New Robot Control System!

[tseres]

i just really hope they stick with IFI. IFI does everything for FIRST. I'm a rookie this year, but was the pre-2004 RC extremely different from the 2004+ RC's? i dont think FIRST will throw everything they have out. maybe i can hope for a screen on the OI? that would be so mich cooler than the dashboard. And i think the tranition from a PIC will be a slow one...if the new system is too different, no one will be familiar with it. you could potentially have a seasoned FIRSTer who now knows little or nothing about a new system. I noticed in the email it said "multiple programming languages." as long as they keep C (for now) i'll be happy. i'm sure they'd support many different (or popular) languages. maybe something like VB (lol)? personally, the only thing i would want is a better processor for trig (i'm told they dont like trig now...).

well, whether we like it or not, there will be a new system, bugs and all. i guess all we can do for now is deal with the 2008 season and trust that FIRST will make the best choice on what to do.

[Dave Flowerday]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Given the GDC's stance on repeated code use from year to year, just how much sleep are you and your mentors planning on getting with 6 weeks of coding and debugging this flashy linux RTOS based robot to look forward to?

I have a hunch those asking for Linux or an RTOS probably haven't spent much time trying to debug thread synchronization issues, memory corruption, deadlock, priority inversion, stack smashing, etc. Especially on an embedded target. Especially on a physically-moving embedded target!

When it comes to software, my rule of thumb is that the simpler it can be the better.

Incidentally, it's possible to run an RTOS on the current IFI hardware. FreeRTOS runs on the PIC18. No one that I'm aware of is doing it (and it's not because there aren't people here capable of it).

[artdutra04]

While I'm not directly opposed to change, I sure hope FIRST truly understands and comprehends everything before they move onward with implementing this new system.

Right now, Vex and the FRC controllers share much of the same hardware. Vex is a cheap[er] controller to buy to develop code on. Much time and effort was spent on writing WPIlib and EasyC to program both of these controllers, and to facilitate the use of many of the advanced features (like the CMUcam2) on both platforms.

With a new control system, FIRST needs to understand that:

• A low cost version of the controller (such as the Vex controller) should be cheap and readily accessible. Most FRC teams probably already own Vex kits, so this is essentially free for them.
• Sometimes having a "limited" system with less features than having more-features-than-you-can-shake-a-stick-at is better. While we intuitively always want bigger, better, isn't a "limited" controller much more like the you-have-six-weeks-and-not-enough-time-and-resources-to-do-this-perfectly mindset that FRC has always been about? (I support upgrading the control system, but I also strongly stand beside the limits placed on things like the number/type of motors used, etc.)
• If FIRST wasn't to go with IFI to produce this new system, will the new company provide the immense amount of support that IFI has? Will the new company send reps to every regional? How much experience specifically with FIRST (as opposed to Battle Bots) would the new company have?
• If IFI is developing the new platform, will it be at least cross-compatible with the old system? (I'm thinking of teams - like my own - who have a ton of older IFI control system equipment from being involved with FIRST for many years, that we can use for prototyping/practice robots/etc.)
• If FIRST truly wants the majority of teams to do advanced things with their robots, they need stability! By keeping the same architecture of the control system, robot size/weight, etc. the same year-to-year, teams are given the chance to come up with advanced ideas in the off-season. (Six weeks is enough to implement ideas, but not enough to try entirely new and untested things.) But if FIRST is always changing things around, then teams won't want to develop anything in the off-season if they have any indication that their work will be all of a waste come the next Kickoff Date.
• Any decision made should be in the best interest of the teams competing. Rather than have this be a "secret", I hope FIRST openly and transparently announces soon what exactly is the change they are proposing, and open up for feedback from the community. If there is anyone who knows what is best for teams, it's the teams themselves.

[bear24rw]

I really hope that they dont move away from C.. And I really really hope they dont make us program graphically. I don't think that we need Linux or another OS, I wouldn't mind seeing a faster processor and more memory and eeprom (maybe switch to an arm processor) but i deffiently dont think that we need a computer on our robots. For the radios, they should stick with 900mhz, 802.11 is too crowded and 2.4 has phone issues. The only thing that I would really want to see change in more serial ports on the RC and a faster program loops 26ms is soo slow.

[Schnabel]

I wonder if a form of blue tooth is going to be used since the technology is all ready there and has been used for a few years.

[Danny Diaz]

Originally Posted by whytheheckme

I'd love to see a control system in which all of the processing is done on the OI by a laptop...

I dunno about that completely. I would love to see the OI end of things be done on a laptop and a "custom circuit" you'd use with the laptop. That way you could go REALLY crazy with your user control station, and use things you previously weren't allowed to do or that you couldn't do easily. I can easily imagine being able to perform TONS of pre-processing on the laptop before the data gets sent down to the robot controller, and then perform post-processing before data is sent to the screen (like we do now with a LabVIEW dashboard). Yeah, I can dig that.

I'll go on record saying I don't like the idea of a laptop, however, and let me tell you why. How many times have you installed software onto your [windows] laptop and have it become extremely unstable? Have you ever accidentally dropped your laptop? I can think of about 100 reasons why a laptop is probably worse for these kinds of scenarios just because of reliability. And will the laptop stand up to issues of reuse? <sigh>

But I think it's a cool concept.

