1
Connor Gidner – Kingsley Michael Farese – Lake Leelanau St. Mary
Rachael Peabody – Benzie Central Colin May – Bellaire
Advisors: Tim Wheatley and Hollianne McHugh
Competition Date: March 7 – March 8 & March 21 – March 22
Date: May 21, 2014
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
2
Abstract The FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) is an international event in which teams are given six
weeks to design and build a robot that will play a 3-on-3 game. The rules for the game are presented
at the beginning of the six weeks. In this year’s game, every team had to design a robot that would
function autonomously and by Teleop (remote control). The game was called Aerial Assist, it was
played on a 25’x54’ field, straddled by a truss 5’ off the ground. The objective was to score as many
balls in goals as possible during the 2 minute and 30 second match. The more Alliances score their
balls in their goals, and the more they work together to do it, the more points their Alliance receives.
The team used the Plan, Do, Study, Act (PDSA) process in order to successfully build their
robot. The process began at the Manufacturing Technology Academy, where the team watched the
live streaming of the game introduction. The team then held a brainstorming session at MTA where
they used a structured process to gather design and functionality ideas. The team met with mentors
in order to get feedback on their design ideas. Once a design was finalized, the team started to build
prototype systems for the robot.
Each team member took the lead on a specific portion of the project in order to build the robot
in an organized fashion. These positions included: Design, Build, Electrical, and Programming. The
team had four leaders, making sure the sub-teams worked well together and communicated with
each other. In addition, the team has other personnel readily available to them: this included the
junior class at the MTA.
The team participated in two FRC district competitions. The first competition was hosted by
Gull Lake High School and the second was hosted by Traverse City High School. Compared to
previous years, the robot didn’t perform well at the Gull Lake competition. Although the team’s robot
preformed much better at the St. Joseph competition, they came out with the same record and
ranking as at the Traverse City competition.
The team’s ultimate success showed how well they worked together and their perseverance in
the face of challenges while following the “Student Designed, Student Built” expectation. The PDSA
process controlled the teams journey and provided the team with a solid foundation in order to
succeed.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
3
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 5 Background ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 6 Plan 1: Document the Background - Describe why you team has chosen this engineering project. Include the
context in which your project will function.
Initial Problem Statement -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 7 Plan 2: Define the Problem or Opportunity – Create a problem/opportunity statement with specific quantitative
measurable outcomes.
System Analysis of the FRC Process ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 8 Plan 3: Document the Current Situation – List and describe constraints: Budget, existing and available resources,
personnel, and rules.
Team Responsibilities Chart ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 9 Do 4: Develop an Action Plan – Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and instruments to be used.
Driving System ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 10 Do 4: Develop an Action Plan – Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and instruments to be used. Do 5: Implement an Action Plan to Create a Prototype – Carry out the plan. Construct the prototype; document with diagrams, photos, video, or similar means Do 6: Test the Prototype – Document all activity and record all data and results. Note: All modifications must be recorded. For some projects step five and six occur concurrently. Study 7: Analyze the Test Results – Convert data acquired in step six into appropriate graphs. Describe trends, problems etc. indicated by the data Act 8a: For design features that were successfully implemented, Implement, or Standardize the Improvement. Describe how successful design features were made permanent parts of the prototype. Act 8b: For design features that were NOT successfully implemented, re-engineer the prototype. Decide how to address each unsuccessfully-implemented design feature by repeating steps 3 through 8.
Electrical System ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 11 Do 4: Develop an Action Plan – Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and instruments to be used. Do 5: Implement an Action Plan to Create a Prototype – Carry out the plan. Construct the prototype; document with diagrams, photos, video, or similar means Do 6: Test the Prototype – Document all activity and record all data and results. Note: All modifications must be recorded. For some projects step five and six occur concurrently. Study 7: Analyze the Test Results – Convert data acquired in step six into appropriate graphs. Describe trends, problems etc. indicated by the data. Act 8a: For design features that were successfully implemented, Implement, or Standardize the Improvement.
