It is about the robots (OpEd)

FIRST General Forum
#5

… But you do realize that FIRST is “For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology” … not “For Building Robots That Win and Nothing Else” (Hmm FBRTWNE just doesn’t have the same ring to it …)

Less educational? I hate to break it to you, but in “the real world” most companies don’t build everything from scratch. They have people who contact companies and look through catalogs trying to decide which part will meet their need the best, based on size, weight, material, cost, efficiency, etc. And if a company can’t find the exact part they need, THEN they’ll either make the part on their own, or order something as close as they can and modify it to fit their needs. That’s what most FIRST teams do. It doesn’t get more “real world” than that. And a little “real world” experience, though boring it may be, never hurt anyone.

So say some FIRSTer is manufacturing gearboxes and selling them at a reasonable cost to raise money for their cause or, heck, even make a few bucks for themselves. I look at the part and realize it’s EXACTLY the gearbox I need. In fact, this one will work even better for me than the one I planned on using. Are you saying I should make the gearbox myself when there’s one already available to me? Why? To build it, it would take many, many manhours plus I would need to find people to do it. To buy it, I would receive my part, I wouldn’t have to worry about correctly building it and I’d be helping out the other FIRSTer.

It is most definitely not. If there’s a part you need and someone is already manufacturing it, why waste your time reinventing the wheel? Buy the part, save some time, get done faster.

But then again, that’s just my opinion.

#6

This is right on. I can’t agree more with Karthik. Last season we decided we were going to build the T-kats 2003 transmission. We did all the drawings in inventor, spent a lot of money on parts, and tons of time machining. I can’t even count how many hours myself, a professional machinist, a parent from our school, and another student spent making the thing, and we still didnt finish it on time for a number of reasons.

I can’t even tell you how happy I would’ve been if these were available for sale last year. We could’ve paid essentially the same monetary price, maybe slightly more, and had to do next to no work on it ourselves. A drivetrain is the integral part of any robot.

Just think of how much less pressure you would be under throughout build if you could say to yourself “Hey, I bought that transmission from that Andy Baker guy, and man does it work great. And the best part is, we didnt have to spend any time to design it or build it, instead we got to focus all our effort into making a killer arm/whatever”

It’s a fact that many teams lack the engineering resources to make anything approaching the level of sophistication of a Technokats gearbox. This is something that could truly level the playing field, and allow students to feel MORE inspired when they create a killer function for their robot because they didnt have to work out drive problems for six straight week.s

$0.02 Cory

#7

I also agree that without robots there would be a lot less people in FIRST. The robots provide the excitement. Most of my goals are met the day we ship the robot. The learning, cooperation, compromise and communication provide the strength for the team and individuals.

As for buying gearboxes…I build custom assembly machines for a living. Being able to buy an assembly for these machines saves countless hours of design and testing and allows us to deliver a machine in a reasonable timeframe at an acceptable price. So let us take a look at this gearbox I purchased for my latest machine. It took many hours of design, test, refine, re-test before it was offerred for sale. The company manufacturing it does not want to spend money on field failures, service calls and returned product. And since they make more than the one I need, there is data on its life and I get a proven product. But this gearbox was not built with smoke and mirrors. It was produced on machinary that was most likely purchased. That machinary was designed, tested…

The argument of buy versus build is a healthy one. The Mars Rover has many custom assemblies because none existed to meet its specs. The Globe motor with gearbox that we receive in our kit has been reported here to be in both Ford and GM vehicles. The principles of engineering needed to build a gearbox can be learned on other mechanisms. Some teams need to allocate their resources to the game playing portions of the robot. Choices are a part of life. What we learn in building these robots is more important than which part we bought. Look at other designs and at the world around you. Borrow from others and make it better, simpler or even just unique.

#8

Here I am again. On the opposite side of the wall. Were would we be if people only used rebuilt parts? Were does the design and thought process come in to play? The inspiration comes from the mind not the field. When you build your first gearbox. When you understand why and how it works. I have seen the light in students and mentors eyes when something that they designed and built succeeded. The people in FIRST are the best. They have ideas. They can look inside and outside of the box. Why get in a habit of buying this transmission or that arm?

