Important Q/A forum responses [Archive]

Guy Davidson

11-01-2007, 23:07

I thought it should be pointed out that the GDC has started to answer some questions. Here are some of the interesting ones I found at first glance:

Coaches may NOT have laptops on the field (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1185)

The wrap-around exists! (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1137)

Herding of more than one piece is illegal (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1108)

Legs may only be pushed in order to control them (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1108)

Scoring of other alliance's ringers results in a penalty, but ringer counts, as long as it's the only one in the leg. (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1120)

Post other interesting links you find, or comment about the ones posted.

Ian Curtis

11-01-2007, 23:17

How 'bout defining AM two speeds as COTS mechanisms, which means they must be purchased after kickoff . Those AM people will be making lots of money.

As an aside to AM employees: Interested in selling some stock? :rolleyes:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1100

EDIT: Perhaps this came across the wrong way, and is actually quite irrelevant after what Andy said about this rule change.

Andy Baker

12-01-2007, 01:29

How 'bout defining AM two speeds as COTS mechanisms, which means they must be purchased after kickoff . Those AM people will be making lots of money.

As an aside to AM employees: Interested in selling some stock? :rolleyes:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1100

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

Fred Sayre

12-01-2007, 01:40

Legs may only be pushed in order to control them (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1108)

This is not the link you were talking about? It is a link to a question about herding tubes.

I was curious what ruling you were referring to.

Guy Davidson

12-01-2007, 01:50

This is not the link you were talking about? It is a link to a question about herding tubes.

I was curious what ruling you were referring to.

Sorry. I was referring to the thread found here: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1098

-Guy

Fred Sayre

12-01-2007, 01:56

Sorry. I was referring to the thread found here: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1098

-Guy

Oh, yeah - I saw that in the Q&A and thought that might be what you were talking about. I just misread the claim "Legs may only be pushed in order to control them" to read that the only way in which you can contact the legs is when you are pushing them to control and score.

Taylor

12-01-2007, 08:27

I assume this means that a team cannot intentionally sway the spiders to keep an opponent from scoring? I was looking forward to that type of defense, and teams overcoming that.

GaryVoshol

12-01-2007, 08:35

I assume this means that a team cannot intentionally sway the spiders to keep an opponent from scoring? I was looking forward to that type of defense, and teams overcoming that.
Did you read the answer here? http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1098 It says the legs "may be pushed".

BrianR

12-01-2007, 08:59

Did you read the answer here? http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1098 It says the legs "may be pushed".

If you read on though...

Re: Spider attachment clarification

The Spider Legs are considered part of the field structure, and are covered under Rule <G33>. The Spider Legs may be pushed to one side, from the front, or from the bottom, to stabilize them during the process of hanging a game piece. However, they may not be grasped, held, or severely restrained without violating this rule.

I believe they will not allow you to just go forwards and backwards into the rack for the duration of the match, but this would be a useful question to submit.

GaryVoshol

12-01-2007, 09:12

If you read on though...

Re: Spider attachment clarification

The Spider Legs are considered part of the field structure, and are covered under Rule <G33>. The Spider Legs may be pushed to one side, from the front, or from the bottom, to stabilize them during the process of hanging a game piece. However, they may not be grasped, held, or severely restrained without violating this rule.

I believe they will not allow you to just go forwards and backwards into the rack for the duration of the match, but this would be a useful question to submit.

And <G33> says
<G33> Field interaction - ROBOTS may push or react against any elements of the field, provided there is no damage or disruption of the field elements. ROBOTS may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any field structure. Robot may not HANG GAME PIECES on the Vision System Targets , or otherwise block visual access to the Vision System Targets. If a ROBOT violates this rule, the head referee will give one warning. If the referee determines that the TEAM is disregarding the warning, their ROBOT will be disabled for the remainder of the match.

They've already said we can push as long as we don't break. The Q&A was only referring to how much constraint could be put on the spider to be considered grasping. And I can hardly believe that "disruption" would mean putting the spider into motion, else no one would ever be able to nudge it, even accidentally.

Fred Sayre

12-01-2007, 10:01

They've already said we can push as long as we don't break. The Q&A was only referring to how much constraint could be put on the spider to be considered grasping. And I can hardly believe that "disruption" would mean putting the spider into motion, else no one would ever be able to nudge it, even accidentally.

Yeah, I agree. The Q&A question was specifically asked in regards to contact while attempting to score, so it seems the GDC answered that question specifically with "...during the process of hanging a game piece" instead of a general ruling about spider contact.

akshar

12-01-2007, 10:40

a questiong about the herding clarification... if your home zone is littered with pool tubes, can you move them out of the way to make room for your robot to deploy ramps and such, or is this still considered herding?

Cody Carey

12-01-2007, 10:46

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

While this will not effect our team personally, I can definately see that extra money will need to be spent on everyone's account, and excess paperwork will need to be done. It reminds me of our team having to disassemble the spare KOP gearbox at the door of the Pitt regional in order to get in, only to re-assemble it on the other side. We didn't use it on the robot.

