I’d just like to point out a couple of other threads with very similar intents:
I’ve noticed quite a few newly christened names for assemblies or parts. (Mostly the Hyukapult, which is just a 2-Ball catapult with capabilities to shoot from multiple distances)
I’d like to invite a (friendly) discussion over the naming of parts, assemblies, linkages, etc. over how obscure names can be until they are no longer recognizable. (ie. Danny Lift vs. DR4B)
Specifically, I recognize a few users, such as @ meng and @ Foster have had opinions on this topic, but were without a dedicate…
So, I figured I would make a post just to inform people who either recently joined the forum or robotics about some of the different terms used on the forum. The answer below will be a wiki, if I forgot stuff, feel free to insert it.
Oh goodness no. It’s sorta funny when other teams hear that term and have no idea what’s going on.
we started calling them “pucks” already. Simple clean effective and gets the point across
I think this says it well. As scientists and engineers, we use specific terms that the industry recognizes. I am not saying people who feel they have invented or innovated should not have the joy of naming their creation, however, they should qualify it - “this is 8-32 screw with a triangular head that we call FooBar”. Note if this is an invention, publicly disclosing it probably removes some IP protections in different jurisdictions. Consult your local IP Law Firm for advice on how to pro…
BOM = Bill of Materials