FTC RoboCamp
Date: July 14 - 18, 2014
Time:
7:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. (Mon.);
8:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. (Tues.-Thurs.);
8:00 A.M. - 6:30 P.M. (Fri.)
# of Members: 14
In mid-July 2014, Whitney’s FTC team, with the help of the VEX and FLL teams, ran the club’s second Tech RoboCamp. As the third Robocamp of the summer (after the FLL and VEX Robocamps), this program was developed to give older students the opportunity to experience another platform of robotics, the Tetrix building system produced by Pitsco and used by FTC teams for their competitions. Throughout the week, we taught the 14 students in the class how to use the large metal pieces, strong electrical and motor system, and the RobotC programming interface to compete in a final game.
The week began on the 14th with lessons in all aspects of the parts and mechanical design of FTC robots. We introduced ourselves and had the rest of the students introduce themselves to start with a brief icebreaker. The students were organized on to two teams of three and two teams of four of their own choosing, with whom they sat throughout the week with a table on which to build and program their robot. We also gave the students a beginning test to gauge their initial knowledge in FTC parts and skills and to compare their knowledge with a test at the end of the week. After the introductions and initial test, the students were shown a presentation on FTC, FIRST, Gracious Professionalism, and the Tetrix parts. After learning the basics of the Tetrix system, the students were given time to build their base kitbots. As some students were faster than others at constructing the base robot, some groups had nothing to do as they waited for the other groups to finish their robots. For future RoboCamps, we need to create activities for students during off time. After lunch and robot construction, we gave powerpoint presentations on mechanisms, drive trains, and other mechanical design aspects in the FTC competition. While our gear challenges were good activities for the students, the lectures included should be more interactive time to engage the students and allow them more fully understand the concepts. One interesting addition to this year’s RoboCamp was a presentation to explain a design idea for a mock challenge relating to the end of the program game. This introduced judging and presenting, two valuable aspect of engineering and robotics competitions. Small prizes were given out for the best presentation, encouraging a better discussion. Ideally, for the next RoboCamp, this should be repeated and expanded to a final review of each team’s robot design.
On the second day, students were introduced to programming an FTC robot using RobotC. Moses introduced students to the logic behind autonomous programs using jsdares, a platform designed to visualize code. The students experimented with moving their virtual robot using various commands to move, turn, and stop. Later, Moses, Andrew, Daniel, and Proud introduced decision making through if-else statements, as well as for-loops and while-loops. Students were challenged to write their own functions to streamline their code and use the statements taught in order to make different paths with their virtual robots. After they practiced this, the teachers introduced them to the syntax of RobotC as well as the basics of remote control. By the end of the day, all of the students were able to make their physical robots move via joystick controller by writing their own programs.
On the third day of the RoboCamp, we introduced the game to the students and presented the final powerpoint on strategy and the design process to the students. After explaining how to brainstorm for the game and develop a design, a teacher worked with each group and helped the teams work out a feasible design for the competition. After brainstorming, the four teams worked to finish their robots for the game with guidance from us as necessary. Teams worked on their robots with help as requested from us for the second half of Wednesday, all of Thursday, and the beginning of Friday. Each group developed a different strategy to the game, with most skipping the large beach ball. By the last day however, only two robots functioned as one robot’s ball collector design did not work and the other robot had programming and mechanical malfunctions. The final competition went well, however the housebot was unable to score, thus making matches very boring as two teams dominated. For future Robocamps, the final competition should include at least six robot teams to make matches more fun and less predictable. Also, more time should be given between matches to allow for repairs.
Overall, our second FTC RoboCamp went well. We had over double the turnout to this camp and better lessons than last year. While the powerpoints were improved, presentations could still be improved by adding more interactive lessons. Presentation skills and the engineering process should also be covered more as higher level material for the generally older audience we intend to attract with the Tech RoboCamp. The team did well at inspiring new faces to engineering while earning needed funds for the upcoming season.
