Hi All,
I gotta throw in my $0.02. I've only been coaching for the last two
years, but I feel it has been invaluable to have the kids split into pairs
to work on their missions. Our first decision as a team is to come up with
a base design and make 2 or 3 copies of it so that each pair of students
can work more or less independently with their own robot to get their
assigned missions completed. They come up with their own appendages, but
any significant changes have to be coordinated with the other subgroups.
I'm a big believer in this method as it keeps all kids focused on the
problem solving of their missions during practices without anyone waiting
for their turn on the one and only robot. I've never run into any of the
memory issues so can't comment on that.
I will also point out that from what I have read, they initially gave
some scoring advantage to teams using RCX robots when competing against the
"new" NXT ones. They eventually dropped this when they found the RCX wasn't
as much of a disadvantage as they thought it would be. This tells me a lot
of the problem solving comes in the cleverness of the solution and is not
so limited by the confines of the technology used to solve it. One of my
teams had very, very simple designs last year and still earned 1st place in
robot performance in the VA/DC regionals so I'm not sure I would expect the
EV3 to be a huge advantage when it comes to the missions.
Anyway, long story short, if it were me, I would definitely go with
another NXT for this team so you can have identical robots that the
students can work on programming in parallel. This means more time on task
for them and the more they will get out of it in the long run.
Regards,
-David Lawrence
Coach Spegonauts 2011, 2012
On Thu, Jul 4, 2013 at 3:37 PM, Bdh612-ess <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Lego response is indeed great, no disparage of their performance was
> intended, but the OP needs to evaluate which is the greater advantage to
> his team, the new hardware we haven't seen yet or the flexibility of
> redundancy.
>
> If there is a parts issue with any of the electrical parts, the robot sits
> in a partially disassembled state while awaiting the replacement - its an
> unlikely scenario, but one that good engineering practice considers as part
> of the decision process. The OP may well decide to take the risk - Our team
> did just that initially.
>
> I've seen pictures of the new programming interface and while its pretty
> similar to the old one and is still based on labview, there are
> differences. I hope they're improvements, but we won't know what impact
> it'll have until people start receiving their kits in August.
>
> All that said, the new features are pretty exciting, I'm working really
> hard to be able to use it ourselves and also to acquire an additional base
> set for the redundancy, but I do so with a little trepidation that we will
> waste some valuable time in the first weeks after the challenge is released
> incorporating the unfamiliar technology.
>
> Brandy mentioned the memory issues with the now fairly old NXT, but the
> additional processing speed of the new brick is also not insignificant - it
> should be able steer more accurately and I know from the videos that it can
> react fast enough to balance on two wheels. Maybe it'll even be able to
> transition from one movement to the next with less of a gap (although that
> may be limited in how long it take to know that the motors have stopped). I
> also think that the new gyro sensor could be a total game changer for some
> designs (if they allow its use) and the ball wheel should significantly
> reduce the thought that goes into the third leg of the robot. I've also
> heard rumor that we'll be able to use a fourth motor this year, but not
> from an authoritative source, so I'm not holding my breath.
>
> For our team, we're trying to go with the EV-3 solution, but we don't have
> to actually make that decision until we have the kit. For the OP's team and
> any other team that can only get hold of one set of hardware this year, I
> think the situation is a little more complex- it'd be like a rookie team
> again.
>
> Even with all the additional features of the EV-3, it's not going to win
> or lose tournaments for anyone - it does help, but it not the only factor
> by far.
>
> Brian
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Jul 4, 2013, at 11:41 AM, Brandy bergenstock <[log in to unmask]>
> wrote:
>
> About broken parts- Lego is super good about getting broken parts out to
> you fast- IF you have purchased them within a year. We had an issue during
> our season last year, and they sent me a replacement before I had sent
> them the broken one to examine (repair?). Gotta love Lego :)
>
> I would go with the EVO3.
> The advancements that Lego has made during each total machine upgrade has
> been significant (NXT1.0 to 2.0 aside, where the only difference was the
> color sensor and some data logging that FLL teams will never use.) FLL
> now allows teams to use color sensors, about 2 years after they were
> introduced. How many more years before they allow 4 motors during
> competition? Also, a major downside to the NXT is its limited memory
> capacity. My team had to change several programs to fit them all on the
> bot :( My brilliant programmers were forced to set aside any knowledge of
> datawires to make sure we could get all the programs on the brick. Since
> EVO3 has more memory and an optional stick for added memory, that is
> unlikely to be a problem for future EVO3 teams. So the only thing that
> really bothered me about the NXT brick has been solved in their Evo3
> upgrade. Bonus, the programming is still the same. You can move from
> using the NXT's labview to EVO3's labview without any problems. Having
> two bots running two versions of the software does mean that you will have
> to have at least 1 machine dedicated to each version of the software. Kids
> will have to know which bot they were using and stick with that one. It
> seems that any program written in one version would need to be copied
> down on paper and then written into the other. The NXT brick versions
> were backwards compatible, but not RCX to NXT. Meaning, I could download
> a NXT1 program to my machine with no problem, but if a 2.0 code were
> transferred to a NXT 1.0 labview it couldn't read it all the time- some of
> the time yes, but not allows. I have no idea if the Evo3 is backwards
> compatible to NXT. I truly hope so!
> Because the Evo3 appears to be a better, larger machine capable of
> more tricks than the NXT, and because it shares the same programming
> language, I would upgrade with a Evo3.
> Brandy
>
>
> ------------------------------
> *From:* Jeff Lavezzo <[log in to unmask]>
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 3, 2013 9:25 PM
> *Subject:* [VADCFLL-L] NXT2 vs EV3
>
> Hi All,
>
> My team's sponsors are offering to buy us an additional robot this year.
> It'll be our second year as a team and this would be our second robot.
> We have to choose between getting a second NXT2 or getting the new EV3.
> The pros of getting the NXT2 is that we'd then have to of the same kits
> that we could use in parallel and interchangeably. The pros of getting the
> EV3 is getting the latest and greatest and setting us up for future work.
>
> Can anyone with more experience in FLL than we have come up with a good
> reason to go either way? Is it really that great a benefit to have two
> robots to work with? Is the EV3 so much better?
>
> One other point to consider: our team is pretty much 13 and up so probably
> winding down our time as an FLL team, but our equipment will probably be
> passed to a younger team at some point.
>
> Thanks for any advice
>
> Jeff Lavezzo
> Charlottesville
> ------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit
> https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or
> leave the list".
> VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L.
> Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-announcements-l.html to
> subscribe.
>
>
> ------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit
> https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or
> leave the list".
> VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L.
> Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-announcements-l.html to
> subscribe.
>
> ------------------------------
> To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit
> https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or
> leave the list".
> VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L.
> Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-announcements-l.html to
> subscribe.
>
-- To UNSUBSCRIBE or CHANGE your settings, please visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-l.html and select "Join or leave the list".
-- VADCFLL administrative announcements are sent via VADCFLL-ANNOUNCEMENTS-L. Visit https://listserv.jmu.edu/archives/vadcfll-ANNOUNCEMENTS-l.html to subscribe.
|
