IFI Control System (OI/RC) - The Future???

[ChuckDickerson]

Has anyone else noticed that the OI and RC as well as the breaker panel and some other stuff are no longer available for the rest of the year from IFI? Now that the official season is over, what are teams that need replacements for off season events to do? Does this possibly indicate a new major upgrade or replacement for the IFI Control System for 2007? Does anyone have any inside information on what IFI has in the works? I am keeping my fingers crossed for USB joystick ports in addition to the old style 15 pin DOS joystick ports. Maybe at least 2 of each would be nice.

[spears312]

I would hope that this means there will be a new RC, the last time it was out of stock it was just before this build season. I personally don't deal with the programming aspect of our team, but I do fully understand the RC and the restrictions our development team faced when they were writing the code. Its kind of ironic that now the next Lego RCX has more features than the one on the FRC robots. At least USB functionality would be ideal though because serial cable is becoming a very old way of communication.

[Billfred]

An integrated USB port for some of the serial ports (program, dashboard, etc.) would be pretty awesome. USB joysticks are a little tricky, what with drivers and all--plus, how will folks wire up their custom controls?

One thing that would make me positively giddy would be a nice breakout box for the joystick ports, something in the vein of 116.

Alternatively, to rip a page out of 68's playbook, what about swapping out the three-pin Molex connectors for something like Cat5 cable? The wires inside are the right gauge, everything locks into place, the cable is cheap and crimpers are plentiful. I'd gladly take the weight penalty to use it.

[Tom Bottiglieri]

If the RC is being reconfigured for next year, I wouldn't doubt seeing a jump to a linux based solution, much like the AdamBots Delta Force Co processor project.

I would love to see onboard support for things like bluetooth and removable memory. Sure we can use the EEPROM, but its still not really efficient. You still need terminal software and a good knowledge of software to get anything working. Also, in order to change auto mode the robot must be on.

Team 217 had an amazing set up in their pits in Atl. I dont want to go into details so they can release it themselves.. but let's just say it solves all these problems and can be integrated into the existing RC solution.

[ChuckDickerson]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

I would love to see onboard support for things like bluetooth ...

Wouldn't it be cool if there was some sort of built in wireless networking on the RC? Think of the game possibilities if the robots could actually communicate with each other and coordinate their actions. Wouldn't it be neat to have a game with LONGER autonomous where all the robots cooperate autonomously to complete some task before the human drivers take control.

[chrisinmd]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Team 217 had an amazing set up in their pits in Atl. I dont want to go into details so they can release it themselves.. but let's just say it solves all these problems and can be integrated into the existing RC solution.

I noticed their setup a few times walking by. I finally had time to stop and talk to someone about it and snap a few pictures, all I have to say is very, very cool. I hope one of their team members jumps in here and elaborates, I can post the picture of the setup if anyone wants.


-Chris

[Mike Shaul]

Originally Posted by Tom Bottiglieri

Team 217 had an amazing set up in their pits in Atl. I dont want to go into details so they can release it themselves.. but let's just say it solves all these problems and can be integrated into the existing RC solution.

Someone needs to give some details!!

If IFI does make updates/changes I hope/suggest they update the power supply to OR the 12 volt supply with the backup battery. The external backup battery circuit seems unnecessary when a few diodes would take care of it and the battery being required for servos is annoying (we got nailed at nationals and lost the backup battery mount... and our camera went with it... almost no points for us that match).

[PS - I think IFI does a GREAT job and overall I am very happy with their products and support.]

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by Billfred

Alternatively, to rip a page out of 68's playbook, what about swapping out the three-pin Molex connectors for something like Cat5 cable?

I assume a bunch of RJ-45 (8-pole CAT-5 style) connectors is what you mean, as a replacement for the PWM connections? They're quite a bit more expensive than those .025" square headers, and unsure how we'd use an 8 pole connector to replace some 3-pin connections (8/3=non-integer).

But, nevertheless, I implore IFI to consider either a different PWM connection system or, if the de-facto standard remains necessary, then some kind of adapter gizmo to a more robust connection system, or at the very least some kind of positive connector retention system (like a plastic locking bar) for those pesky PWM cables.

Don

[Greg Marra]

Originally Posted by Mike Shaul

If IFI does make updates/changes I hope/suggest they update the power supply to OR the 12 volt supply with the backup battery. The external backup battery circuit seems unnecessary when a few diodes would take care of it and the battery being required for servos is annoying (we got nailed at nationals and lost the backup battery mount... and our camera went with it... almost no points for us that match).

Actually, there is a very good reason for the backup battery. If you put a lot of draw on the 12v battery, it's voltage can drop very low. If it drops too low, the RC loses power, shuts off, and then reinitializes when it powers back up. The backup battery keeps this from happening, so even if your motors die a little, you won't have a few seconds of being dead on the field.

