Originally Posted by Donut (Post 1252359)

I'll give a little bit of the background here, since our team was responsible for 2 of the times that this happened at Wisconsin this weekend (including against 3692, 4212, and 3734 in the quarterfinals).

As noted with this picture, we played qualification match 65 against team 4212 and knew we were going to get smoked if we didn't stop their full court shooter. 71 and 167 helped 3734 add an 84" blocker to their robot before that match and got it re-inspected. I wasn't there in person but I heard there was a lengthy discussion as to the legality of the mechanism, and many of the robot inspectors at the event got involved in the inspection process. It was initially ruled legal but that any modification like this would have to be permanent (i.e. 3734 couldn't remove the blocker in future matches), but this was corrected sometime later and the blocker was ruled as a reconfigurable mechanism.

When we got picked by the #8 alliance and knew we were facing 4212 again we opted to do the same thing, this time adding an 84" blocker to 1781. Less weight to work with and some drivetrain issues meant it didn't work out as well as Friday's blocker did but it was still our best shot at advancing in eliminations since we knew we didn't have the firepower to outscore 4212.

In both cases the robots that had blockers added to them were under the weight limit and within the height rules with the mechanism added. I believe neither one had to remove any components to stay within the weight restrictions which makes the blockers reconfigurable mechanisms that could be added/removed at will.

I see the potential rub in the interpretation of "during the entire competition event", but if this was taken to literally mean no changes after initial inspection then a team could not make any repairs or improvements once they pass inspection. If you had a broken shooter Friday morning, you would just have to live with your broken shooter the rest of competition. Similarly if something failed that could not be replaced like for like (say a weld on a frame) then the team would have to remain broken the remainder of the event. This is obviously not how FIRST has ruled in the past (how many times have you seen teams "get things working" Saturday morning?), and I hope they won't ever rule this way or we might see a mass defection to the SECOND Robotics Competition.

In the 2 cases we were involved in the robots in question could pass inspection with or without the blocker mechanism attached. Here's something I'm less sure of; if the robots in question had to remove something in order to have enough weight for the blocker (say a broken shooter), are they violating R05 since weight is determined for all mechanisms on the robot in all possible configurations? Are they okay if they never use that part again (a "permanent" change)? What determines when mechanisms are considered reconfigurable and thus R05 matters?

Originally Posted by DanCreed3692 (Post 1252215)

T08

At the time of Inspection, the ROBOT must be presented with all MECHANISMS (including all COMPONENTS of each MECHANISM), configurations, and decorations that will be used on the ROBOT during the entire competition event. It is acceptable, however, for a ROBOT to play MATCHES with a subset of the MECHANISMS that were present during Inspection. Only MECHANISMS that were present during the Inspection may be added, removed or reconfigured between MATCHES. If MECHANISMS are changed between MATCHES, the reconfigured ROBOT must still meet all Inspection criteria.


I want to see what peoples take on this rule is. To me I read this as that each robot has to be presented at initial inspection with all components of each mechanism for any configurations that are planned to be used during the "ENTIRE COMPETITION EVENT".... E.G. if you came to the competition with a robot designed to be an awesome shooter, but then suddenly see another team has this awesome device, or some other component that allows it to do something completely different. I talking adds a totally new function to your robot and you thus start playing the game in a tottaly different way because of this new mechanism it should NOT be allowed. In fact it even goes on to specifically state that ONLY Mechanisms that were present during during the inspection may be added/removed/reconfigured between matches..

We got the #1 seed, and went to finals with an AWESOME long range shooter and had two teams them subsuqently out of the blue build completely jury rigged 84" masts with plastic and netting specifically added to block our alliance partners shots. These masts WERE NOT used during any other matches, were NOT presented during initial inspection, and didn't exist until other teams saw the threat our long range shooting alliance partner brought to the table.
(much more importantly they did not exist in any way shape or form before initial inspection).
What are your thoughts. Personally I think the rule is pretty black in white, as it does specifically state that the mechanisms used for the entire competition event must be presented at inspection (implies initial one), and then further clarifies that ONLY mechanisms preesented during inspection may be added/removed/reconfigured... thus further indicating the intention to not allow teams to fabricate new mechansisms out of the blue to add whole new funcationality just to defeat other teams with a different design that is difficult to defend with the robot you brought to the arena...

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis (Post 1252404)

At the point of that reinspection, all mechanisms that are and were a part of that robot are required to be present. If you're sitting right at 120lbs, you can't remove a 30lb shooter in order to add a 10lb blocker - both the shooter and the blocker would be included as part of the overall weight.

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis (Post 1252404)

Teams are allowed to make changes... otherwise you would have a lot more teams with issues than the few that have added blockers during the competition.

Further, any inspection supersedes any previous inspection. If a team builds a blocker to add to their robot on Friday, they are no longer legal, until they get reinspected. At the point of that reinspection, all mechanisms that are and were a part of that robot are required to be present. If you're sitting right at 120lbs, you can't remove a 30lb shooter in order to add a 10lb blocker - both the shooter and the blocker would be included as part of the overall weight. However, if you were under 120lbs, and could add the shooter without taking anything off, how is this different (from the point of view of the rules) from a team modifying their shooter to make it more accurate? The rules don't say anything about robot capabilities, or intended use of mechanisms, or anything like that.

In my mind, the grey area here is when a team is right at the weight limit and makes a change that includes removing something and adding something else. What happens when the team disassembles the old mechanism and uses the parts to construct the new one? Is this a swappable mechanism at this point, or is this a permanent change? What happens if a team spends an hour swiss-cheesing their robot in order to drop enough weight to add something to their shooter to make it more accurate? Do we need to collect all the metal shavings and weigh them with the robot too?

These are just some examples where teams can really try to lawyer the rules, instead of looking at the intent of the rules.

The intent of T08 is to ensure that robots designed with swappable mechanisms follow strict weight rules. It's not intended to prevent teams from making modifications to their robot.

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann (Post 1252517)

If the team took off their shooter to put the blocker on because with both the shooter and blocker they are over weight, then they should still pass the new inspection. However they would have to play without their shooter for the rest to the competition including elims. They would not be allowed to put the shooter back on as that would violate the "multiple interchangeable mechanisms must be included in the 120 pound limit" rule.

That is how I have seen it enforced in all my years, and how it was enforced at Northern Lights. As I am not an RI, I can only comment on how I have seen it enforced and how I interpret the rule. Final ruling goes to the LRI at each competition. Though having the rules on hand to cite never hurts, when politely disagreeing with your robot inspectors.

Originally Posted by buchanan (Post 1252492)

I think this is a reasonable interpretation that ought to be explicit in the rules. Once a mechanism has been used in competition, replacing it with another shouldn't allow you to reinspect as though it never existed. What you've really done is added a new interchangeable mechanism to your robot in addition to the previous one.

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis (Post 1252521)

At any rate, I would encourage everyone to get their LRI involved early on if you're considering making a significant change that might, in any small way, run afoul of this rule, even if you think it shouldn't.

Originally Posted by buchanan (Post 1252534)

Maybe I'm just "borrowing trouble", but this looks to me like a loophole through which a team could bring two alternative mechanisms to the competition, present only one for initial inspection, then swap in the other if they decided the first wasn't as effective as they'd thought, effectively giving two shots at picking the best design.

Originally Posted by buchanan (Post 1252534)

Maybe I'm just "borrowing trouble", but this looks to me like a loophole through which a team could bring two alternative mechanisms to the competition, present only one for initial inspection, then swap in the other if they decided the first wasn't as effective as they'd thought, effectively giving two shots at picking the best design.