Posted by Dan.
Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret’s and Banner Engineering.
Posted on 6/20/2000 5:29 PM MST
BattleBots was held June 9-11 in San Francisco, it will
be airred as a 13 episode series on Comedy Central
starting November 8th (or was it 9th?) 2000. Some guys
from team 59 (Ramtech, the ones with the black & white
striped shirts) were there with their super heavyweight
robot Rammstein. They were using some very new 24VDC
Innovation First speed controllers which will soon be
available to all. Innovation First is also going to
make a cheaper version of their control system and some
other products aimmed specifically at the BattleBots
market.
BattleBots is really, really cool and, soon, you’ll be
able to watch it every week on TV.
Check it out at the link belo
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 6/21/2000 6:09 AM MST
In Reply to: BattleBots on Comedy Central & NEW Innovation FIRST products posted by Dan on 6/20/2000 5:29 PM MST:
Ok, I may be getting myself into some really hot water for what I’m about to say, but that’s never stopped me before…
Battlebots is not cool!
There, that makes me feel better. (Now, I want to say right off, if any of your teams have a Battlebots team, I’m not critizing you directly, just the idea behind Battlebots.) I want to know what’s so great about seeing all your hard work go out there and get smashed into tiny bits in the first 3 seconds. And it always turns into wedge with a sledgehammer vs wedge with a spear or something (now, in FIRST, wedge bots are interesting and plain cool, so I’m not knocking the design of your bot Dan!) It turns into a match of who can flip the other the fastest…BORING!!!
Now look at FIRST. Exciting and challenging game that changes every year. Something that promotes engineering in a positive and fun light. Still a very vigorous contact event, most robots survive competition. Plus there is a diversity in the bots that Battlebots could never have. Just take our two bots as an example: Team 10 - great agressive defensive bot that uses the wedge shape as an advantage. Team 69 - long, tall monkey bot that could steal and cover goals as it was needed.
Besides, arn’t there enough machines of destruction out there? Let’s at least make something helpful to mankind, and though there may be no immediate real life use for FIRST bots yet, it is teaching us about engineering and ‘Gracious Professionalism.’
Am I alone on this theory?
Lora
Posted by jack.
Student on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High School and Nypro(molding the future).
Posted on 6/21/2000 9:05 AM MST
In Reply to: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/21/2000 6:09 AM MST:
I agree totally with what lora said. battlebots serves only one purpose and thats to waste time and materials which could have been put forth to educate the youth of today. its a decision of whether you would want to creat a device to destroy a week civilization with problems that could be be solved, or whether you want to use the knowledge you have been given to better society for oursleves and our future. thats one way this knowledge could be used in a true to life situation.
Posted by Andrew Rudolph.
Student on team NASA KSC/Michael Krop Senior High School from Michael Krop Senior High School sponsored by NASA Kennedy Space Centre.
Posted on 6/21/2000 10:43 AM MST
In Reply to: Re: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by jack on 6/21/2000 9:05 AM MST:
I agree 99% with you guys that Battle Bots is mostly a waste, but what you are forgetting is that battle bots is inspiring the people that would never like anything tech. Not like FIRST cant do that but this is an entertainment competition, and when poeple are entertained they want to do this and thats good. I have heard from people who are on footbal teams and other ‘sports’ say ‘do you guys make battle bots, thoes are really cool i wanna make one of thoes’ after they see im in the Robotics club at our school. If FIRST had the Air time that battle bots has then we would probably be doing most of that inspireing into these non-Techies. FIRST CAN do what this so called Robotic Sport does and much more.
Andrew
Posted by Amy .
Student on team #126, Gael Force, from Clinton High and NYPRO.
Posted on 6/21/2000 12:06 PM MST
In Reply to: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/21/2000 6:09 AM MST:
I agree, Lora! Although, BattleBots may ‘inspire’ those who would otherwise never become involved in technology, it lacks some of the most important ideas that FIRST teaches-gracious professionalism, team spirit, and cooperation to name a few. And another thing about BattleBots–I watched it once, and it looked like just a bunch of middle-aged men driving the robots. 
