Go to Post If the pattern holds, it's a bizarro year. - GeeTwo [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 Rating: Thread Rating: 2 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 16:28
WillNess's Avatar
WillNess WillNess is offline
Programmer
AKA: Will Ness
FRC #4944 (The Hi Fives)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 90
WillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really nice
Why I think having no defense was a great idea

I think that a game without defense helps the students learn more than it does with defense.

The reason is, last year when designing the robot, after every suggestion we had to evaluate if we thought it could survive constant beating during a regional. This year, we had to worry about that a lot less, don't get me wrong it was still a consideration but it wasn't as severe as last year. In fact, we were able to be much more creative and even have a 5 foot arm sticking behind our robot that could pick up bins from the step without mining the landfill. Even if the same length/width rules were in place in a game with defense, we never would have been able to make that arm because it couldn't have survived being run into. FIRST is about the students, and I learned much more this year about engineering and programming than I did last year because of the creativity involved in this years game. Remember that the competition is where the students can go to show off what they've done, but the important part is what the students do up to that point. I would vote for the crappiest game ever if it means that the students on my team were to learn more. The competition is NOT the important part of FIRST, the students are the most important part of FIRST. The competition can help students build time-management skills when you need to fix something in the 10 minutes of pit time in between matches, and other skills, but the competition should never be the focus.
It's For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology not For Recognition of The Best Robot.

"To transform our culture by creating a world where science and technology are celebrated and where young people dream of becoming science and technology leaders." - FIRST Mission Statement

Thoughts?
__________________

Outreach Lead // Lead Programmer // Junior

2014 FRC:
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Utah
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Colorado
2015 FRC:
Creativity In Engineering & Semifinalist @ Arizona West
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 16:35
Conor Ryan Conor Ryan is offline
I'm parking robot yacht club.
FRC #4571 (Robot Yacht Club)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Midtown, NYC
Posts: 1,889
Conor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond reputeConor Ryan has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

No Defense this year caused teams to evolve in new ways. One of those ways was cheesecake.

Cheesecaking has been around for a long time, however because more teams needed to find something different to stay relevant as the game progressed, it became much more common. One of the oldest forms of cheesecake is taking a robot that was designed to play offense and have it play defense in Eliminations.

Chew on that philosophy for awhile.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 16:39
WillNess's Avatar
WillNess WillNess is offline
Programmer
AKA: Will Ness
FRC #4944 (The Hi Fives)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 90
WillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really nice
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by Conor Ryan View Post
No Defense this year caused teams to evolve in new ways. One of those ways was cheesecake.

Cheesecaking has been around for a long time, however because more teams needed to find something different to stay relevant as the game progressed, it became much more common. One of the oldest forms of cheesecake is taking a robot that was designed to play offense and have it play defense in Eliminations.

Chew on that philosophy for awhile.
So are you for no-defense or against it?
__________________

Outreach Lead // Lead Programmer // Junior

2014 FRC:
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Utah
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Colorado
2015 FRC:
Creativity In Engineering & Semifinalist @ Arizona West
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 17:00
brinoc's Avatar
brinoc brinoc is offline
Cecilia Brino
FRC #0195 (Cyberknights)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: CT
Posts: 17
brinoc is a jewel in the roughbrinoc is a jewel in the roughbrinoc is a jewel in the roughbrinoc is a jewel in the rough
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

I agree that this years game with no defense allowed teams to come up with some very different and creative designs that haven't been used in years past. However; I do not believe that defense hinders design and engineering in any way. In the real world of engineering, designing a mechanism or device that can perform its intended task and can withstand any possible expected (or even unexpected) situation is very important.

Years with defense actually pose an equal or larger engineering challenge, because teams must design and build a robot that can manipulate game pieces while also being able to take a little bit of a beating. FIRST evened it out slightly this year by making the game piece very difficult to manipulate, so there was a higher challenge in that aspect, with a lower challenge in drive power and ruggedness.