Madison

12-01-2007, 14:12

While this will not effect our team personally, I can definately see that extra money will need to be spent on everyone's account, and excess paperwork will need to be done. It reminds me of our team having to disassemble the spare KOP gearbox at the door of the Pitt regional in order to get in, only to re-assemble it on the other side. We didn't use it on the robot.

Why did you have to disassemble anything to get into the event? I can't imagine how this is in anyone's best interest, nor do I recall a rule that would prevent you from bringing assembled mechanisms in as spares.

Alan Anderson

12-01-2007, 14:31

Why did you have to disassemble anything to get into the event? I can't imagine how this is in anyone's best interest, nor do I recall a rule that would prevent you from bringing assembled mechanisms in as spares.
<R29> last year seems applicable. Most of the components of the KOP gearbox were available as COTS, but the gearbox itself would count as a fabricated item, and would be subject to the 25 pound limit. Taking it apart would let you slip a lot of the weight through as unrestricted COTS components.

ChuckDickerson

12-01-2007, 14:45

We are not happy about this ruling. That is an understatement. I don't forsee anyone winning or "making lots of money" in this situation. I see alot of needless paperwork and shipping for teams to become legal.

I still want to see an official FIRST update on this.

Andy B.

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.

Jonathan Norris

12-01-2007, 15:03

Kevin Sevcik

12-01-2007, 15:05

Andy, are you implying that teams should plan to return any COTS MECHANISMS purchased from AndyMark prior to kickoff so that you can refund their $ and then turn around a reship them back to the team and recharge them? I only see this serves to waste your time, team funds for double shipping, and additional paperwork on both ends. While I think I understand the intent of the rule, this solution, while seemingly legal, seems totally ridiculous for all involved.
I feel confident in in saying that Andy, I, and many others wholeheartedly agree that it is, indeed, a completely ridiculous thing. You must admit that, as the rules are currently written, the only other options available to these teams are to either buy more transmissions or chunk their current transmissions in the trash and kiss their money goodbye. I'm pretty sure neither of those options is preferable to a lot of paperwork getting the transmissions legal. Obviously what would be best for these teams would be for the GDC to reconsider this rule.

EDIT: Jonathan. Saying Dave warned us is like saying the tooth fairy warned us. Everyone here takes anything he says preseason with a grain of salt, for good reason. Unless he was deputized as an official spokesperson for the GDC and I didn't notice, then saying that he warned us is a pretty poor defense. Aside from which, making a preseason, non-authoritive announcement of a possible rule change on CD? Exactly how may teams is that supposed to reach? If FIRST was serious about telling teams they could, and should, have sent an Email Blast.

Jonathan Norris

12-01-2007, 15:15

EDIT: Jonathan. Saying Dave warned us is like saying the tooth fairy warned us. Everyone here takes anything he says preseason with a grain of salt, for good reason. Unless he was deputized as an official spokesperson for the GDC and I didn't notice, then saying that he warned us is a pretty poor defense. Aside from which, making a preseason, non-authoritive announcement of a possible rule change on CD? Exactly how may teams is that supposed to reach? If FIRST was serious about telling teams they could, and should, have sent an Email Blast.

Good point there, but I have learned with Dave that you can tell he is being deceiving an sincere. In those two posts when i first read them I didn't see the deceiving trickery in his post, I saw a general warning to teams about purchasing parts early. I do agree that if they should have sent out and email blast about it, and i also agree that Dave is not a spokesperson for the GDC and likes to play games with us sometimes.

JoshuaFreier

12-01-2007, 17:22

Can someone point me to the rule or ruling that says COTs have to be purchased during the season?

Thanks
Joshua

Richard Wallace

12-01-2007, 17:26

Can someone point me to the rule or ruling that says COTs have to be purchased during the season?

Thanks
Joshua<R17> says, among other things, that any MECHANISMS (COTS or custom) that were purchased before kickoff cannot be used on the final robot.

JoshuaFreier

12-01-2007, 17:31

The version of R17 that I have printed says:
"Prior to kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are encouraged... Teams may gather all the raw stock and COTS COMPONENTS they want. .... Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the kick-off presentation may be used for...."

Unless this was changed in update #2 I don't know where you are seeing what you are seeing and if the AM Transmission is a COTS item why wouldn't a team be allowed to pre-order?

Joshua

ChuckDickerson

12-01-2007, 17:34

Read the whole rule:

<R17> Prior to the Kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are
encouraged to think as much as they please about their ROBOTS. They may develop
prototypes, create proof-of-concept models, and conduct design exercises. Teams may
gather all the raw stock materials and COTS COMPONENTS they want. But absolutely no
fabrication or assembly of any elements intended for the final ROBOT is permitted prior to
the Kick-off presentation. Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the Kick-off
presentation may be used for prototyping or educational purposes, but CAN NOT be used
on the final ROBOT.

dlavery

12-01-2007, 18:36

Read Update #2. It clarifies, and improves, a lot of things.