I guess I’m just partial to FIRST…
Posted by Andy Grady. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Coach on team #42, P.A.R.T.S, from Alvirne High School and Daniel Webster College.
Posted on 6/21/2000 2:33 PM MST
In Reply to: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/21/2000 6:09 AM MST:
I have to disagree with Lora on this one. I personally am a big fan of Battlebots and plan on someday even competing in it. I feel that the challenge and the strategy behind battlebots revolves much more around the design of your robot. Being able to dish out and take damage is part of the game, just like being able to deliver balls is part of the game in FIRST this year. As for wedgebots, sure its an easy strategy, but many of the people who are in this commpetition not only compete to win, but compete with style in design. Its one thing to go out there and win with a wedge bot, but its another thing to go out and win with a very innovative design. Win it in style, thats what I want to do. Also Battlebots gets the attention of the general television watching population and introduces them to science and technology in a whole new way, and maybe even to the point where they will go look around for other competitions and find FIRST thus getting towns around them involved.
Just a thought,
Andy Grady
p.s. Im still thinkin bout that little FIRST All Star team to create a battlebot =) whatcha think?
Posted by Erin. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Student on team #1, The Juggernauts, from Oakland Technical Center-Northeast Campus and 3-Dimensional Services.
Posted on 6/26/2000 3:51 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by Andy Grady on 6/21/2000 2:33 PM MST:
I agree with Lora, battlebots is just… well…
I can’t say not cool, I just see no point. It is automated violence. Where does building robots that go kick each other’s %^&&*%%#^#$ come into play when people couuld be focusing their skills and talents where they are needed? Maybe fun; maybe for mad scientists. I don’t know about you people, but my idea of fun outside of FIRST is doing things like skiing, skating, going on the internet…(haha) etc…, not building a robot with a violent purpose. But hey, I guess guys and some girls have to get their aggression out in some way or another. Whatever happened to kids playing football?
-Erin
Posted by Dan.
Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret’s and Banner Engineering.
Posted on 6/26/2000 4:29 PM MST
In Reply to: Battlebots: geez… posted by Erin on 6/26/2000 3:51 PM MST:
>
It’s not about aggression, it’s about building whatever you want out of whatever you want. No one would ever spend lots of money and time for 10 minutes of ’ aggression.’ Not to mention that a lot of robots (including mine) are about as violent as any FIRST robot.
:-Dan
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 6/27/2000 5:09 AM MST
In Reply to: Re: Battlebots: geez… posted by Dan on 6/26/2000 4:29 PM MST:
: It’s not about aggression, it’s about building whatever you want out of whatever you want.
But it’s the restrictions on materials that gives us all the fantastic engineering challenge in FIRST! This is where creativity works best, when you only have a certain set of materials to design around to accomplish a task. This is real life engineering, I may be a student, but one thing I’ve learned about the engineering world, is that everything is not as ideal as the theories you work with. There are restrictions to everything and anything, and you learn to deal, or you find another profession. What are you learning with Battlebots? To beat the living daylights out of each other?? Obviously not to accept the challenges of real world engineering.
Lora
Posted by Justin Ridley.
Engineer on team #221, MI Roboworks, from Michigan Technological University.
Posted on 6/27/2000 8:41 AM MST
In Reply to: Re: Battlebots: geez… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/27/2000 5:09 AM MST:
Lora, I understand your points. But you are trying to say that since battlebots is a robotics competition it should be just like FIRST with the same rules, goals, and so on. And since it is not like FIRST it’s bad. Well nobody ever tried to claim battlebots was like FIRST in any way, except that it involves building robots. All this means is that it is different, not pointless. There is an increidble amount of engineering challenge that goes into building these bots. Just like FIRST bots they sure don’t design and build themselves. And while it may not be real world engineering, nobody said it was, or should be.
Posted by Dan.
Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret’s and Banner Engineering.
Posted on 6/27/2000 10:25 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Battlebots: geez… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/27/2000 5:09 AM MST:
::This is real life engineering. There are
::restrictions to everything and anything, and you
::learn to deal, or you find another profession. What
::are you learning with Battlebots? To beat the
::living daylights out of each other?? Obviously not
::to accept the challenges of real world engineering.