Aside from the engineering/learning aspect, in my opinion defense is overall a more engaging game for teams, spectators, and sponsors alike.
__________________

_______________________________________________
FIRST Team 195 the CyberKnights
Southington, CT

Team 195 Student: 2007-2010
Team 195 Mentor: 2013-Present



Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 17:01
pmangels17's Avatar
pmangels17 pmangels17 is offline
Mechanical Marauders - Alumnus
AKA: Paul Mangels
FRC #0271 (Mechanical Marauders)
Team Role: Mechanical
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Bay Shore, NY
Posts: 398
pmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond reputepmangels17 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

I have often found that the coolest designs were those that were both functional and resilient. I really enjoyed seeing all the creative designs for robots this year, and a break from defense wasn't the worst thing for FRC, but I look forward to returning to a time when I can marvel at the amazing machines that survive the torture test of FRC defense and still do amazing things. Designs like 341's 2012 intake, 67's entire seamless 2013 robot, and 254's spectacularly simple 2014 machine are amazing not only because they creatively solved a problem but because they did so in a way that they were able to sustain massive hits and still perform at the highest level.

**steps on soapbox
Competition is the vehicle we use to inspire students. We work to build better robots in order to win, and through that desire to win we push ourselves to do better. When we see what we can create when driven to do better, that is inspiring stuff. I enjoyed the creativity we saw from teams this year without the defense, but now I'd like to see how we can take this creativity to the next level. That next level is continuing to be creative, but making our ideas able to survive big hits and stand up to the test of strength.
**steps off soapbox

I also really like defense like we saw in 2013. I think it is important to interact with the opposing alliance, and it adds a certain level of uncertainty regarding who will win the match. This year, after the can battles, we could basically always pick the winner before teleop even started.

[Insert quip about these being my opinions and not necessarily those of my team.]
__________________
Junior at the University of Notre Dame, Mechanical Engineering

Got questions (about Notre Dame, robots, college, etc), don't hesitate to ask.

**Bang Boom Pop!** "Was that the robot?" "I don't know, do it again"
**BANG BOOM POP** "Oh, now it's on fire."
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 28-04-2015, 19:04
WillNess's Avatar
WillNess WillNess is offline
Programmer
AKA: Will Ness
FRC #4944 (The Hi Fives)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 90
WillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really nice
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Agreed I think 2013 was a great mix
__________________

Outreach Lead // Lead Programmer // Junior

2014 FRC:
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Utah
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Colorado
2015 FRC:
Creativity In Engineering & Semifinalist @ Arizona West
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:09
lynca's Avatar
lynca lynca is offline
Andrew Lynch
FRC #2587 (DiscoBots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Houston, TX
Posts: 1,611
lynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond reputelynca has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to lynca
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by WillNess View Post
Agreed I think 2013 was a great mix
Agreed 2013 was the best mix of defense and offense.
2014 was way too much defense.
2015 was no defense.

I get upset when teams build fantastic scoring robots and lose to inferior robots built only for defense.

Hopefully the FRC GDC finds a good balance and rewards teams for building great robots !
__________________
History: 624 - Cryptonite --> 118 - Robonauts --> 2158 - AusTIN CANS --> 2587 DiscoBots
Bio: Andrew Lynch "How I Work" ---- LinkedIn , Facebook, Twitter
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:15
Taylor's Avatar
Taylor Taylor is online now
Professor of Thinkology, ThD
AKA: @taylorstem
FRC #3487 (EarthQuakers)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Indianapolis, IN, USA 46227
Posts: 4,579
Taylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Our robot played 56 matches this season - that's triple any previous amount - and it's still going strong. I'm fairly certain that it would not have such longevity given a defensive game.
__________________
Hi!
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:23
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 5,953
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

It was rather boring in our pit, since we never had to fix anything on the robot. Is that good or bad? I don't know. It was less nerve wracking than having the robot getting damaged in matches.

I did like your robot at the AZ West regional...and I know your team was having fun!
Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:28
donnie99 donnie99 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Steven
FRC #0237 (Black Magic)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Watertown, Connecticut
Posts: 94
donnie99 will become famous soon enough
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

I feel the lack of defense was the catalyst for some of the most creative designs FIRST has ever seen.