I understand why some people would rather buy than build. I still feel that to build what you can is better than buying everything. This has nothing to do with mentor bots or student built bots. I also understand that stand (still think your wrong Karthik but what else is new) and the pros and cons.

Inventions are not built using premade parts. People come up with new ideas, from different angles and with renewed enthusiasm. Playing the game is fun, building and designing is inspirational.

My $0.02 cdn.

#9

I have to come in on that.

The goal of FIRST is to “Inspire” people. However, without the robots, what exactly would we be doing… If it was all about the community work, then we’re just a bunch of co-ed Boy/Girl Scouts. (No offence to any boy/girl scouts out there.) What would be left if we took out the 6 week build time, official competitions, off-season competitions, preparation time for the build time, fund raising for the robot, and showings of the robot at community events? You need to the robot to be able to have those things. FIRST is very much about the robot, because that’s what makes it different than different than a large community service project.

I hope my point is made.

#10

You aren’t just letting someone else manufacture it, if that were the case I’d take no issue with it. You are letting someone else design it, allowing you to focus on some other design. I see this as detrimental to the FIRST experience on whole, as it means some teams don’t have to make tradeoffs. They can buy their way around deciding “awesome gearbox, or awesome arm?” That kind of tradeoff is, much more indicative of real life, no? Making sacrafices builds character :smiley:

#11

I like the idea of that kind of constraint. I want teams to have to deal with:

"Oh man, can we really afford the weight/time of building this CVT? Will we be able to have it AND that [insert other component here] we wanted? " - (Actual Internal dialog going on in my head right now)

On a totally unrelated note: You have to coolest, name, ever.

#12

I just want to touch briefly on these points:

**1. Are you sure it is less fun? **
I imagine the students on team 47 had a pretty fun season this year, even though they bought commoditty DeWalt drill transmissions for their robot, rather than creating custom ones.

2. Are you sure it is less educational?
I’m fairly sure that any mentor worth half a dang can turn anything into an educationall, and inspirational experience for the students. Reverse engineering can be fun lesson to teach. Even with a stock gearbox solution, optimization still needs to be done (final sprocket-chain ratios, wheel size). Even with a stock input-output transmission, there is a SIGNIFICANT amount of engineering that goes into mounting/utilizing it on a robot in any effective fashion.

3. Why is it shameful to adapt a working product to my needs?
You said, essentially: “If I can’t build it, I don’t deserve to have it.” Okay… interesting. Where is the line? My team can’t mold rubber or plastic. Does that mean we’re not allowed to use Skyway wheels? Let’s say… I’m on the “arm” subteam for our design group. My kids and I calculate we need a 367:1 reduction off the Chip motor for our application. We realize, that… (hypothetically) DeWalt makes a transmission to just about fit our needs. Rather than spend $200 and countless design-hours on a custom tranny, we pick up DeWalt’s solution. My kids go nuts working with me to make it dance to our tune.

What exactly is wrong with this?
My kids didn’t learn anything? SURE they did.
It’s not that tough to make it a positive experience for them.

My kids didn’t have fun? SURE they did. You’d be surprised how satisfying it is to “engineer” a solution for a problem, even if that solution involves off the shelf parts. (My team can’t cut/cast gears, does that mean we shouldn’t be allowed to buy from Boston?)

4. Am I really taking a shortcut around thinking by buying something?
Heck no! It shows that I’m thinking MORE. I’m doing the smart thing. S-M-R-T, smart.

Overall I would argue:
My kids would still have a strong positive experience, even if we built our robot out of “Industrial Erector Set” and prebuilt mechanical solutions. It’s still OUR robot.

It is easier on mentors this way, and allows them to spend MUCH more time mentoring. If I don’t have to worry about designing a custom transmission, and working the bugs out of it, I can focus 200% on making sure the kids have fun, and get a lot out of the process (another way around this, is to do the development/debug in the fall, then redesign/tweak/rebuild during the 6 weeks, but this is another story).
Plus, mentor burnout sucks. Making things easier for mentors in this competition (while allowing them to provide the SAME positive experience) is a definite good thing. There are so many people busting their butts for this program, and for these kids… why make their lives harder?

Okay… I guess I wasn’t so brief. I feel strongly on this subject.
I guess, it all comes down to mentor quality. With good mentors, anything can be good for the kids.

