Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

The rules don't specifically say you can use pool noodles to block frisebees.... :D

I don't think it's a good idea to give previously-inspected robots a pass or even an abbreviated inspection. I've found issues on robots that have passed inspection at TWO regionals. If no one has ever found a problem on a robot I've inspected at that robot's next event I'd be shocked. We're human. On top of being human there are rookie inspectors, inspectors that aren't clear on [name your system], there are inspectors that are seeing their 15th robot in one day, and....

I found a robot like this last year (radio in a standard 12V circuit); asked the team why they did it that way. Answer was "we wired it that way last year." Why did you do it then? "That's how we wired it the year before." I explained why they needed to be in the regulated port & got a "huh...maybe that's why we've been having comm problems for the last two years." :ahh:

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

This isn't satisfactory, unfortunately. Teams make changes during an event that aren't always reinspected (the team doesn't ask for a reinspection, and the change isn't necessarily obvious). The teams make hold back 30 lbs from their robot between events and make changes to that as well. Additionally, you have the trouble of inspectors missing stuff... FIRST does the best it can to train inspectors, but there simply isn't enough time available for the volunteers to be trained to a point of uniformity. So, something might get missed by one inspector, and found by another. I've seen it happen while at an event - a team passes inspection, but then another inspector finds an issue while looking at their robot in the queuing line.

Passing the inspection sheet from one event to another simply isn't going to work. And frankly, teams that have already been to an event and passed inspection once can pass it again very quickly as is - At North Star last year there were a few teams that had passed before 9:30, as they could start the process as soon as the robot came out of the bag, knowing they had passed previously and had no changes to make.

The biggest problem we have with inspections isn't getting teams to pass. It's getting teams to come up to start the inspection process early! Those who start early almost always pass early as well.

As the response you quoted indicates, the decision is up to the LRI as to what constitutes "safe" on a robot. If the GDC gave the inspectors a clear-cut definition of "safe" with regards to shooter wheels, they would have given it to the teams as well. There have been plenty of threads and posts here outlining the concern over exposed shooter wheels - take a look at your mechanism and see if any of those concerns apply to you. If so, address the concern to make your robot safer... I've never seen an inspector request a team to remove a safety shield.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

This is the reason for the database with weight and picture. If my robot weighs the same as it did two weeks ago then nothing has been changed -- most likely.

"And frankly, teams that have already been to an event and passed inspection once can pass it again very quickly as is "

If the inspectors know to get to them --- express line -- they still get inspected and things missed will be checked.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

We don't deal with "most likely"'s. If a team makes a small wiring change, it won't show up on the scale... but it could have serious side effects. If a team removed their shooter to use on their practice bot and then put it back on, it won't show up on the scale... but they may have attached it wrong and it's sticking outside their frame perimeter now. Weight isn't everything, it only indicates big changes that were made, not small ones. And all it takes is one small change to short a wire to your chassis or have your robot die on the field.

Inspectors know to get to them when the team comes up and tells us they're ready to be inspected. I've always seen inspections handled on a "first come, first served" basis - whoever comes up first gets an inspector in their pit first. The teams who have already been to a regional and been inspected should be the first ones in line, but often they (and a lot of other teams) lollygag around and don't come up to inspections, causing a delay themselves. The concept of an "express line" would give teams fortunate enough to attend multiple events a larger, unfair advantage over other teams who may be ready for inspections at that particular event first.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Not every regional does it all the same way. At Virginia, teams were inspected in the pits and weighed at inspection to my knowledge.

If FIRST could create a protocol, not even a data base, where teams that had been to previous events, could receive an cursory inspection on load in night. If the Inspectors at that previous event can sign the lock up form, they can do a quick once over and put a copy of the sheet into the bag.

The reason I say during load in is that I've seen enough robot inspectors present to at least try this. If 10 teams were previously at events, let's say 5 do early load in. Things should be calm enough to get a few of them checked out, freeing them up for teams that need a more serious look over.

To ensure things are above board, the inspectors can do a final check before they are allowed to compete in matches, in the event teams do major work.

I say all this because 3 practice matches were skipped by the field in a row cause teams were too nervous to miss an inspection and no teams were qualified to be in the filler line, as they have to pass inspection to be in the filler.

Just my two pieces of copper.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

This is how every inspection I've ever been part of is done. Typically we start with weight & size; hence the "come up to inspection" to start.

As several of us have said, there's no "cursory inspection" we can do. Besides, this would change checking in on Wed from a traffic reduction exercise to something that some teams could use to get more time with their robots on Thursday.

Inspections are always supposed to be done after changes; this doesn't do anything to reduced the delays on Thursday.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

And did you have any team(s) required to put guards over the drive system?

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

I didn't know that first part so my bad. I've never been with my team when they inspected as student or mentor. I've been volunteering or scouting.

Inspections are usually slow (more so with 65 teams), I've gotten used to that. So many teams don't go over their robot with the list. To any team still sitting there with a bagged robot, check it over again best you can while it's in the bag.

My biggest things from the technical support side is make sure your radio, CRIO and cameras are wired correctly.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Okay -- don't want to get into a debate, but. I never said they would not get inspected. Exact weight is an indicator of no change. Practice bot -- most of us do not have that luxury, but incorrect instalation would be corrected if found to be a problem.....

