No Ship Day?

[DampRobot]

This was mentioned to me at dinner tonight, and as after the requisite five minutes of shipping nothing had turned up, I thought that she just might have stumbled across something interesting...

There's no official ship or bag and tag date on the official FIRST calendar (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/calendar/list). All of the award deadlines are on there, and most of the regional dates. Could it be that there will be no ship date and an open build season? Given that the traditional ship date is always the seventh Tuesday after kickoff, and kickoff appears to be scheduled, shouldn't we seriously consider Manchester considering a non-conventional length or open build season? Wouldn't they normally just put bag and tag day on the calendar?

On the other hand, it could be that I'm missing something huge, or that FIRST doesn't usually post bag and tag day.

[Andrew Lawrence]

Interesting idea, but I think it's more likely that it's just not on the calendar yet for some silly reason or another. Remember Frank's blog post about how they like the idea of a stop build time?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Please note that there is a very limited number of 2014 entries and most of these are for awards.

[rick.oliver]

Very interesting. Kick off is listed, but no Bag 'N Tag date. I don't recall not seeing the date listed by this time. Not going to read in anything either, but will hope that positive change is coming.

[Pault]

I'm just going to leave this here. Take it as you will.

This topic [The necessity of stop build day] has been on my mind lately, and to answer the second part of your question, FRC is carefully exploring it and our alternatives. We are constantly looking for ways to improve all aspects of our program. I don’t want to get everyone excited, though, no change is imminent, and any significant change to this aspect of the program, which represents a core part of what it means to be FRC, would need to go to the very top for approval.
source (http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/frc/blog-frank-answers-fridays-08162013)

[E Dawg]

Intriguing...

Although having more days to work on the robot would be excellent, I hope that there is a set bag'n'tag date. 6 weeks is already a lot of time (especially for the mentors) away from family. I should think that HQ wouldn't increase the time longer than it already is.

In addition, I think that increasing the build time may give some teams an unfair advantage at Nationals. Since competitions are staggered over the course of several weeks, those teams who have earlier events are at a disadvantage compared to other teams, especially those who can only afford to go to one event (other than Nationals, of course).

[AllenGregoryIV]

Intriguing...

Although having more days to work on the robot would be excellent, I hope that there is a set bag'n'tag date. 6 weeks is already a lot of time (especially for the mentors) away from family. I should think that HQ wouldn't increase the time longer than it already is.

In addition, I think that increasing the build time may give some teams an unfair advantage at Nationals. Since competitions are staggered over the course of several weeks, those teams who have earlier events are at a disadvantage compared to other teams, especially those who can only afford to go to one event (other than Nationals, of course).

Before this thread goes to much further, anyone with an opinon on this issue should first read through this thread (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=116658&highlight=6+week+build). The 442 posts pretty much encompass every argument and view point on the issue.

[khanh111]

The Pacific Northwest is switching to a district model this year. Two main changes to bag n' tag will apply for us. These are in the interest of saving time that would otherwise be used on competition day.

1. There will be FIRST-certified inspectors who can inspect your robots and tell you the issues.

2. Teams will have 6 hours, divided up into a max of three individual instances, where they can unbag the robot and work on it.

The district model is still being refined, so these may change slightly, but I've posted the gist of it.

[DampRobot]

The Pacific Northwest is switching to a district model this year. Two main changes to bag n' tag will apply for us. These are in the interest of saving time that would otherwise be used on competition day.

1. There will be FIRST-certified inspectors who can inspect your robots and tell you the issues.

2. Teams will have 6 hours, divided up into a max of three individual instances, where they can unbag the robot and work on it.

The district model is still being refined, so these may change slightly, but I've posted the gist of it.

So, just to be clear, the inspectors inspect your robot while it would normally be bagged, or the inspectors make sure it's bagged and unbagged for the right lengths of time?