$.20 (10x over my limit here)
John

#13

Don’t be so hard on yourself (rimshot) :smiley:

Thanks for elucidating!

#14

Amen. The decision making process still weighs heavily for teams no matter what the choice. There are a lot of parts/systems to a robot. Buy a gearbox? Build a gearbox? Use a white paper design? Create your own? Adapt a readily availble gearbox for the kit motors? In all of these cases student learning and inspiration can still be high. In all of these cases student learning and inspiration can still be low. It’s not the “WHAT you do” it’s the “HOW you do” that makes a difference in our society. Every one of the above choices is accepted practice in today’s global economy. Why create artificial boundaries that don’t exist in today’s world?

A team can choose or not choose to buy/use a stock gearbox. I won’t argue over philosophical views on which one a team should do - that’s up to the team and I respect all views/decisions that are well thought out.

I will tell you what inspires me about the selling of one awesome gearbox. A team is willing to take their own invention and share it with other teams at the risk of getting beaten with their own design. This elevates the level of competition and pushes all teams to “do it that much better” while encouraging teams to share more at the same time. I say horray for any team willing to make such a bold move. They’ve just increased their own workload, made it easier on others, and taken a step toward more highly functional machines at all regionals which will attract more sponsors and media. The end result is a huge win for FIRST and it’s participants.

I’m quite sure Phil Jackson never took his coaching staff to other cities to teach the fabled triangle offense to help elevate the level of competition in the NBA. This is a culture changing activity we engage in for the betterment of society as a whole.

I guess I wasn’t brief either … oops :slight_smile:

#15

So suppose that a middle ground was struck.

Instead of getting a plop-it-in-and-go TechnoKats gearbox, you received the gearbox with some assembly required. You’ve still got to learn how to put it together–you just don’t have to worry about puzzle pieces not fitting.

Teaching how to assemble off-the-shelf parts can be fun, I swear.

<storymode>

This past year, I was in Teacher Cadets at my school. And we had to teach a minimum of one lesson…of course, I had to teach this to about twenty fourth-graders in front of the teacher I was paired with and the TC teacher who determines my grade. So during my full day at the school (oddly enough, the day before Palmetto), I taught how to design, build, and test a communication device: radio-controlled cars. I explained the components, how the drivetrain works, the radio…the whole schimaymay. And then I turned the kids loose on their own kit of parts–a mostly-disassembled car.

It didn’t matter to them that the trucks were all off-the-shelf components. It didn’t matter to them that they didn’t get to do any high-end machining. It didn’t even matter to them that none of the groups managed to finish by the end of the school day (mostly due to bad planning on my part). These kids were inspired anyway…and I hope when they hit high school in about five years, they’ll join 1293.

</storymode>

Moral of the story? You can inspire kids with a lot of things–including twelve-buck R/C cars.

#16

As several people have mentioned, I think one of the best parts of FIRST is how FIRST can cover so much ground and not be the worst for it. Chairman’s or Championship, whatever you choose, there is a great community and great organization there for you. Both would inarguably be great accomplishments. FIRST brings the often very different people who find each of those goals most important together. It isn’t just For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology, its also For Inspiration and Recognition of Community Service and Selfless People (FIRCSSP? I need to work on that a bit more…)

As for purchasing, I think the rules are excellent as they are now. In fact, I would remove some restrictions on components (like pneumatics and motors). The reason buying components is fine and still provides opportunity for students to do stuff is because of two rules in FIRST 1) The low cap on spending, and 2) the restriction on buying goods that are not available to any team. Combined, they make it impossible to find a component that can make up a significant part of your robot. Unless FIRST robots start being mass produced, there is no way 3500 will buy any major part. Either the part is too specific to FIRST and costs a lot, or its too general and then you need to add work to make it functional (Andy’s gearbox has got to cost more than a DeWalt transmission, but it will be a lot easier to drop in and use.) Because we all compete with these same rules and because many teams reach their budget cap, or would if they acutally had the need to, the rest of the competition is left up to the work put into robots.

