Driver Station Vision?
 

So I just had this random thought: a driver using the laptop webcam to control the robot during autonomous!

1. I didn't see any rules that disallowed this, anyone care to correct me?
2. Thoughts?

Anyway, as for the implementation, I'd have one driver wearing gloves with vision tape on them, and have leds on the laptop powered by usb to activate the tape (or cypress io). Then I would setup the software to detect the y coordinates of each hand and send them to the robot. Maybe have the other driver with colored note cards that functions like buttons. Sounds pretty cool to me!

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

I'll say this: It's illegal. That's that.

Plus, it's impossible. During hybrid mode, the robot doesn't accept inputs from controllers. It runs solely off of the code put on it. By making this contraption, you are essentially creating a new controller, and though it will send inputs, the robot will not receive them until telep mode. And then, it's a lot more accurate to use a controller.

Also, what you're describing is essentially the kinect. Why do a whole other thing?

EDIT: See exact ruling below.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

You're simply inviting scrutiny unless you cite a rule.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

While I don't know the exact rule (looking it up now), I know how hybrid mode works. Once it initiates, it doesn't take any inputs from the driver station controllers (albeit the e-stop, though it's not a controller). The kinect bypasses this. I'm not trying to slam down this guy's idea, but rather stop him from wasting time.

EDIT: Here's the rule. Per [G19], "During Hybrid, any control devices worn or held by the Drivers must be disconnected from the Operator Console, and not connected until Teleop". Violation: Foul

You would be controlling the robots with your body. You are wearing/holding your body, so therefore it is not allowed.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

Process the web camera images just like the one on the robot & pass it to the crio in the same way. Our camera code runs on the driver station & functions during hybrid. So it should be technically possible

While I think it is against the intent, I don't see that it violates any of the hybrid rules (g17-G19) which are pretty specific. I wonder how the game officials would interpret this.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

It would be interesting to see how a ref would disconnect a laptop webcam ;)

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

A Piece of tape!

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

Interesting? I'd say entertaining. :p

I think the hands, or whatever part of the body being moved, in this case, would be the controller. That would be even more entertaining.

Ref: "Sir, you need to disconnect your hands before starting the match."

Driver: "Wait....what?"

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

with a screwdriver, unless it is an impatient ref, they use dremels

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

Innovation In Control Award anyone?

BTW, lolz:

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

I'm going to go through this once. I may or may not answer questions about the first part of this post. This is another round of FRC History 102: Rules that Changed the Game.

For this episode, we travel back in time to the year almost 10 years ago when autonomous was introduced: 2003. Yep, my first year on a team. I hadn't discovered CD yet, but I've seen some of this sort of thread from way back then.

Now, back in 2002 and before, you had 2:00 of driving. Teams would start the match with sticks at full forward on occasion, especially in 2002. Then along comes this 0:15 of autonomous to start that (actually, there were 30 seconds of match play before teleoperated, but that's another story altogether--humans were actually on the field in 2003 during the matches).

And so teams started coming up with "Can we use this button on the operator interface to control the robot" scenarios, including using the E-stop, if I recall the threads correctly. FIRST then responded: You must be behind this line to start the match or else (I forget the penalty). Collective "WAAAAAHHHH" from the teams who were discussing this, followed by "How can we reach?" and "But we can't go 3 feet fast enough!" See http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=17122, particularly Dave Lavery's post.

Do you see what I'm getting at? Other than the means that FIRST specifically says may be used to control a robot (the IR remotes in 2008 and the Kinect this year, both strictly controlled), if you are controlling a robot in autonomous/hybrid mode with anything other than onboard/on operator console code, you are violating the intent of that mode, and you can bet your rear that the first match you do that in, someone contacts the GDC and says that someone is controlling their robot via non-approved methods. The best you can look forward to is it being ruled legal for the event while the GDC discusses the matter. But then there are rules...

Now, the rules.
[G19]: Any control devices held or worn by the drivers must not be connected during hybrid. As noted, if you're the control device, via a webcam, then either you or the webcam must not be connected. Your choice. (If you're using special clothing, that would be the control device, put it down on the shelf; not only that but there's other rules dealing with that.)

And the largely-unread rules.
Guess what controlling the robot during hybrid is? Yep, a competitive advantage. Using your body to provide a competitive advantage... that's a stretch, but I think that that could be called. Could you do something with non-powered signaling devices? Possibly. But you'd be dangerously close to a line between unpowered signalling device and device intended to provide a competitive advantage. Not a line that I'd want to cross.

I should also note that using the reflective tape would probably be considered distracting or jamming a robot's vision system, and shut down under those rules.

In short, you're violating the spirit, but not necessarily the letter, of the rules. And, in short order, you'd probably find yourself also violating the letter of the rules, when the GDC had time to review. How would you feel if the system that won Innovation in Control was ruled definitively illegal almost immediately, if it wasn't ruled illegal from the get-go?

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

There was a team in 2010 that came up with the idea to make a ramp to deflect soccer ball from the input ramp back into their on goal. Dominated their competitions. Not specifically against the rules, but I expect was not something the game committee thought of or intended. I expect this is a similar situation. The camera is part of the allowed devices (no restrictions on operator station computers.) so you can't use [T33]. [G19] applies specifically to worn/held devices which the camera is not. I would be OK with the game committee say the intent of Autonomous (hybrid) is no operator input & saying you cannot do it. Q&A seems to hang on the letter of the rules though. Maybe I will ask just to see the response.

For a variation of a theme has anybody tried voice commands through the op station microphone?

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

That would be the coolest thing ever! Unfortunately, it gets pretty loud down there behind the glass.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

Tell your team they have to chant loudly so the robot will shoot? Might be fun for demonstrations.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

You, sir, may just have a test subject for your great idea! Let's see in the off season!

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

If you read rule [1.6]

Using anything not specifically allowed for driver input during hybrid would not be allowed.

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

Alright, first of all, I started this thread just to share what I thought would be a cool idea more than anything. Just putting that out there... Is it realistic? Probably not. But cool? Yep!

Now onto the lawyering:

I don't see how rule 1.6 would apply to this, it never disallows means of control

By the way, EricH quoted rule T33 awhile back, I'm going to bring that up again:
So my question is: how do non-powered signaling devices != hands?

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

The rule says any input (not signalling). Pretty inclusive to me. But I am not the one you have to convince. I don't think you will get much traction with the ref though. :)

Re: Driver Station Vision?
 

If you have something that attaches to your hands, or that is held in your hands, to allow the laptop to see it better (or, more to the point, to make sure that the laptop is getting the correct input hand), then that is your non-powered signaling device. That is the ONLY way you would have even half a chance at being legal for more than the first time you tried this.

And, like Frank said, the rule disallows any input from the drivers. Control with hands is input. As I noted before, when talking about the discussion when automode first came out, that would be akin to using the reset button (or appropriate substitute) to control the robot during automode. Unless it is specifically declared as legal, like the Kinect, then I would assume that this method is not legal.