Introducing the EWCP FRC Research Agenda

FIRST General Forum
#21

Research for the sake of research, regardless of outcomes has value. 900 doesn’t use ROS for it’s competitive advantage but because they seem to enjoy the process and outcomes of using it - I’m not saying I understand them, but sometimes the point is the process.

I’m going to cherry pick some research topics that potentially could impact more than the top 10%:
DSTR.02 Tripped breaker performance degradation - Should there be a standard practice around replacing breakers? What should it be. Personally I’m unaware if my team should be replacing breakers.
CAN.01 CAN wire joinery impedance Is there a best way to extend my CAN lines?
PNEU.03 Performance impact of tubing size Pneumatics, from my non-mechanical perspective, are mostly “we do it this way because we do?” Adding some “here is why” could help teams.
AWD.01 WFA word frequency analysis I’m super biased because I put in a lot of time to collect and present WF(F)A essays and I want a word cloud.

I guess I’m not sure what goal you’re trying to reach. “No don’t do something on your own time for free because maybe it won’t benefit everyone” is an interesting take.

Is this an argument with wording? Should EWCP ditch their justification and say “yeah we just want to science” or… ?

16 Likes
#22

Re: pneumatics

I don’t remember the equation off the top of my head, but iirc the rate of flow between two areas of different pressure is inversely proportional to the cross sectional area of the opening (so the tubing diameter), meaning larger tubing will always lead to faster flow, but the flip side of that is you need more air to ensure the pressure stays relatively close to where you wanted (since pressure and volume are inversely proportional, and as tubing size goes up so does volume)

2 Likes
#23

I’m not really sure what point I’m making anymore, I mistakenly assumed the intention was more of an outreach versus research program.

12 Likes
#24

Mixture of things.

When dealing with all volunteer organizations you do have to play to the interests of the workforce. Some of these topics are just what people want to play with. We don’t currently have the ability to distribute grants on specific topics of value.

Second - there’s some level of behavior modeling. By approaching frc scale problems with a research mindset and approach it models behaviors for students to help understand that area of STEM.

That being said - your comments sparked quite the internal discussion about communicating goals more effectively and evaluating what we do for communal good or for our own interest.

4 Likes
#25

I’d like to see someone put an oscilloscope on star vs. bus CAN to see signal degredation. Even better would be getting SNR vs. Frequency.

8 Likes
#26

Me too! I encourage you to submit a PR to add this agenda item.

3 Likes
#27

It would also be good to have some sort of software to monitor the number of dropped packets and resends etc.

Noise effects are non-linear. Often, no significant effects are observed until the noise crosses some threshold level.

1 Like
#28

Ideally figuring out where that threshold is for dropped packets vs SNR would be nice, even a ballpark. That combined with signal integrity data would tell people how much headroom they have with star networks.

I’ll submit a PR tonight.

3 Likes
#29

Can individuals donate to sponsor research? Is EWCP a real non-profit?

What can I get done for $100?

7 Likes
#30

Great questions.

Yes EWCP is a real nonprofit (EIN 83-3371895).

At the moment we are not ready to spool up the commissioned research phase of the project. However, we’d love to hear your ideas about what kinds of research should be supported-- and that is what this thread is for!

In the meantime, your donation would be applied to the 2022 EWCP scholarship cycle.

3 Likes
#31

You are asking the wrong questions. The real question, how much do I need to donate to get someone to make an all NEO 550 drivetrain?

3 Likes
#32

I’d want to sponsor specific initiatives (out of my own laziness to not have to do them myself)

  • Strength of hex bores in various printed materials & infills
  • quantifying cycle distances/times/variants over the years
  • determining what %age of teams do not outperform KOP drives (somewhat subjective)
  • determining what %age of teams each year have a low enough scoring average such that gearing faster than 10 fps adds no value (also somewhat subjective)

Please share when you’re accepting direct sponsorships.

18 Likes
#33

I assume hex bores?

#34

yes, hex bore

#36

I’m not sure how github works so I don’t know how to submit a PR so I am posting here:

What are the coefficients of friction between the different wheel tread materials available and FRC carpet / HDPE? Do those change with the angle the tread is cut at?

What are the wear properties of said treads (probably measured in thickness of tread lost / time driven in “standard” play)?

How do wheel width and diameter affect these measurements?

4 Likes
#37

I mean, how would you quantify that? Since unless a team’s scoring mech is very clearly non-functional, it’s possible that the energy spent on a custom drive was either insignificant to them or helped with integration, offsetting the “energy cost”. Maybe set some threshold of average points scored, then look at all robots below that to see if they did a custom drive?

#38

Dunno, I’m just a guy with $100 and am in no way a scientist.

18 Likes
#39

This is something I have been frustrated with for a while. Normal force exerted on the ground doesn’t have anything to do with the magnitude of the area of contact, however we see F1 cars with wide tires to increase friction.

I spent a few days trying to dig at this and only found the Pacejka Magic Formula which I don’t understand. The gist of wider tires = more traction is because the ground isn’t a perfectly flat surface, but I am not sure if anyone in the world is capable of quantifying it.

probably a lot

2 Likes
#40

Just a guess about a possible method:

  1. Take the median performance of the top n% of teams using kitbot in a given year.
  2. Take a team using a custom drivetrain in that year and compare their median score with the result from 1.
  3. Repeat for all teams using a custom drivetrain in that year
  4. Take percentage
#41

This an approach, but since likely far too few teams run KOP drive I think you’ll find an answer that is artificially skewed away from running KOP drive.