Programmers: I Have A Challenge For You

[lemiant]

During the off-season this year or next year, someone should hold an all autonomous event.

<rambling>
I wish first would make a game with way more. but it would sort of wreck their "no robot left behind", since for some reason there isn't enough support for beginner programmers.
</rambling>

But I digress, anyone up to host an all-autonomous off-season?

[kamocat]

I like the "Perceive, Plan, Control" paradigm that was mentioned earlier, and I think it's time that we break the conversation up into those three topics.
Should I take the liberty of starting a thread for each of those?

The "control" discussion is almost solely about the Autonomous Development Kit.
In essence, what is the code structure for controlling mechanisms?
It needs to be able to handle both sequential and simultaneous tasks, with a variety of control parameters for each task. (For example, a ball kick must be able to be triggered by the completion of another action, or an input, or after a time delay, or during a certain time in the match. Similarly, it must be able to be stopped by any of those.)

The "plan" discussion is the most complex of the three, as it deals with analyzing the situation, and there's a range of levels that this can be done on.
Here's a couple of examples (in first-person robot):

• Where should I move next?
• Is now a good time to kick, or will that robot get in the way?
• Should I block or score?
• Is it worth it to go over the bump?
• Will I get penalized if I go into that section of the field?

The "perceive" discussion entails what sensors should be used for what purposes.
I'll list some things an autonomous 'bot might want to know:

• Where am I on the field?
• Where are the robots around me? (what alliance are they?)
• Where are the balls around me? (on the floor, presumably)
• Where are the goals? The bumps? The towers? The walls?
• Have I flipped over?
• What are the other robots doing? Do they need help? (Inter-robot communication)

There are also simpler things, implemented into the "control" section, liked "have I completed my kick" or "is my arm fully extended", usually potentiometers or limit switches, that are used in feedback to make sure the action is completed. Unless someone's doing something exotic like using a non-contact thermometer to tell when a motor is stalled, I don't think these need to be discussed with the rest of the sensors.


As many have said, the scope is huge. I don't plan to do all of those things in "plan" and "perceive", but the first step is to consider the "how" so we can determine what is and is not feasible.

[biojae]

Originally Posted by kamocat

The "perceive" discussion entails what sensors should be used for what purposes.
I'll list some things an autonomous 'bot might want to know:

• Where am I on the field?
• Where are the robots around me? (what alliance are they?)
• Where are the balls around me? (on the floor, presumably)
• Where are the goals? The bumps? The towers? The walls?
• Have I flipped over?
• What are the other robots doing? Do they need help? (Inter-robot communication)

There are also simpler things, implemented into the "control" section, liked "have I completed my kick" or "is my arm fully extended", usually potentiometers or limit switches, that are used in feedback to make sure the action is completed. Unless someone's doing something exotic like using a non-contact thermometer to tell when a motor is stalled, I don't think these need to be discussed with the rest of the sensors.

This is where the GDC may play nice again, and bring back something like the 2 freq. IR beacons.
But, even if they don't there are simple ways for determining where you are on a field using encoders (Assuming the wheels don't slip. Hard for last year).

Using kinematic formulas:

S = (Delta Left + Delta Right) / 2
Delta Theta = (Delta left - Delta right) / wheelbase
Theta = Theta + Delta Theta
X = X + (S * cosine ( Theta ) )
Y = Y + (S * sine    ( Theta ) )

This satisfies one item on the list, but only slightly.

As far as knowing where other robots are, that would need a lot of DSP, or an external observer telling the bots where they are, or all bots to communicate with each other

[gblake]

Originally Posted by lemiant

During the off-season this year or next year, someone should hold an all autonomous event.

<rambling>
I wish first would make a game with way more. but it would sort of wreck their "no robot left behind", since for some reason there isn't enough support for beginner programmers.
</rambling>

But I digress, anyone up to host an all-autonomous off-season?

Great idea!

Let's carry it out in a way that will let us try walking before we try to run.

I'll assert that it would be easy to produce a fully autonomous competition using Vex or Tetrix equipment and fields; and that it would be reasonably easy to replicate that competition set-up in many geographically diverse locations around North America and the rest of the planet.

Before any instinctive reaction takes hold and you reject this suggestion as being too unlike FRC, think for a minute.

The reduced diversity found in the the Vex/Terix equipment suites, the greater simplicity of the Vex/Terix computers, and all of the other factors that make a fully autonomous Vex or Tetrix match unlike an autonomous FRC match are all good things for people who want to take on David's challenge.

Working with, and succeeding with the simpler, Vex or Tetrix equipment will lay a solid foundation on which to base the FRC attempts. There will still be plenty of work to do when the project members graduate into FRC attempts; but many of the "Doh!" realizations and many of the collaboration-process SNAFUs will have been shaken out of the software and out of the project teams processes.

Think it over. Walk before running.

Blake
PS: This would not replace my earlier suggestion to use a simulator or appropriate video game as a learning tool. A Vex/Tetrix competition would complement also using a simulator.

[the programmer]

through my 3 years in FLL, I realize that performing routines like getting a ball, aiming, and shooting is something that's very realistic, so my suggestion, treat teleop like 08's hybrid mode and give the drivers different routines that they could run and just a normal teleop

[Frenchie]

I didn't read the entire thread, so my apologies if I repeat what has been said already.

Imho, most FRC games of years past did not lend themselves well to full autonomous play. Just look at how much trouble teams had to go through to get the smallest aspects of autonomy down (autonomous mode, camera use, automatic transmission, ...).

Instead, maybe an offshoot of FRC should be created with full autonomy in mind. The scale of the robots would probably have to be smaller. Hell, a standard platform could even be issued (i'm thinking robocup and aldebaran Nao robots...).

