[BB]: Regional Variations & Bagging It

[Jared Russell]

Originally Posted by Jack Jones

IMO, three's a crowd, but necessary, while more than three is just a crowd.

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jared341

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

Or use the strategy used before 2001: only operate the robots from one side of the field, and set up the other side (sans robots/power) for the next match during the current one.

[Foster]

Remember too that in the water game you have the entire pool volume to deal with. So while 6 robots may fill the floor of the arena, they take up very little space when looking at the entire volume. So 8 robots at a time would pick up the cycle time.

(Yes, this is really off the topic of Bagging and Tagging ....)

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by dlavery

- What happens if the performance envelope of the robots is not limited to a single two dimensional surface?

Originally Posted by Foster

Remember too that in the water game you have the entire pool volume to deal with. So while 6 robots may fill the floor of the arena, they take up very little space when looking at the entire volume.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Jared341

There are ways to get more than 6 robots on the field every 6 minutes other than by having all of the robots on the field at once. Two (slightly) smaller fields, side by side, playing alternating rounds of 2v2 would be one way. Back-to-back matches (cutting down on queuing/reset times) would be another.

Starting to look more and more like the VEX Robotics Competition all the time...

[Fe_Will]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Starting to look more and more like the VEX Robotics Competition all the time...

Sadly

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Fe_Will

Sadly

There's precedent you know. In 1992 FRC robots were roughly the same size as today's FTC/VRC 'bots.

[Alan Anderson]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

In 1992 FRC robots were roughly the same size as today's FTC/VRC 'bots.

In 1992, FRC robots were roughtly the same size as a couple of today's FRC robots' batteries.

The TechnoKats 1992 robot is smaller than the TechnoKats 2009 robot's control system alone, without battery.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

In 1992, FRC robots were roughtly the same size as a couple of today's FRC robots' batteries.

The TechnoKats 1992 robot is smaller than the TechnoKats 2009 robot's control system alone, without battery.

That is a little misleading considering the controls were not on the robot. It is about the size of a battery though. Actually I thought it was a part of a FRC robot and wondered why Eric was bringing a robot up in pieces the first time I saw it. Regardless, that 1992 robot is clean, elegant, and... well, just freaking cool.

Also, if you guys think that FTC is the minor leagues you are NOT going to like my next sentence. FRC needs to emulate FLL. I mean think about this, the goal of FRC is to inspire as many people as we can right? How many FLL events are there? How many teams? How many COUNTRIES? And I can tell you, as an FLL alumni, mentor, and judge, those students are inspired and there are a LOT of them. They have to be doing something right down there in the intramural leagues because how many of us went through it and are now involved in FRC? An interesting statistic might also be, what percentage of FLL students go on to be in FRC (if it is available) compared to the percentage of FRC students that come back to FRC after graduation.

You guys, remember the robot is a tool, a large, complex, and often shiny tool. Use it to help make your work easier. You don't need a 130lb robot racing around the field at 20fps with a 14' arm to inspire kids. Does it look better on TV than a 18"x18"x18" robot moving at a slow walk and struggling to pick up a football? Of course it does. Do they both inspire students? Nope, the mentors do that. Changing the scale of the robot doesn't change anything.

Now, those things being said, I think that FRC is the perfect scale. Smaller means that it gets boring for TV (less complicated mechanisms which are always impressive). Larger means it gets more expensive.

[Rick TYler]

Since my wildly humorous comment above may apparently be misconstrued -- I was suggesting that we might be seeing parallel evolution with different processes trending towards a similar result. I started saying three years ago that FVC would be successful only in that it looked like a smaller version of FRC and not Sr. FLL. That came true. Now in solving some different problems, an FVC/FTC/VRC-style multi-field 2v2 competition with smaller robots has been posited as a possible solution. Hence, the jocular and somewhat ironic comment about convergence. FRC --> FVC --> FTC/VRC --> new smaller FRC. See?

Originally Posted by Andrew

Now, those things being said, I think that FRC is the perfect scale. Smaller means that it gets boring for TV (less complicated mechanisms which are always impressive).

One small disagreement: smaller <> less complex. Take a look at this VEX robot: http://www.vexforum.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=3051. You couldn't see it on television, but there is a lot of engineering going on there in an 8-pound package.

[Fe_Will]

Do mentors helping students build robots regardless of size inspire? Yes.
Do robots regardless of size make the general public take interest in science and technology? Yes
Do students learn some important life skills like team work regardless of robot size? yes

But, I personally feel that having a predetermined kit to work from is an extremely limiting factor in many robotics competitions out there. Yes, there are students who get something out of them but, having an open ended kit allows for a higher diversity of students to participate. For example, we are currently trying to recruit a senior who has his welding certificate from our local community college. Whether or not he joins the team is completely dependent on being able to weld to keep his skills up. There is no way we could recruit him if we did VRC/FTC. The opportunities for students to be exposed to and learn about real world manufacturing, fabrication and assembly are so much more advanced in FRC.

My other major issue with VRC/FTC/FLL is the event format. Having multi-day FRC events makes our program stand out as being something more than a science fair to our school and community. Having regionals where students on our team get to tell their their friends that they are going to a 3 day event in another state is a BIG deal. And for those students who aren't on the honor roll or play a sport it is a HUGE deal.

