Actually Mario... it is possible to key a robot to a specific transmitter, if you use non-standard radio control equipment. Its not something that would be easy to do with off-the-shelf RC gear so I wouldnt expect other roboteers to do it. However perhaps we should have more notices at events to tell people not to use RC models.
Hi Mario (hard luck with TaN at IRR 2003, btw, I really wanted to see it run well).
Ah, I remember the guys with the R/C car outside, but Id presumed that theyd been sanctioned by the organisers. Thatll teach me to be a good spectator and check! Im glad there was no harm to the roboteers (although, as a spectator, it renewed my musings about whether a robot could break someones arm against the railing while theyre trying to play with links - my best alternative, a bull pen with a cattle crush to hold the robot still, would be large and a pain to construct, as well as slowing things down, so I hope my fears are unfounded). I concur - these things happen, whatever we try to do, and I was just indicating that at no point had an official endangered themselves in any of those cases.
That particular problem does make me wonder if it might be a bonus to have someone sitting there with a frequency scanner before each fight to check that no-one was mucking about. Wouldnt help once the fight had started, but itd be better than nothing. Dont know if anyone has the relevant kit available.
Sorry, the degrees thing was just a take on the you dont have to be mad to work here, but it helps popular in offices in the 80s - dont worry, I know you didnt mean it! Besides, roboteers will get far closer to a specialist degree in each of these fields than a member of the general public, in the course of learning while roboteering. We keep telling people its educational, after all.
If Roger has seen examples of bad practice inside other peoples machines, Im sure the professional in him rebels. Perhaps scorn isnt the most popular response with those being criticised, but hes allowed to express an opinion, especially if he feels too endangered by the level of expertise around him to be involved in the sport. When I eventually get to the stage of having a robot ready to compete on the circuit (I have no interest in Mentorn), Id love Roger to look at it and give me a dressing down for whichever bits of construction are sub-par: thatll be the way for me to learn.
Roger didnt say all roboteers are electrically incompetent, just that some might be (at least by industrial standards); Im sure I would be, in spite of my best efforts, when I first enter. The way to avoid criticism is to be above it - if you know Roger (or anyone else) cant find anything wrong with your machine, you know criticism isnt levelled at you. If your workmanship is challenged, ensure it meets that challenge!
There are always going to be novices at these events - I intend to be one, after all - and there will be people who have acquired bad habits. Perhaps it would be better to tell an individual roboteer that their wiring might be improved by doing something specific (if it improves the robot, who would mind?) rather than making everyone feel theyre being tarred with the same brush, but Im sure thats just down to a misunderstanding (the traffic has gone both ways, and Im putting all Rogers comments under the spotlight whilst - not unconditionally - defending him). Theres going to be poor workmanship; if that makes any EO or roboteer feel unsafe, theyre well within their rights to object and withdraw, although trying to help rectify the problem case-by-case would also be good.
Assuming that people cant be relied upon to wire a safety light (on topic - woohoo) properly might offend some people, but it might be true for others - and anyone can have a bad moment. I still think the light makes the correctly wired robots safer, but equally *if* assumptions are made (and weve all agreed they shouldnt be) only one robot - not the majority - needs to go wrong for there to be an accident.
That said, youd hope the quality inspection before the fight would flag up a problem, possibly with a free lesson in soldering attached from someone who *does* know what theyre doing. Even if things arent going to be perfect (and people will learn fast if their non-safety electronics keep failing), comments from an expert, even a despairing one, can only help.
Perhaps Roger might consider doing a lecture at an event or two in which he would describe the correct ways of doing things (and, ideally, what happens if you dont do them)? Anyone feeling unjustly criticised could sit in and confirm that theyre not the target of complaint; novices like myself could learn a lot, and we can all decide exactly what Rogers criteria for non-shoddy construction would be. Someone might be able to show him some improvements on his own technique, from which we can all learn. At the moment, the ire at his comments are because nobody knows whether theyre being criticised, and if so, what for.
In the meantime, well have to accept that perhaps those novices less thick-skinned than myself could do with a buffer zone until theyre up to a quality level where Roger can stand to comment on them without disdain!
I hasten to add that Id hope Roger can learn something from poking around inside peoples machines, too. The evolution in our sport is very rapid, and anyone out of the scene is going to need to keep interested to be aware of current standards. This became painfully clear when, in sounding out colleagues at work, I found a season 2 entrant who persisted in trying to tell me that the trick is PCM motor control. An innovative feature five years ago has been obligatory for so long that it never even occurred to me that anyone would have entered a robot with on/off motors. WBC wont be obsolete for a while, but if we want to see it competitive again we need to encourage Roger to stay involved (along with everyone else on this forum, I should add). Im a great fan of many robots which arent very active on the charity circuit, so lets keep everyone as happy as we can.
My god, but I ramble. Ahem.
--
Fluppet
My next robot will have an indicator which will show if the receiver is in failsafe (orange light), receiving all channels in zero position (green light), or has one of the channels active (red light). This way I can check if it is safe to put the main link in, without having to worry that the robot will go crazy when I put the link in. (As happend to me during the IRR2003).
I dont see what the problem is with a power light. Of course it can break, and it is only an indication. But pulling out the removable link is also not a guarantee that the robot is totally dead. Removable links may have been wired incorrectly, or wires may have been shorted due to battle damage. Is that a reason to stop using removable links ??
Niels
Hammerhead
We can not stop using removable links in one form or another i cant think of another sure way of killing main power.
