I wouldn’t say we did a great job painting and it still turned out to look way better than raw aluminum.
To answer the OP’s question… pretty much just paint it black.
2 Likes
It looks like your team did a decent paint job.
Runs in the paint and paint flaking off can look really bad**.
** Unless one is wanting the “rat rod” look.
The trick is not looking too closely at it 
4 Likes
Having a team/robot logo/name/number milled or engraved somewhere is really nice
Drape the bot in blue banners.
1 Like
There is nothing worse than a painted robot with a rats nest for wiring.
Clean up and plan your wiring, not just for your bellypan, but for all electronics going on your mechanisms too. If you wire neatly, hide wiring in tubing, use ducting, zip ties, zip tie mounts, you’ll be in a good place.
3 Likes
I agree with all above, but there’s one thing they left out - aesthetically pleasing design.
After you figure out what your robot’s major functional lines but before you start any building, back up and look at those lines as a skeleton - where the pieces are, how they move. Then, figure out what aesthetics on top of that work for you, and include that in the design. Follow that concept through with your choices of colors and textures. [Added: @JameCH95’s post below has many great examples of this!]
And a few minor tidbits:
Use fine sandpaper or ScotchBrite to texture all your metal surfaces, especially those which you aren’t going to cover up. Using a power sander, it’s a lot quicker than paint or powder coat, and works well with many aesthetic types.
Sometimes even simple things like adding rivets where they aren’t needed (but complete the pattern set by those which are) can make a noticeable difference.
2 Likes
Real robots have curves!
The curve on the back of Feynman here was designed with a french curve. While subtle, it catches the eye.
Grace Hopper (our team’s name progenitor robot) was full of lovely curves on her side plates. They could have more easily been straight cuts. But lines are usually less sexy than curves.
Chuck had plenty of curves with offset and overlayed lightening patterns. It created a wonderful visual effect as he was viewed from different angles.
I specifically picked robots that 95 has made that were not painted, but painting is worth discussing along side this. We are huge fans of a quick shaker-can paintjob, just one coat, with a concise and planned color scheme. This takes good aesthetics to the next level.
Our 2017 robots, Wilbur and Orville, side-by-side show how aesthetics can be improved with a cohesive color scheme.
Instead of just painting everything one color (sorry #allblackeverything) picking different colors to highlight mechanisms or interesting shapes present in the design makes it pop. The unpainted practice robot looks more like a silver blob in comparison. However, you have to have those interesting shapes in your robot to start with!
To drive this point home, here is our 2018 competition and practice robots next to each other. The paint and cleaner wiring show off the robot well. While these robots have fewer interesting shapes than the others, we make the most of it by painting the chain maw red.
TL;DR - you should design in interesting shapes, even if it is a little harder, and make sure that these choices are cohesive. Coordinate your color scheme to highlight these interesting parts. Keep everything else clean. The clutter of wires, tubes, or poorly laid-out sponsors will detract from the robots aesthetic.
But don’t take my word for it. 118’s coordinated coloring has been wowing people since 2010. They contrast gold with white to highlight mechanisms and shapes on their robots to great effect.
3 Likes
I’m sure the special effect smoke and great lighting had nothing to do with it either : P
1 Like
Consider using some of the virtual KoP from Inventables to get Lucite Light Guide acrylic. Toss it into an engraver and side light it with LED strips. Inexpensive and very cool looking. We did a joint project with one of our sponsors and used this as a front panel for our new pit carts.
TW
Ooooooh, interesting point, I would argue (for the sake of arguement) that:
Cool Looking =/= Aesthetically Pleasing
I’ve seen some cook looking robots with special under-glow an and other fancy tricks, but aren’t aesthetically pleasing. Either something is off feels off in the design, or it doesn’t seem to move “naturally” on the field. (Not to say a robot couldn’t be both, we are boarding some pretty subjective subjects)
Cool Looking - Something added in addition to the robot as an after thought
Aesthetically pleasing - Something that was thoughtfully incorporated in the design for a specific purpose along with the purposes of looking beautiful.
I’d love to hear other peoples thoughts on this idea!
1 Like
Well, I can’t agree with those definitions.
By your definitions, this is Aesthetically Pleasing but not Cool Looking. By mine, it is Cool Looking but not Aesthetically Pleasing.
We could be getting into a generational thing here…eh?
Modern automotive styling (I’ll pick on cars, because they’re the closest thing there is to robots in this regard) apparently is really cool looking. But dang, are they ugly!
Yes, I’m 58 years old.