Describe how successful design features were made permanent parts of the prototype.
Act 8b: For design features that were NOT successfully implemented, re-engineer the prototype. Decide how to
address each unsuccessfully-implemented design feature by repeating steps 3 through 8.
Shooting System ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 12 Do 4: Develop an Action Plan – Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and instruments to be used.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
4
Do 5: Implement an Action Plan to Create a Prototype – Carry out the plan. Construct the prototype; document with diagrams, photos, video, or similar means Do 6: Test the Prototype – Document all activity and record all data and results. Note: All modifications must be recorded. For some projects step five and six occur concurrently. Study 7: Analyze the Test Results – Convert data acquired in step six into appropriate graphs. Describe trends, problems etc. indicated by the data Act 8a: For design features that were successfully implemented, Implement, or Standardize the Improvement. Describe how successful design features were made permanent parts of the prototype. Act 8b: For design features that were NOT successfully implemented, re-engineer the prototype. Decide how to address each unsuccessfully-implemented design feature by repeating steps 3 through 8.
Loading System--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------13 Do 4: Develop an Action Plan – Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and instruments to be used. Do 5: Implement an Action Plan to Create a Prototype – Carry out the plan. Construct the prototype; document with diagrams, photos, video, or similar means Do 6: Test the Prototype – Document all activity and record all data and results. Note: All modifications must be recorded. For some projects step five and six occur concurrently. Study 7: Analyze the Test Results – Convert data acquired in step six into appropriate graphs. Describe trends, problems etc. indicated by the data. Act 8a: For design features that were successfully implemented, Implement, or Standardize the Improvement.
Describe how successful design features were made permanent parts of the prototype.
Act 8b: For design features that were NOT successfully implemented, re-engineer the prototype. Decide how to
address each unsuccessfully-implemented design feature by repeating steps 3 through 8.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
5
INTRODUCTION
FIRST stands for, “For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology.” Below is a
description of how the FIRST competition operates each year. This excerpt was taken from
usfirst.org.
FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) is a unique varsity sport of the mind designed to help high-
school aged young people discover how interesting and rewarding the life of engineers and
researchers can be.
The FIRST Robotics Competition challenges teams of young people and their mentors to solve
a common problem in a six-week timeframe using a standard “kit of parts” and a common set
of rules. Teams build robots from the parts and enter them in competitions designed by Dean
Kamen, Dr. Woodie Flowers, and a committee of engineers and other professionals.
FIRST redefines winning for these students because they are rewarded for excellence in
design, demonstrated team spirit, gracious professionalism and maturity, and the ability to
overcome obstacles. Scoring the most points is a secondary goal. Winning means building
partnerships that last.
The Manufacturing Technology Academy (MTA) has participated in FRC since 2006. Every year
since, MTA has fielded a robot that is both student designed and student built. The instructors at the
MTA have students compete in FRC and lead the project with very little adult interference because it
promotes the advancement of necessary real-world skills. The experience of leading a FRC team is
unmeasurable; students gain so much from competing and receive an edge that puts them ahead of
other high school students.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
6
Plan 1: DOCUMENT THE BACKGROUND
Describe why your team has chosen this engineering project. Include the context in which your
project will function.
The team used the time they had before the game was released to gain an understanding of what
would be asked of them during the build season. The background work done during this time helped
the team organize and prepare themselves for the build season. The tool used to carry out this task
was brainstorming.
Research
Analyze preceding FIRST teams’ documentation
Perform online research
Interview MTA instructors on previous MTA participation
Why This Project Was Chosen
To design and build a robot that will compete in this year’s FRC
To apply the skills we have learned at MTA
To develop our management and leadership skills
To learn new skills in all categories
To have fun
Context in Which This Project Will Function
MTA’s FIRST robotic teams will be given six weeks to design and build a robot that will play in a
three-on-three game that will be played on a 27x54 ft. court. Each match is to be two minutes and
fifteen seconds, with an initial twenty second autonomous period. The robot must fit within a
38x28x60 inch box, and weigh no more than 120 lbs.
