Build Project

This place will be the accumulation of information on the build project for the newbies, as well as any discussion on it. Periodic edits will be made to this post to ensure it is up-to-date with what we are planning to do.

FINAL VERDICT: Newbies do build project (chassis + addition); vets work on other more advanced/complicated projects, starting with the important stuff like GENERIC MOTOR MOUNTS! <-----VERY IMPORTANT.

1) Meeting Plan
2) Prioritize Things to Do (List of 6)
3)

Old Ideas:

End Goal:
Obstacle course: Robots are timed on how fast they can drive around school or a designated track (with sensors and cameras). Optional: scatter traffic cones around; robots must either avoid or move them with manipulators/arms.

Other ideas:
To make 2 subgroups, and make them just focus on drivetrain and a working electronics system first. The electronics system will be the old one if we can't borrow a cRIO from MVRT.

Things to do:
Get a list of needed materials, and what we actually have:
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkYmTuP9I0r3m3ld9QyvAADshBcr3gC4yEJ41xeDpvk/edit?hl=en_US
Understanding previous electronics board, programming, etc.
(Add moar later)

1) camera with onboard display on the bot, this will allow audience to see themselves. In addition have a transmitter to broadcast the video to the control console. this will allow you to drive the robot around corners.
2) Incorporate a speaker and mic so that audio conversation/music can be communicated back and forth between bot and console
3) Add sensors to this bot such as traction control, I believe this will be needed more in the coming year's competitions.
4) Gyro for directional positioning, very good for autonomous, more in the future.
5) build a real functioning arm, pivot and elevator type. There is a lot of physic and prototype needed for that.
6) very importantly, mechanical interfaces to allow the use of the window, FP motors. Also additional gearboxes for the Globe motors. These mechanical interfaces will allow you to easily adapt your motors to whatever application in the coming season's challenge.
All the above will be built on separate platforms and bolted to the existing bot.this may produce added weight but we are not competing, but just learning about concepts.
~Mr. Chew's suggestion. He puts emphasis on number 6, as it is most important for competition (Not having to redesign/remake the same part) and newbie training.
I agree on all of them, but I'm skeptical that we can still build an arm. I think 1,3, 4, and 6 are the most important. Thoughts?

So I came up with a few new ideas:

several mini-build projects: throughout the year, similar to mousetrap cars that take a few meetings, but with actual robots (Beetlebot, etc). These could lead up to our practice build.

practice build: split into teams, build 1-2 FRC-size chasses (chassi?) on which we can attach parts, such as cameras, sensors. Rather than one competition (e.g. soccer) at the end, we could have multiple little challenges: soccer, line-following, etc. Each one would simply involve a part that can be attached/detached easily from the chassis. This way we can test multiple parts (kicker, sensors, cameras) before the actual build season!

obstacle course/relay race: FRC/FTC-size robots race through an obstacle course. In the latter, it can be teams of 3-4 vs. 3-4. Each robot will drive up to another autonomously and hit a touch switch, which will trigger the next robot (the last robot has to cross the finish line). We could make this really interesting by adding parts of the course that robots have to climb or get over obstacles, etc.

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1QkYmTuP9I0r3m3ld9QyvAADshBcr3gC4yEJ41xeDpvk/edit?hl=en_US
Google Doc for Build Stuff.

Zhili and I came up with an idea for a 3-part competition:

(Competing?) teams are told to build an FRC-size chassis. In the first part, they focus on speed and manipulation for the drivetrain. The second part involves sensors, and the third a manipulative object (arm, kicker, etc).

Between each build period (which should take 3-6 meetings), there will be a mini-competition or challenge for the bots: an obstacle course around the school (teleoperated, then autonomous), or a game for the manipulator.

This multifaceted build allows for not only hands-on training with FRC-sized robots, but also experience with different additions that would be invaluable to build before the actual FRC competition.

The only thing that I am currently worried about is if each of the "teams" will be able to get a bot together (after training) in the relatively short time especially since the teams are composed of mostly half-vets and newbies.

But apart from that, +1 for the competition idea overall.