[Ian Curtis]

So, just to be clear, the inspectors inspect your robot while it would normally be bagged, or the inspectors make sure it's bagged and unbagged for the right lengths of time?

From what I got from the webcast, the intent is to have inspectors looking at robots prior to the district events so that teams can more easily pass inspection in the abbreviated practice time at a district versus the full day we have traditionally had at regionals. It sounded as if the details were very much a work in progress, but that HQ was very interested in the idea and making it work.

[Steven Donow]

From what I got from the webcast, the intent is to have inspectors looking at robots prior to the district events so that teams can more easily pass inspection in the abbreviated practice time at a district versus the full day we have traditionally had at regionals. It sounded as if the details were very much a work in progress, but that HQ was very interested in the idea and making it work.

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's an opportunity to use your 6 hour unbag time(which existed in FiM and MAR) and go to a predetermined location where you can (essentially) go through a preliminary, unofficial inspection by official FIRST inspectors?

[BrendanB]

Last week we got an email from our director for NH & VT saying that in the NEFIRST model the day before your competitions from 5-10 (preliminary and subject to change) teams are allowed to load in their event, pits open, and get inspected. Robots enter the event that evening bagged and at the conclusion of the event leave bagged. There has been talk of the 6 hour work window as used in Michingan and MAR but nothing official has been said. It sounds like this method is becoming standard for the two day district events.

[Mr V]

The Pacific Northwest is switching to a district model this year. Two main changes to bag n' tag will apply for us. These are in the interest of saving time that would otherwise be used on competition day.

1. There will be FIRST-certified inspectors who can inspect your robots and tell you the issues.

2. Teams will have 6 hours, divided up into a max of three individual instances, where they can unbag the robot and work on it.

The district model is still being refined, so these may change slightly, but I've posted the gist of it.

1. This is something that the PNW district has asked for, it is still under consideration by FIRST headquarters.

2. The 6 hour un-bag time in the week preceding your district events was what was done last season in FiM and MAR. The minimum un-bag time is 2hrs per opening of the bag. So you could do 3-2 hr sessions, 2-3hr, 1-4hr + 1-2hr or 1-6hr. This is unlikely to change as it represents a change from the 8hr un-bag time that was used in the first years of the FiM district.

So, just to be clear, the inspectors inspect your robot while it would normally be bagged, or the inspectors make sure it's bagged and unbagged for the right lengths of time?

This would be an additional un-bagged time in which teams are not allowed to do any work on the robot, nor power it up other than as necessary for inspection, for example to verify proper operation of a pneumatics system.

So, if I'm reading this correctly, it's an opportunity to use your 6 hour unbag time(which existed in FiM and MAR) and go to a predetermined location where you can (essentially) go through a preliminary, unofficial inspection by official FIRST inspectors?

As mentioned above it is in addition to the 6hrs of un-bag time to work on the robot.

What the PNW district is proposing that we would come up with a number of places where teams could bring their robot to have it officially pre-inspected, it would be done by official FIRST inspectors and the document would then be brought to the event where the inspection would be completed. The goal would be to catch potential problem areas so team can use some of their 6hr un-bag time to fix problems.

Since the goal is for all districts to have the same rules, starting this season, I would fully expect all districts to have this option IF FIRST approves of it.

[JohnBoucher]

before your first competition from 5-10 (preliminary and subject to change)

Suggesting inspections will be different at your second event?

[BrendanB]

Suggesting inspections will be different at your second event?

Meant to say "first day of competition". Fixed now.

[Steven Donow]

What the PNW district is proposing that we would come up with a number of places where teams could bring their robot to have it officially pre-inspected, it would be done by official FIRST inspectors and the document would then be brought to the event where the inspection would be completed. The goal would be to catch potential problem areas so team can use some of their 6hr un-bag time to fix problems.

Since the goal is for all districts to have the same rules, starting this season, I would fully expect all districts to have this option IF FIRST approves of it.


