Autonomous Longer????

[Qbranch]

I can say that in this year's game especially the 15seconds is a really short time to do anything seriously cool...

for instance, I'm doing an ultrasonic radar system only autonomous (for style points ) and it takes 14.78 seconds with NO SLIP UPS. Granted, the world doesn't work this way, so usually it runs overtime even in simulation and can't complete in the time allotted... even 5 extra seconds would be great!

-q

[LightWaves1636]

I would love to have a longer autonomous time period. Mainly so our robot can get to the other side of the rack and score but our robot just isn't fast enough. But we're going to try and just score on the rack and if we can't get it dialed in, our robot is just going to hurry to the other side so we can start grabbing the tubes off the wall. But the 15 sec does test the strengths of the programmer. When the robot scores within the 15 seconds perfectly, feels pretty good. Plus with the 15 sec., at least try, or be very creative.

Originally Posted by Qbranch

I can say that in this year's game especially the 15seconds is a really short time to do anything seriously cool...

It wasn't intended but it was so cool to watch it happen.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...&highlight=862

[cziggy343]

i wouldn't b in support of it. i say that because from what i have seen, only a small percentage of people take advantage of the autonomous mode. adding a couple of seconds would only add time to the "staring competition" that takes place at the begining of most of the matches.

[Not2B]

I guess I don't understand why more teams don't do... SOMETHING in auto mode.

No one said you had to try and score.

If you have a arm all folded up, why don't more people just unfold the arm and get ready for human play. Or move forward onto the field. Maybe you don't have the time to perfect a camera based auto mode - but it's not as hard to "get ready" for game play.

Maybe alot of teams never really thought about it...

hmmm....... I never really thought about it before now.......

[Tom Line]

I would support Autonomous being longer if there was actually something more to do.

As it is, 15 seconds is more than long enough to score on the front light or either side light. Since picking up another ringer is all but impossible in auton, we've got all the time to do what they expected us to do.

We even wrote in a part of the routine that backs the robot up so that a tube can get thrown in front of it - but that got too dangerous because if one lands on your flag you're stuck.

In the end, auton this year stinks. It isn't valuable enough to be worth it (even though we did it). I wish it was worth more, because it sure seems that in the world of robotics, auton is the part you should be focused on.

Perhaps this year they should hold an "auton olympics" where the robots that can do auton do it and are scored. Perhaps a seperate award for it as well. I'm a little stunned that "best auton mode operation" isn't an award already.

[KTorak]

Don't make it longer, simply make it worth more. Personally, I think autonomous is great for programmers to test out their skills and it has great potential. Aim High 2006 was probably one of the best autonomous periods in a while because we saw many great offensive ones, AS WELL AS defensive maneuvers. The outcome was also totally unpredictable and was different every game - even between the same alliances. The Autonomous period also had great value due to the high volume of regular and bonus points you could score. However, I don't think the general audience (sponsors, administrators, etc) like watching pre-programmed movement. It's probably much more exciting to watch drivers battle it out against each other on the field.

[Eldarion]

Originally Posted by KTorak

It's probably much more exciting to watch drivers battle it out against each other on the field.

This reminds me of an idea I had, whereby the autonomous period would be made longer, and each robot would be required to have a rectangle of vision-system-readable color on each side that would identify it as another robot. Then each robot would be able to "see" opposing 'bots in autonomous, and react accordingly to avoid, seek, etc. THAT would be a cool autonomous to watch!!!

[GUI]

I think the autonomous period should be more intricate to the game. Instead of just being able to score an extra tube, if autonomous gave a team more of an advantage for tele-operated period more teams would do it.

[GaryVoshol]

I voted yes for a longer autonomous period, in future games. You have to have valuable options to justify that extra time, though. Triple Play had options, other than the incredibly difficult vision tetra. Rack and Roll just doesn't have that.

[Tetraman]

While we are at it, lets just ask FIRST if instead of an autonomous mode, we can have our human players run out onto the field and place the keepers where we want, than begin the 2 minute match.

The goal of Auto-mode is to provide a seen advantage that effects the remainder of the game, as a reward to additional work added to the robot.

Auto-mode is about the skill of programing. If a handful of teams can score, and yours can't or didn't, either your team didn't have enough skill or you didn't work as hard to make it work.

[Doug Leppard]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

Auto-mode is about the skill of programing. If a handful of teams can score, and yours can't or didn't, either your team didn't have enough skill or you didn't work as hard to make it work.

I agree it is the skill of the programmer, but also it is the skill of hardware team. We have a very successful auto because we got the robot over a week before shipping date. They set goals to finish early and kept to it. so we had time to work on this hard autonomous game.

