RoboMaster2019 Finals

RoboMaster2019 Finals

The team's flag is flying.

https://gyazo.com/786ed897c2d76e8535036dbe03bdc1b3

The venue looks like this

https://gyazo.com/9ddee5a806e5e4923101abf42a4f5270

Seat numbers were separated by even and odd numbers, which was confusing.

https://gyazo.com/4e1ed7ea1a403ae394c18e8f99ae90e2

FUKUOKA NIWAKA is a team from Japan participating in this contest.

I even took some videos of the venue, but you can watch them on Nico Nico Douga or Twitch with a beautiful camera.

Explanation against highly stable drones. The launch mechanism was modified to be the deciding factor for the winning team due to its amazing stability.

The concept of eSports, like the results screen and the ease of analyzing results, is being used for robotics competitions.

After returning to Japan, the person I showed this video to said, "Isn't that an overwhelming difference in technology from Japan?" but that's not quite true.

RoboMaster has been held under approximately the same rules for five years, although the rules have changed slightly from year to year.

That's why the accumulation of technology is happening.

There is also a bounty for open sourcing.

The shiny design on the exterior looks cool and consistent, but that is a sensor module supplied by the management to determine damage, and its installation is required by regulations.

On the other hand, there's the problem of everyone being a similar or identical robot.

In a contest like Japan's Robocon, where the rules are reset every year, the robots are diversified.

FUKUOKA NIWAKA won three design awards.

https://gyazo.com/c677f6be406a95d69f8539f1b25b3ffc

The team's engineer robot, infantry robot, and drone won the RoboMaster2019 international frame design awards! (omission) I think it's safe to say that it's an accomplishment for one team to receive three out of five different types of robots.

We're seeing these great results in the design direction.

It is not a matter of which type of game is better: one with strict rules and racing on a one-dimensional evaluation axis, or one with loose rules and exploring a variety of options.

RoboMaster has a strong racing element, but also offers a variety of evaluation criteria such as design and open source awards.

The strong tinge of competition appears to create incentives to expand the ecosystem.

To use an analogy, the Waseda-Keio game is not about "either of you made an original play," but about "win or lose," which creates a feeling of "I don't want to lose to my rival," making it easier to get alumni and others involved.

MVPs will be awarded for each game.

https://gyazo.com/5d9ab81bfd1c84091522766f134e85c6

Operators and R&D representatives (R&D leaders) are featured.

In the free time between matches, technical commentary is sometimes given.

https://gyazo.com/e2f91f681a93d6a026efb6c34434a532

This explains that the center of the head is in the center of the four tires and that the weight distribution to the four tires must be consistent for the robot to operate.

Others were talking about targeting by image processing and a mechanism to eject bullets from a drone with less recoil.

It's a very good design, with commentary on image processing and mechanical engineering in the time between games, a focus on the MVP at every game, and always shining a light on the engineers as well as the people operating the system when introducing the MVPs.

Ecosystem Design

https://gyazo.com/e0c4bc2c2596659f548d17d1ec2106e8

Ecosystem design is clearly stated in the brochure.

4 school ecosystem, event system, mass education, and cultural propagation.

The high prize of 100,000 yuan (about 1.8 million yen) for the open source first prize also suggests that the DJI side is pushing very hard.

I see, so there is a prize for open source as well as a prize for the winner of the contest.

Q: Why does it spin around? A: There are lights on both sides of the armor module to judge the damage, and if it is stationary, it can easily be auto-targeted by image recognition.

The first three winners win, and the third-place game was exciting with three consecutive wins in a row after two losses.

deciding match (in a competition for a cup (pennant))

Can you win by precision shooting the sensors on top of the fortress without dropping the barriers?

The drone's targeting capabilities are overwhelmingly technical, interesting.

I'm curious as to why the drone didn't let him toddle off in the second round, can it be serviced before the third round?

Injection mechanism commentary videos were interspersed between matches, I want to be able to listen to Chinese.

It is my understanding that there is an ejection mechanism using friction rollers instead of air, which stabilizes the initial velocity and thus improves aiming accuracy.

Technological innovation creates overwhelming advantages

It's like Civilization, where bombers are the most powerful in a world with no air power.

The red drone flew first and you can't go interfere.

String attached, because if the drone malfunctions and falls into the audience, people can be injured.

I'm sure there will be items in there that will interfere with drones next year.

Proposal to include a rule to destroy helicopter depots.

Let's introduce a target that reduces the opponent's drone charge.

Or smoke screen module

There was just an article on the topic that the Yawata Steel Works burning coal tar to create a smoke screen was the reason why the atomic bomb did not fall on Kitakyushu, I don't know if it's true or not.

That's a lot of money for the winner, about 7.5 million.

There is excessive pressure to make things easier to understand due to TV broadcasts, reducing the players to the framework of "people doing interesting things" instead of "making them heroes.

It is important to say that the operator is not a TV station... It has to be one that clearly benefits from the cycle of creating heroes and increasing the population that plays the sport. Otherwise, the only KPI that can be defined is the short-term number of viewers, and it becomes a documentary existence, a program that is easy for everyone to understand.

When I saw this story about TV stations optimizing for ratings written by watching this Chinese robocon thing, I thought it was the same structure as the problem of publishers optimizing for circulation by watching Chinese bookstores yesterday.

---