The only problem I see with having it be an official FIRST document is that if teams don't use the last of their unbag time during this "event"(for example, my HS team sometimes used our final two hours the morning of load-in), what's to stop them(yes, I'm being somewhat cynical) from modifying after inspection?

I think this makes perfect sense in an informal sense(ie. an official FIRST inspector does an informal inspection with no official paperwork other than unbag form), but I think it's being overly cautious towards an extremely rare problem. In my two years of MAR, never have I seen the cause of failing inspection prior to the start of matches be because of lack of time at the event. It's definitely a good idea for being an informal pre-competition, communal unbag "meeting/event"

[Taylor]

My reading of this suggests that this initial unbag time will not serve as an official inspection; it will be a pre-inspection to alert teams to issues that may make the official inspection more difficult.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Everyone,
We know that some teams will not use their time wisely but the hope with this method is to reduce the time it takes to get everyone ready to play. From an inspector's standpoint, our worst nightmare is having a robot come in the wrong size or over weight. Getting a few hours to work on the solution before an event will help everyone have a better experience.

[AdamHeard]

The only problem I see with having it be an official FIRST document is that if teams don't use the last of their unbag time during this "event"(for example, my HS team sometimes used our final two hours the morning of load-in), what's to stop them(yes, I'm being somewhat cynical) from modifying after inspection?

I think this makes perfect sense in an informal sense(ie. an official FIRST inspector does an informal inspection with no official paperwork other than unbag form), but I think it's being overly cautious towards an extremely rare problem. In my two years of MAR, never have I seen the cause of failing inspection prior to the start of matches be because of lack of time at the event. It's definitely a good idea for being an informal pre-competition, communal unbag "meeting/event"

What's to stop a team from modifying a robot after any inspection?

I'd work as an inspector a bit before saying the timecrunch is not a problem. Inspectors often have to go crazy to get those last few teams to pass. Some teams have no sense of urgency when they are far from being legal, with only 30 minutes left in the day....

[Mr V]

The only problem I see with having it be an official FIRST document is that if teams don't use the last of their unbag time during this "event"(for example, my HS team sometimes used our final two hours the morning of load-in), what's to stop them(yes, I'm being somewhat cynical) from modifying after inspection?

I think this makes perfect sense in an informal sense(ie. an official FIRST inspector does an informal inspection with no official paperwork other than unbag form), but I think it's being overly cautious towards an extremely rare problem. In my two years of MAR, never have I seen the cause of failing inspection prior to the start of matches be because of lack of time at the event. It's definitely a good idea for being an informal pre-competition, communal unbag "meeting/event"

As Al mentioned the idea is to catch major items before the teams get to the event. It does not mean that any items that were pre-inspected would not be revisited. That is why you want the document that notes those areas of concern, so they can be addressed first, as the event inspector may not be the same person as the pre-event inspector.

Some of it will rely on teams to be open and honest if we want the at-event inspections to be as quick as possible. However we already rely on that as teams are able to continue working on and modifying their robot after they have received their inspection sticker. Which of course is why there we ask teams to seek a re-inspection if any changes are made that could affect their approved to play status, and there is an abbreviated re-inspection before finals.

I see it mainly as a courtesy to rookie and younger teams who still aren't that familiar with the inspection process. If your team has been around for a number of years you should already build you robot and do a self inspection so you know it will pass when you get to the event.

I also see this as mainly taking place before, but not necessarily limited to, the team's first event. At a team's second event it is less likely to see an out of dimension, seriously over weight, un-approved parts, ect.

[EricH]

In my two years of MAR, never have I seen the cause of failing inspection prior to the start of matches be because of lack of time at the event.

What's to stop a team from modifying a robot after any inspection?