With the background and general idea of the project outlined, it was time for the team to create a
problem statement.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
7
Plan 2: Initial Problem Statement
Create a problem/opportunity statement with specific quantitative measurable outcomes.
The team decided to use the Initial Problem Statement tool in order to define the problem at hand.
This tool takes the problem statement and looks at it as three parts: the current situation, the impact,
and the desired situation.
Current Situation We do not have a functioning robot Impact We cannot compete in the FIRST robotics competition Desired Situation Create a robot that is both student designed and student built that will excel at this year’s FIRST Robotics Competition. The robot must be no more than 38x28x60 inches and cannot exceed a weight of 120 lbs. The robot must be able to compete in a three-on-three, two minute and fifteen second match on a 27x54 foot court. It will also need to meet the requirements of any rules and regulations announced specifically for the 2014 FIRST Robotics Competition.
The initial problem statement helped the team outline the issue and realize what steps needed to be taken in order to field a robot.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
8
Robot must meet 2014 FIRST requirements for size, weight and function
Match Results
Kicking distance
Speed
Plan 3: DOCUMENT THE CURRENT SITUATION
List and describe constraints: Budget, existing and available resources, personnel, and rules.
See Budget Appendix for list of materials and Bill of Materials on the robot. See Appendicies
Competition Information and Game Manual for rules and information about the game.
The team used a Systems Analysis, a reflective tool, in order to look into where the improvement
process was to begin.
Aim of Process
System Measurables
To construct a functional robot to compete in the 2014 FIRST competition
Cone Drive MTA Guidance
Board Bill Marsh
General Motors G.T.
Manufacturers’ Golf Outing Fox Motors Northern
Michigan Glass Bridge Tool & Die
Brown Lumber
Students Teachers
Business Partners 2014 Team 1896
Process/Responsibilities/Activities/Etc.
Customers
Suppliers/Sponsors
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
9
Do 4: DEVELOP AN ACTION PLAN
Document your plan using tools such as schedules, flow charts, Gantt charts, etc. that describe that
sequence of the prototype development process. Describe the structure and design features of the
prototype using CAD, sketches, or other models. Describe the data collection techniques and
instruments to be used.
The team decided to create a chart that would outline each leader’s responsibilities. The
responsibilities were split up into four categories: build, design, program, and electrical. Each leader
had a primary responsibility and a secondary responsibility that would direct their focuses. The chart
that the team used is below.
This chart proved to be very helpful because it gave each team leader an idea of what would be
asked of them when it was time to build and develop the robot. At times, team leaders would work on
areas out of their primary and secondary focus in order to complete certain task that needed to be
done. However, the team followed this chart as best as they could.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
10
The following charts describe each individual system of our 2014 FRC system and the path we took
to design and redesign the systems. We used the PDSA process to guide us and address each
problem we encountered. The four columns stand for the four steps of the PDSA process and the far
right column represents the time frame in which the changes were made.
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5- Implement
the Action Plan
to Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
G
U
L
L
L
A
K
E
Create a way to
drive
Ordered and
assembled drive
system kit from
Andy Mark. (see
appendix photo
#1)
The drive system
worked well.
No further action
taken.
Our drive system was assembled from the AndyMark Kit of Parts Chassis Kit. We did not change or
our drive system at all throughout the competitions.
Driving System
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
11
We did not have any other electrical issues besides this.
Electrical/Programming System
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5- Implement
the Action Plan
to Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
T
C
Use PWM cables
to connect motor
controllers for
kicker to cRIO.
Kicker did not
spin.
One PWM cable
was in
backwards.
Flip PWM cable
around.
Flip PWM cable
around.
Kicker spun at full
speed.
PWM cable was
in the right way.
No further action
taken.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
12
Shooting/Kicking System
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5-
Implement the
Action Plan to
Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
G U L L
L A K E
Create a way to
shoot/kick
exercise balls
Design and build
wooden kicker
mounted directly
to CIM motor.
