Defend the Robot Systems Dossier

The final product of this course is not a perfect robot.

It is a defensible explanation of a robot system: what it is designed to do, how its parts work together, what evidence supports readiness, what remains uncertain, and what should happen next.

That is a much more useful engineering skill than pretending every project ends cleanly.

Required dossier sections

1. System architecture

Include power, compute, communication, actuation, sensing, and major mechanisms.

2. Mechanism decision

Show at least one tradeoff, gearing/speed calculation, prototype result, or design revision.

3. Electrical and CAN evidence

Include a power tree, device/network map, and one troubleshooting or inspection record.

4. Software architecture

Show how driver input or autonomous logic reaches a subsystem and how the subsystem owns hardware.

5. Sensor and control evidence

Include one measurement definition and one feedback/tuning or response trace.

6. Autonomous and driver control

Show authority boundaries, one autonomous sequence, and a fallback.

7. Strategy and reliability

Include a match objective, scouting/decision evidence, and a failure/recovery plan.

8. Readiness test

Include the mock-match or integrated-test record.

9. Risks

Name at least three remaining risks.

Do not hide them to make the project look finished.

Evidence quality ladder

Weak:

The drivetrain is reliable.

Better:

The drivetrain completed repeated drive cycles.

Stronger:

The drivetrain completed 20 full-field-equivalent cycles across three battery states without a command fault; one loose fastener was found after trial 12 and the retention method was revised.

The strongest claim is specific enough to challenge.

Final defense

Record a short written or spoken defense answering:

1. What is the strongest part of the robot/system design?
2. What evidence supports that claim?
3. What is the highest remaining technical risk?
4. What would you test next?
5. If competition started tomorrow, what capability would you trust and what capability would you limit?

Postmortem

A postmortem is not a blame document.

Write:

• what you expected;
• what actually happened;
• what surprised you;
• what design or process decision you would keep;
• what you would change next build season.

Advanced extension map

You are now ready to branch into deeper FRC topics when the robot or team needs them:

• swerve-drive architecture and kinematics;
• PathPlanner or Choreo workflows;
• AprilTag/vision pose estimation;
• SysId and feedforward;
• AdvantageScope and deeper telemetry;
• advanced autonomous composition;
• subsystem leadership and integration reviews.

Those are extensions, not another course.

The course ends where real FRC work begins: with a system you can inspect, explain, test, and improve.