I'd work as an inspector a bit before saying the timecrunch is not a problem. Inspectors often have to go crazy to get those last few teams to pass. Some teams have no sense of urgency when they are far from being legal, with only 30 minutes left in the day....
Listen to Adam. I was about to say that, because I HAVE seen teams unable to make their first few matches because they did not pass inspection, due to a robot problem, even with the inspectors working with them to solve their issues. And did I mention that this was with an extended inspection time because the inspectors were few in number?


And after any inspection, teams can (and do!) modify their robots. If the modification involves adding something or changing a dimension and it could affect legality, the team is supposed to check with the inspectors before their next match--9/10 times, the inspectors will walk over, go "You're good", and walk away. Most of the rest will be weight checks. (I think one of the folks commenting on this thread got bitten by not informing the inspectors of a change that brought the robot's weight up too high... but still made weight for elims after a hectic lunch break.)

[AdamHeard]

-9/10 times, the inspectors will walk over, go "You're good", and walk away.

The precedent set last year is that this is not an inspection. I'd force the inspector to note on your form, or notify the lead inspector, if you're concerned. Not worth the Red Card.

[Steven Donow]

Listen to Adam. I was about to say that, because I HAVE seen teams unable to make their first few matches because they did not pass inspection, due to a robot problem, even with the inspectors working with them to solve their issues. And did I mention that this was with an extended inspection time because the inspectors were few in number?


And after any inspection, teams can (and do!) modify their robots. If the modification involves adding something or changing a dimension and it could affect legality, the team is supposed to check with the inspectors before their next match--9/10 times, the inspectors will walk over, go "You're good", and walk away. Most of the rest will be weight checks. (I think one of the folks commenting on this thread got bitten by not informing the inspectors of a change that brought the robot's weight up too high... but still made weight for elims after a hectic lunch break.)

In regards to my comment about not making inspection, the intention of my comment(which, rereading it, I definitely did not make it clear) was that in the firsthand times I personally(and I'm aware you two of infinitely more experience than me, so keep that in mind) have seen, in which a team didn't make their first matches due to unfinished inspection at districts, it often seemed to be issues that would have required an amount of time that, logistically, would be hard to account for.

Also, in all honesty(and I probably shouldn't have made the post because of this), I wasn't 100% what exactly this pre-event inspection entailed. And yes, I'm 100% well-aware that teams can do illegal modifications, but it's much harder to get caught when your robot is not under FIRST supervision(and yes, I know FIRST isn't watching every move you make at a competition, but still). Also, I generally try to view FIRST through rose-colored glasses, but I'm well aware it's not the truth.

[AdamHeard]

In regards to my comment about not making inspection, the intention of my comment(which, rereading it, I definitely did not make it clear) was that in the firsthand times I personally(and I'm aware you two of infinitely more experience than me, so keep that in mind) have seen, in which a team didn't make their first matches due to unfinished inspection at districts, it often seemed to be issues that would have required an amount of time that, logistically, would be hard to account for.


No worries, you should try it once, it's a lot of fun!

[Pault]

Also, in all honesty(and I probably shouldn't have made the post because of this), I wasn't 100% what exactly this pre-event inspection entailed. And yes, I'm 100% well-aware that teams can do illegal modifications, but it's much harder to get caught when your robot is not under FIRST supervision(and yes, I know FIRST isn't watching every move you make at a competition, but still). Also, I generally try to view FIRST through rose-colored glasses, but I'm well aware it's not the truth.

The possibility that this could happen doesn't concern me that much. I believe that 99/100 teams will honestly try to the very best of their abilities to follow all the rules that are enforced only by honor code. And for that 100th team, if the worst they are doing is modifying their robot to be illegal, I am relieved. There are much worse things that they could be doing (not bagging the robot until the night before the event, using a chassis they built in the preseason) that would bother me. But I cannot imagine what a team could do to give themselves such a huge advantage within such a short timespan. It is still immoral to try to do this, but if allowing one team out of a hundred to cheat means that teams who accidentally made an illegal robot get more inspection time to try and get it fixed, the by all means let those losers do what they want. The teams that would actually do that are normally teams that have bad robots whether they cheat or not, and probably won't do well anyways.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