I think that FFL is a great thing. I have personally volunteered at our local FLL event for the past 5 years (many times on my birthday). Its fun and a great scale for that age group.

I think the greatest thing for FTC would be to allow 6th and 7th graders to participate. If they would be allowed to compete then FIRST would have a better overall system for promoting its core values. I would stand completely behind a setup where a student could go FLL in 4-5th grades, FTC in 6-8th grades and FRC in 9-12th grades. Leaving the overlap to adjust for economic and emotional levels of course.

Back to the thread topic:

Originally Posted by Cory

I sure hope FIRST has some sort of minimum standard they intend to enforce for quality.

Agreed

[EricH]

Note that some school districts complain about students missing a lot of school when they go to a 2-day event. (I'm leaving Saturday off because it isn't a school day.) For those schools, FTC/VRC could be a better option.

Likewise, absolutely nothing says that you can't be in one, two, three, four, or more competitions. Many a team does FTC/VRC (and FLL, in a supporting role) in the fall and FRC in the spring.

Predetermined kit to work from is NOT a limit. See the early FRC rules once again. (I understand that sometimes a drill was included--it was used for building the robot, then driving the robot.) See the creativity shown by the teams back then.

[Fe_Will]

Originally Posted by EricH

Note that some school districts complain about students missing a lot of school when they go to a 2-day event. (I'm leaving Saturday off because it isn't a school day.) For those schools, FTC/VRC could be a better option.

Likewise, absolutely nothing says that you can't be in one, two, three, four, or more competitions. Many a team does FTC/VRC (and FLL, in a supporting role) in the fall and FRC in the spring.

Predetermined kit to work from is NOT a limit. See the early FRC rules once again. (I understand that sometimes a drill was included--it was used for building the robot, then driving the robot.) See the creativity shown by the teams back then.

Humans used to use stone tools and hunt with sticks. We figured it out eventually, the same can be said for FRC evolution. Our school has learned to understand and support our efforts(and missed days) due to the effort we have made the past 8 years to change the culture.


I don't see why you feel the need to be hostile. I understand your position and respect your view. How about you do the same for me?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Fe_Will

I don't see why you feel the need to be hostile. I understand your position and respect your view. How about you do the same for me?

I don't understand why you felt the need to insult FTC and VRC. I'm trying not to be hostile towards you; but when it seems that you are hostile towards something for no reason, then that kind of riles me. That's part of why I started the thread on negativity on CD--people are being negative/hostile for no reason.

You may not like something, but please don't insult it for no reason other than not liking it.

[ATannahill]

Eric and Will, please enjoy this fact-based post.

Originally Posted by Fe_Will

That's OK if you don't agree. I would prefer to continue to participate in a Varsity Level Competition.

On the FIRST website FRC is called “The varsity sport for the mind” I cannot find the word Varsity linked with FTC, FLL, or JFLL.

Originally Posted by Fe_Will

But, I personally feel that having a predetermined kit to work from is an extremely limiting factor in many robotics competitions out there. Yes, there are students who get something out of them but, having an open ended kit allows for a higher diversity of students to participate. For example, we are currently trying to recruit a senior who has his welding certificate from our local community college. Whether or not he joins the team is completely dependent on being able to weld to keep his skills up. There is no way we could recruit him if we did VRC/FTC. The opportunities for students to be exposed to and learn about real world manufacturing, fabrication and assembly are so much more advanced in FRC.

My other major issue with VRC/FTC/FLL is the event format. Having multi-day FRC events makes our program stand out as being something more than a science fair to our school and community. Having regionals where students on our team get to tell their their friends that they are going to a 3 day event in another state is a BIG deal. And for those students who aren't on the honor roll or play a sport it is a HUGE deal.

Facts and information for why Will chooses FRC with respect to other competitions. Even if some are just opinions. But does he think that FTC/FLL/JFLL is not important?

Originally Posted by Fe_Will

Do mentors helping students build robots regardless of size inspire? Yes.
Do robots regardless of size make the general public take interest in science and technology? Yes
Do students learn some important life skills like team work regardless of robot size? yes

I think that FFL is a great thing. I have personally volunteered at our local FLL event for the past 5 years (many times on my birthday). Its fun and a great scale for that age group.

This information shows otherwise.

Originally Posted by EricH

Note that some school districts complain about students missing a lot of school when they go to a 2-day event. (I'm leaving Saturday off because it isn't a school day.) For those schools, FTC/VRC could be a better option.

Likewise, absolutely nothing says that you can't be in one, two, three, four, or more competitions. Many a team does FTC/VRC (and FLL, in a supporting role) in the fall and FRC in the spring.

Predetermined kit to work from is NOT a limit. See the early FRC rules once again. (I understand that sometimes a drill was included--it was used for building the robot, then driving the robot.) See the creativity shown by the teams back then.

<opinion>I fail to see any of this as hostile or insulting, but just as two people with different opinions.</opinion> Without arguments and opinions CD will be nothing but a group of yes-men. Just because someone disagrees doesn't mean they are being negative.