The single motor
did not produce
enough torque
to spin the
wooden
hammer.
Mount CIM
motor to gear
box using a
1/16th gear ratio
for 16x the
torque.
Mount CIM
motor to gear
box using a
1/16th gear ratio
for 16x the
torque.
The wooden
hammer spun,
but it did not
spin fast enough
to kick the ball.
One CIM motor
did not provide
enough speed to
kick the ball a
good distance.
Add a 2nd CIM
motor to the
gear box.
Add a 2nd CIM
motor to the
gear box. (see
appendix photo
#2)
The hammer
kicked the ball
much further.
The 2nd CIM
motor provided
the needed
speed and
torque to kick
the ball well.
No further action
taken.
This is the shooting design we used throughout the competition and did not make any changes to it.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
13
Loading System
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5-
Implement the
Action Plan to
Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
G
U
L
L
L
A
K
E
Create a way to
pick up/load the
exercise ball.
Design and build
loader that uses
two wooden
dowels mounted
to two CIM
motors that spin
and pick up ball.
(see appendix
photo #3)
The dowels did
not grip the ball
well.
Put double sided
tape on the
dowels.
Put double sided
tape on the
dowels.
The dowels
gripped the ball
better.
The motors were
spinning too fast
to pick up the
ball.
Slow the motors
down.
Slow the motors
down.
The motors were
spinning the
right speed to
pick up the ball.
The dowels
were separating
from each other
and not picking
the ball up
consistently.
Connect dowels
using a spring.
Connect dowels
using a spring.
The dowels
stayed together.
When mounted
on robot, the
loader was
mounted too
high to load the
ball.
Lower the
loader.
Lower the
loader.
The ball still did
not load
consistently.
The loader just
did not fit on the
robot very well.
Scrapped the
design and
redesigned for
the TC
competition.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
14
Loading System
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5-
Implement the
Action Plan to
Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
T
C
Create a more
consistent way
to load the ball.
Built a fork lift
design with two
steel rods
hooked up to
two CIM motors.
(see appendix
photo #4)
Two CIM motors
did not provide
enough torque
to spin steel
rods.
Mount CIM
motors to gear
boxes using
1/4th gear ratio
for 4x the
torque.
Mount CIM
motors to gear
boxes using
1/4th gear ratio
for 4x the
torque.
Gear boxes still
did not provide
enough torque
to pick up the
ball.
The 1/4th gear
ratio was not
enough to pick
up the ball.
Tie bungee
cords to the
steel rods to
help the loader
pick up the ball.
Tie bungee
cords to the
steel rods to
help the loader
pick up the ball.
The bungee
cords helped
enough to pick
up the ball, but it
was
inconsistent.
The bungee
cords kept
untying and
sliding around.
Scrapped
bungee cord
idea and
redesigned for
MESS.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
15
Loading System
Do 4- Develop
an Action Plan
Do 5-
Implement the
Action Plan to
Create a
Prototype/Do 6-
Test the
Prototype
Study 7-
Analyze the
Test Results
Act 8- Action
P
O
S
T
C
O
M
P
E
T
I
T
I
O
N
Create a more
consistent way
to load the ball
without using
bungee cords.
Used same fork
lift design but
used gear boxes
with 1/16th gear
ratio instead of
1/4th. (see
appendix photo
#5)
Gear boxes
worked very
well, but were
too powerful.
Weakened the
power of the
motors in the
gear boxes.
Weakened the
power of the
motors in the
gear boxes.
The loader
loaded well
every time.
The decreased
gear ratio
provided the
needed torque
to load the ball
consistently.
No further action
taken.
FIRST Robotics: Team 1896 Concussive Engineers The Manufacturing Technology Academy Leaders: Michael Farese, Connor Gidner, May 21, 2014 Colin May, and Rachael Peabody
16
Appendices
Table of Contents
Budget Lock-up Form Safety Guide Programming
Competition Information SolidWorks Electrical
Photographs Administrative Manual
Game Manual