Overview

I engaged across three progressive tiers of the FIRST robotics competition program (FLL, FTC, and FRC), taking on increasing ownership of the engineering design process at each level, from table-scale autonomous systems to full-size, multi-subsystem robots. Today, I contribute back to the program as an FRC judge, evaluating teams on the same engineering rigor and design discipline that shaped my own development.

Project Objective

Each annual game challenge required a team to scope a robot's capabilities against a defined set of objectives — effectively a product requirements problem. I had to prioritize mechanisms, make trade-offs explicit, and validate designs against rules, weight limits, and real match conditions. The goal was never just to build something functional, but something that performed reliably under competition stress and reflected deliberate engineering decisions. As a judge, I now apply that same standard when assessing whether a team's stated rationale holds up.

What Was Done

• FLL: I focused on autonomous mission optimization—analyzing the game table, determining which tasks yielded the best point-to-time ratio, and programming a Mindstorms robot to execute a reliable, repeatable run.

• FTC: My scope expanded substantially. I helped design and build custom metal chassis, drivetrain configurations, and game-piece manipulation mechanisms from scratch, with direct involvement in motor selection, sensor placement, and the software architecture governing autonomous and driver-controlled operation. I ran design reviews and iteration cycles between scrimmages to identify failure points ahead of competition.

• FRC: I took part in a full product development cycle compressed into six weeks—contributing to game strategy analysis early in the season, translating strategic priorities into mechanism requirements, and collaborating on subsystem design, including prototyping multiple solutions before committing to a build path. I worked on control system wiring, software integration, and driver feedback loops to close the gap between a mechanism that worked on a test stand and one that held up through a full match schedule.

• Judge Role: I now evaluate FRC teams as a certified judge, requiring deep technical fluency to assess engineering notebooks, probe design rationale in team interviews, and score consistently across teams at very different stages of maturity. This means holding every team accountable to the same standard I once held myself to as a competitor—distinguishing genuine engineering process from surface-level polish.

End Result

I built a strong, practical engineering instinct across mechanical design, embedded systems, and systems integration—developed not through coursework alone, but through the high-pressure, build-or-break reality of competition. That foundation directly shapes how I evaluate teams today: as a judge, I bring a competitor's understanding of what real trade-offs under constraint actually look like, which sharpens how I probe design decisions and mentor the next generation of engineers through the same process discipline that shaped me.