'd expect that FIRST would not condone FRC suppliers selling what essentially constitutes ready-made entire robots, and could trivially put an end to it by simply not giving them any information on the game prior to kickoff. To this end, I doubt we'll ever see COTS mechanisms that deal with year-specific game tasks.
The only manual I have handy is from 2011, but similar (if not identical) wording was present other years.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Section 4.3 Robot Rules
...COTS items that provide a complete solution for a major ROBOT function (e.g. a complete manipulator assembly, pre-built pneumatics circuit, or full mobility system) that require no effort other than just bolting it on to the ROBOT are against the intent of the competition, and will not be permitted.
Reply With Quote
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 13:44
thefro526's Avatar
thefro526 thefro526 is offline
Mentor for Hire.
AKA: Dustin Benedict
no team (EWCP, MAR, FRC 708)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 2,599
thefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond reputethefro526 has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to thefro526 Send a message via MSN to thefro526
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson View Post
The only manual I have handy is from 2011, but similar (if not identical) wording was present other years.
Oddly enough, this was not present in the 2013 Manual, although I believe every year prior to 2013 or 2012, that exact rule was repeated.* As I looked through the archived version of the manual, I found the most relevant rule and the 'blue' explanation box below it, and it more or less allows a team to purchase a complete sub-assembly from a vendor regardless of function.

*I went back and checked the 2012 Manual, and it reads the same as 2013's, meaning that 2011 was the last year there was a rule preventing a supplier from selling complete mechanisms.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2013 Manual
4.1.3.5 R15
If a COTS item is part of a modular system that can be assembled in several possible configurations, then each
individual module must fit within the price constraints defined in R12.
If the modules are designed to assemble into a single configuration, and the assembly is functional in only that
configuration, then the total cost of the complete assembly including all modules must fit within the price constraints
defined in R12.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Blue Box
In summary, if a VENDOR sells a system or a kit, a team must use the entire system/kit
Fair Market Value and not the value of its COMPONENT pieces.

Example1: VENDOR A sells a gearbox that can be used with a number of different gear sets, and can mate with two different motors they sell. A team purchases the gearbox, a
gear set, and a motor (which are not offered together as an assembly or kit), then
assembles them together. Each part is treated separately for the purpose of BOM
costing, since the purchased pieces can each be used in various configurations.

Example2: VENDOR B sells a robotic arm assembly that the team wants to use.
However, it costs $700, so they cannot use it. The Vendor sells the “hand”, “wrist” and
“arm” as separate assemblies, for $200 each. A team wishes to purchase the three
components separately, then reassemble them. This would not be legal, as they are
really buying and using the entire assembly, which has a Fair Market Value of $700.
As Example 2 implies, a vendor could in theory sell an 'Arm Kit', that is pre-assembled for $399.99 and have it be completely legal within FRC. (As the 2013 rules are written)

The change from the previous verbiage may be due in part to conflicts with the KOP Chassis, since technically, according to some rules it would be illegal - although with it being supplied in the KOP, it's technically exempt from some/most rules.

Regardless, I doubt we'll see wide scale proliferation of 'ready' made mechanisms any time soon, due in part to the nature of FRC games. The fact that the game is unknown (at least at some level) to even major FRC suppliers would mean that they'd have to prototype, brainstorm, and produce any relevant mechanisms in a very, very short period of time, and then have the produced in an equally short period of time - or take a gamble on having a series of components designed and ready for production (or produced) by the time kick off comes around. The counter argument to this would be Vex's Chassis from 2013, since it was basically designed, built, and ready to be shipped within a week or so from kick-off, so it is "Possible" - but reasonable to do with mechanisms? Maybe.

