|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#16
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I'm with Andrew and others - the VP was a major advance that changed how easily our mechanisms could be iterated through in 2013 and onward.
Vendor proliferation of hex shaft -based COTS components was the next big leap IMO. It takes most of the design work of power transmission around a shaft, allowing us to focus on mechanism design rather than pouring effort into that particular detail. In the last 3 years, the mechanical technical leap seems to been many more options for intake wheels when interacting with non-compliant game pieces. Other than that, more DIY-based CNC's & 3D printers have helped more than a few teams increase their capabilities. |
|
#17
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I want to be allowed to use hydraulic systems.
|
|
#18
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
/s?
With the number of leaks I see in pneumatics I'd rather nobody shoot Lincoln[1] on an FRC field. [1] Disney had a leak in their hydraulic system on an Abe Lincoln model. The fluid was red, it looked like he'd been shot. |
|
#19
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I'll echo what several others have already mentioned in that the biggest difference for the most amount of teams is made by available COTS items. The hex shaft system makes a subtle but monumental difference. I don't even want to think about having to use keyways or interference fits or clamping hubs or tapers or set screws every time I want to transfer torque on a robot. I'd love to see hex shafts adopted by real-world industries, but I'm not holding my breath.
As for the next big technological advancement that will impact teams? I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say mid-scale advanced manufacturing services. Already we're seeing things like the Wazer or other small scale CNC machines. While I don't think these are viable for anyone just yet, within 5 to 10 years, affordable CNC manufacturing on an FRC-esque scale could be a thing. Also, mid-scale additive manufacturing is a possibility. A vast amount of teams already have small desktop 3D Printers. There's lots of research and development being done all over the world with large scale additive manufacturing. *ahem* But to the best of my knowledge, there's barely any work being done to create printers in between the extremes. So I think we'll start seeing additive manufacturing machines much more on the FRC scale start coming from industry R&D, and then we'll swoop in to reap the benefits. |
|
#20
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
No, I really want it to be allowed! Limit the fluid volume and give the field crew some bags of kitty litter. If you don't put hydraulic items in the KOP then they will likely only be used by teams that go out of their way to make a system that works correctly.
It would be a lot of fun. I like fun! |
|
#21
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
I tend to look at this question from a mechanical perspective. Agree with Jesse that the last big step forward was the standardization of interchangeable parts for hex shafting. That single change allowed us to devote our time iterating on mechanisms instead of wasting time fiddling with shafting fitment issues.
#2 has been the availability of COTS drive train solutions. This allows teams to focus their build season time developing and building scoring mechanisms instead of struggling to get a drive train up and running. I think the next major technological leap will be when someone puts an affordable COTS swerve module on the market. We've wanted to run a swerve drive for years, but can't justify the ridiculous cost of COTS swerve modules. And, without advanced CNC manufacturing capability, we don't have the resources to make them ourselves. In the fall, someone posted a design for a swerve module made completely from waterjet cut parts. We'll be looking at that design this summer to perhaps become the basis for an in-house swerve module. But, we'd MUCH rather just buy the parts COTS. I'm betting there are a lot of other teams out there that are itching to go swerve who are in the same boat. Just look at how quickly West Coast Drive trains spread, once we had a few affordable options for COTS shifting gear boxes. |
|
#22
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Re: Cameras: 192 had a *fantastic* student-built vision tracking system for variable-distance shots off a 270-degree turret in 2009, making 80%+ of our "sniper-type" shots. Not enough ball storage & rate of fire to win a regional that year, got wrecked by 254's crazy dump at both we attended.
Did win the Innovation in Controls award at every regional we attended that year. Did not win any regionals. 100% agree that 1/2" hex products with VersaPlanetaries feeding them is the recent "sea change" of capability available to the average team. Having 3+ medium size high-quality suppliers (VexPro, AM, WCP, many more) competing to bring the best possible components and products to FRC is what enabled that. Back when we were picking between AM, Banebots, and in-house, in-house won most of the time and we'd spend the most time figuring out how to get torque off a shaft and second-most figuring out how to not smoke the Banebot. Since then AM has stepped up it's game to compete with VexPro and WCP, there's been a ton of standardization (to 1/2 hex), and every supplier is coming out with fantastic new products every year. I don't know what's coming next, but I know it'll come a heckuvalot more quickly than 1/2 hex did. |
|
#23
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Personally, I'm eager to see what happens with COTS computing devices, solid state LIDAR, encoders, IMUs, and batteries in the next two-ish years. Prices are going to keep falling and the technology will become more accessible to your average team with better UIs and easier integration as it becomes used and documented. |
|
#24
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
HOVERCRAFTS!!!!