And after any inspection, teams can (and do!) modify their robots. If the modification involves adding something or changing a dimension and it could affect legality, the team is supposed to check with the inspectors before their next match--9/10 times, the inspectors will walk over, go "You're good", and walk away.
If any change is made it must be reinspected. Making the change means you are playing with an "un-inspected" robot and there are consequences for that. Yes nine out of ten times an inspector will look at the change, see that it is legal and respond "you're good". What you don't see is that person going back to the table and changing the inspection sheet or making a note on the sheet so others will know.
Paul, the numbers are way higher than you imagine.
This year the modifications that were being made with regularity was the addition of blocking devices. Teams made the change thinking, "Hey we're 20 lbs underweight so we can add a lot". The reality, there was still a height restriction that must be met. Also, not discussed much, if a robot needs to modify the current robot to accomplish the change (not simply adding something), and the change would have put the robot over weight with the original parts, you can't go back to original configuration at that event (T08).
The inspection team and the LRI in particular are your friends. They are tasked with making all teams have a great event and they are chosen so that their experience can help you compete. Please include them in your decision to modify your robot at an event. In no particular order, we have seen teams wanting to make these changes during the weekend...
1. Remove half of the robot since it is not functioning the way the team had hoped.
2. Adding weight to get better friction for defensive strategies.
3. Modifying designs to make their alliance partners happy.
4. Modifying to get an alliance partner to pick them.
5. Adding free weights, vises, lead, lead shot, water bottles, extra battery and tools to add weight or balance parts of the robot.
6. Remove wheels, add motors, remove drive train parts.
7. Add attachments to change robot dimensions or contact the floor.
8. anything you can think of while you are reading this...
While many of these can be legal modifications and pass inspection, they are not necessarily the right action for your team. Making significant changes in weight for instance vastly affect driving performance which will take your drive team back to square one. In the finals, a known robot behavior is better than starting off from scratch.

[Pault]

Paul, the numbers are way higher than you imagine.
This year the modifications that were being made with regularity was the addition of blocking devices. Teams made the change thinking, "Hey we're 20 lbs underweight so we can add a lot". The reality, there was still a height restriction that must be met. Also, not discussed much, if a robot needs to modify the current robot to accomplish the change (not simply adding something), and the change would have put the robot over weight with the original parts, you can't go back to original configuration at that event (T08).
The inspection team and the LRI in particular are your friends. They are tasked with making all teams have a great event and they are chosen so that their experience can help you compete. Please include them in your decision to modify your robot at an event. In no particular order, we have seen teams wanting to make these changes during the weekend...
1. Remove half of the robot since it is not functioning the way the team had hoped.
2. Adding weight to get better friction for defensive strategies.
3. Modifying designs to make their alliance partners happy.
4. Modifying to get an alliance partner to pick them.
5. Adding free weights, vises, lead, lead shot, water bottles, extra battery and tools to add weight or balance parts of the robot.
6. Remove wheels, add motors, remove drive train parts.
7. Add attachments to change robot dimensions or contact the floor.
8. anything you can think of while you are reading this...
While many of these can be legal modifications and pass inspection, they are not necessarily the right action for your team. Making significant changes in weight for instance vastly affect driving performance which will take your drive team back to square one. In the finals, a known robot behavior is better than starting off from scratch.

I understand a lot of teams probably end up doing illegal things. But I believe that they at least don't do them with the intent to cheat. I think in most cases it is just ignorance, and that is a completely different issue with different solutions. I don't think many teams forgot to bag their robot until the night before the event. But teams may do smaller things illegally without knowing. I agree that teams should talk to event staff with every change they aren't certain of. But I like to think very few teams purposefully cheat if they know they can get away with it.