Consider this: What is a conservative estimate for the time that goes into a robot (Don’t forget all the time you spend outside of your designated build hours)? 8 hours/week * 10 people * 6 weeks = 480 hours. Assuming these people would be averaging a meager $8/hour and that a rough estimate for a non manufacturing job is that it costs a company twice the employee’s wages to employ him/her. That comes to 480 * 8 * 2 or 7680, or more than twice the allowed maximum spent a robot. What I’m trying to say is that you can’t realistically purchase a significant part of your robot.

#17

I like that solution. It seems like a pretty good balance to me. It’s obviously up to Andy and the Technokats to decide how they would want to market their “product” but I think that idea may be a good compromise. Plus, it would probably be easier to ship machined parts and instructions than it would be to ship a fully-assembled product.

#18

The $3500 cost limit, and the $400 single part cost limit still exist. These will force teams who are considering buying these gearboxes to make some crucial decisions when it comes to tradeoffs.

Steve,

I didn’t help Marconi invent the radio, or Da Vinci paint the Mona Lisa, I guess what they did wasn’t very inspirational for me. While we’re at it, why don’t we get rid of the KOP entirely, and force all the teams to build their robots from scratch. I mean after all, “inventions aren’t built using pre-made parts”.

You and I have had many an argument on topics similar to this one before. I guess were just coming from two totally different perspectives. I see what you’re saying, but I just see multiple paths on the road to inspiration.

Another reason why I am so behind these gearboxes, it’s going to raise the level of competition. Say I’m a mentor on a team who has mastered the art of building two speed gearboxes. Right now I’m thinking, “That Andy Baker has done it again, now everyone is going to have a 2 speed tranny, how am I going to give my team an edge, better head back to the drawing board…” The elite teams are going innovate to gain a competitive advantage. Expect to see all sorts of cool new drive systems this year, as a result of the availability of these gearboxes.

Cooler robots = Impressed sponsors = More money for FIRST = Easier expansion = Easier culture change

Isn’t this what we want?

#19

Good point, but I’d again look at what JVN has said here. If it’s fully assembled, I can certainly take it apart and give it to my students in a big pile. And if I really want to be a jerk (AKA teacher), I can tell them I lost the plans. Then, when they get stuck, tell them it’s their problem to solve and not mine (and become the biggest jerk of the year :)). Then, if they can’t figure out on their own who to contact, I’d point them to AB, Team 45, and CD in general. Voila, students communicating with an engineer and competitors half way around the country to get advice/information about their design, it’s assembly, application, maybe even integration. Sounds pretty real-world to me, but then again I’m just an English teacher :wink: .

If your team is not yet “old/mature” enough to handle that level of problem solving/stress, then use the assembled gearbox and concentrate on appendages, etc. It’s all about knowing your personnel and where they are on the learning/pain tolerance curve.

#20

Jeff,
I would argue that no “solution” is necessary.
Teams will always do their own thing. I feel a ruling from FIRST or a “compromise” as has been suggested is silly. Again, we’ve already got other design constraints, and FIRST could just be limiting a good thing.

Let’s face it, a team of bad mentors is still going to put the gearboxes together by themselves with no student involvement. Has your rule changed anything? Not really.

What Rich has said about being a “jerk” certainly applies here. :wink:

I would do something very similar. (Yeah… I’m a jerk).

In fact (thinking back) we DID do that this year. On this year’s robot we used the “rookie drivetrain” provided in the kit to power our arm. We took the (note: all premade) gearboxes and components, laid them down in a big pile in front of the kids, and said “go to it”. They went to it.

In retrospect, it was one of the coolest meetings we had. Nothing like a bunch of kids elbowing the college mentors out of the way, and working together to make that huge mountain of stuff into something moving.

JV

#21

Can’t agree with you more, mentor burnout does suck.

I just think that if you have the time and man power to make a good transmission then great, if not, there has ALWAYS been one there for you IN THE KIT to use if you attached a servo motor to the bosch transmission… that is why ppl started making custom trannys in the first place, to outdo the stuff that came in the kit.

Now if you think you can do better than the technokats, good luck. If you figure out some new revolutionary thing well then that is what this is all about now isn’t it?

You wouldn’t spend hours on making a hook if you could go to home depot and pick one out? I hope not cause I will be a few steps ahead of you time wise!