If anything, we're long over due to see the wide scale production of 'build your own _______' kits geared towards FRC robots. 'Black Box' mechanisms like Ball Conveyors, Elevators, Telescoping Arms, Etc are well now well understood enough that someone with the resources could very easily manufacture a kit containing the 'tricky bits' of the mechanism with the end users supplying raw materials in the form of aluminum extrusion or similar. It's funny to see that there are actually a handful of teams that currently use this method internally and have refined their designs to the point where the only thing that ever seems to change is the size of the system, but not the construction method...
__________________
-Dustin Benedict
2005-2012 - Student & Mentor FRC 816
2012-2014 - Technical Mentor, 2014 Drive Coach FRC 341
Current - Mentor FRC 2729, FRC 708

Last edited by thefro526 : 09-12-2013 at 13:46.
Reply With Quote
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 14:18
Qbot2640's Avatar
Qbot2640 Qbot2640 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Terry McHugh
FRC #2640 (Hotbotz)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Reidsville, NC
Posts: 473
Qbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond reputeQbot2640 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

Just in case anyone was thinking I advocated complete subsystems in an off the shelf package with my earlier post....I definitely do not. I was just trying to express that the nature of COTS items that is currently available has not changed the way my team designs or builds very much. We did buy some belt pulleys and some other hardware type items for 2013...but we have always used the kit drivetrain - and we have always constructed our specialized systems from our own designs.

I will concede that the current stock of available items has changed the activity greatly since the early years - it was my impression that this thread (and other similar current threads) were speaking more to very recent changes and/or comparison to seasons only a few years ago.
__________________

2012 Palmetto Regional Winners (Thanks 2059, 2815, and 287).
2012 Newton 14th Seed
2013 Chesapeake Regional Imagery Award Winners
2014 North Carolina Regional Imagery Award Winners
2014 Greater DC Regional Team Spirit Award Winners
2015 North Carolina Regional Finalists (Thanks 3971 and 587)
Reply With Quote
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 09-12-2013, 23:06
DampRobot's Avatar
DampRobot DampRobot is offline
Physics Major
AKA: Roger Romani
FRC #0100 (The Wildhats) and FRC#971 (Spartan Robotics)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Stanford University
Posts: 1,277
DampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond reputeDampRobot has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Sustainability - 2014 - COTS parts

Quote:
Originally Posted by thefro526 View Post
Regardless, I doubt we'll see wide scale proliferation of 'ready' made mechanisms any time soon, due in part to the nature of FRC games. The fact that the game is unknown (at least at some level) to even major FRC suppliers would mean that they'd have to prototype, brainstorm, and produce any relevant mechanisms in a very, very short period of time, and then have the produced in an equally short period of time - or take a gamble on having a series of components designed and ready for production (or produced) by the time kick off comes around. The counter argument to this would be Vex's Chassis from 2013, since it was basically designed, built, and ready to be shipped within a week or so from kick-off, so it is "Possible" - but reasonable to do with mechanisms? Maybe.

If anything, we're long over due to see the wide scale production of 'build your own _______' kits geared towards FRC robots. 'Black Box' mechanisms like Ball Conveyors, Elevators, Telescoping Arms, Etc are well now well understood enough that someone with the resources could very easily manufacture a kit containing the 'tricky bits' of the mechanism with the end users supplying raw materials in the form of aluminum extrusion or similar. It's funny to see that there are actually a handful of teams that currently use this method internally and have refined their designs to the point where the only thing that ever seems to change is the size of the system, but not the construction method...
I completely agree. It's not a particularly good business practice for companies to build "frisbee shooter" and "frisbee intake" systems for the number of logistic and technical problems mentioned in this thread. Even if they could see us "2014 manipulator I" or "2014 manipulator II," I doubt most teams would use them. They wouldn't have any reason to think that they would actually work, and using them would probably raise questions of morality.

On the other hand, someone is going to make a lot of money making components for 233 style arms, 254 style elevators, good arm components, and decent worm gearboxes. There's a lot of "secret sauce" that goes into a 233 telescoping arm say, as well as manufacturing technology, and it would make a lot of money as a great COTS solution. Teams will buy them in droves if they're available, well made and useful.
__________________
The mind is not a vessel to be filled, but a fire to be lighted.

-Plutarch
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 06:20.

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