Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

Reread the rule. It says source files must be shared. Not designs.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

If someone can without a reasonable doubt prove that your design is similar to something that doesn't exist (the off season project you didn't do) then I think we have a different issue.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I suppose the argument of custom vs COTS also comes into play. Say I want to make a swerve drive, and I have a past design of my own, a full machine shop, and plenty of raw materials, but no funds to purchase a COTS swerve drive, or perhaps I just wish to experience the process of making my own over buying one. My past design is functionally equivalent to the COTS model. It will take me say three weeks to manufacture, as opposed to 3 days to buy one.

By making one off my past design, how am I any better off competitively than the team that bought the COTS one? I'm actually much worse off competitively, just somewhat financially better off.

There should be a provision allowing teams to re-use past designs that are functionally equivalent to COTS parts currently on the market, without having to publish the design. Otherwise, it becomes competition of fund raising rather than a competition of manufacturing ability, which it once was.

Of course, you'd have to define functionally equivalent.

And before anyone says it, I know, what's our objection to just open sourcing everything? Before I go any farther down that train of thought, I know that's the start of yet another dead horse that has already been beaten, and I'm not looking to go there.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I think this captures the point better. If team A thought team B has a part on their robot that was made before build season, even if an LRI comes over to inquire about it, team B would have had to either posted it publicly online before build season or designed/built it during build season. While it's easy to provide proof showing you posted it before build season, there really is no great way, and especially no air-tight way to prove that it was designed/built during the season.

So this shows that there is no way to enforce this rule, because if a team says they did it during build, then who is the LRI to say otherwise?

This rule has always been more about honor system than anything else. To be legal you just have to be honest and follow it yourself. Could you not and get away with it? Sure.

Whether you agree with the rule or not (I personally don't really see the point) it is what it is.

A separate issue is what Adam has it as far as what constitutes using a full design that was done ahead of time? If I add a lightening hole to a single piece, does that mean it's technically not the same design? This has and probably always will be the debate, and will continue to just be however you choose to interpret it because no one can enforce it anyway.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

And alternately, a freeze frame from a reveal video 2 days before ship day can be enough to replicate a design from 2010 (148/217 collector), or a minibot video where the aspect ratio and speed up the pole show that a working minibot can be made without the transmissions in 2011 (1625 video week 4-ish).

I think they way they wrote the rule is fine, but I can see where enforcement of it could get wierd (some define things more stringently then I do).

I have never fully understood the rules against "pre-designing" and then using. I get some of the thoughts and intentions, but it seems to go against a lot of best practices in engineering.

Of course, I am more of a give a benefit for those that do extra than penalize. In other words, I would prefer to see a "best pre-season design/whitepaper" award than trying to make ideas you cam up with in off season illegal..

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I never thought that the simplest of blog posts could get so much attention. I think that a lot of people got fired up about this because they are passionate about FIRST and want to see it work the way they view as being best.

In my adult life, I have seen people argue over some silly things, I have even argued over some myself. What I have learned from this came from my 3 1/2 year old daughter the other day. The rules aren't there for you to bend or break, they are there for you to follow as best you can (okay, some of that came from her mother...).

This rule provides every team with a great opportunity to use what they have learned while sharing that knowledge with the greater community. It also provides a phenomenal way to measure your own character (much like bag and tag). You can take it for whatever it means to you, but just beware that others will view your actions based on their own beliefs and not yours.

With that said, I'm going to go read books to my little conscience of a daughter.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

This is supposed to be an honor system sort of thing. If you've planned to build something in the offseason, and you've created software/drawing/models of it, you should share them with the community. The documentation doesn't need to be so specific that it tells you how to fixture the parts on your mill, and it shouldn't be so vague that it only contains a fuzzy screenshot of your CAD software.

As others have said, the rule cannot reasonably be enforced, so there aren't strict criteria that define design, publicly available, prior to kickoff, and complete. FIRST trusts you to make the judgement call as to what is reasonable for your specific design. That's a good thing.