But more seriously, as someone mentioned before, manufacturing servicing available to everyone including rookies. (yes, I know it's already available, but many younger teams don't have the right resources to get the right resources right away) |
|
#25
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
USAC once experimented with hydraulic 4WD sprint cars with the tubular frame as the reservoir. Perhaps someone thought that was a technical leap...well...until that first crash. But don't worry, things like that rarely happen in FRC, and especially not this year. |
|
#26
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
It's already hard enough for Field Reset to keep the field clear of debris and the carpet patched up between matches. I doubt we'll be adding hydraulic fluid to their headaches anytime soon.
|
|
#27
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
From a software perspective, I would like to see vision targets that don't use reflective tape come back in order to push teams to make more advanced vision software. Or maybe design a game that uses reflective for one task and non reflective for another. As basic tracking becomes more and more accessible, it seems like adding harder and more complex vision tasks would be the next step.
|
|
#28
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
Quote:
Two years (3 years?) ago was the NavX. Then the Spartan board, and many others with extremely high quality gyros. That allowed for much better navigation and vibration rejection - just look at crossing the barriers last year. I'd add in versa planetaries too. The current 'revolution' going on is thanks to CTRE. The can-bus system seamlessly integrated into the control system was a huge step. Built in current monitoring. Pneumatic control integration. The motor controllers that implemented easy speed control, and now motion control, have been transformative. Many, many teams struggled mightily with speed control for years. It was never a simple thing. Just look at the discussions about sampling rates versus rpm, the correct sensors to use, etc. Last year for many teams it was as simple as plug-and-play. The next true revolution? I suspect it will be brushless DC motors. They allow for lighter weight in a smaller package, etc. The minute they are allowed, they will become ubiquitous among top flight teams. |
|
#29
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
There is also a subtle revolution taking place as more districts are formed. North Carolina took one huge step forward last year, their first year in districts, in terms of qualification and OPR rankings at Worlds over previous years, and is looking to repeat that this year. The average team now has at least two events with 12 qualification rounds and more time to grow, improve and be inspired. The district model also seems to have brought more teams together to collaborate and share technology and resources, as regional alliances form within the district. This year we will have two full practice fields that should further the advancement of skills and tech exchange. An interesting stat claimed by the one full practice field last year is that every team that came to practice and/or utilize the space earned a blue banner. Granted, those who recognize the value of practice and take advantage of it are more likely to perform better, but it is interesting none the less. "Chance favors the prepared". Clearly, success is motivating, inspiring and contagious.
And finally, as a district we are granted 15 spots at worlds this year. That means more teams are playing in an environment with elite and above average teams and experiencing a new way of thinking. That definitely leaves a mark and brings that experience back to the district for others to consume. Not everyone on CD would agree, but I think FIRST HQ knows what they are doing with creating growth. |
|
#30
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: What will be the next technical growth leap for the average team?
The general pattern for these things tends to be:
1. Innovation - Some enterprising team develops some technical innovation on their robot and has at least modest success with it (and often the most visible team to have success with something isn't the first team to try). Often this involves crossing some barrier to entry (overcoming manufacturing challenges, creative sourcing of a non-standard FRC material, advanced software expertise, lots of iteration, etc.) that keeps most other teams from being able to do the same thing immediately. 2. Early adoption - Other teams (whether nearby, of similar expertise, and/or related to the somehow through the diaspora of alumni and mentors) are inspired, and adopt a similar innovation and add their own twists to it. Whitepapers are released, code/CAD is open-sourced, etc. 3. Commoditization - Vendors take note...the AndyMarks, Vex's, West Coast Products, REVs, WPIlibs, etc., of the world begin to offer partial or complete solutions that significantly lower the barrier to entry for the average team. New companies spring up around the new products (Kauai Labs, CTRE, 221, etc). FRC "standards" emerge to allow for modularity in design and avoid vendor lock-in. Teams of "average" means and expertise can now utilize the idea. (This is the standard lifecycle of adoption of a new idea...) ![]() I've watched this all unfold time and time again. I can remember a time when each of the following had not yet attained ubiquity among "average" FRC teams...15 years ago there were entire regionals which would not have featured a single instance of:
All of the above are now basically ubiquitous (and I'm sure there's a bunch more I missed); I can't remember the last time I saw a robot with none of these features. To get back to the OP's question, I think there are a handful of ideas currently in the "Innovation" or "Early Adoption" phase. Yes, these are mostly on the software side (partially because I'm heavily biased, but also because FRC is far more mature mechanically than in software).
...as well as a few capabilities that have not yet been widely featured on an FRC field, but might in the next couple of years. In most cases here, I think the real opportunity for innovation is from the commoditization of robotics technologies from consumer products and early-stage robotics industries ramping up capability while driving down cost:
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|