After all, we already have FTC and LLC.

This would allow for games that are better suited to autonomy. The lighting of the field could be standardized, AR tags could be integrated to field components, robot to robot communication could even be enabled...

The game could have a 10 sec "teleoperated" mode at the beginning of each match as a cameo to FRC.

Just a wild idea .

[45Auto]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

Honestly it only took us 2 days to get the autonomous right, the day before the competiton when you have to get inspection and stuff and the first day of autonomous... I think you over complicated it

It could be that there are different definitions of "getting autonomous right". Looking at davidthefats last 3 games on the Blue Alliance, I personally wouldn't call their autonomous "right".

It appears that in Q77 they started in the close zone and knocked the ball toward the goal without scoring.

Q84 they start in the far zone and kick one ball into the middle.

Q89 they start in the close zone and don't move at all.

I think you may be over-simplifying it .....

[davidthefat]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

It could be that there are different definitions of "getting autonomous right". Looking at davidthefats last 3 games on the Blue Alliance, I personally wouldn't call their autonomous "right".

It appears that in Q77 they started in the close zone and knocked the ball toward the goal without scoring.

Q84 they start in the far zone and kick one ball into the middle.

Q89 they start in the close zone and don't move at all.

I think you may be over-simplifying it .....

The Q89, we chose NOT to go or that was the one with the leak in the pneumatic system. (the robot does not do anything if the kicker is not retracted, since the ir sensor is triggered by default)Don't blame me, thats the best autonous can get without an adjustable kicker. Its right since our goal was just to kick the ball, the camera was out for the last half of the competition, so we didn't even track.

[45Auto]

Don't blame me, thats the best autonous can get without an adjustable kicker.

I'm not "blaming" anyone for anything, just trying to point out that a decent full-autonomous may not be quite as simple as you are assuming, given the level of performance you have demonstrated. I would disagree that what you have is the best you could do, an adjustable kicker would have no effect on how many balls you could kick out of the far zone. Just a matter of driving to each ball and kicking (sounds simple doesn't it?). It doesn't get much easier than knowing EXACTLY where each ball is located when you start and not having to worry about any defending robots.

We could only kick one ball in autonomous because one of our encoders died and there is no way to change it without dismantling half the robot. The robot has a small drift to the left and there wasn't time to get the time-based autonomous to compensate for it. Hopefully having all encoders working at Atlanta will allow us to clear whichever zone we are in. I would consider clearing our zone of balls (or scoring from the front zone) a minimum level of autonomous competence to shoot for. Many of the top teams already do this. Our programmers have been working on it all season and haven't got there yet.

Rather than trying to develop a full-autonomous game, it may be to your advantage to try smaller steps. Demonstrating a working 15 second autonomous that would at least clear the zone you are in would be a more attainable goal, and could possibly help in persuading your team to attempt more complicated building (you need to integrate the sensors into your robot) and programming projects.

[davidthefat]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

I'm not "blaming" anyone for anything, just trying to point out that a decent full-autonomous may not be quite as simple as you are assuming, given the level of performance you have demonstrated. I would disagree that what you have is the best you could do, an adjustable kicker would have no effect on how many balls you could kick out of the far zone. Just a matter of driving to each ball and kicking (sounds simple doesn't it?). It doesn't get much easier than knowing EXACTLY where each ball is located when you start and not having to worry about any defending robots.

We could only kick one ball in autonomous because one of our encoders died and there is no way to change it without dismantling half the robot. The robot has a small drift to the left and there wasn't time to get the time-based autonomous to compensate for it. Hopefully having all encoders working at Atlanta will allow us to clear whichever zone we are in. I would consider clearing our zone of balls (or scoring from the front zone) a minimum level of autonomous competence to shoot for. Many of the top teams already do this. Our programmers have been working on it all season and haven't got there yet.

Rather than trying to develop a full-autonomous game, it may be to your advantage to try smaller steps. Demonstrating a working 15 second autonomous that would at least clear the zone you are in would be a more attainable goal, and could possibly help in persuading your team to attempt more complicated building (you need to integrate the sensors into your robot) and programming projects.

The last paragraph: I have been trying to do that since day one, I wanted a kicker that shoots ACCURATELY from the 3 zone... But my ideas just got shot down because I was new to the club and the team did not have faith in themselves, since our history of robots are not the best, infact I heard ours this year was the best out of all our robots... but I say it needs TONS of improvements...

[45Auto]

Originally Posted by davidthefat

I wanted a kicker that shoots ACCURATELY from the 3 zone

Originally Posted by davidthefat

Honestly it only took us 2 days to get the autonomous right, the day before the competiton when you have to get inspection and stuff and the first day of autonomous... I think you over complicated it

I think you'll find it much easier to guide your team towards your goals if you attempt smaller steps. I'm having a hard time understanding why you couldn't at least KICK 3 balls from the 3 zone (not worrying about accuracy) if it's as easy as you seem to think.

Right now, you're like the Wright brothers trying to invent the airplane. They didn't start with a 747. You'll probably be much more successful if you work towards your goals in smaller, more realistic steps. Claiming you can invent warp drive by next weekend and fly to Mars in 5 minutes isn't going to get you many followers. Talk is cheap.

[lemiant]

FIRST should make a game where you're only able to send commands to your robot every 5 seconds, or there could be an area which was completely blacked out, so you pretty much had to use auto as you couldn't see.

[kamocat]

The "no sending a command for 5 seconds" could pose a safety problem. However the portion "blacked out" could be simulated by putting a wall up the middle of the field (with a small doorway in it for robots to go through).

[Robototes2412]

Actually, this kind of thing would be a good experiment for the off-season