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by Don Rotolo

I assume a bunch of RJ-45 (8-pole CAT-5 style) connectors is what you mean, as a replacement for the PWM connections? They're quite a bit more expensive than those .025" square headers, and unsure how we'd use an 8 pole connector to replace some 3-pin connections (8/3=non-integer).

That is what I meant. You'd only use three of the pins off the wire (unless IFI starts using some built-in feedback like some folks keep raving about). The cables themselves are cheap--compare $20 for a four-pack of PWM cables from IFI with $10 for 10 at Newegg (http://www.newegg.com/Product/Produc...2E16812105302). (As a bonus, the students using them for sensors can whack them in half and get two for one.)

Granted, they cost more to IFI, but I'd imagine that switching to the RJ-45 connectors would cut down on repair calls because a PWM cable got yanked the wrong way and bent/tore off the pins. (Every time I disconnect those things, I cringe a little bit in fear.) If you keep the service calls down, it makes the teams happy (their RC stays problem-free) and probably makes IFI happy (as it frees up manpower, even if the teams are footing the bill for their services).

At least that's my take on it.

[skimoose]

It's not surprising that the OI/RC are out of stock until next season. These are high priced items. If I was at IFI, I wouldn't want to keep too many in stock for post season. The same thing happened with CIMs last year and the Vex Field this year. Once the main competition season is over, you don't have much demand for these expensive items. So why stock them? I'm sure if a team really needed an RC or OI IFI would have one.

As far as development goes, that would be another reason not to stock OI/RCs post season. If IFI changes interfaces or components, like a new PIC, it would make any models in stock obsolete unless it were a simple retrofit.

These are simply good business practices, not a clue to changes afoot.

With that said, IFI has always worked to improve these systems as technology improved or deficiencies have been found. The new PIC and more memory on this year's RC were in direct response to at least one team who ran out of memory and processing horsepower last season.

As for new technologies, the April IEEE Spectrum magazine had an article on wireless USB. Unfortunately, the IEEE committee working on standards for IEEE 802.15.3a ultrawideband (UWB) couldn't agree on a standard, so it looks like the competing technologies will launch soon and the market will have to sort it out.

Just think someday... wireless USB joysticks, wireless victors and spikes oh my!

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Greg Marra

Actually, there is a very good reason for the backup battery. If you put a lot of draw on the 12v battery, it's voltage can drop very low. If it drops too low, the RC loses power, shuts off, and then reinitializes when it powers back up. The backup battery keeps this from happening, so even if your motors die a little, you won't have a few seconds of being dead on the field.

Worse, you could lose all robot control for the rest of the match (if your batteries are in atrocious contition). It happened at least once before the backup was introduced in 2004. The team I know of it happening to was jamming the E-stop down, and the robot was still wandering all over the field.

[Stuart]

I(and my battered hands) would love a "program" button on the OI itself . . not just on the robot board. . ohh and would love to change the serial cables to USB . . and find some way to integrate the antenna on board . . and C++ compiler would be great too.


. . and get rid of those small main power pins, they break off to easy.

[chrisinmd]

Originally Posted by Stuart

. . and get rid of those small main power pins, they break off to easy.

Mounting our 05 RC on a practice robot this year, I pulled both (+/-) of the spade terminals out of the board. A little JB Quik worked wonders, but I wonder why they switched from the trusty screw on ring terminals? They certainly were secure. Also, the backup battery connection needs to be more secure, that plastic connector is too wiggly even when electrical taped together.

[Gdeaver]

I recently have dealt with some Zigbee modules. There are some FCC precertified modules that include powerful processors. Some are 32 bit RISC and I believe an ARM one will be available soon. They have enough i/o and a to d pins to virtually replace the entire operator interface. This could drastically lower the cost of First electronics. The robot controller is a little different. With the master proc generating the PWM's and other house keeping, a single Zigbee module would not be a good replacement of the master proc on the RC. A Cheaper less capable Zigbee module and 2 pic 16 assembly coded PWM chips would fit the needs of the master proc. The cost savings of not having to provide 2 radio modems could be substantial. 50$ in volume buys 1 hell of a powerful module. All IFI would have to do for the oi is make a back plane with some sockets on it. Micro chip and FIRST are close. IFI would have to look beyond Microchip for precertified modules.

The Vex could also benefit from a little radio change. This past weekend I got a PS2 wireless controller hooked up to a pic and some servos powering a Vex square bot. I don't know about licensing issues but if vexlabs total skipped the radio's and oi and just provided a Sony PS2 jack the cost of a VEX kit could drop allot and reach a larger market. Let the user provide the PS2 wireless controller. I really liked the feel of the PS2 controller for vex.