Billfred

12-01-2007, 18:48

<R17> says, among other things, that any MECHANISMS (COTS or custom) that were purchased before kickoff cannot be used on the final robot.

Can someone point me to the rule or ruling that says COTs have to be purchased during the season?

Thanks
Joshua

The version of R17 that I have printed says:
"Prior to kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are encouraged... Teams may gather all the raw stock and COTS COMPONENTS they want. .... Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the kick-off presentation may be used for...."

Unless this was changed in update #2 I don't know where you are seeing what you are seeing and if the AM Transmission is a COTS item why wouldn't a team be allowed to pre-order?

Joshua

Read the whole rule:

<R17> Prior to the Kick-off: Before the formal start of the Robot Build Season, teams are
encouraged to think as much as they please about their ROBOTS. They may develop
prototypes, create proof-of-concept models, and conduct design exercises. Teams may
gather all the raw stock materials and COTS COMPONENTS they want. But absolutely no
fabrication or assembly of any elements intended for the final ROBOT is permitted prior to
the Kick-off presentation. Any MECHANISMS purchased or assembled prior to the Kick-off
presentation may be used for prototyping or educational purposes, but CAN NOT be used
on the final ROBOT.
Note that this got flipped around in Team Update #2 (http://www2.usfirst.org/2007comp/Updates/2007%20Team%20Update%2002.pdf) (PDF link).

Richard Wallace

12-01-2007, 19:34

Read Update #2. It clarifies, and improves, a lot of things.Oh, we of little faith.

Props to the GDC for fixing the COTS MECHANISM rule quickly. To paraphrase what Andy Baker said a while ago (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=319647#post319647), anyone can err -- great thinkers fix their own errors.

Andy Baker

12-01-2007, 21:48

Props to the GDC for fixing the COTS MECHANISM rule quickly.

Agreed... Thank you to the GDC for making this adjustment and improving the clarity on these rules.

Andy

sniggel

18-01-2007, 14:07

Yeah, I agree. The Q&A question was specifically asked in regards to contact while attempting to score, so it seems the GDC answered that question specifically with "...during the process of hanging a game piece" instead of a general ruling about spider contact.

Any thoughts about a manipulator that surrounds the Spider Foot?

GaryVoshol

18-01-2007, 14:18

Any thoughts about a manipulator that surrounds the Spider Foot?The GDC used the words "severely constrained". Surrounding is constrained, is it severe? Do you want to risk your design on the ruling of a ref at the competition(s)?

Joe Ross

19-01-2007, 14:16

Referees will not wait until everything on the field comes to a rest to figure out the score: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1604

Elgin Clock

19-01-2007, 14:36

Apparently the GDC has a bad sense of humor.

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1253&highlight=pressure

If a rookie team asked this I'm sure they would get a straight answer.
But seeing as it was 3 teams who have been in FIRST for 5+ years then I think this was an example of sarcasm.

Not cool. :(

edit: Looking at the title of this thread, I'm guessing this answer would more suit a thread named "Unimportant Q/A Forum Responses"

jgannon

22-01-2007, 11:43

To follow up on Elgin's Unimportant Responses idea, take a look at this one:

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1508

It's a little surprising that this question was asked six times, and it still wasn't really answered. I'm guessing that most teams have figured out that stores do indeed sell sprockets, but that they're interested in buying the exact sprockets that are in the kit, so they don't have to do "minor additional machining (broaching keyways, enlarging bores, etc.)". Is there any reason for FIRST to be beating around the bush with this one?

Ricky Q.

22-01-2007, 20:49

Ian Curtis

22-01-2007, 21:22

Saw this answered today:

Q:We were wondering if we could hang signs during Regional Competition where our team is sitting?
A:No. As stated in section 3.11.3, teams cannot hang banners in the competition area. This area is designated for official FIRST sponsors' banners. Teams may only hang banners in their own personal team station (within the pit).

I'm sure that will be interesting.

It's the same rule every year. And every year regionals have team banners hanging everywhere. I'm not going to speak on the beaten-to-death-topic of teams showing disregard for this rule, but if regionals and the championship are continually decked out with banners which stay up for the entirety of the event, why is this rule in the rulebook ever year?

On another note, we have to ship 2 batteries this year. :mad:

However, it is perfectly acceptable to bring the rest of your batteries in a car. :confused:
Does anyone here have any insight why we must ship the 2?

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1683

Billfred

22-01-2007, 21:48

Edit: I missed a key part of <R11>, the part under the box. I still don't like some of these rules, but I've struck out the erroneous parts.

I normally go with the flow when it comes to Q&A, but this new direction they're taking with the fabrication rules are getting highly irritating.

Irritation #1: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=3878#post3878

Under Rule <R11> the Operator Console is considered part of the Robot, and all associated rules apply. Rule <R35> prohibits the use of adhesive tape, except under certain circumstances. If the use of the tape on the Operator Console is not permitted by one of these exceptions, then it can not be used.<R11> says, in part:

<R11> For the purposes of determining compliance with the weight and volume limitations specified
in Rule <R07>, these items are NOT considered part of the ROBOT and are NOT included
in the weight and volume assessment of the ROBOT:
...
 The OPERATOR CONSOLE. I read further, thinking I missed something in the Robot section of the manual, and could not find any part of the manual definitively saying that the OPERATOR CONSOLE is part of the robot. Further language in the manual seems to indicate the opposite:

<R18> During the Build Season: ... When the ROBOT shipment deadline arrives, all work on the
ROBOT must cease and the ROBOT must be placed in a “hands-off” condition. The entire
ROBOT (including all FABRICATED ITEMS intended for use during the competition in
alternative configurations of the ROBOT) and OPERATOR CONSOLE must be crated and
out of team hands by the shipment deadline specified in Section 4.5.1.1.
It seems like if they're going to go this route (which, in my humble opinion, is more frustration than anything), a further update to the manual would be required.

Irritation #2: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=3897#post3897

During the match the flag must remain approximately vertical. If it is mounted to a body part that tilts significantly, then this is not an appropriate mounting point.

The intent of Rule <R15> is that during the majority of match play the flag is the tallest point on the robot, so that it may be easily seen and the alliance assignment of the robot may be easily determined. If an appendage or manipulator spends most of the match higher than the flag, then this is not a "temporary" condition. This would be considered a violation of Rule <R15>, and would need to be corrected before the robot would be allowed to play in another match.This one obviously rules out some past designs, but I sincerely hope their view of "temporary" will be one of those much-feared subjective situations. I'm telling my drivers to keep their arm down as long as they can safely do it.

Irritation #3: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=3897#post3897

Per Rule <R11> and Section 4.2, the two 12V batteries supplied in the kit must ship with the robot. Any additional batteries you purchase as spares may be either brought to the event, or shippped with the robot.Now, I will concede that the 12V battery is part of the robot. But somebody tell me, what's the benefit to this rule? While most everything else has changed with the batteries, I can't see why we can't put them in the trunk of the car Thursday morning like the past two (or three, or maybe more) seasons.

This sure seems to be the season of seemingly odd rule changes.

SamC

22-01-2007, 21:59

Irritation #3: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=3897#post3897
Per Rule <R11> and Section 4.2, the two 12V batteries supplied in the kit must ship with the robot. Any additional batteries you purchase as spares may be either brought to the event, or shippped with the robot.

Now, I will concede that the 12V battery is part of the robot. But somebody tell me, what's the benefit to this rule? While most everything else has changed with the batteries, I can't see why we can't put them in the trunk of the car Thursday morning like the past two (or three, or maybe more) seasons.

This sure seems to be the season of seemingly odd rule changes.

Possibly this is to keep from the rare possibility that a team may forget to bring it the day that they are traveling. Or, if a team must travel by air, some teams may have trouble getting their batteries to the regional/championship venue (i think 1 of our extra batteries were sent back by security on our way to Atlanta last year...).

sanddrag

22-01-2007, 22:04

Irritation #3: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?p=3897#post3897

Now, I will concede that the 12V battery is part of the robot. But somebody tell me, what's the benefit to this rule? While most everything else has changed with the batteries, I can't see why we can't put them in the trunk of the car Thursday morning like the past two (or three, or maybe more) seasons.

This sure seems to be the season of seemingly odd rule changes.This season, a lot of rules are costing veteran teams a lot of money. Our crate just squeaked in under the weight limit with only the robot in it last year. Now we have to put the controls in it. Okay, our robot is 10 lbs lighter, so we'll still squeak it. But now we have to put the batteries in it? Goodbye Ben Franklin.

Oh well, FIRST isn't cheap. Whadayagonnado?

Kevin Sevcik

22-01-2007, 22:06

Irritation #4
Regarding <R29>:The long dimension is the greatest of the height, width, or depth measurements. If a robot is particularly short (e.g. the height is less than the length), then it must start the match "on-end" in order to comply with this rule. If such a robot can not be designed to flop down, you may consider installing a post, bracket, etc that increases the vertical dimension of the robot (and upon which the flag holder may be mounted).The GDC has just made the kit-bot illegal and/or, utterly useless as built out of the box. I refuse to speculate on the reasoning here, for fear of losing my sanity. I have no idea why the whole "fit in a 28" x 38" x something box with something dimension vertical" paradigm wouldn't work this year.

sanddrag

22-01-2007, 22:09

Irritation #4
Regarding <R29>:The GDC has just made the kit-bot illegal and/or, utterly useless as built out of the box. I refuse to speculate on the reasoning here, for fear of losing my sanity. I have no idea why the whole "fit in a 28" x 38" x something box with something dimension vertical" paradigm wouldn't work this year.

This is quite odd. I mean, there's a lot of rules that we can say "are part of the game challenge" but, this is like the "gotta touch the triangle" thing of 05. It is gonna add ugliness to a fair number of robots out there. If it isn't dangling strings from their front frame rail,it is ugly sticks rising from their centers. I think this is probably aimed at discouraging teams from fielding a rolling box whose soll purpose is to get in the way of other robots, but if a tall stick satisfies this requirement...

Richard Wallace

22-01-2007, 22:12

Kevin Sevcik

22-01-2007, 22:17

Perhaps the GDC is tired of seeing a lot of knee-high motorized brick-bats charging wildly around the playing field?This would make sense except they turn around and give simple suggestions for how to make these robots legal in about 10 minutes. So I really just don't know what we're going for here.

dlavery

22-01-2007, 22:41

I read further, thinking I missed something in the Robot section of the manual, and could not find any part of the manual definitively saying that the OPERATOR CONSOLE is part of the robot.

You need to read ALL of <R11>.

rocknthehawk

23-01-2007, 14:55

This is quite odd. I mean, there's a lot of rules that we can say "are part of the game challenge" but, this is like the "gotta touch the triangle" thing of 05. It is gonna add ugliness to a fair number of robots out there. If it isn't dangling strings from their front frame rail,it is ugly sticks rising from their centers. I think this is probably aimed at discouraging teams from fielding a rolling box whose soll purpose is to get in the way of other robots, but if a tall stick satisfies this requirement...

I agree with you 100%. I like to see good looking robots....but with a random stick out of no where to hold a flag? I understand the reasoning (ok...only a little) But it especially complicates the design of robots with ramps, as now teams need to place their flag holder somewhere, and hope a team driving up the ramp doesn't take it out.

Last year we had to go to home depot and get PVC and make a new flag holder because ours was an inch too short. Seriously, like it was going to affect our performance....maybe we would have been first seed instead of second if we didn't have that inch....

Richard Wallace

23-01-2007, 19:27

This response (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1720) is interesting. I don't think it is a departure from standard practice since Q&A was introduced, but it does clarify how Q&A responses are to be used at events; i.e., as guidance.The answers given in the Q&A are guidance only. Inspectors and referees will use the current revisions of the documents on the FIRST website 2007 FIRST Robotics Competition Manual and related documents page to perform their jobs at competitions. FIRST updates these documents in Team Updates if a question or answer on the Q&A requires. The same guidance given in the Q&A is given in inspector and referee training.

Peter Matteson

24-01-2007, 07:57

This response (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1720) is interesting. I don't think it is a departure from standard practice since Q&A was introduced, but it does clarify how Q&A responses are to be used at events; i.e., as guidance.

I'm certain they used the same language last year because Mike Betts and I have had this discussion a few times. Last year we came across similar comments at the end of build season that made us question whether or not the Q&A was binding. In the end we decided as we usually do if we feel a Q&A response is relevant to something we did we will have it printed in hand so that we can make sure the apporpriate "guidance" is available to an inspector.

Taylor

24-01-2007, 09:36

Peter Matteson

24-01-2007, 09:40

Say Blueabot is 28W X 38L X 18 H - one of the infamous "rolling bricks" - and would have to start the match on end. Would the flag mount have to be on a pivot so it would remain vertical as the robot's orientation changes as soon as that first horn sounds?

I say make the flag holder tall enough they don't need to start on end and avoid the issue.

Fred Sayre

24-01-2007, 09:46

Say Blueabot is 28W X 38L X 18 H - one of the infamous "rolling bricks" - and would have to start the match on end. Would the flag mount have to be on a pivot so it would remain vertical as the robot's orientation changes as soon as that first horn sounds?

Are you referring to this rule?

<G29> ROBOT orientation - ROBOTS must start the match with their long (maximum) dimension in
a vertical orientation. After the start of the match, ROBOTS may change their orientation
such that the long dimension is either vertical or horizontal. Refer to Rule <R37> in Section
8 to determine how this affects the use of bumpers.

I think what it is intending is that the "long dimension" is talking about the available long dimension, and not the robot's actual measured dimension. Even though it is 18" tall that dimension is still the long dimension (as 4',5', or 6' is available). I think they just want to prevent people from having a huge starting footprint with the 4'-6' available size.

Kevin Sevcik

24-01-2007, 10:12

Are you referring to this rule?

<G29> ROBOT orientation - ROBOTS must start the match with their long (maximum) dimension in
a vertical orientation. After the start of the match, ROBOTS may change their orientation
such that the long dimension is either vertical or horizontal. Refer to Rule <R37> in Section
8 to determine how this affects the use of bumpers.

I think what it is intending is that the "long dimension" is talking about the available long dimension, and not the robot's actual measured dimension. Even though it is 18" tall that dimension is still the long dimension (as 4',5', or 6' is available). I think they just want to prevent people from having a huge starting footprint with the 4'-6' available size.Nope, it's measured dimension. Here's the GDC's answer on that:The long dimension is the greatest of the height, width, or depth measurements. If a robot is particularly short (e.g. the height is less than the length), then it must start the match "on-end" in order to comply with this rule. If such a robot can not be designed to flop down, you may consider installing a post, bracket, etc that increases the vertical dimension of the robot (and upon which the flag holder may be mounted).If it was just the "available" dimension, then all this verbiage wouldn't be necessary. They obviously intend it to be the measured dimension.

Fred Sayre

24-01-2007, 11:23

Nope, it's measured dimension. Here's the GDC's answer on that:If it was just the "available" dimension, then all this verbiage wouldn't be necessary. They obviously intend it to be the measured dimension.

Thanks for clearing that up. What an odd rule. Do you have the Q&A link to that?

Ian Curtis

25-01-2007, 20:50

Looks like the GDC is implementing a "No Pretty Bumpers" Rule. Last year we thought our embroidered bumpers were the snazziest part of our robot. Looks like no more eye catching bumpers for us. :(

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1879

If the numbers are applied to the cloth of the bumbers with ink or dye, they would still be considered Standard Bumpers. If addition material is added to the bumpers in order to display the number, they would no long be considered Standard Bumpers but would instead be considered custom bumpers.

Also of interest, if you ink/dye your team numbers on your bumpers, and you drop ramps, another instance of your team number can appear to satisy<R14>.

Kevin Sevcik

25-01-2007, 22:19

About the operator console:
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1800According to <R11> the operator console is NOT part of the robot:
... these items are NOT considered part of the ROBOT ...
... The OPERATOR CONSOLE ....
This contradicts what was said at http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1752
I do not see any rule that states that the operator console is part of the robot.Please read ALL of Rule <R11> which, in the final paragraph, states that for all other purposes, these items are considered part of the ROBOT.
So.... everyone's doing all their cost accounting for those bump-plated, ground effect lighting festooned operator interfaces with four $50 joysticks plugged into the $130 USB chicklets, right?

jgannon

25-01-2007, 22:25

So.... everyone's doing all their cost accounting for those bump-plated, ground effect lighting festooned operator interfaces with four $50 joysticks plugged into the $130 USB chicklets, right?
Oh geez... didn't think of that. Does this also mean that everyone's favorite CH Flightsticks are not legal this year, since they are no longer publicly available?

Karthik

25-01-2007, 22:30

About the operator console:
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=1800
So.... everyone's doing all their cost accounting for those bump-plated, ground effect lighting festooned operator interfaces with four $50 joysticks plugged into the $130 USB chicklets, right?

Take a look at <R51> (bolding added for emphasis)

<R51>
The total cost of all non-Kit Of Parts items must not exceed $3,500.00 USD. No individual item shall have a value of over $400.00. The total cost of components purchased in bulkmay exceed $400.00 USD as long as the cost of an individual component does not exceed $400.00. The following items are EXCLUDED from the total cost calculation:

- The cost of any non-functional decorations
- The cost of individual fasteners, adhesives, or lubricants, unless any one component exceeds $1.00
- The costs of SPARE PARTS. A SPARE PART used as a direct replacement for a failed or defective ROBOT part (either Kit part or non-Kit part) that has already been included in the cost accounting is covered by the accounting for the original part
- All costs for the construction of the OPERATOR CONSOLE

Mike Betts

25-01-2007, 23:27

Oh geez... didn't think of that. Does this also mean that everyone's favorite CH Flightsticks are not legal this year, since they are no longer publicly available?

Joey,

Unless FIRST revises their rules, I agree. The CH Flightsticks are illegal.

Goodbye old friends...

Mike

Kevin Sevcik

25-01-2007, 23:39

Karthik,

Missed that one, thanks. I think the whole it is included, it isn't included, it is included again rulings on the OI are just a bit confusing. Obviously.

kibbs425

26-01-2007, 00:06

I agree with was last said. You do NOT have to include the cost of the operator controls into the cost of the robot based on the R51. It states EXCLUDING THE FOLLOWING...

So we do NOT have to inclued the cost of the $130 chicklet and the 4-$50 joysticks in the 3500 we get for the robots. If thats what you were to use.

jgannon

26-01-2007, 00:20

Indeed, I followed the flowchart, and Flighsticks are ILLEGAL based upon current FRC rules. So unless I'm missing something, we are now limited to essentially the joysticks we get in the kit, make ourselves, or the USB ones we hook up with the Chicklet, as I can't find a vendor of gameport joysticks. The manual makes no exclusions for the Operator Console, other than it is not included in the volume and weight of the robot, and we don't need to account costs for it.
I have so much trouble thinking that this is the intent of the rule, but that is definitely how it reads. I can't imagine that they would want to effectively ban every gameport controller except for the KOP sticks. If this holds up, don't expect to see more steering wheels than you can count on one hand this year. I don't figure that very many teams will be shelling out $200+ for a Chicklet and a USB wheel. I always kind of liked how they treated the OI differently from the robot, and allowed teams to go nuts. Pick up some old sticks from eBay, add some cathodes, work on it after the ship date, don't account for it. I hope the Q&A will give us a reprieve. Otherwise, expect a lot of cookie-cutter OIs from everyone but the wealthiest. Also expect a lot of teams to not figure this out ahead of time and be furiously searching for KOP sticks and redoing their OI on Thursday of their first regional. That's not how it ought to be.