You need to be aware of how every regional operates before making assumptions. We get wieghed before 9:00am and have to wait until after noon to get inspected in our pits because of teams having problems passing that have not been inspected before -- there is a problem with that.

The fact is that the inspection process is flawed and needs to be fixed -- I do not have the answers, but was passing on suggestions made by a very good inspector at our regional. This system could work. People just need to be open to admitting that what is being done is not working well.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Above bolded for emphasis... you should also be aware of how every regional operates as well - from what you've described earlier, the process you saw at your regional is very different from the process I've seen at other regionals (Kansas City, St. Louis, 2 in Duluth, 2 in Minneapolis, and Champs).

We can't implement any sort of "express lane" or early inspection solely for those teams that had been at a previous regional. It would give them an unfair advantage, allowing them more time on the field during the practice day than other teams who might have been just as ready for inspection but didn't have the benefit of a previous competition. The only fair way to handle inspections is on a first-come, first-served basis, which is the only process I've actually seen employed.

We've also pointed out the difficulties with allowing inspections to "carry over" from one event to the next - there's a very good reason for requiring a full inspection at every event.

I certainly am up for hearing (and passing on) suggestions that can improve the inspection process... But we can't sacrifice fairness for all teams or potential safety issues at the event just to make it easier for teams to get through inspection at their second event, or to reduce headaches from inspectors missing something the first time and catching it the second.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Exactly matching weight at two different regionals is an indicator of something fishy. :p

If those teams with problems got into the inspection queue before you did, then I think it's perfectly reasonable for them to get inspected before you do. The underlying problem isn't one of priority, it's one of manpower. You want the inspections to go faster? Volunteer to be an inspector.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Inspection procedure varies from event to event, and year to year. Lead inspectors do share best practices, but the exact procedures will definitely vary, depending on numerous factors.

When in charge of inspections, I consider equity as being more important than priority, at least in terms of ensuring that all robots are able to compete. However, inspectors don't necessarily have the resources to evaluate either one in any comprehensive sense. Demonstrate a greater need for inspection (e.g. by showing up unfinished) and you may be seen by more inspectors, more often than the team that showed up to be weighed first. One priority-driven consideration is access to the practice field—and at least in that respect, promptly visiting the inspection station is likely to work in your favour.

Also, because of limited resources and uncertainty about teams' individual needs, inspections tend to be organized around efficient use of inspectors' time, rather than efficient use of teams' time. And even then, different inspectors spend different amounts of time for different reasons.

This means that on a practical level, FRC inspection is not currently a deterministic process, and you can't expect that it will operate like a priority queue. (As for whether or not it should be a strict priority system, that's worth further discussion.)

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

To concur with much of what has been said above:

Every robot needs a full inspection at every event. In Atlanta, I once had the opportunity to explain to a team (who had previously passed inspection at two regionals) what a pressure relief valve was, and why it was an important part of the pneumatic safety system. They found the part in their toolbox, said, "Oh... so THAT's what THIS is! Thanks!" and put it on their robot. Then we discussed bumpers, which they also fixed... although that took a bit more effort. But they had passed inspection without the valve or proper bumpers twice previously.

Secondly, there IS an unofficial priority queue at most events I've been to... but the priority isn't for teams who have been to a previous event, it's for teams who are organized, have followed the rules, and did their own tech inspection prior to bagging/shipping their robot. All they need to do is send a representative to the inspection station early Thursday morning and say "Ready whenever you are." They'll have priority over all the teams doing last minute repairs and modifications and saying "Not yet! Not yet!"

Finally, and I don't think I can stress this enough... inspectors want to see teams pass inspection. Teams need to know that if they need help, they should also request an early inspection.... one year during an early inspection I identified a problem that was going to be very difficult for the team to solve (at least not in a way that would make them happy), so I was able to discuss it with a few other inspectors over lunch. I figure that between the inspectors at the table we had probably built at least 30 FRC robots between us. We batted around a few ideas and then someone suggested a brilliant solution that while "out of the box" was still within the rules. I took the suggestion back to the team, they implemented it, and darned if the solution wasn't cited as part of one of the awards that they won. Had we found the problem at 5:00 on Thursday afternoon, it would have been a much... less happy... outcome.

Jason

Edit: One more example... at GTR once, after previously having passed inspection in Portland, we got called for having a pneumatic cylinder that was either 1/2" long or 1/2" short... our spares were all in Vancouver. Tristan <yep... same guy who made the previous post!> was the LTI and while he was quite clear that we couldn't use an illegal cylinder, he was also on his phone to his buddy at the pneumatics supply shop and had a legal replacement waiting for us (at a nice discount) in about half an hour. I'm glad we were inspected in the morning, and not in the late afternoon! I still use that as my personal example of how inspection "should" work.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

Per R24-A, is it legal to also have a metal backing along with wood, so long as it abides by R24-A and R29-B?

We're having arguments inside the team about what the rules say. I don't think its legal, but it'd be really nice if it was.

Re: Al's Annual Inspection Thread 2013
 

If you look at Figure 4-4, it shows an optional "backing"--though it's more of a clamping system for fabric--that is metal. However, I caution you that R24 (no subpart) and Figure 4-4 combine to bar any other type of metal backing (and note Al's comments on the heavy stuff inspectors have been telling teams to pull out of bumpers, as well--he is, after all, the lead lead robot inspector).

In my opinion, your opinion is correct.