Should teams be pushed to make higher quality robots?

[JohnBoucher]

How soon you forget. 2004 One-Day Bot
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=27919
IMHO this was the "Best" bot of 2004.

[Steve W]

After reading this whole thread twice I have decided to put 2cents in.

Pretty robots, who cares? Quality robots are another matter.

I believe that some that have posted do not really understand all that goes on with different FIRST teams. There are a lot of teams that ship their robots not even built. With the restrictions that they have placed on them there is a real pressure to finish. There are teams that work out of basements and garages. There are teams with full shops, engineers, craftsmen, professionals at their disposal. We MUST NOT look down on others and expect them all to have the same amount of resources, dedication and time as we do.

The team that I joined met a t a mentors house and we worked in the garage and basement. They were able to find someone with a mill to do some of our work. Everything else was done in the garage. As the team gained experience the robot gained quality. We still don't have the prettiest robot around but we do take pride in our quality.

That said their are teams that just don't know how to do something properly. I was at an event 2 years ago and was doing some inspecting. One team just didn't have their pneumatics up to snuff. If you looked at it, it was like a rats nest. I stopped my inspecting and went back to that team. We spent a few hours going over everything so that they could pass inspect. I was also able to give pointers on "Good Housekeeping" on the robot. Gave reasons on why we should have neat wiring and pneumatics. The next year this team had really improved with the wiring and layout.

Sometimes we have to put ourselves into the other teams scenario. When I talked to the mentors of the above team I found out why. The team was designed as a student team. There were mostly new students. Mentors were new or not knowledgeable on some of the robot. There were financial issues. BUT the team did show, worked hard on their robot and made it to the elim rounds. They were happy, inspired and improved when they left. The next year I saw them with another team showing them the lessons that they were taught.

FIRST is a learning, growing and inspiring organization. We can never dictate pretty. We can however encourage and teach quality.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Of course we push teams to make better quality robots. That's why there are inspections. That's why we answer questions for whoever visits our pits. It is why we proudly post pictures of assemblies and robots. But more importantly, a quality robot in my mind, is one who accomplishes the tasks and keeps working match after match. It is a robot that is efficient in design, elegant in it's use of the parts provided, and just plain cool to see. To paraphase a famous judge, Quality is not something I can really define, but I know it when I see it.

[jason_931]

Maybe FRIST could start a award that highlights the creativity and design of a robot. Of cores you want functionality out of your robot. How about creating something that appeals to the eye and shows of the creativity of your team. Maybe making fancy robots will help bring more spectators to the competitions most people are afraid of gears,chains and sprockets. Its not difficult to polish up the chassis and smooth out the rough edges. Teams should not be pushed but encouraged!

[Cory]

Originally Posted by jason_931

Maybe FRIST could start a award that highlights the creativity and design of a robot. Of cores you want functionality out of your robot. How about creating something that appeals to the eye and shows of the creativity of your team. Maybe making fancy robots will help bring more spectators to the competitions most people are afraid of gears,chains and sprockets. Its not difficult to polish up the chassis and smooth out the rough edges. Teams should not be pushed but encouraged!

Xerox Creativity Award.

Motorola Quality Award

GM Industrial Design Award.

[KenWittlief]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

Then I guess whoever was responsible for making the Segway an absolute masterpiece of art isn't a "real" engineer. They were only pretending then right?

I dont want you to feel like Im picking on you, but there is a distinction to be made here.

There are people assigned the task of making products look nice, cool, pretty... whatever the marketing people tell them it has to look like to increase sales. They are called industrial designer or graphical designers. I do not mean to belittle the work they do. It is important, and I personally do appreciate a product that looks like someone put some thought into its appearence and the human-factors aspects.

But that takes time and money and resources - and you almost never see industrial designers involved in the engineering design cycle during the initial prototype phase of a new product.

Like I said before, FIRST robots are protoypes, one of a kind.

When I got my BSEE degree there were no courses that had anything to do with product appearance, polishing metal, applying paint, hooking up wires so they look nice. Im not aware of any of the other engineering disciplines offering any appearence-related courses. There are human interface courses, how to design a system so it is easy, safe and simple to use - but they are dealing with form, fit and function, not appearance.

I admit I am being a little snobby with my 'real engineers' comment. Engineers solve problems. We make systems that fullfill a need. When we get done making it functional we hand the system off to someone else to make it look pretty - but that someone else is not an electrical, mechanical, SW, chemical, industrial, or nuclear engineer.

The other thing you need to grasp is that for EVERY engineering project you always have limited funds, people, time and resources. No company is ever going to ask you to design a system, and tell you "go ahead and take as long as you need, spend as much as you want, hire as many engineers as you like, build new facilities, buy whatever equipment you like...."

FIRST does an excellent job of reflecting this: limited time, money, resources, materials that can be used... Teams are forced to make tradeoff decisions: what gives us the most return for the investment? Adding new features or functions to the robot, or taking the frame apart to polish it?

Engineering project management is one of the most important aspects of engineering. You have to know what resources you have at your disposal, and how to make the most of what you have.

Personally when I see a FIRST team that has gone way over the top, that has spent a fortune on their robot, and has 30 engineers at their disposal, and tons of money, my first thought is "Gee, couldnt you guys split up and start six more teams, with the same resources you are spending on one?" (but thats just me).