[Nirvash]

Also, not discussed much, if a robot needs to modify the current robot to accomplish the change (not simply adding something), and the change would have put the robot over weight with the original parts, you can't go back to original configuration at that event (T08).


Just out of curiosity, I don't exactly see how T08 wouldn't let a robot but reinspected in it's original configuration. Could you expand on that?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

If the change requires removing assemblies (to remain under weight), from the robot then all assemblies were not present at the initial inspection under R05. You may upgrade/modify the robot to improve functionality throughout the event, but to reinstall the original assembly violates this rule. You can of course return the robot to it's original configuration prior to your next event and that inspection process. This policy has been in effect for many years. Prior to that, robots could have numerous assemblies (changed match to match) and only had to make weight with the heaviest one to pass inspection.

[Nuttyman54]

If the change requires removing assemblies (to remain under weight), from the robot then all assemblies were not present at the initial inspection under R05. You may upgrade/modify the robot to improve functionality throughout the event, but to reinstall the original assembly violates this rule. You can of course return the robot to it's original configuration prior to your next event and that inspection process. This policy has been in effect for many years. Prior to that, robots could have numerous assemblies (changed match to match) and only had to make weight with the heaviest one to pass inspection.

Are you saying that there are changes to my robot that I cannot make at an event, regardless of how many times I get inspected?

My understanding of the T08 rule is that if I have 2 different mechanisms which together would put my robot overweight, but individually do not, I could (theoretically) get re-inspected each time I wanted to change my mechanism out. I understand this example is not in the spirit of the rules and the inspectors have no obligation to comply with my request in time for my next match. However, if a team decides to change a mechanism by removing the old one, discovers the new mechanism doesn't work as intended, I'm under the impression they can revert the robot to the old mechanism as long as they get reinspected with the old mechanism before competing. They CANNOT assume that because the old mechanism passed inspection the first time, reverting after they passed inspection with the 2nd mechanism on the robot is legal without reinspection.

[BigJ]

Previous discussion on the modification issue this season: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1259415

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Evan,
You may not switch mechanisms/assemblies as you suggest (with regards to both weights). You can make the first change under the premise you are improving functionality or upgrading the robot provided the assembly is manufactured on site or is included in the 30lb allowance (R21). Any subsequent return to a previous mechanism/assembly will violate R05 and T08 if the sum of parts and robot exceed the maximum weight allowance. This rule has been in place so long, I can't remember the full reasoning behind it. The first year this was introduced was 2004. I call this a WildStang rule as previous to that year, we always made multiple assemblies and changed them match to match to suit the strategy and/or alliance. Inspectors were reminded of this interpretation during 2013 as teams wanted to make changes in the finals, mostly to add blocking devices. Teams were advised of the rules when adding or changing and were weighed following the change. The head refs were then advised to the changes they would be seeing in subsequent matches.

[Racer26]

I'm still really disappointed by the decision that was made regarding 1519 in 2008.

I saw it as being a brilliant usage of that "multiple mutually exclusive MECHANISMs are OK as long as all of them together fall under the ROBOT weight restriction" rule.

For those that don't know, in 2008, 1519 built an electronics board that was totally modular. Then they built two MECHANISMs that constituted the majority of their ROBOT. One, a very small, agile, lapping robot, that was little more than four wheels and motors (Speed Racer). The other, a simple hurdler (Fezzik). The idea being, that they could drop the electronics board into either Speed Racer or Fezzik as match strategy dictated. Speed Racer and Fezzik combined with the electronics board weighed less than the 120lb restriction. The argument was "Does the electronics board constitute a ROBOT, and Speed Racer/Fezzik are large MECHANISMs, or did 1519 build two ROBOTs?". (The rules have always said each TEAM can only enter a single ROBOT in competition).

HQ decided that 1519 had brought two distinct ROBOTs, and 1519 was forced to play with Fezzik only at their official events.

At an offseason that year, 1519 played with Fezzik, and they had a second drive team play with Speed Racer as "9151".