Mike Betts

26-01-2007, 00:30

jgannon

26-01-2007, 00:48

You can use almost anything that is COTS or manufactured by the team for the OI. But because the CH Flightsticks are no longer manufactered, they are not COTS and not allowed.
I understand the COTS rule. The problem that iCurtis points out is that nobody makes gameport joysticks these days, with the exception of AVB, whose only remaining analog product is the stick that comes in the KOP (See http://www.avbusa.com/pc.htm). I always thought that the OI was kind of fun because there weren't a whole lot of limits on creativity; buying old sticks, gamepads, and steering wheels from eBay was okay. If you can point us to anyone still making analog gameport sticks, I would be thrilled, but I'm pretty sure they've all died out.

Ricky Q.

26-01-2007, 01:04

I posted a Q&A question about old CH joysticks and other analog joysticks from eBay and the like, just for clarifications.

sanddrag

26-01-2007, 01:05

I posted a Q&A question about old CH joysticks and other analog joysticks from eBay and the like, just for clarifications.
Link?

I'll tell ya though, FIRST has really done a number on poor teams this time around.

What I don't like about this is some guy called "GDC" has just with one line of text, potentially cost the FIRST program over $100,000

EDIT: Please read the posts below. It appears CH Flightsticks may not be outlawed afterall.

Cody Carey

26-01-2007, 01:20

If you can point us to anyone still making analog gameport sticks, I would be thrilled, but I'm pretty sure they've all died out.

A quick search turned This (http://www.jpcparts.com/page/search2.asp?partnumber=963236-0403) up, but I don't know if it is a gameport model... because one of the pictures if you follow the "view picture" link has a USB attached.

eugenebrooks

26-01-2007, 02:49

Joey, et al,

You can use almost anything that is COTS or manufactured by the team for the OI. But because the CH Flightsticks are no longer manufactered, they are not COTS and not allowed.

JMHO

Mike

See R28 as updated in Team Update 2.
It would appear that COTS items that are no longer commercially
available can be used, as long they are in vendor delivered condition.

Eugene

Karthik

26-01-2007, 03:02

See R28 as updated in Team Update 2.
It would appear that COTS items that are no longer commercially
available can be used, as long they are in vendor delivered condition.

Here's the ruling that he's talking about:

Rule <R28> has been updated to state that:
<R28> COTS ITEMS that are generally available may be used on the ROBOT. COTS ITEMS from ROBOTS entered in previous FIRST competitions or COTS ITEMS that are no longer commercially available may be used under the following conditions:
- The item must be unmodified, and still in its original condition as delivered from the VENDOR
- The item must not be a part custom made for the FIRST competition and provided in a previous FRC Kit Of Parts (e.g. 2006 FRC transmissions, custom-made motor couplers, custom sensor strips, IFI CMUcam II modules, etc. are not permitted)
- The item must satisfy ALL of the rules associated with materials/parts use for the 2007 FIRST Robotics Competition

sanddrag

26-01-2007, 03:14

Hooray Eugene Brooks and Karthik! Team Update 2 to the rescue? Seems like it eh?

petek

26-01-2007, 08:51

I wonder if FIRST is going to emphasize inspection of the operator controls this year? I think last year we just looked at the size, OI vintage and whether the right team number and firmware came up.

Mike Betts

26-01-2007, 09:48

All,

I missed that one... As amended, <G28> does allow for the CH Flightsticks.

Regards,

Mike

jgannon

26-01-2007, 10:24

I missed it, too. Thanks to Eugene and Karthik... it sounds like the OI will be okay after all.

Billfred

13-02-2007, 07:31

Here's one that's going to get a lot of people, if it's not publicized...

Just to be crystal clear, can a team utilize a battery other than the 2007 FRC-legal batteries for pre-charging a pneumatics system before a match, provided a legal battery is swapped in before the robot takes the field? For moving some appendage of the robot into position before a match under similar circumstances?Non-competition batteries may be used on the practice day, and in the pits for development, debugging, etc. However, all operations of the robots during the competition matches (qualifier matches and elimination matches), and done to prepare the robot for competition (e.g. charging the pneumatic system for a match, or positioning an arm for the start of a match) must be conducted with the competition batteries.

We allow teams to have an offboard compressor to reduce the weight of the robot. However, control and power must come from the competition robot, and therefor the competition batteries. Per Rule <R46>, you must use competition legal batteries in preparation for a competition match.

Swan217

13-02-2007, 08:19

Here's one that's going to get a lot of people, if it's not publicized...

I agree - this is a VERY important Q&A that will be missed.