One of the things that defense does teach students about design, is being able to build resilient designs that can complete the challenge. This year saw some designs that could break fairly easily, including the first match of Einstein finals. Part of learning engineering is building designs that don't break easily and don't need to be fixed often.
__________________
It's a mechanical problem. It's an electrical problem. It's a programming problem. It's a design problem.

Whatever the problem is, it's our problem, and we have to fix it.
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:32
Citrus Dad's Avatar
Citrus Dad Citrus Dad is offline
Business and Scouting Mentor
AKA: Richard McCann
FRC #1678 (Citrus Circuits)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Davis
Posts: 984
Citrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond reputeCitrus Dad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by lynca View Post
Agreed 2013 was the best mix of defense and offense.
2014 was way too much defense.
2015 was no defense.

I get upset when teams build fantastic scoring robots and lose to inferior robots built only for defense.

Hopefully the FRC GDC finds a good balance and rewards teams for building great robots !
The answer to creating the right level of defense is to insert "traffic calming" obstacles that prevent full-speed hits, and safety zones for scoring. Those could have been added to the 2014 game without changing it very much.

As for the balance of defense and offense, it is part of the competition to find a way to counter those scoring machines. 1114's goalie bot almost stopped 254 (at least one of 254's auton shots deflected off 1114's goalie pole in the last final). That was perhaps the most exciting moment in 2014 and maybe for many years.

FRC is about much more than the engineering of the robots; its about the organizational challenges of real world competition. Students may not always realize that even if they build the coolest device in the world, they still have a lot more work to get it adopted for widespread use. Training your drive team, preparing in-depth scouting, creating robust strategies, and marketing your program to raise funds are all just as important as building the best robot. The teams that cover all of the elements are more likely to be successful.
Reply With Quote
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:36
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 5,953
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus Dad View Post
Training your drive team, preparing in-depth scouting, creating robust strategies, and marketing your program to raise funds are all just as important as building the best robot. The teams that cover all of the elements are more likely to be successful.
That's true.

For most teams, there are limited resources, and we have to prioritize. Since it's a robotics competition, we usually put most of our resources into designing and building the robot. Having little or no defense allows us to have some success with this model, while allowing us to showcase our creativity.
Reply With Quote
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 12:41
K-Dawg157's Avatar
K-Dawg157 K-Dawg157 is offline
Aspiring Engineer
FRC #0157 (Aztechs 157)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Marlborough
Posts: 78
K-Dawg157 has a spectacular aura aboutK-Dawg157 has a spectacular aura about
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by brinoc View Post
I agree that this years game with no defense allowed teams to come up with some very different and creative designs that haven't been used in years past. However; I do not believe that defense hinders design and engineering in any way. In the real world of engineering, designing a mechanism or device that can perform its intended task and can withstand any possible expected (or even unexpected) situation is very important.

Years with defense actually pose an equal or larger engineering challenge, because teams must design and build a robot that can manipulate game pieces while also being able to take a little bit of a beating. FIRST evened it out slightly this year by making the game piece very difficult to manipulate, so there was a higher challenge in that aspect, with a lower challenge in drive power and ruggedness.

Aside from the engineering/learning aspect, in my opinion defense is overall a more engaging game for teams, spectators, and sponsors alike.
Just... Yes.
__________________
"The Future is yours, should you choose to accept it"

"The future belongs to those who believe in their dreams"
Reply With Quote
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 14:02
Pretzel Pretzel is offline
Ex-Driver
AKA: Tyler
FRC #1619 (Up-A-Creek Robotics)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Colorado
Posts: 161
Pretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to beholdPretzel is a splendid one to behold
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Interestingly enough our robot had much more to fix this year between matches than last, and I think no defense had a lot to do with that.

