Challenge discussion thread

Hi guys,
I think, this is the time to start with a new challenge, what do you say
guys??? we need a new challenge every month, start in 1/---/-- and end
in 30/---/---. this once we should voting on the topic of the challenge not it's
components.

Abdulla

I have a better idea. I challenge you guys not to have a stupid challenge any longer.


edit. I thought you meant freudian challenge. suppose i should read the thread on occasion.

1 month is too fast I think, not enough weekends...

i would propose an 'ask Tim' thread, wherein he gets assaulted with random questions.. honour based system, he's gotta give answers without researching..i realise he may have a life outside of here, but who cares..?..

Abdulla.. what about 28/31 day months?..

if the 28/31 day months are taken into account that would pretty much incorporate colt45's suggestion .

Regardless the time, we can put the suitable time after select the project, so
the require suitable time will depend on the difficulty of the project, come in guys,
we need to do something useful and to learn from others, I see doing
scientific challenge better from "freudian challenge"

Abdulla

I agree that regular intervals would be constructive for both beating learnings into the novices as well as corrosion control for the seasons veteran gurus of the electron.
but a one month deadline is kinda a short turn around for most projects given that life goes on between solder joints ...
IMO a two month duration between would be closer to optimum, allowing more development time while avoiding undue stagnation.

Actually I have to go against the crowd here, and here's my opinion on why:


Reason no#1:
Giving people MONTHS to complete a project , encourages laziness - or priority control. Meaning...if you don't feel like you have the time or the power to do it right now - you KNOW there's still WEEKS of time left, so you can ALWAYS do it later...

...this is counter intuitive because it gives too much time to push it aside and slack.

Reason no#2:
Waiting 1-2 months for a challenge, is boring. We have an experience with our previous challenges and votes, that we rarely ever agree on what subject the challenge will be, or what components should be allowed to complete it, be honest - we NEVER agree on this.

...this splits the potential challengers in several parts, meaning that some won't participate because they feel left out, and had different ways to "solve things" than the others, meaning we'll have even fewer participants to the challenges. Bad idea!

Reason no#3:
If we had a challenge a week, people could much easier choose what challenge they wanted to participate in. If the first challenge isn't par with taste - no problem, there's a new one each week, so one time - you're bound to find some time. Waiting several months - KILLS the enthusiasm, I know thats why I rarely participate anymore, I'm literally bored to death.

Experience:
I'm with many forums on the internet, some of which I've been an eager participant in other competitions, these are so called SPEED-Modelling competitions or drawing competitions.

Why they don't differ from electronics projects:

Anyone can build a radio, a transmitter or a RF/AF generator in less than 3 hours, it's the same thing with drawing - ANYONE can draw, but the quality of the submissions are very variable, of course depending on knowledge and experience.

The good thing about SPEED based competitions, is that you've got to make a decision - FAST!
I know this from the experience with the robot-cup competition I participated in, the first time I had only WEEKS to complete a fully functional digital autonomous robot, and made it! The NEXT time - I had a YEAR, and rarely came past the basic skeleton of the thing and FAILED miserably.

If you don't have the time - you can WAIT until you do, and I bet - if YOUR favourite subject comes up, I'll BET you'll find a few hours for it

My offer:

At the moment I'm unemployed, which is a PITA, I have lot's of time on my hands, and would be willing to run the competitions on a WEEKLY basis.

This does, however - REQUIRE that we RISE a FORUM section called

ELECTRONICS CHALLENGES

In this forum, I'll be doing the following:
- Make a voting post with ONE picture of EACH participant SUBMISSION.
- Voting will only last ONE WEEK. I'll open and close the voting booth, and insert the images manually.
- Each challenge will have a number: #1 , #2 , #113 etc.
- All submissions on each challenge will be submitted in the CHALLENGE NUMBERED thread ONLY! to keep things clean and easy for people to view.

Any takers?

Great offer JoOngle, and you made everything clear, and your reasons is very
acceptable.
I think everything will be ideal with this rules.

Abdulla

+1 for JoOngle's suggestions.
I also vote to put JoOngle in charge of the challenges (it must be a dictatorship, not a democracy or stuff will only be discussed, but never put in place).

Peace

Sounds great, but how about adding a twist?? I propose we build something relatively complicated as a long term project, But break it up into many smaller stages. Each stage would be a competition of sorts. We could even all build the same exact thing, the same exact way, based on whose particular solution is voted the best for that stage. Survival of the fittest sort of thing. That person will post enough info for others to copy their work. Then off to the next stage where everyone goes on their separate track, again.

