I believe that the cRIO is set to be reused every year for at least som set of years, so would that have any implications on the placement and build of the the robot, since it has its own requirements and we have to move it from robot to robot on testing and demos?
I heard this too, but I think it is only a rumor.
Just as the deployment of the cRio to teams has not yet been finalized - I believe that the decision on whether or not to give one as mandatory in the kit has not yet been made.
I personally hope that they decide to make it mandatory since that might lower the cost for everyone… and I think 90% of teams will want a new one each year.
but then again that means that teams that don’t want it or even worse - can’t afford it have to get one despite their objections.
but the counter-counter argument is that if it is mandatory then they can mass produce with certain numbers (± the growth of FIRST) and thus lower the cost.
If it is a team choice then the numbers may vary wildly from year to year and they will have to produce in small numbers which is more costly.
Has getting a controller in the kit ever been a team’s choice in the past?
-Leav
I went to the mentor’s meeting (as I am a future mentor) of the new cRIO and control system in Atlanta on Thursday night. They mentioned that the cRIO will be more expensive than our current control system, but many of the parts in the cRIO are being donated by the vendors. They said at this point, teams should look at reusing their controller year after year, but they will have the cRIO available for purchase, you know… if for some reason your cRIO breaks or your team likes to keep your robots together year after year.
So basically… I believe they intend to “give” teams only one cRIO, and they can purchase additional ones as they like. So I believe you will reuse them year after year.
RyanN is correct, their current plan is to give one controller to teams to be reused every year, while teams can buy an additional controller every year at an immensely reduced cost.
With teams only getting 1 cRIO; in the years after 2009 will the price of the KOP be different for rookies and veterans?
I had already stated that I was fairly certain about this part.
My question is how it will affect demos and build of robots.
It would mean that we’d have to keep programs around so that if there was a call for the 2009 robot in 2010, we’d pull the unit from 2010 and put in on 2009 with the 2009 code, then switch back.
I’m not so sure that’s a wise move. Maybe all teams get two, then it’s get your own would be better. Sometimes demos come up suddenly while the robot isn’t there. Two would make sure that practice robots could be built, or old robots kept alive for another year for demo uses.
With teams only getting 1 cRIO; in the years after 2009 will the price of the KOP be different for rookies and veterans?
The pricing isn’t finalized yet, so noone knows. But my guess is that NI will supply the cRIO in the '09 KOP at a huge expense on their part, and that future KOP money will offset that expense, meaning that the price would be the same.
A modular system that can be swappable between all your robots sounds like it would be your best bet. Of course, you would have to reprogram it for each robot, which would take all of 2 seconds with your laptop right beside you. As more and more information become available, you can start designing a modular system.
My only question is… will all the other components be reused, or will they be provided new? If the cRIO isn’t going to be given each year, what about the power distribution board or the I/O boards? If they are given out each year, then this will make a reusable system much easier to build, and a simple plug and unplug setup will work fine and will be reliable.
I don’t know about you guys but when 2010 comes around the corner I can tell you now that the 2009 controller isn’t coming off of our robot! 
It might be a bit expensive but come on… unless the cRio costs significantly more than the current controller I think it is highly reasonable to purchase a new one each year.
a functional demo robot is almost worth it’s weight in Dollar coins (in getting new students, mentors, parents and sponsors)!
That is much more than the price of a controller no matter how they price it…
-Leav
Depending on how far you go with the cRio you could always install the IFI controller on the demo robot.
my issue with this stems from the fact that it means that the new controller will not be upgraded for years. I see this as FIRST getting into the same issues which pushed them away from IFI. Locking into a controller for multiple years while important for teams makes them majority supplier dependent. If it truly is the case that NI is only going to give one controller in the first year and then recycle them for financial reasons, I hate to see the year that NI is not doing well. Seems to me that this would indicate some hesitance in having the whole program on their backs financially.
I hate the idea of only getting one controller, as it raises many issues which teams don’t currently have. As many would happen demo robots become difficult, helping pre-rookies at off-season events becomes impossible, and it puts a huge liability on teams breaking their controllers as most could not afford replacements (in the past 2 years teams could use older controllers if they needed to).
For lack of a better way to describe it this seems really cheap on behalf of NI and/or FIRST.
How would you expect teams to break the controller?
Bad wiring and unexpected loads on the connections seem to be the two biggest killers of the IFI controllers. Both happen to a nonzero amount of teams every season in spite of their best efforts, rookies and veterans alike.
Dropping metal shavings in a sensitive spot.
Miswiring of power and consequent electrical fryage.
Accidentally drilling through it.
Fatal EMI induced by nearby arc welding.
Mechanical impact on a plug-in module.
Corruption of firmware.
Water damage.
Never underestimate the ability of a team of high school students and engineers to break expensive things.
I learned many years ago never to underestimate the abilities of a team of high school students and engineers working together.
The ‘breaking expensive things’ is an added bonus. 
Dropping metal shavings in a sensitive spot.
Miswiring of power and consequent electrical fryage.
Accidentally drilling through it.
Fatal EMI induced by nearby arc welding.
Mechanical impact on a plug-in module.
Corruption of firmware.
Water damage.
Never underestimate the ability of a team of high school students and engineers to break expensive things.
Screwing in program cables and then running autonomous… oh wait, no more serial cables 
The mechanical impact I know won’t kill it unless you go at the plug-in module with a jackhammer.
In Atlanta they were careful when doing drop demonstrations not to drop the cRIO on the exposed DB connectors. Broken and bent pins, especially when the bumpers for the .1" pin header conversions are attached, will be a not uncommon occurrance.
The other sides of the cRIO are pretty solid.
Never underestimate the power of a robot to gut itself…
The datasheet is kind of irritating in that regard. It says six different directions. One would imagine it means all six sides of the module including the side with pins.