Anything i can buy off the shelf and use that can save me some time in that six weeks I will probably buy it instead of making it. I’m not gonna reinvent the wheel cause I can already buy it :slight_smile:

#22

I was making it a point to ignore this part, but it keeps bugging me and since you are looking forward to the replies, here we go :slight_smile: … I could take so many directions here, but let’s look at just a few personal examples I know about:

  1. Visit Al Ostrow and Team 341. The’ve won a division at the Championship and would love to win it all I’m sure, but they’ve also won two Regional Chairman’s Awards and were named a Chairman’s Honorable Mention in 04 in Atlanta. Ever sit and talk with these kids and Alums? They’re all fired up about their futures, FIRST, and sharing with others. NBC10 Tech Fest, Ramp Riot, Food Drives, mentoring, helping the disabled, visiting sponsors, demos, presentations to young kids promoting science and technology, on and on. These are people, very young people, who know every day that they do this they are positively affecting the future, creating limitless opportunities for themselves, and are seeing tangible changes for the better in their school, community, all of society, and most importantly in themselves. Make a visit and see if you come away remembering their robots.

  2. Chesapeake Regional 2003 - 357 Royal Assault wins the Regional CA. Tears, joy, excitement. The students of 103 spent some time with them afterward. All they could say to me was, “We want to feel like that.” Visit 357 and you’ll see a huge LEGO effort and hundreds of young - REALLY YOUNG - kids fired up about learning, sharing, and the future.
    Joy Troy and his crew are nothing short of remarkable for what they do for kids and for FIRST. Robots? Really?

  3. 2004 SC Regional - Team 433 submits their first ever CA entry. They don’t win, but they do win a Sat Judge’s Award and come away with the respect of thousands. Small team with limited resources has impacted a community and the future in amazing ways. I suggest you talk with Meredith Rice about what she has learned in FIRST and what excites her.

  4. Team 103 in 2003: I can write a book here, but let me just say that all of our lives are richer today, we have friends across the country, students and adults have had educational, professional, and job opportunities they wouldn’t otherwise have, a town with more cows than stoplights is known for technology of all things, and after winning the CA, we all began to work harder to help others because it was our responsibility. Every time I write a letter of recommendation for one of these students and list their accomplishments, contributions, and the people they have encountered (Kamen, Lavery, Abele, Flowers, Wosniak, CEO’s, Astronauts, …) I think, “Holy $%&#! These kids are so far ahead and have so many opportunities because of this.”

Man would I love to celebrate on Einstein someday, but there’s no way it’ll have the profound impact this has had. Get out there among these teams and spend time with them away from the craziness of the six weeks and find out what’s important. They’re all over the country and I could list dozens more team numbers here.

When you find a person (rare) or a group (much more rare) that is fully aware of the positive impact their efforts are having, believe that they really do make a difference in the world, and sense their own part in it as it is happening, the energy that is created is boundless and infectious. Some people spend their whole professional and personal lives in search of this feeling and they never experience it. From what I have seen, this occurs in FIRST more than anywhere else in our society and it is because of the CA and Gracious Professionalism, not because of the competition and who wins it.

#23

Rich, you are dead on. I love competition, love winning and love the challenge. The reason that I am involved as much as I am in FIRST is NOT because of these things. It IS because of the positive impact that I see with the students, mentors, teachers and those that they come in contact with. I have said many times that it was the students that drew me into FIRST. The excitement that I saw on everyones faces in Cleveland. The willingness to help out each other even if it meant that you might lose because of it. The impact that can be made by individuals and teams is huge. If I was given the choice of Chairmans or championship winners I would take Chairmans every time. To win at a regional or Championships is to win a battle but to win Chairmans is to win the war.

When at events you will not see me in the pits (not much anyway) with our team. I visit other teams and spend my time helping were I can and the on game days I announce. I do this because I believe in the principles behind FIRST more than the competition.

Karthik as per your quote “Another reason why I am so behind these gearboxes, it’s going to raise the level of competition.” I have to agree fully BUT is it all about the competition.

Note - Karthik and I disagree and argue lots. I believe that we are good friends and that there is no animosity held before, during or after one of our “discussions”. I just wish that he would see the light. :wink:

#24

“I could be wrong, but I’m not.” - Victims of Love (The Eagles ) :wink: