Autonomous Longer????

[Dan Richardson]

This years autonomous mode is quite the challenge, It takes a solid mechanical bot and a extraordinary programming team. I'm not under the impression however that an additional 5 seconds will do anything to help out the process. There are very few teams that are " Just Missing " consistently, don't get me wrong they are out there.. but there aren't too many. If you add 5 seconds there are still gonna be those just misses.

With the extra 5 seconds I believe all you are going to be adding is an additional 5 seconds of announcers making things up to say. The task was difficult this year and the problem is, unlike last year, there is no simple task to complete. If you could not find the target last year you could just do guess work, point your bot at the target and shoot. If you were a low ball scorer it was even better. Just a drive straight code for 5 seconds and release your balls.

I believe we really just need more effective preparation for the season. Teams need to have in their repertoire built and tested code for each one of the sensor packages, so that what ever may be the most important for that particular year and your particular robot. A programming team needs as much time if not more than a mechanical team. Robotics is a programming intensive field, and thats hard to say for a Mechanical Engineer in training who has a desire to go into a Robotics Field. The beauty of it is that you can bench test most of these sensors without even needing the huge robot. You can get your team to use vex, or the practice bot or even just a piece of cardboard with wheels and a motor attached to the cpu and your able to build the code. After 5 weeks playing with vex robots, the mechanical team handed our programmers the bot and in just about 2 day ( 1 day of calibrating sensors, and 1 day of actual programing ) they had the bot running autonomous.

I know its hard for this to happen, and it seems like mostly only larger teams who are even able to cap in autonomous effectively, the same argument is always made from the Mechanical End " Well they build at GM, or they build at NASA, of they have 1231232 CNC Machines. " But programming is the area where the mediocre robot can make up in their competitiveness. I know I know, this years autonomous may be not worth as much or some people think its " too short " but what about autonomous sub routines, or ease of driver use by pre-programmed positions, all of these things are extraordinary successes from a programming point of view.

So in conclusion I don't believe autonomous needs to be longer, If your drive team can cap a tube that it starts with in under 15 seconds, your robot should autonomously be able to as well. In fact I'm of the impression and will make the argument that your robot should quite possibly even do it faster/more efficiently than your drive team. Hehe I know this would rarely happen but I'd love to see this competition get to that point. If your robot can't cap under 15 seconds well than, maybe in your case 5 extra seconds is a valid argument from a purely programming point of view. Otherwise, work on it and develop it, just because it may not happen during the season, that does not mean its not a success. Success, at least within the realm of this competition, comes when you complete the challenge, and if you can learn to complete a challenge as hard as this one, I guarantee you'll be able to complete nearly anything thrown your way throughout your academic and your professional career.

[Joohoo]

I really wouldn't mind it but as the second poster said the point is to do with what you have. Thats what the challenge is. I would however support something that would make any keepers scored in auton more valuable. ie. in FLR the teams that could reliably score in auton mode really didn't have a great advantage.

[EHaskins]

I think a longer autonomous mode would be great. If kids in FLL can have a robot run for 2 minutes(i think) totally autonomous, then why can't FRC? FRC should be a step up, and having only ten second autonomous, that most teams don't even use, is backwards.

I understand that autonomous is a challenge, but with EasyC, KOP sensors, and encoders on the drive, it isn't much harder to write an autonomous for FRC than FLL.

I'm not trying to say we should abolish user control, but a 30-45sec autonomous wouldn't be bad, if teams would do it. Even for audiences not involved with robotics watching autonomous mode can be exciting. FLL can do it.

EDIT: I forgot to say I think the games need to made with autonomous in mind. A long autonomus mode in "Aim High" would have been boring, but a longer autonomus mode in a game made to be played autonomously could be great.

[Bharat Nain]

The autonomous is long enough. Maybe the task they give us should be more feasible and worth a little more.

[Chris Fultz]

I think it is the right length.
Many robots do not move, so a longer time would not add anything.
I have not seen any robots run out of time - most that work are complete in 10 seconds.

At first I thought the point vaue was low, but it is really the point potential that makes it worth it - you have the start of an 8 row or 3 column that cannot be spoiled - and that can be worth a lot of points.

[Doug Leppard]

Reading Dan's post it gave me an idea for a new auto mode.

As soon as your bot succesfully rings the keeper, then the drivers can go to the controls, others have to wait until auto mode time is over.

With this option 1902 probably could have 2-3 ringers up before others even started playing. Talk about making auto mode important.

[Joe Matt]

Originally Posted by EHaskins

I think a longer autonomous mode would be great. If kids in FLL can have a robot run for 2 minutes(i think) totally autonomous, then why can't FRC? FRC should be a step up, and having only ten second autonomous, that most teams don't even use, is backwards.