I didn't like this year's auto mode as compared to last year's. But looking back at the scores at our last regional, because we had a dependable auto mode we came in second in qualifying rounds at Florida it made the difference in 1-2 games. It saved us in semi-finals and moved us to finals, and in the last game it failed and we lost by one ringer so we might have won if auto worked that time.

So auto mode does make a difference at the higher levels and more time would not have helped us. We do it now in 5-8 seconds.

[Bongle]

Originally Posted by Not2B

If you have a arm all folded up, why don't more people just unfold the arm and get ready for human play. Or move forward onto the field. Maybe you don't have the time to perfect a camera based auto mode - but it's not as hard to "get ready" for game play.

Why not arm unfolding? Because you can do that in the time it takes your human player to run forward and toss the first ringer

Why not move forward? Risk of ringer-ing yourself or an alliance member ringer-ing you on the first toss. You're safer in the 'shadow' of the driver wall.

Why not move across the field and prepare to defend? I saw a few teams get tangled on the rack trying this. In order to avoid entangling yourself, you need the gyros and accelerometers as well as the programming skill to use them, which is nearly as hard as the camera.

I agree it is the skill of the programmer, but also it is the skill of hardware team. We have a very successful auto because we got the robot over a week before shipping date. They set goals to finish early and kept to it. so we had time to work on this hard autonomous game.

Totally agree with this. You CANNOT make an effective autonomous mode from scratch at the competition, unless you have a godlike hardware team. At the competition, there will always be repairs to be done, bolts to be tightened, kajiggers to be lubed and polished. The programming team only gets robot access when all those things are done, which is never. You need substantial alone time with the robot during the build period in order to develop and test autonomous mode, which requires a fast hardware team.

[PhilBot]

Originally Posted by Bongle

The programming team only gets robot access when all those things are done, which is never. You need substantial alone time with the robot during the build period in order to develop and test autonomous mode, which requires a fast hardware team.

As an embedded computing veteran, I can assure you that what you've described happens a LOT in the real world too, and it's often the downfall of any new system. Software is always placed at the end if the "critical path" for robot designs, mainly because programmers are not pro-active enough during the initial design stages. They often let themselves be back-burnered because they like working in isolation.

Unfortunately, these days you can't say "hey, we really don't need autonomous mode" because it's going to be more and more critical to future "real-world" robots.

So it's important that guys like me, teach young programmers the importance of being an active part of the design process, establishing software requirements early, and learning how to be an asset during the build so they get the required "face time" with the robot.

I've learned that if the programmers allows themselves to be put off till the end of the build, the overall team will suffer (and I'm not just talking FRC here). It happens all the time in industry.

So, I beleive that Autonomous doesn't need to be longer, it just needs to be more integral with the game (like in Aim High). The whole team needs to see the benefit to a good auto mode so that the programmers get to be involved in the design process early. It shouldn't be so easy for the mechanical guys to say "we don't need auto, we can push any robot".

If each aspect is seen as important (mech, elec, software) the design groups will learn better habits for the real world.

Phil.

[nuggetsyl]

I think 15 sec auto is long enough. I would like to see auto in the last 15 secs instead of the first 15.

[Phalanx]

I've said all this before and I'll say it again and I'll keep on saying it....

The only drawbacks are I've seen and heard from teams that they don't plan the time or invest the time and effort to develop autonomous routines prior to shipping the robot. Then they get to a regional decide they would like some autonomous, but only get 5 minutes on a pratice field or a few minutes between rounds to develop it which just isn't enough time to develop, test and debug a sofisticated and complex autonomous routine.

Even with that being said I still believe the autonomous period should be lengthened slightly with more options and opportunities than a single task or two. I suggest allowing for multiple different challenges with some harder than others.

Some can be done with simple dead reckoning; others will require the use of different sensors or combinations of different sensors to meet the challenge. The greater the challenge the greater the bonus.

This way teams that don't yet posse the technical knowledge and skills for the more complex tasks have a chance to learn those skills and succeed through the simpler ones. Using the success of the simpler ones as building blocks for the future.

The teams that do posse the technical knowledge and skills are now presented with a challenge that will push the limitis and test those skills.

By doing it in this way, everyone is given a challenge and a chance to succeed, as well as being given motivation to improve thier knowledge, skills and performances to meet greater challenges over time.

So I also suggest make it a three tier scoring autonomous challenge... a 1, 3, 5 or a 2, 4, 8 scale or similar for the easy, moderate and difficult task respectively.

This program in my opinion is designed to enhance and challenge the students. Not everything should be made easy, simple or plug n play. It's the learning, the challenge, the knowledge gain and the creativity that comes from it that is important.