Example might be to make an electromagnetic levatator thingie, that can hold a ferrous object in midair. But it would be broken up into several tiny stages, such as initial sketch, housing, electromagnet, power supply, power switch/control, controller circuit. Once the "winner" of a stage is selected, everyone else will copy as exactly as possible, including dimensions and materials, etc. This way, each successive stage will be compatible. This means that care must be taken to design stuff so that others can replicate it. No "I took this part off an old [] that was laying in my attic."

And anyone who has trouble doing some/all stages could just wait it out to see what other people come up with. Then they might be able to contribute to a later stage down the road.

And in the end, every participant would have some completely useless (but kewl) gizmo on their desk that is more-or-less identical to that of all the other participants - an eternal souvenir representing a collective, shared experience?

Sounds good.

This, not so much. Building the same thing twice? Perhaps having to buy stuff especially for this? I think this could alienate some people... What about people that want to join half way through?

How about something modular? Then people can join in at any point...

nah ... a large scope project of that nature would suck unless the end result had universal appeal. especially getting regular challenges going.
Its a golden opportunity to get the noobs learning, intermediates progressing, and seasoned veterans on corrosion control while showing us pathetic pleebs how its really done
I know I'd be in to the last stage of a high power audio series ... other less enthusiastic as their interests might lie in robotics or just trying to make LED's work

I think regular challenges should be established with fairly simple design goals first ... then later on splinter off into lofty achievements after its done some growing

By the way ......



Did i win that last one ?

I don't think anyone did. It just faded away.

I like Joogle's idea too. Since the time span is shorter, it will mean simpler projects, and hence simpler circuits, which I expect will be a bit more general purpose in nature. That should have a broader appeal than having a challenge for a more complex specialized circuit which may appeal to only a few.

Yeah this is good idea

Abdulla

As long as one challenge includes blowing things up with HV or cap discharge. I always wanted to see what a 3kV cap discharge into an ordinary speaker looked like.

I'm going to try this

Mine already did ... I just omitted that part since it no longer was a part in the final version

Perhaps we're looking at this from 2 different viewpoints?
Building things twice might appear costly or redundant. But isn't it really a learning experience?

1. You make something the way YOU always do.
2. Someone else has achieved the same thing a different way that might be better in some way.
3. You do it THEIR way and learn something in the process.
4. Perhaps each stage/competition would be a design/schematic/diagram, only, rather than an actual build??

ANYONE can join halfway through, because they can either choose to
1. Work only on the current stage (as if you have been asked to design only one part of a device, same thing)
2. Use the documentation of the previous stages and build the entire thing.

Some participants might only lend their ideas, schematics, or plans for a few different stages that interest them, and never build ANYTHING, themselves.

???

The real beauty and final shining truth of the matter:

INITIATIVE:

it takes EVERY participant to have initiative to "compete" in a normal "challenge."

In this "challenge," It only takes ONE person to "compete" and complete any one stage. Anyone else can passively follow along and just copy what has been voted the best and possibly find the next stage more interesting. And the project still moves along.

Kill the freudian challenge!!

Kill the freudian challenge!!

Why? Nobody is twisting your arm to look or participate in it? Or, is this a case of just-can't-help-myself?


@The O: Video, or it didn't happen.

This, not so much. Building the same thing twice? Perhaps having to buy stuff especially for this? I think this could alienate some people... What about people that want to join half way through?

How about something modular? Then people can join in at any point...

If the subprojects are properly spec'd, and everyone builds to the specs, then there is no need to have to build two separate circuits. Spec the input and output ranges, supply voltage etc., then any circuit meeting the spec's should be useable, and there's no need to build a second one.

Some people may argue that things should be loosely spec'd to allow for creativity, but if these subprojects are going to be interconnected into a big project, then I don't see any alternative to tight specs. So, the projects would have to be modular as Roccivic suggests.

I still say start the series sweet and simple with stand alone projects to let people get into the groove THEN run a modular project of sub projects later after things are well established or better still .. retain stand alone projects with a "level 2" modular series in its own thread ...
we had all of four entries in the last wide open discreet build with glee competition.
there was an example of excellent circuit craft in an LED driver, a rather cute toob love beam deflection amp .. a guitar stack on loan from the almighty metal gods and a rather lofty attempt at a self balancing robot that never quite made it.

of the four, only two were remotely related thus establishing 3 totally different interests.
it will be bad enough with stand alone projects getting people involved due to differing interests.... but then those that shied away from one may jump into the following weeks run.

if a modular project with an end goal is chosen too soon, it will be two people eating months of time until the next cycle when one or two others eat a few months after replacing the first two

I think we should all build high voltage generators. Who ever generates the most voltage wins.

The Earth isn't large enough to contain my generator