Well, the elegance of this project is that if they don't get past step 1 (Drivetrain) they can't move on to the actual arm assembly, or the sensors. This was pretty much a problem in previous years, as the bot wouldn't MOVE but the actual mechanism worked. So, yay, learning.

We have over 20 meetings from now through November, which gives us 80 hours (excluding workshops). That's at least 4 weeks of build season, which should be plenty of time to complete a chassis. As for the sensors and add-ons, I think they're a reasonable extra goal to work toward.

If we're going to do some sort of obstacle course/relay race i think that they should be separate. I don't think that people are going to be able to accomplish both.

Relay Race: I think that it would be cool if the robots could pass a baton between each other. (granted we aren't going to have that many robots but still)

Obstacle course: If we did this, could we make it completely autonomous?

Echoing Alvin, do you guys think that its realistic that we would finish 3 FRC-size robots in fall semester? Alternatively, we could just do smaller robots. Or maybe, just take out the manipulator part and just do chassis and sensors--> depending on where people are in October/Early November, we can hold the competition and then build another robot (going along with the whole build as many robots as you can)
But if we want manipulators and FRC size robots, i would say split the team in half and only do two--> 14-15 people per team? but thats just logistics and we can worry about that later

and i love how after all those discussions, we're back to what we started with....

Oh, another thing--> do we want to incorporate something that requires talking strategy? its something that we have to do for FRC, and it would be more of a true fake FRC experience but at the same time, it really doesnt take up that much time so we should be hitting the more essential points. --> do you think it would be worth it if we added a layer of complexity?

1. Sure. Going for time would be fine.

2. Yargh, or maybe some other object. Like various tools xD

3. Obstacle course: Uhhhhhh...maybe? I don't know if we have enough sensors to distribute for that, but if they did it based on guessing on far they have to go, then maybe.

4. Yes, yes, yes. Ivan's numbers says yes. And, remember, we're breaking it into 3 parts, to see how far they can get. If they only finish the drivetrain, okay. If they can get into the sensors, great. If they can get into manipulators, EXCELLENT.
In terms of dividing up the team, I don't care how it's divided, so...Have fun deciding that =)

5. It was the best method to get acquainted with FRC. Actually, it's a great method to do most things.

6. No idea what you mean by talking strategy. Like, a team based game, discussing strategies among themselves, or like talking the strategy around the game?

um I just did the math (saved the world?) and if everyone participates, I'm sure we can at least finish the chassis, and hopefully sensors. The manipulator is not as important, but if we have time, working on it would always be helpful.

In the obstacle course we could do tele-op first (once the chassis is completed); then we do it again completely autonomous (once the sensors are done). We could just time each robot and see which one is faster.

As for the relay race, we could add the baton if we finish the manipulator! That would be a really cool final addition. There would only be 2-3 bots, though, so maybe they would pass the baton multiple times?

Okay, correct me if I'm wrong but i get the feeling that you sort of want to do three steps? Like first finish the chassis, and then the sensors and then if time allows a manipulator?--> why cant the chassis and sensor happen simultaneously?

haha yeah thats why i was like uh wait not that many bots...

Going by that, i think that we should do the obstacle course, it would be easier to have a running bot for that than the relay race.

so the game then: build a bot capable of going through an obstacle course.
1) Do we want the obstacle course to have different heights (i.e. ramps/bumps)
2) fastest robot that only hits/knocks over X amount of obstacles wins?


A thought occured to me... there really isn't much to design... we're just having them build a chassis .... unless we add something interesting to the obstacle course but then the question of the ability of members pops up

1. Because they have to understand importance of different parts of build. A working mechanism won't mean anything if the bot won't MOVE. And, it's not like electronics don't have anything to do while build is working; same with programming. Also, it's better to have people understand the process and more on building a bot, as that means their ideas in brainstorming and when we actually chose an idea is more weighted, in the sense it's more well-informed.

