February 15, 2016 at 13:24Illinois School Robotics Competition
Recently, I participated as a judge in a robotics competition among high school students at a high school in Batavia (Rotolo Middle School, Batavia), Illinois, USA. I would like to tell about these competitions - the guys who participated in them, as well as their robots, impressed me.
In fact, quite by accident. I do particle physics in the NOvA experiment at Fermilab, a national accelerator lab in Illinois, not far from Chicago. The school in which the competitions were held is close to the laboratory, and these competitions have been held there for several years, and several people from Fermilab have participated in them as judges for the first time. They needed volunteers, and they called my friends, and they already called me.
In my professional life, I do software development and science, but I have never been involved in robots. But judging required, rather, common sense and the ability to ask questions correctly than specialized knowledge. How exactly the competitions were held and the robots were evaluated, I will tell below - this is quite interesting.
The competition in which I was a judge - the FIRST® Tech Challenge (FTC) - is one of the FIRST® robotics competition lines . Also in the range is the FIRST® Robotics Competition for about the same age category, as well as the FIRST® LEGO® League for younger students. Pupils of grades 7-12 (12-18 years old) participate in the FTC. FTC is a fairly popular competition, with teams from around 40 countries participating in the world. In Russia, the FTC will be held February 20-21 in Sochi .
The basis of the competition is the games of robots. Games change every year, this time it was a RES-Q game in which 4 robots (in teams of 2) must move around the field and collect cubes and balls at certain points on the field, press buttons, move the figures of men to baskets, climb onto ramp and press the levers on the sides of the ramp. Two opposing teams cannot intentionally interfere with each other, block passage and so on (for more details about the rules, see, for example, here ).
The field for the game with ramps, balls and located robots looks like this:
The rules of the game are not very balanced - but I do not want to write spoilers, because in Russia the competition has not yet passed. I think the rules could be more balanced if they were maintained with minor changes every year, but, on the other hand, robots would become too specialized.
In total there were 2 lines of awards - awards awarded by judges in different nominations (for judging nominations, the effectiveness of the robot during the games mattered, but not only that - more on that below), and separately awards for game winners. The main nomination from judges is made in the Inspire category - the best team in terms of the combination of technical training, quality of the robot, quality of the technical report, etc. There are also categories Think, Innovate and several others - here prizes are given for the best engineering solutions, original ideas and so on.
An interesting feature of refereeing here is that not only the technical characteristics of the robot and the technical knowledge of the team are evaluated. It would be interesting to observe Russian competitions, since in Russia, as it seems to me, the emphasis is traditionally placed on the technical part.
In addition to the technical part, the team’s social involvement was also assessed - many teams, for example, held master classes and demonstrations in schools, museums, etc. ... Some of this activity was organized by the teams themselves, and some were organized by the FTC. To identify the best in social activity, there was a separate “Connect” nomination, which, incidentally, was won by a team sponsored by a local pizzeria - they attracted many students to their events through free pizza.
Another interesting (and very American) feature is that the teams themselves are looking for sponsors. They do not earn money on this, but this gives them the opportunity to buy parts, make shirts with logos for themselves,bribe judges and so on, and also adds motivation. Sponsoring was very different - someone did not have private sponsors, the school allocated money to them, many were sponsored from small private sources (I think, primarily parents), some from private companies, such as that pizzeria, some then from large corporations - one of the teams, for example, was sponsored by Motorola, and one more - by Microsoft. The average amount of funds raised was about $ 1,000 per season, the Fruit Salad team had a record - about $ 8,000, the same team eventually received a prize in the main nomination.
In addition, teams often have their own website and facebook page. For example, such commands: GotRobot , Octopi , Fruit Salad , etc. In short, for teams, in addition to competition, it is also something like organizing and promoting a small business.
This is what the teams and their robots looked like:
And here are the games themselves (the referees are in blue robes, and the referee are in striped T-shirts):
The preparation of the teams and the quality of the technical report were very different for different teams. Technical documents for many teams consisted of leaflets with brief reports on their weekly progress, of which nothing was clear, but the best reports were a miracle of technical documentation, especially for schoolchildren. One of the highest quality reports was from the very winning Fruit Salad team - there were reports on events held, financial reports on borrowed funds, illustrations in AutoCAD, code examples, illustrations of the use of kanban boards, etc. Unfortunately, I have not found their technical documents anywhere in the public domain - apparently, technical secrets are protected from other teams.
