Module B
Sunday 6th February 2005 – Saturday, 19th February 2005
Story
Before the second meeting with Hank, on February 8th, the CS team holds a short “pre-meeting”. Denise poses some questions she has, based on her work with the code and Matlab. The main meeting opens with Denise’s questions, often posed by Bob.
[Matlab Questions 2-8.mp3, 20 min.]
All CS team members ask some questions of Hank and Hank explains several aspects of the working of Matlab, regarding parameters and header files and writing code in C to use in Matlab in different ways. Hank does ask for an informal update on what was discussed in the previous meeting to assess any progress made in segregating functions into two bins- trash and useful.
What this meeting probably showed Hank was that the team had looked into what was discussed in the last meeting and were asking specific questions about concepts integral to both porting the code and interpreting it. This probably helped increase Hank's level of confidence in the team's abilities.
The tone of the meeting appears to have changed from a pedagogical theme, like in the last meeting, to more conversational interactive mode, where Hank is still explaining things and answering questions but the CS team is actively participating with either questions or ideas. The team also appears to be more comfortable with Hank in this meeting.
Hank sketches a drawing to show the different inputs, how they feed into the control, and output to the motors on the crane:
[Crane 2\Crane 2 Drawings\Client Drawing2-8.pdf]
During the meeting Denise asks about “initial values”. They feel these should be provided by one of the ME teams, and Bob is tasked to contact them:
[Initial Values 2-8.mp3, 13 min]
To answer Denise's questions, Hank explains the concepts of boom angle, swing angle, ship motion, crane speed, etc. He suggests that the input parameters be examined to see which variables mean what corresponding real world values. He suggests that the team speak to some folks from the ME teams to ask how they intend to implement these parameters. He also suggests different ways to test how the measurements of some of these parameters are taken, like using a joystick and how to differentiate measured values with intended calculated results of the same variables. He also explains the significance of a rotation matrix, and its use in determining the orientation of bodies.
Finally, the CS team negotiates responsibilities—who will do what—with Hank. Justin takes the “top-down overview”, Bob will contact the ME team, but suggests they not meet the next week.
[Setting Responsibilities 2-8.mp3, 5 min.]
Hank says that if the team is able to test their C function capabilities and take a stab at Inverse Kinematics, then they can say that they are well on their way to understanding how it all works.
The team agrees to skip the next week's meeting because of Denise and the other team members having exams due. Bob says that they will spend that time in trying to get the skeleton together. Bob also takes the responsibility of it.
Hank suggests that the team consider dividing up the work amongst the team members so that different parts of the work can be done simultaneously.
Separately, the team decide to meet multiple times during the week, to try to figure out what the blocks do, specially main and control with respect to S functions. Denise suggests to Bob her idea of what they should be doing. Bob and Justin agree with what Denise is suggesting.
As part of their CS Senior Design class, the team must present their progress to Dave at bi-weekly meetings. You can see how their progress was transformed into that presentation by viewing their presentation:
Attachment Converted: "Crane 2\Attach\week6.ppt"
Questions:
- Hank suggested to the CS team that they divide the work amongst themselves.
- What could be the benefits of dividing up the work?
- Who would be the best judge of how the work should be divided?
- How does the team arrive at a method for dividing the work?
- Can you think of criteria to use while dividing up work in a student project?
- Do you think Hank's asking the team to do so is an indication of more trust in the team's abilities?
- What kind of questions is the team asking Hank?
- Compare the type of questions the team asks Hank in Week 2 with Week 1
- Compare the type of questions the team asks Hank at different places in the Seabase I story and the 2nd week in SII
- Do you think a code block sketch a good artifact for explaining a technical concept?
- What other artifacts can you think of which serve as good technical discussion accompaniments?
- Would you consider a code block sketch a formal or an informal technical artifact?
- The team appears more comfortable with Hank in the second week's meeting.
- What could be the reasons for the team's increased comfort?
- Does Hank appear more comfortable with the team? Does he appear more confident in the team's abilities? Why?
- “The team agrees to skip the next week's meeting because of Denise and the other team members having exams due.”........ “The team decides to meet separately, without Hank multiple times during the week.”
- What could be the reason for the team to decide to meet without Hank?
Sunday 6th February 2005 – Saturday, 19th February 2005
Story
Before the second meeting with Hank, on February 8th, the CS team holds a short “pre-meeting”. Denise poses some questions she has, based on her work with the code and Matlab. The main meeting opens with Denise’s questions, often posed by Bob.
[Matlab Questions 2-8.mp3, 20 min.]
All CS team members ask some questions of Hank and Hank explains several aspects of the working of Matlab, regarding parameters and header files and writing code in C to use in Matlab in different ways. Hank does ask for an informal update on what was discussed in the previous meeting to assess any progress made in segregating functions into two bins- trash and useful.
What this meeting probably showed Hank was that the team had looked into what was discussed in the last meeting and were asking specific questions about concepts integral to both porting the code and interpreting it. This probably helped increase Hank's level of confidence in the team's abilities.
The tone of the meeting appears to have changed from a pedagogical theme, like in the last meeting, to more conversational interactive mode, where Hank is still explaining things and answering questions but the CS team is actively participating with either questions or ideas. The team also appears to be more comfortable with Hank in this meeting.
Hank sketches a drawing to show the different inputs, how they feed into the control, and output to the motors on the crane:
[Crane 2\Crane 2 Drawings\Client Drawing2-8.pdf]
During the meeting Denise asks about “initial values”. They feel these should be provided by one of the ME teams, and Bob is tasked to contact them:
[Initial Values 2-8.mp3, 13 min]
To answer Denise's questions, Hank explains the concepts of boom angle, swing angle, ship motion, crane speed, etc. He suggests that the input parameters be examined to see which variables mean what corresponding real world values. He suggests that the team speak to some folks from the ME teams to ask how they intend to implement these parameters. He also suggests different ways to test how the measurements of some of these parameters are taken, like using a joystick and how to differentiate measured values with intended calculated results of the same variables. He also explains the significance of a rotation matrix, and its use in determining the orientation of bodies.
Finally, The Initial Values clip depicts how the relationship between the team and Hank is changing, from instruction to discussion, even though Hank is still explaining fundamentals to the team, he can see that they are asking the right questions and arriving at good conclusions, with his help. What is also significant is the need for the team to be able to meet with the other ME team to understand and coordinate over some parameters and their treatment. This may be an issue later. Also, as Hank is mentoring the ME teams as well, it is interesting that he wants the team to contact the ME team through channels independent of him.
[Setting Responsibilities 2-8.mp3, 5 min.]
Hank says that if the team is able to test their C function capabilities and take a stab at Inverse Kinematics, then
they can say that they are well on their way Hank shows confidence that the team are on the track he wants them to be, or at least close.
The team agrees to skip the next week's meeting because of Denise and the other team members having exams due. Bob says that they will spend that time in trying to get the skeleton together. Bob also takes the responsibility of it.
Hank suggests Hank is involved with what the team is doing, and wants to be able to help them make progress fast. This may seem like Hank still does not trust them enough to let them run things themselves, but it could also be an indicator that Hank really believes that the team are making good progress and wants to encourage and guide them.
Separately, the team decide to meet multiple times during the week, to try to figure out what the blocks do, specially main and control with respect to S functions.
Denise suggests This shows that for the most part, Denise has a more leader-like role in the group, although it may be an unstated understanding that is slowly emerging from their interactions.
As part of their CS Senior Design class, the team must present their progress to Dave at bi-weekly meetings. You can see how their progress was transformed into that presentation by viewing their presentation:
Attachment Converted: "Crane 2\Attach\week6.ppt"