Time:
7:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. (Mon.);
8:00 A.M. - 4:00 P.M. (Tues.-Thurs.);
8:00 A.M. - 6:30 P.M. (Fri.)
# of Members: 14
In mid-July 2014, Whitney’s FTC team, with the help of the VEX and FLL teams, ran the club’s second Tech RoboCamp. As the third Robocamp of the summer (after the FLL and VEX Robocamps), this program was developed to give older students the opportunity to experience another platform of robotics, the Tetrix building system produced by Pitsco and used by FTC teams for their competitions. Throughout the week, we taught the 14 students in the class how to use the large metal pieces, strong electrical and motor system, and the RobotC programming interface to compete in a final game.
The week began on the 14th with lessons in all aspects of the parts and mechanical design of FTC robots. We introduced ourselves and had the rest of the students introduce themselves to start with a brief icebreaker. The students were organized on to two teams of three and two teams of four of their own choosing, with whom they sat throughout the week with a table on which to build and program their robot. We also gave the students a beginning test to gauge their initial knowledge in FTC parts and skills and to compare their knowledge with a test at the end of the week. After the introductions and initial test, the students were shown a presentation on FTC, FIRST, Gracious Professionalism, and the Tetrix parts. After learning the basics of the Tetrix system, the students were given time to build their base kitbots. As some students were faster than others at constructing the base robot, some groups had nothing to do as they waited for the other groups to finish their robots. For future RoboCamps, we need to create activities for students during off time. After lunch and robot construction, we gave powerpoint presentations on mechanisms, drive trains, and other mechanical design aspects in the FTC competition. While our gear challenges were good activities for the students, the lectures included should be more interactive time to engage the students and allow them more fully understand the concepts. One interesting addition to this year’s RoboCamp was a presentation to explain a design idea for a mock challenge relating to the end of the program game. This introduced judging and presenting, two valuable aspect of engineering and robotics competitions. Small prizes were given out for the best presentation, encouraging a better discussion. Ideally, for the next RoboCamp, this should be repeated and expanded to a final review of each team’s robot design.
On the second day, students were introduced to programming an FTC robot using RobotC. Moses introduced students to the logic behind autonomous programs using jsdares, a platform designed to visualize code. The students experimented with moving their virtual robot using various commands to move, turn, and stop. Later, Moses, Andrew, Daniel, and Proud introduced decision making through if-else statements, as well as for-loops and while-loops. Students were challenged to write their own functions to streamline their code and use the statements taught in order to make different paths with their virtual robots. After they practiced this, the teachers introduced them to the syntax of RobotC as well as the basics of remote control. By the end of the day, all of the students were able to make their physical robots move via joystick controller by writing their own programs.
On the third day of the RoboCamp, we introduced the game to the students and presented the final powerpoint on strategy and the design process to the students. After explaining how to brainstorm for the game and develop a design, a teacher worked with each group and helped the teams work out a feasible design for the competition. After brainstorming, the four teams worked to finish their robots for the game with guidance from us as necessary. Teams worked on their robots with help as requested from us for the second half of Wednesday, all of Thursday, and the beginning of Friday. Each group developed a different strategy to the game, with most skipping the large beach ball. By the last day however, only two robots functioned as one robot’s ball collector design did not work and the other robot had programming and mechanical malfunctions. The final competition went well, however the housebot was unable to score, thus making matches very boring as two teams dominated. For future Robocamps, the final competition should include at least six robot teams to make matches more fun and less predictable. Also, more time should be given between matches to allow for repairs.
Overall, our second FTC RoboCamp went well. We had over double the turnout to this camp and better lessons than last year. While the powerpoints were improved, presentations could still be improved by adding more interactive lessons. Presentation skills and the engineering process should also be covered more as higher level material for the generally older audience we intend to attract with the Tech RoboCamp. The team did well at inspiring new faces to engineering while earning needed funds for the upcoming season.