LED - think indicator not safety device
Link - think safety device
You know what... Im with Mario on this one. Im ditching my robot for basket weaving!
I was thinking of a nice apple basket using a contrasting kevlar and carbon fibre weaveOne question though, are the apples classed as a consumable or do I have to include them in my weight limit? Oh... and are red apples allowed or is it only green because I was thinking of using a mixture of the two.
Long live competative basket weaving!
And yes sarcasm is the lowest form of wit - but I like it
LOL - well said Dan. I cant believe this thread is still rageing on.
Give it up every one - fit the light if you think its a daft idea or not. If as much effort was put into helping eachother and working together as has gone into the rowing on this thread then im sure we would all be better off!
Now where did you say those basket weaving lessons were Dan?
To the people who say I made mistakes when building WBC, you are right, I did make one big mistake.
I did not calculate the number of people who would annoy me by telling me I built it incorrectly.
I have learnt much from that, a lot of it from a just few of the FRA members.
I have been reminded just how annoying nit pickers can be.
The most annoying are those who do not check their facts before telling me I did something wrong.
Such as telling me and the world that I can€™t weld grade 5 tititanium, when I was not actually using grade 5 titanium.
If you get your facts wrong when telling someone off, the telling off rebounds on you and you are regarded with suspicion and probably disliked.
Had I built WBC perfectly, without any errors at all, I would still be looking for the perfect pencil to start the first sketch with, and no one would have heard of it.
But I did build it, using the best materials and techniques available at the time, and millions of people remember it, warts and all.
We should remember that robots for RW were supposed to be built on the cheap, from surplus materials by amateurs.
Most are still built that way and to the best ability of those amateurs.
We know they dont have college degrees in robot building techniques, and never will have.
Some of them will, by safety standards, do a poor job, but it is the best they can do.
Technical inspections can only be so thorough and may miss, for example, bad joints in wiring and other well hidden faults.
Those of us responsible for event safety must take that into account when robots are let loose in the arena and use our lifes experience to make sure that nobody gets hurt.
Your experience will not the same as the guy in charge at the time.
If you question his methods be VERY sure you do know what you are talking about or you will be the one in the wrong.
I have now made another mistake; I have posted on this forum again.
Some will no doubt find reason in this post to say things to annoy me again and no doubt what I have said here will annoy some of you.
It was not my intention to annoy anybody deliberately and you should take that into account before you do get annoyed.
Roger and everyone.
It seems a lot of people have gone on the defensive when their skills, safety awareness, whatever have been questioned. The thread does seem to have turned into a bit of a sniping match and thats counterproductive as weve gone off topis as to whether the LED is a good idea or not.
I for one think WBC is and was a fantastic robot and I wish Id had 8 grand (or whatever) to spare when it went up for sale. I can fully understand your feelings when you come under criticism from what you must regard as relative amateurs - Id certainly welcome some design and build assistance from someone with your record.
A lot of the other bot builders contributing to this also have extremely well built robots and have spent a lot of time on them (for example Mute) and a lot of them also have bucketloads of experience in their fields (e.g. Mario) and I can understand them not taking kindly to being criticised.
Can we now all just accept that the LED is mandatory, should not be taken as a this robot is safe indicator, but can be used as a power on confirmation or a first-glance indicator of status. Were all agreed that links have to stay, and whether theyre behind a standard panel or not, they must be easy to remove without tools in a safe manner. On the basic points were basically all on the same side. Is it really worth a 12 page thread made up largely of attack, defend, counterattack, defend, lets get back on topic, ok... Attack, defend, etc etc just to debate whether an LED should be added or not?
Lets just add them, and those that wish to ignore them can do so. At the end of the day if they get made non-mandatory its not like well be forced to remove them.
-- Kev
2 things,
first to Roger...
I agree with everything you said, except one thing. Would you believe there are actually universities that are running robot wars degrees now? how mad is that? I think (from memory) Wrawick univercity was mentioned recently as having one of these courses. Maybe you should e-mail your local uni Roger and see if they would be interested in your rather deep pool of experience for them to draw on if they have similar plans.
2nd,
I questioned the point of an LED indicator when it was first brought up. I thought about it getting damaged, and people assuming that because it was not lit it was safe etc... people using it as a reason to disconnect their brains. As long as this is never allowed to happen, I see no reason now no to have them, we are not replacing anything with these, just adding them to give us another layer of protection. I wouldnt champion the cause, but Ill agree and vote for it if I was given the choice.
Just my little contribution, without the attacks or defends.
James, several places do courses in robotics; Im not sure Im aware of doing a course in *combat* robotics, which is a subtly different thing. From their comments and judging abilities, as seen from a TV spectators perspective, its not clear to me that the eminent academics on the RW judging panel know anything like as much as the competitors do (about combat robots - Im sure their expertise in the flocking behaviour of helium balloons is unparalleled). Of course, they may just not be putting their knowledge across very well. Er, this isnt supposed to be another attack - its not clear who else the judges could be - just an attempt to point out that even pertinent academic expertise probably wont go far. If anywhere *does* do a course in combat robotics, let me know!
Im sure a visit from any roboteer would be popular in a university. Especially if it was open to non-students of the university in question (Id go if Roger - or Arfur, or Rex, or... - gave a talk in London, for example). But Id travel a lot further to a talk at a robot combat event, aimed at people who know the basics and the obvious; pity team Plunderbird ran out of time when they started a technical talk at Debenham 2002. Long may all the experts keep posting to the forum.
Sorry, off-topic again. Ill go and buy some LEDs. :-)
--
Fluppet
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks