Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Maybe a hyperbaric chamber and the dump valve can just be opened to the ambient atmosphere...

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Why do people seem to think that my disagreement with a rule is tantamount to me saying I don't think I need to follow it? I understand that the rule is what it is, and consequently I have to follow it. Silly rules get thrown away and replaced with better ones because people discuss them and the reasons behind them. It doesn't just happen out of the blue. I don't understand the logic behind this rule, and nobody has been able to explain what it adds to the competition.

The argument of a rookie team deep in the eliminations not having a battery makes no sense to this argument for a whole host of reasons. a) Spare parts has charged batteries for that express purpose. b) Hopefully their veteran alliance-mates would have one to share, and c) your argument isn't even relevant since the scenario you've described is wholly within the rules.

Also, Al is a Lead Robot Inspector, he's not the only one. Tristan is an LRI as well, and he agrees with me.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Al is the Chief Robot Inspector, and he is the only one, just like Tigger...

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Al is Tristan's lead inspector. If Tristan has a question, he talks to Al. Al is the Lead LRI. That means, that if Tristan agrees with you, but Al does not, Al wins, and you fix your robot.


I don't know what the rule adds to the competition either--now. I would go so far as to say it's a "holdover" rule; it's been on the books in one form or another ever since I can remember, but maybe should be looked at in terms of revision.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Didn't realize Al was the Chief LRI. The remainder of my point stands.

I don't see questioning the logic of a rule as being the heinous crime that he seems to. The rules are not gospel and shouldn't be taken as such. They change with every Team Update and are clarified with every Q&A answer.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

I suspect that it wasn't the questioning of the logic itself. I suspect it was the tone of the questioning. Effectively calling a number of LRIs incapable of understanding reasonable thought doesn't necessarily go over very well, as I think you'll agree. Al might also have been making a preemptive move in case rookies were reading the thread and thinking the manual was just guidelines (I've actually seen a rookie refer to bumper guidelines this year when referring to the bumper rules).

If I were to question the logic, I would say simply, this doesn't make sense, can anybody explain the logic. And if nobody could, then I would say, can anybody tell me why is the rule on the books in the first place. (I suspect it was initially to prevent teams from using portable shop-type compressors, which can easily go over 120 if you let them.) I would also ask that question of the GDC at the end of the season, to give them time to work out the answers to the questions.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Just for disclosure's sake, I'm not currently signed up to be an LRI at any 2013 events. (But I've done it many times in the past.)

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Guy,
Just to update everyone, the Nasson pressure switch cannot handle the run current (10-12 amps) of the compressor let alone the start current(22-25 amps). It won't fail immediately but it will fail at some point. Teams regularly still make this mistake every year.

So am I reading this correctly? You have a functioning pneumatic system on your robot and you want to pre-charge the robot from a second system you have built for this purpose using a second control system, any battery and second compressor?

Everyone,
To set the record straight, I am the Chief Robot Inspector for FRC. That doesn't mean that I have ultimate power nor does it mean I make the rules. It certainly doesn't mean I can't make mistakes. Just that I have slightly more responsibility than other LRIs and I am the contact person for FRC HQ. I still depend on all robot inspectors to get the job done and the division LRIs (of which I am just one of four) discuss items throughout the year. Tristan, has served as LRI and division LRI with me when Champs were in Atlanta, at which time furthering his education took more precedent. His opinions are his own.

While many rules need no logic (they are there merely to add some additional challenge to the design), some rules are born from the mistakes of the past. These are an attempt to make things better and more easier to read/understand/implement. Some rules/penalties are in response to previous issues. The need to be inspected prior to receiving points and the harsh penalty is in direct response to issues that have arisen in the past. The compressor rule we are discussing is partly for this reason. It is easy for teams to deal with competing with a team that has deep pockets and a large mentor and sponsor backing provided all other parts of the competition are equal. Some teams actually revel in the challenge of competition with these large teams knowing that they are able to field a robot with the same limitations as the larger teams. Sponsors, spectators and people off the street marvel at how all teams design a robot using the same motors, batteries, compressor and control system, and have to fit the same weight and size. All participants depend on these factors to level the playing field. The Head Ref and their staff perform that function on the field, and LRIs and their staff perform that off the field. Insuring the level playing field is what makes this competition great!

Mark,
That's spelled T I double GGGGGGGGG E R!

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

@Al: Your assessment of my statements is essentially correct. At one time, we had a fully functional on-board pneumatics system which could be precharged by this separate fully functional "almost-robot". Other years, we dropped the on board compression (and ended up having to hack together something to abide by this rule at the competition, instead of just being able to charge from the cart's compressor).

While I agree using a second FRC level control system to do this is something not all teams (ie. rookies) could do, I don't believe that a control system is necessarily integral to the setup. Without looking around for COTS replacements for the Nason switch, I don't know if there exists one with sufficient current rating for a series setup. Or perhaps with a little ingenuity it could directly feed a spike a control signal. At the very least, something like an Arduino could certainly do the job.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Al's mention of the pressure switch was a tangent. The pressure switch should be wired to the CRIO digital input per rule & never see the motor current of the compressor. I believes he mentions it has an example of things not to do. Rules aside there are other pressure switches designed to handle motor loads. They abound on small shop compressors.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Everyone,
I have been waiting to put this out there, so here goes. One of the reasons for this practice has been to prevent all the teams, every year, who use any of a number of different methods to charge tanks. Yes, everything from shop compressors with no cutoff and no over pressure relief (the team shuts off the pressure relief valve because it "keeps leaking air") to "we watch the gauges and disconnect the air hose when it reaches high enough" to "we just connect the compressor to a battery and disconnect the leads when the compressor gets too hot or we think we have enough". If you can think of all of the possibilities, I can tell you of at least one more you haven't thought of.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

And if instead of 340, they are also paired with rookies?

More to the point, it's all about keeping a level playing field for everyone.

And you're right, not every imbalance is a rule violation, except in this case of course where it actually is.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

As mentioned in another thread (linked above somewhere) it could directly feed a relay to controller the compressor. I use a scuba tank all the time to fill compressed air of all sorts but if someone were to miss use somthing like that at a competition it could be very dangerous, pharps (just a thought) each robot has a standard 1/4" or 1/2" quick disconnect adapter (like the type found on a air compressor) and events have a large regulated 120psi system. now that i think about it though that could all much cost and complexity to an event.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

Mark,
Sounds good but many events, MARS more than others, have a hard enough time with power distro. Insurance would then also rise.

Re: 2013 running 2 - VI air compressors legal?
 

One team does something well, and another does it poorly; you want to level the playing field by making them both do it poorly? They tried that in Harrison Bergeron, and you know how it turned out?

Let's be specific: which rules are being violated?