I agree that FIRST’s contraints encourage creativity but it’s exactly those restrictions that limit your field of knowledge. Brushless motors, gasoline engines, foam-filled rubber tires, magnesium, kevlar, and carbon fiber never enter into the picture in FIRST.
I did not order and read the 40+ lbs. of catalogs and literature because of FIRST–it was because of BattleBots.
There are still constraints in BattleBots (beyond the competition’s restrictions.) But the constraints are amorphous and different for every person. I have limited money, limited time, limited tools that can work with limited materials, and limited knowledge. This last one–limited knowledge–is my (and pretty much anyone’s) greatest constraint. Even though I can use any material I do not know about every material. So the more I learn the better I do.
These constraints are FAR more difficult to work with. No one gives you a neat little box of parts and catalog with which you must build. It is FIRST–not BattleBots–that does not accept the ‘challenges of real engineering.’ The constraints on FIRST are there to make it easier. Engineers at NASA or GM have it much harder because they have very few constraints on budget and materials; it is up to them to stay on the cutting edge of numerous fields.
FIRST and BattleBots are both awesome competitions. However, they are apples & oranges and can not be compared to each other because they have different purposes and different means.
Ever since I got into BattleBots/Robot Wars I’ve become really interested in engineering design theory. I’ve put a link below to a little webpage with my own thoughts on the subject that will be soon be linked to my BattleBots webpage.
:-Dan
Posted by Justin Ridley.
Engineer on team #221, MI Roboworks, from Michigan Technological University.
Posted on 6/21/2000 8:56 PM MST
In Reply to: Battlebots: waste of good parts IMHO… posted by Lora Knepper on 6/21/2000 6:09 AM MST:
No way, I think battle bots is way cool. I hope to one day help build one myself. Just because they don’t have the same goals as FIRST does, and just because the entire idea behind it is different doesn’t make it a bad thing. I would like to do it just for the challenge of building a really cool, competitive robot. As for seeing your hard work get destroyed, well these robots that are built are used in many competitions and just like a pit crew of a racing team, you have to repair and modify your robot after competitions. It’s a real engineering challege, and I just think it looks like a lot of fun. Plus I love the idea of being able to use pretty much whatever you want on your bot. . . I think that makes the potential for diversity almost endless. I would never give up FIRST for it, but I’d really like to give it a try one of these years.
Justin
Posted by Dan.
Student on team #10, BSM, from Benilde-St. Margaret’s and Banner Engineering.
Posted on 6/22/2000 10:59 PM MST
In Reply to: BattleBots on Comedy Central & NEW Innovation FIRST products posted by Dan on 6/20/2000 5:29 PM MST:
I’ve been ‘into’ BattleBots and Robot Wars for four years now and I even got to compete at the first ever BattleBots in August of 99. For those 4 years my competitors have been more than willing to answer my questions and share virtually anything about their robot. The competition was just as fun as any FIRST competition; the people were just as friendly and helpful. Tools were openly shared–like FIRST–and the atmosphere was nothing like it was in the arena. After matches the competitors would share their dents and scars, sometimes autographing the big ones or trading aluminum panels as souvenirs.
Right now the focus of most competitors is not solely to win. A lot of the designs are really not meant to be competitive but just cool. I’m not looking forward to the days when this is super-competitive and cut-throat because I aspire to make robots that are cool and entertaining.
As for the waste of parts thing, the only things usually wasted are armor panels or frames. 95% of the damage is cosmetic or cheaply and easily repaired. Most people couldn’t afford to blow motors or lose electronics every competition. Of course some people have lost their entire robot in a match but the way I see it:
- By sacrificing your robot you are forced to realize it’s not the end product (ie the robot) that matters, it’s the process that produced that robot that matters. That process, of course, cannot be destroyed.
- You put your money where your mind is, so to speak. If you engineered your robot well than it won’t get turned into waste. What better motivation to have a well thought out robot.
- It’s entertaining, and now since BattleBots will be nationally televised, it entertains a whole bunch more.
:-Dan
PS I think you guys will like my robot, it has a little of the FIRST-style flare in it.