-Danny

[Danny Diaz]

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday

I have a hunch those asking for Linux or an RTOS probably haven't spent much time trying to debug thread synchronization issues, memory corruption, deadlock, priority inversion, stack smashing, etc. Especially on an embedded target. Especially on a physically-moving embedded target!

ROFL. That's actually my job right now (working in LabVIEW Real-Time at NI), and yeah, good luck. I'll testify that working with an embedded RTOS is really cool, really rewarding, and really powerful, but with great power comes great responsibility (and a potential debugging nightmare). Of course tools have come a long way, NASA even had to debug an RTOS on the Pathfinder mission, and the story of how they figured out what was wrong and how they fixed it makes for a VERY interesting read.

-Danny

[ZZII 527]

Originally Posted by Adam Y.

Actually, my best guess is that this product is going to be announced on Wensday by IFI in Boston. They really don't want some random person posting this information and hence they send out the email so that people are suprised by some random Joe posting it on Chiefdelphi.

Could somebody please fill me in on what IFI is doing in Boston? I'd love to see it.

Also, since I originally speculated on the laptop situation, I feel I should temper that suggestion a bit - I don't see it as a really great option namely because of the durability, not the cost. The cost of the current OI is ~$350. Add on the radio modem and some chicklets, all of which aren't necessarily needed with a laptop/wireless solution, and you can get into the price range of a low-end model, which is all we would need. (Yes, I know the chicklets aren't in the kit cost now.) But I would agree that its durability would be questionable, given the amount of abuse laptops seem to take at competitions. OI processing is a cool concept, though. Maybe the RC does real-time sensor-type stuff and the OI does game strategy-type stuff.

It's fun hearing everyone's interesting ideas. No need to shoot down ideas in this thread - I think they all have some merit.

[Karthik]

I'm glad FIRST is getting a head start on this, even still, I'm worried that this timeline is too tight. 20 months of development time on a project of this nature is not much at all. Consider that the 2007 IFI radios were under development for over two years. Many of you may recall that they began field testing a revision of these radios at IRI in 2005.

The control system is the make or break part of the FRC. Before joining FIRST, I was part of a competition that had many control system issues. The result was a competition that very unprofessional and definitely uninspiring. Let's hope that the migration to a new system doesn't lead us down this road.

[Rob2713g]

During the Championships, there was a team who was testing something wirelessly on the Newton half of the practice field. We were on the Galileo half and were told by the practice field operator that they were testing something new and that it was a unusual for this to happen. Unfortunately, I did not check which team it was. I believe it happened on Saturday morning. Anyone know what team this was and what they were testing? It seems like they could have been testing something related to this new system.

[vivek16]

i think visual basic, C, and java are pretty much the most widely used programming languages. our school stopped teaching C . but visual basic and java are taught. although C is a very powerful i think others are becoming more popular.

vivek

[BornaE]

I would love it if we had event programming like visual basic than a loop

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Rob2713g

During the Championships, there was a team who was testing something wirelessly on the Newton half of the practice field. We were on the Galileo half and were told by the practice field operator that they were testing something new and that it was a unusual for this to happen. Unfortunately, I did not check which team it was. I believe it happened on Saturday morning. Anyone know what team this was and what they were testing? It seems like they could have been testing something related to this new system.

I was the practice field operator you recall. The team being 'tested' by IFI was the (More) Martians (70). The IFI guys were trying to diagnose a radio related problem, and as you know radio operation is generally not allowed in the pits. You'd have to ask the (More) Martians if IFI ever figured out their problem.

That test had nothing to do with the new robot control system we are discussing here.

[Not2B]

As anyone taken a look at this?
http://www.terk.ri.cmu.edu/
It's a telepresence robot, you run it over WiFi off your laptop. So far, cool, but so what...

It's sponsored by Google.
It's sponsored by Microsoft.
It's sponsored by Intel.
It's run by Carnegie Mellon Univeristy (CMU)

I don't know. I'm a mechanical guy - but it seems cool to me.

[Adam Y.]

Originally Posted by ZZII 527

Could somebody please fill me in on what IFI is doing in Boston? I'd love to see it.

Also, since I originally speculated on the laptop situation, I feel I should temper that suggestion a bit - I don't see it as a really great option namely because of the durability, not the cost. The cost of the current OI is ~$350. Add on the radio modem and some chicklets, all of which aren't necessarily needed with a laptop/wireless solution, and you can get into the price range of a low-end model, which is all we would need. (Yes, I know the chicklets aren't in the kit cost now.) But I would agree that its durability would be questionable, given the amount of abuse laptops seem to take at competitions. OI processing is a cool concept, though. Maybe the RC does real-time sensor-type stuff and the OI does game strategy-type stuff.

It's fun hearing everyone's interesting ideas. No need to shoot down ideas in this thread - I think they all have some merit.

It's a robotics convention/conference. It's more bussiness related than anything. Soemeone from IFI is giving a talk about the market for educational robotics.