Not to derail the thread, but oml, modern sedans are just so uncool! I love the older style sedans that are a bit longer and boxier and much less this:
That being said, part of aesthetics and coolness is personal preference. @ADA1 build a robot that looks good to you and makes you feel good. The most important part of building a good looking robot is organization and planning. Also, a robot that is falling apart on the field will not look good, even if it is beautiful when standing still. FRC is a competition where “function over form” isn’t necessarily true, but it is certainly something to consider.
Teams 254, 696, 968, and 1538 all make beautiful robots. And its no mistake the mentors are all connected back in the day.
118 makes beautiful robots AND videos too.
Many other examples already shared.
2 Likes
Opinions on design trends (look in to the history of american product styling) will vary, but above all good design is timeless.
Style how you like, but design with elegance, design for your manufacturing capabilities. Curves or no, painted or bare: a dysfunctional robot is a ugly one.
In this context, I recommend a modernist form-directly-to-function approach. Team Dave does this well.
1 Like
The overarching principle 2767 uses is what I’d like to term “deliberate design.” This is further broken down into the following points related to aesthetics:
- As others have mentioned, form follows function. If it doesn’t have a function maximizing the scoring of points or meeting another program requirement such as sponsor nameplates, get rid of it. Ex. I know lots of people love them, but LEDs that don’t communicate information to the drive team or illuminate something for gameplay reasons are visual clutter, a distraction from the things that matter, and add weight/complexity/get in the way of robot maintenance. I’d rather see them in the pit or on the robot cart. Another saying/groaner pun we have on our team that relates to this is “make your mass matter.” An extension to the mass issue is that mass should be kept as low and central as possible. This control of the center of gravity performs and looks better/right. Try to avoid chasing robustness issues with additional mass–use designed-in flexibility and structure (increased cross sectional moment of inertia & triangulation) rather than rigid, thick walled/solid structures. This’ll help on robot weight limit challenges as well.
- Consistency. With multiple “cooks in the kitchen” its easy for a FRC robot to look like it was “designed by a committee.” The antidote is to settle on a few standards regarding design elements. Ex. To reduce stress concentrations, sharp corners are replaced with radii everywhere–even in spots where it might not be strictly necessary. Lightening holes/trusswork and rivet patterns are similar. Likewise, if the angles of robot structures are close, make them the same. If parts are colored, limit the number of colors and control them. Few things look worse than two yellow parts next to each other that are similar but not the same. This is one reason we generally print our 3D printed parts out of black material. In my opinion, the crazy toy colors common in 3D printed filament usually don’t come off looking great on a robot. On the spray paint issue: We powder coat because we have access to it through our primary sponsor and powder coating is much more durable than paint. That said, we’ve also spray painted. The keys to spray painting are clean parts and several light coats of good quality paint. For some materials, primer is needed. The rubber armor spray coat can also be a good trick for 3D printed parts because it is thick, fills the FDM grooves, and is durable.
- Contrast. If two things are different, then give them separation. On the radii mentioned above, we use a limited set of doubling incremental values like 1/8", 1/4", 1/2", 1", etc. Its a similar thing on lightening hole diameters and angles. From a color perspective, high contrast “pops.” A combination of safety yellow, black and raw aluminum for example are visually striking, and sponsor logos are easily legible when printed in black on yellow background (or white). An alternative would be to reverse it (yellow or white on black). For those looking for a more complicated color palate, contrasting colors (those across the color wheel from each other ex. green and red, blue and orange, or yellow and purple) will also work well for this reason. Primary colors (red, blue, and yellow) can work, but some may see these as more toy-like because that scheme is common in toys & elementary education.
- Symmetry. We joke about appeasing “the gods of symmetry” on our robots. While not always possible, symmetric designs often perform better because they are balanced. In many cases, it also allows parts to be mirrored, saving design time. As a side note, one of the things I preach to my design students is to explicitly define part symmetry in CAD–it usually is the design intention and enforcing it through constraints can avoid problems as designs evolve.
- Cleanliness and attention to detail. This is a lot of little things but here are a few related to aesthetics. Consistent wire types/size/color by function. Eliminate extra wire. Bundle runs of wire, but remember to think through maintenance issues when doing so. Flexible cable races and wire loom can both look good and reduce wiring failures. Wash off the manufacturing markings on raw aluminum using acetone and de-bur the parts after machining/fabrication. Although we haven’t bothered, sanding or bead blasting and then clear coat spraying or anodizing aluminum can keep it looking good if you don’t want to color it. If the loads allow it, belts are less messy than chains (oil and wear debris) and generally safer from a pinch perspective. A common mistake with belts and chains is using too small of a diameter on the pulleys/sprockets. This leads to a need for extra tension and sometimes a bunch of claptrap to maintain it. Servo-latch deployable mechanisms in between uses so they don’t bounce around (looking sloppy) and cause failures due to shock loading.
10 Likes
I’d also add clean wiring.
1 Like
Cad