Robots by committee

[Jeremy_Mc]

Originally Posted by Gui Cavalcanti

This year I've been having some issues with this topic, and I just wanted to get some opinions.

Should a robot be designed by everyone on a team, or a select few? What tests/qualifies "the elite" from everyone else? Is there team bitterness if you have the elite design a robot?

I'm not just talking about engineers designing a robot, I don't want to make this thread into one of those arguments. I'm talking about having a core of people who are acknowledged to be better at design, design the robot, as opposed to every single person on the team having individual input.

I don't know where I stand. On the one hand, there's good old fashioned democracy, everyone has a say. However, if everyone on the team has a different skill level, this can quickly boil down to a haphazard, patched together robot. Then there's the core designing a solid, together robot while other people watch. Argh...

Typically we group, make designs, then present them to everyone. The nonsensical and unfeasible ones are weeded out semi-democratically. Whoever can find a problem brings it up and it is addressed. If it's a major problem, the design is discarded. Then the designs are narrowed down to 2-3, presented with a discussion of pro's and con's, and voted on.

This process takes 2-4 days depending on how alike your team thinks