Last year we had a robot that, until our second off-season event (for a total of four), had only one mechanical issue in the form of a broken tank tread. The only reason that we had a second issue was that the loctite holding one of our transmissions onto the frame of the robot broke loose and allowed the screws to back out slightly, causing a catastrophic failure that cut shelves into the gears and destroyed every bearing in the transmission. We had, from the start, anticipated high levels of defense with heavy contact and designed accordingly. Nothing extended outside of our frame at any point in time other than a claw with rollers to grab the ball, which was robustly constructed from 1" x 2" .125" box tubing along with two polycarbonate "fenders" that helped guide the ball and reduce side-impacts. Everything else remained completely contained within our robot frame, including our tank treads, that was constructed of 1" x 2" t-slot extrusion with corner braces. This meant that, once bumpers were installed, the driver could ram into other robots or bump into walls without fear of damaging the robot. Every item on the robot was also designed as simply as possible for the quickest turnaround times if something should break. Our entire catapult/claw assembly was held on with eight bolts, four pneumatic tubes, and one sensor wire and was actually removed between competitions as our withholding allowance to practice and iterate.

This year's robot was a bit of a different story. Our design this year was much more complex to deal with the more specialized requirements (throwing a ball is easier than stacking totes AND handling recycling containers). We had a conveyor belt, a claw, a stacker, and a canburglar that each had its own subtle nuances. For the first time in three years we went back to using wheels and chain for our drivetrain as opposed to tank treads, which was a really nice change to be honest. This robot, however, was fairly often in need of repairs. Due to weight restrictions, we had only 4 mini-CIM's and 2 BAG motors on the robot. The rest of our motors were RS-775's or RS-550's, which would burn out whenever they were stalled for a short period of time in a match or practice. We replaced the 550 in the claw four times before finding the weight to switch it to a BAG motor, and the stacking Raw Box ate up at least 3 775's in testing before PID issues had been sorted out. Our "crowder" rails that we used to center totes on our conveyor belt burned another 3 550's. The claw itself was frequently "tweaked" by the driver when he picked up the recycling containers located near the alliance wall, and the canburglar's CATOBAR (Catapult Assisted Take-off But Arrested Recovery system, really just multiple wraps of surgical tubing around a lever arm with more tubing to dampen the impact upon the can) tore up both the driver's hand while it was being loaded and the gears it was linked to when it was fired on one occasion. This was after a season where the only time a wrench touched the robot was to replace a broken tread that had been improperly tensioned, and it was just due to a shift in the design process. This year we designed for more complex mechanisms as opposed to those that would withstand a hit, and I actually enjoyed the change from a design standpoint. It was the best engineering challenge I've been involved with since I joined FRC, and that includes our 14 second pyramid climber in 2013.

While it was a fun change of pace to design for, I do not think that no defense should happen again in the near future, or at least not in this manner. The lack of robot interaction other than the initial can battles made for a less interesting game to outside observers. Last year we threw exercise balls up to 60 feet in the air, this year we just stacked what appeared to be shipping containers and trash cans. No defense has it's place and I think every FRC student should get to experience a game like this one, but I think a game can still have interaction between opposing alliances without "defense" being involved. A game where the goal is to have as many gamepieces on the opposing side of the field at the end of the match as possible, for example, would provide a no-defense challenge that also ensures an exciting spectator experience.
__________________
It's not done until it's overdone!
Reply With Quote
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-04-2015, 14:25
WillNess's Avatar
WillNess WillNess is offline
Programmer
AKA: Will Ness
FRC #4944 (The Hi Fives)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Apr 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 90
WillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really niceWillNess is just really nice
Re: Why I think having no defense was a great idea

Quote:
Originally Posted by lynca View Post
Agreed 2013 was the best mix of defense and offense.
2014 was way too much defense.
2015 was no defense.

I get upset when teams build fantastic scoring robots and lose to inferior robots built only for defense.

Hopefully the FRC GDC finds a good balance and rewards teams for building great robots !
Agreed like in 2010 alliances would just have goalies that would literally just put themselves in a opposing goal and the best scoring robots couldn't do anything.
__________________

Outreach Lead // Lead Programmer // Junior

2014 FRC:
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Utah
Rookie Allstar, Highest Rookie Seed & Semifinalist @ Colorado
2015 FRC:
Creativity In Engineering & Semifinalist @ Arizona West

Last edited by WillNess : 29-04-2015 at 18:45.
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 14:59.

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