2. Fine. We make bumps and all that stuff. We'll just copy some elements from the previous FRC map pools.

1. If you're saying that each thing should be a different step then read the following. If not then, my bad, i misunderstood. Then what will mechanical people be doing while they are waiting on programming. I feel like we should make it so that no one is ever not doing anything. If programming people honestly finish the sensor before the chassis is done, they can run the code with the 2010 bot.

2. I meant, input on the specifics on the game please....

We wanted to split into 3 parts because we always end up finishing parts we can't test. (This way we can focus on one thing at a time and actually finish stuff.) But I suppose we can pull people to do sensors IF there are enough already working on the chassis.

And I'd say definitely do obstacle course, but that doesn't mean we rule out the relay race (we can do that at the end IF we finish the manipulator).

Obstacles would be cool, but ramps/bumps might be hard. I was just thinking driving around school and going over rocks or grass or up small hills? But we can always throw in tiny obstacles like paper or wood or stuff on the ground.

As for design, they don't really need to worry about that until the manipulator or sensor part. That's why I suggested practice brainstorming with previous years' challenges.

yup yups--> we are all saying the same thing about relay race

CONCLUSION THUS FAR:
-We will do obstacle course build project
--> relay race will only happen if we have enough time to incorporate a manipulator

OHHHH! WORKSHOPS!!!--> wait so did you guys mean that you wanted to have sensors be separate because those could happen during workshops? cuz in that case then definitely the whole team should be doing the chassis stuff regardless of specialization. but if not, then i still think that sensor/chassis should be separated after a certain point

OMNIWHEELS!
6 WHEEL DRIVE!
4 WHEEL DRIVE... ?!? input!?!? :DDD

Poopy. Someone posted before, and, so, my post didn't get through. Well, here it is, again:


Okay, here:
Part 1:
Mechanical people does drivetrain. This shouldn't take long.
Electronics People does electronics board: This might take awhile, but would have no problem extending if needed (Since we have our own electronics board to "test" mechanical things if needed).
Programming does their own thing, maybe trying to work on tank drive, or camera.
Part 2:
Sensors
More specific mechanical (meaning more precise parts) to mount sensors, account for room.
Electronics: Wiring the sensors, understanding different types of sensors, etc.
Programming: Sensors. Obvious.
Part 3:
Mechanical: Making the work assembly.
Electronics: Pneumatic, adding on electronic parts to make "Manipulator" work.
Programming: Programming the arm, various stuff.

If we follow this, then no "subgroup" should be waiting on any other group.

Omniwheels: Maybe during actual build, and depending on the benefits it gives us.
Brainstorming: Yes, on previous challenges. Yes, yes, yes.

Sounds good! Finances/PR/Multimedia can do their own little thing while the project is going on. Or they could even do fake advertisements or animations or art related to our project... like Power and Pride!

About omniwheels, we were planning on giving each subgroup a different drive system, which means one is getting 4-wheel, one 6-wheel, and one omniwheels~

As for brainstorming, now that we have so many drive systems and sensors to worry about, I think we should just discuss designs/strategies for the build project.

about media--> HELL NO. I WANT MY FREAKIN NEWSLETTER ARI/CRYSTAL! >

okaayyy since everyone appears to vehemently oppose the use of omniwheels we can just have each team use 4-wheel drive. This will probably limit time differences in the obstacle-course-traversing to the driver/programmer's skills, but so be it.

EDIT: Okay...so I didn't realize there was a 2nd page to the discussion...major fail #2 on my part. Just disregard this mostly / take that into account...I think most of this has been covered in some way or another.

1. Going back to what Sophia said / also one of my concerns -- assume worst case scenario and all we get through is the basic chassis. That means the only engineering experience teams will have gotten will be the assembly of a kit chassis. I'm a little concerned about that...although...I guess at least that still offers chaining / gear ratios / motor interfacing / wheel mounting. Something to keep in mind.

2. Different heights -- at this point, an uneven surface will hardly factor into the design; it's not as if we're going to build bots with suspension for the practice build. I don't see much of a point to this. While it does add interest, it also adds room for stuff to go wrong. KISS?
Avoiding obstacles is more of a driver challenge; I think that's fine.

I vote 2

Crystal, can you not vote?