Even though the rule makes a lot of sense in the theory of "all power from the robot," logistically, it's a disaster. Hypothetically this means that you cannot use an offboard battery to power the compressor, even if you're using it at the competition. Why? Because the battery to power the compressor would count as a SECOND battery, and you're only allowed one battery to power your robot per match. Teams will HAVE to find a way to "port in" to their robot to power the compressor (like an electrical outlet). This is easily accomplished by having a couple of unused Anderson Connectors attached to the outside frame of your robot, connected to the rest of your wiring harness. Just plug, pressurize, and go!

Al Skierkiewicz

13-02-2007, 08:44

Please remember that at the base of this issue with off board compressors is the need to demonstrate that the compressor will shut down under RC control which precludes the need for the compressor to be powered through a spike from the same battery used to power the RC.

Kevin Sevcik

13-02-2007, 09:54

Even though the rule makes a lot of sense in the theory of "all power from the robot," logistically, it's a disaster. Hypothetically this means that you cannot use an offboard battery to power the compressor, even if you're using it at the competition. Why? Because the battery to power the compressor would count as a SECOND battery, and you're only allowed one battery to power your robot per match. Teams will HAVE to find a way to "port in" to their robot to power the compressor (like an electrical outlet). This is easily accomplished by having a couple of unused Anderson Connectors attached to the outside frame of your robot, connected to the rest of your wiring harness. Just plug, pressurize, and go!I'm pretty sure an offboard compressor has always needed to be powered by an onboard robot battery. Atleast thats how I've always read the rule.

I'm much more concerned about the fact that ALL robot prep must happen with the competition battery. I understand the logic there, but keeping track of whether you're testing and debugging or actually resetting devices on your robot for a match will be a real nightmare. What if you've been debugging over lunch with a non-comp battery and parts of your robot end up in reset position and then you forget that you did so over lunch and don't re-reset them with a comp battery? I'm thinking that they'll almost have to be a bit lenient with this one and only come down on blatant repeat offenders. It's not as if you can scan the robot with a tricorder and find out if the quantum wave stat of the last electrons to course through it match a competition battery...

Peter Matteson

13-02-2007, 10:19

I'm pretty sure an offboard compressor has always needed to be powered by an onboard robot battery. Atleast thats how I've always read the rule.

I'm much more concerned about the fact that ALL robot prep must happen with the competition battery. I understand the logic there, but keeping track of whether you're testing and debugging or actually resetting devices on your robot for a match will be a real nightmare. What if you've been debugging over lunch with a non-comp battery and parts of your robot end up in reset position and then you forget that you did so over lunch and don't re-reset them with a comp battery? I'm thinking that they'll almost have to be a bit lenient with this one and only come down on blatant repeat offenders. It's not as if you can scan the robot with a tricorder and find out if the quantum wave stat of the last electrons to course through it match a competition battery...

(Begin Sarcasm) Does this mean we have to use the battery to reset all stored power too, sine power is work over time and work is a change in energy. I mean so many teams are using gas springs, springs, latex tubing, gravity, etc. to activate mechanisms on their robot that they must clearly follow this poorly worded explanation by creating a Rube Goldberg powered off their battery to reset any and all mechanisms just to follow the rule because you know power is power and since it has to come from the battery all power on the robot must come from the battery. (End sarcasm)

The wording in that was poorly thought out but the intent is clear. They don't want you to use the old batteries in a way that may allow for them to get in the robot for competition. Don't lawyer like I did above and don't do something stupid like showing up to the field with an old battery on your robot or cart, and you'll probably be fine.

Pete

Richard Wallace

13-02-2007, 11:22

... The wording in that was poorly thought out but the intent is clear. They don't want you to use the old batteries in a way that may allow for them to get in the robot for competition. Don't lawyer like I did above and don't do something stupid like showing up to the field with an old battery on your robot or cart, and you'll probably be fine.

PeteThanks for cutting to the chase, Pete. As you point out, the intent is clear. And competition officials will be looking for incorrect batteries in and around robots that are near the field. Inspectors will be looking at teams' pneumatics charging procedures in the pits.

Kevin Kolodziej

17-02-2007, 15:54

Here's one that's going to get a lot of people, if it's not publicized...

Here's where this rule gets hairy, in my opinion. Its good practice to come back from a match and run through all your functions to make sure everything is in working order. In doing so, positions will be reset to competition ready. Are they saying that this post-match assessment needs to be done with the competition battery? These actions are not the same as debugging.

While we won't be charging the pneumatic system at that time, its likely that the "pit" battery will remain in the robot during pit maintenance and it just makes sense to charge the system, using that battery, while still in the pit, then swapping in the new battery, then heading to the match. Not all teams can charge their system in the pit for a variety of reasons, and I realize it would be rediculous to say if you charge in the pit, you can use a different battery...but this rule just doesn't seem add any fairness or take away any advantage or anything like that. The two things it does is limit the number of non-competition batteries that make it to the field (a very good thing) and suggest that teams purchase more and more new batteries (not such a good thing for all teams).

Kev