I understand that autonomous is a challenge, but with EasyC, KOP sensors, and encoders on the drive, it isn't much harder to write an autonomous for FRC than FLL.

I'm not trying to say we should abolish user control, but a 30-45sec autonomous wouldn't be bad, if teams would do it. Even for audiences not involved with robotics watching autonomous mode can be exciting. FLL can do it.

EDIT: I forgot to say I think the games need to made with autonomous in mind. A long autonomus mode in "Aim High" would have been boring, but a longer autonomus mode in a game made to be played autonomously could be great.

That's because there's still a lot of human interaction during the autonomous portions of FLL. This human interaction delt with the kids acutally handling the robots, chosing modes, etc. You cannot do this with FRC.

[EHaskins]

Originally Posted by Joe Matt

That's because there's still a lot of human interaction during the autonomous portions of FLL. This human interaction delt with the kids acutally handling the robots, chosing modes, etc. You cannot do this with FRC.

I don't think a 2 minute autonomous would work, but having a 30 second autonomous is not unreasonable. I mentored two FLL teams last year(1192(Microlasers) and 1193(Phoenix NanoTechs)), and they each had at least one routine that was longer than 30 seconds. They where both new teams, and their programmers were learning during the season.

If middle school kids with little or no programming and engineering skills could build and program a robot to run for 30 seconds autonomously then why can't we?

[Tetraman]

Originally Posted by EHaskins

I don't think a 2 minute autonomous would work, but having a 30 second autonomous is not unreasonable. I mentored two FLL teams last year(1192(Microlasers) and 1193(Phoenix NanoTechs)), and they each had at least one routine that was longer than 30 seconds. They where both new teams, and their programmers were learning during the season.

If middle school kids with little or no programming and engineering skills could build and program a robot to run for 30 seconds autonomously then why can't we?

There is a difference between FLL and FRC auto-modes...is the number of robots on the field. All it takes is for one auto-mode to disrupt another auto-mode and you will have and additional 15 seconds of nothing.

[meatmanek]

Originally Posted by Bongle

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.

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.

If you put sensors on your arm like you _REALLY SHOULD_, and have the PID code already tuned for it, unfolding your arm is not difficult. We only had to write 2 extra lines of code to set up our arm.

Even if you have a godlike hardware team (or really good luck, in our case) and your robot is working properly and doesn't require any hardware adjustments between matches, it's very difficult to write a proper autonomous mode. We abstained from making an autonomous mode simply because our robot was working well enough that we didn't want to make any changes at all.

I agree with a lot of the people on this thread - autonomous mode isn't worth nearly as much as it could be. Yes, it could mean a lot of points, but it's one tube. Even the spoiler factor isn't worth all that much. In a row of 7, if the keeper is placed in the center, if you spoil one spot off center, that row is still dropped to 20. We focused on improving our teleoperated mode code enough that it would help us score at least one more tube. It worked.

[EHaskins]

Originally Posted by Tetraman

There is a difference between FLL and FRC auto-modes...is the number of robots on the field. All it takes is for one auto-mode to disrupt another auto-mode and you will have and additional 15 seconds of nothing.

I do agree having multiple robots on the field could be a problem with previous games, but those games weren't designed for six robots to be moving in autonomous.

A game designed with autonomous mode in mind shouldn't have that problem.

[technoL]

Although I do agree with the importance of software rising in FIRST, I do disagree with extending autonomous. Making the autonomous challenges harder and worth more will inspire better software, not just allowing more time, or making it easy to score.

Many teams already disregard autonomous all together because it is too difficult, and they rather make up for it by making an efficient robot, or at least putting more time into their robot and not wasting* time on things that that have no clue how to do.

Being forced to watch an extra 5-10 seconds of a robot beauty contest doesn't benefit anyone but the teams that are already strong in autonomous. It has been a very rare occasion that I have seen a tube dropped immediately after autonomous, if the robot moves at all. And if you're just a spectator brand new to FIRST, it can be the most boring part.

I do like the way that Vex is setup though. Perhaps it could be a bonus to your score (not required) to complete an extra autonomous challenge on a separate field, or during another time of the day.

-No L

*in no way do I mean that software is a waste of time, although it can be if you have no clue of what you are doing

[pyrome]

Team 852 only unfolds its arm during autonomous for two reasons:
1: we didn't give our programmer enough time with the robot to get it done
2: our programmer then said that the camera was too inaccurate to have an effective autonomous.

[Vogel648]

You didn't have your robot done until halfway through your competition?

Otherwise you shoulda just told him/them to crack down and skip lunches.

[yodameister]

I said no (at least this year) because the auto has seemed basically meaningless and why drag on a match even longer than we already have to endure?