It is also interesting that many teams ordered 3D printing of some elements of their robot - usually these were not very significant details, for example, a phone holder or a box for placing wires, but there was a team that used, for example, 3D printing to create the wheels of the robot.
The main part of the allowed parts for the competition is the TETRIX robotics kit for mechanical parts and servos, drive and power distribution controllers and an Android phone as the main platform for programs, as well as a second phone that receives signals from gamepads and sends them to the first. Programming is allowed only in java in Android Studio or App Inventor.
Some technologies that seem logical for such robots, for example, the Raspberry Pi, are prohibited for use. As far as I know, technical rules can change quite quickly, so perhaps someday it will be allowed.
Some functions of robots were automated, for example, teams used color sensors to press the right button, but most functions were controlled through gamepads, usually each robot had two drivers - one was responsible for the movement, the second for the operation of mechanisms allowing to collect cubes or climb the hill .
American schools are now promoting STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics). This is a keyword on the VEX and FTC websites, and was also constantly used in the competition process - during the presentation of awards, as well as in the opening remarks of local officials.
In my experience, from this set of science and mathematics is still much stronger in our schools and universities - until it comes to the very scientific work with which we have a bad time. Here, school and university training in the natural sciences and mathematics is, on average, rather weak, and to change it one needs to grow strong scientific schools.
As for technology and engineering - I can only judge by small manifestations, such as, for example, this competition. But it seems to me that these areas are better developed here, and the groundwork is being made for a large gap. For example, the popularity of robotics speaks of this. In Illinois, according to data from last year, 110-120 teams with 13 million inhabitants participated in these robot competitions ( taken from here ). For comparison, at similar competitions in Russia FTCRussiaOpen, which I have already mentioned, 25 teams are registered.
I think it’s better to perceive such a difference not as a reason to be upset, but as a field for opportunities. The most necessary thing for this is initiative and motivation, which is needed more than technical training and even money. For example, among the teams in this competition there was a team sponsored only from the school and without adult mentors, with the exception of one person who helped them from time to time.
I’m not sure that the American experience can be directly transferred to our soil, although this would be an interesting experiment. For example, as I said, we traditionally pay more attention to the technical side, rather than the organizational one (a funny fact: all foreign FTC websites focus on sports and educational events, and I could not find the technical specification of robots there, on the Russian FTC website it was the first thing that my eyes fell on). Therefore, in order to build team financing from a local business, some stereotypes must be broken. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s so impossible - from my experience in dealing with people from business, a business of any size is more socially responsible than officials, and it may well donate a certain amount of money, especially since in the end the team will use it symbolism.
How I ended up in competitions
In fact, quite by accident. I do particle physics in the NOvA experiment at Fermilab, a national accelerator lab in Illinois, not far from Chicago. The school in which the competitions were held is close to the laboratory, and these competitions have been held there for several years, and several people from Fermilab have participated in them as judges for the first time. They needed volunteers, and they called my friends, and they already called me.
In my professional life, I do software development and science, but I have never been involved in robots. But judging required, rather, common sense and the ability to ask questions correctly than specialized knowledge. How exactly the competitions were held and the robots were evaluated, I will tell below - this is quite interesting.
About competitions
The competition in which I was a judge - the FIRST® Tech Challenge (FTC) - is one of the FIRST® robotics competition lines . Also in the range is the FIRST® Robotics Competition for about the same age category, as well as the FIRST® LEGO® League for younger students. Pupils of grades 7-12 (12-18 years old) participate in the FTC. FTC is a fairly popular competition, with teams from around 40 countries participating in the world. In Russia, the FTC will be held February 20-21 in Sochi .
How are the competitions
The basis of the competition is the games of robots. Games change every year, this time it was a RES-Q game in which 4 robots (in teams of 2) must move around the field and collect cubes and balls at certain points on the field, press buttons, move the figures of men to baskets, climb onto ramp and press the levers on the sides of the ramp. Two opposing teams cannot intentionally interfere with each other, block passage and so on (for more details about the rules, see, for example, here ).
The field for the game with ramps, balls and located robots looks like this:
The rules of the game are not very balanced - but I do not want to write spoilers, because in Russia the competition has not yet passed. I think the rules could be more balanced if they were maintained with minor changes every year, but, on the other hand, robots would become too specialized.
In total there were 2 lines of awards - awards awarded by judges in different nominations (for judging nominations, the effectiveness of the robot during the games mattered, but not only that - more on that below), and separately awards for game winners. The main nomination from judges is made in the Inspire category - the best team in terms of the combination of technical training, quality of the robot, quality of the technical report, etc. There are also categories Think, Innovate and several others - here prizes are given for the best engineering solutions, original ideas and so on.
How teams are rated
An interesting feature of refereeing here is that not only the technical characteristics of the robot and the technical knowledge of the team are evaluated. It would be interesting to observe Russian competitions, since in Russia, as it seems to me, the emphasis is traditionally placed on the technical part.
In addition to the technical part, the team’s social involvement was also assessed - many teams, for example, held master classes and demonstrations in schools, museums, etc. ... Some of this activity was organized by the teams themselves, and some were organized by the FTC. To identify the best in social activity, there was a separate “Connect” nomination, which, incidentally, was won by a team sponsored by a local pizzeria - they attracted many students to their events through free pizza.
Another interesting (and very American) feature is that the teams themselves are looking for sponsors. They do not earn money on this, but this gives them the opportunity to buy parts, make shirts with logos for themselves,
In addition, teams often have their own website and facebook page. For example, such commands: GotRobot , Octopi , Fruit Salad , etc. In short, for teams, in addition to competition, it is also something like organizing and promoting a small business.
This is what the teams and their robots looked like:
And here are the games themselves (the referees are in blue robes, and the referee are in striped T-shirts):
The preparation of the teams and the quality of the technical report were very different for different teams. Technical documents for many teams consisted of leaflets with brief reports on their weekly progress, of which nothing was clear, but the best reports were a miracle of technical documentation, especially for schoolchildren. One of the highest quality reports was from the very winning Fruit Salad team - there were reports on events held, financial reports on borrowed funds, illustrations in AutoCAD, code examples, illustrations of the use of kanban boards, etc. Unfortunately, I have not found their technical documents anywhere in the public domain - apparently, technical secrets are protected from other teams.
It is also interesting that many teams ordered 3D printing of some elements of their robot - usually these were not very significant details, for example, a phone holder or a box for placing wires, but there was a team that used, for example, 3D printing to create the wheels of the robot.
Some technical details
The main part of the allowed parts for the competition is the TETRIX robotics kit for mechanical parts and servos, drive and power distribution controllers and an Android phone as the main platform for programs, as well as a second phone that receives signals from gamepads and sends them to the first. Programming is allowed only in java in Android Studio or App Inventor.
Some technologies that seem logical for such robots, for example, the Raspberry Pi, are prohibited for use. As far as I know, technical rules can change quite quickly, so perhaps someday it will be allowed.
Some functions of robots were automated, for example, teams used color sensors to press the right button, but most functions were controlled through gamepads, usually each robot had two drivers - one was responsible for the movement, the second for the operation of mechanisms allowing to collect cubes or climb the hill .
And a little philosophy
American schools are now promoting STEM (science, technology, engineering, mathematics). This is a keyword on the VEX and FTC websites, and was also constantly used in the competition process - during the presentation of awards, as well as in the opening remarks of local officials.
In my experience, from this set of science and mathematics is still much stronger in our schools and universities - until it comes to the very scientific work with which we have a bad time. Here, school and university training in the natural sciences and mathematics is, on average, rather weak, and to change it one needs to grow strong scientific schools.
As for technology and engineering - I can only judge by small manifestations, such as, for example, this competition. But it seems to me that these areas are better developed here, and the groundwork is being made for a large gap. For example, the popularity of robotics speaks of this. In Illinois, according to data from last year, 110-120 teams with 13 million inhabitants participated in these robot competitions ( taken from here ). For comparison, at similar competitions in Russia FTCRussiaOpen, which I have already mentioned, 25 teams are registered.
I think it’s better to perceive such a difference not as a reason to be upset, but as a field for opportunities. The most necessary thing for this is initiative and motivation, which is needed more than technical training and even money. For example, among the teams in this competition there was a team sponsored only from the school and without adult mentors, with the exception of one person who helped them from time to time.
I’m not sure that the American experience can be directly transferred to our soil, although this would be an interesting experiment. For example, as I said, we traditionally pay more attention to the technical side, rather than the organizational one (a funny fact: all foreign FTC websites focus on sports and educational events, and I could not find the technical specification of robots there, on the Russian FTC website it was the first thing that my eyes fell on). Therefore, in order to build team financing from a local business, some stereotypes must be broken. On the other hand, I don’t think it’s so impossible - from my experience in dealing with people from business, a business of any size is more socially responsible than officials, and it may well donate a certain amount of money, especially since in the end the team will use it symbolism.