If you want to get stupidly technical, there's no restriction on the design being available after (or during) kickoff, and no limitation to how early before kickoff you can post it...

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I'm deeply saddened by the hostility and bitterness shown in this thread. Instead of picking apart everything put out by FIRST, from games to rules to refereeing, let's view each as an opportunity to improve and make the FIRST- and the world- a better place.

Instead of declaring it a "stupid rule" and "useless," let's find out ways to use this to everyone's advantage. I have an idea- popularize sites like frcdesigns.com, as mentioned before, to help rookies and other young teams grow and improve.

It is well known that most of the teams represented on Chief Delphi are veteran teams, many of them four or more years old. The high 3000's-5000's teams aren't very well represented here. Let's use our power as young, tech-savvy future engineers and scientists to help other, especially younger, teams. Post your designs and point younger teams in your area to your designs. Help them design some drivetrains before the season starts. Help them be prepared for kickoff. You will make the whole FIRST experience enjoyable for a whole other team of students, making them more likely to stay in the program.

Let's spend our time making FIRST more fun and inclusive, rather than taking a curmudgeonly attitude towards the program.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

This. I mean, come on, people, pretty much the entire build process is already on the honor system. If you want to use something, make your best efforts to comply with the rule. It's not that hard. Post it on CD and make a topic on the appropriate forum. No "proof" needed from either side.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I wish FIRST would allow not only posted designs, but also pre-fabricated components. In a day and age where you can legally purchase so many FRC-specific items, why discourage teams from building their own? Perhaps teams could be required to declare them on their BOM with a link/reference to the design. This would eliminate the underlying cause of much of the strife expressed in this thread.

I really don't see how pre-designed or pre-fabricated components give teams an advantage that is worth regulating. Parts built without knowledge of the game are either "generic" in nature (gearboxes, chassis components, etc.) with commercially available "equivalents", or else they are likely to be of marginal use or detrimental for the new game (roller claw, elevator, etc.).

There will always be a wide range of abilities among the teams. Veteran teams will always have an advantage over new teams due to their previous knowledge, experience, etc. However, individual teams don't win competitions - alliances do.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

I think it is more of an attempt to level the playing field between teams that have access to the machines to make the parts compared to the teams that don't.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

Think about how the prefabricated parts rule interacts with the 6 week build rule.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

Our team has worked to develop a strategy for becoming more competitive with teams that posses advanced CNC fabrication capabilities. We do our drive train development in the off season, emphasizing the use of COTS parts. We then pre-buy, at risk, as much COTS stuff as we reasonably can, so we can start assembling our drive train on kickoff weekend. Sometimes we get lucky, and we can use a drive train design with little modification. Sometimes we don't, and we need to scramble. But, in either case, I'd LOVE to be allowed to be allowed to prefabricate our components. Your most precious resource during build season is time. Pre-purchasing COTS parts saves time. Advanced manufacturing capabilities both saves time and provides flexibility.

So, why build something when you could purchase it? Because FRC vendors leave much to be desired. (I originally wrote a much blunter sentence, but decided to be more tactful.) Their quality control is bad. They advertise products they don't keep in stock. They run out of parts early in build season and don't restock until it's too late. Our biggest build season disasters haven't been design problems, they've been vendor problems. The only tactic we've been able to use to combat this is prebuying parts and doing QA on them before build season starts. Even then this sometimes doesn't work. This year we developed a drive train based on one of the most popular gearboxes from last year, the VEXpro 2 CIM ball shifter. We have been trying to order them for over a month, but they've been out of stock.

So, I'd love it if FIRST changed the no prefabrication rule. All the robot parts we make during summer drive train development and fall student skills development training would become potentially useful competition robot parts. As it is, these either end up in the scrap bin or are carefully labeled as practice bot parts, not for competition or competition spares.

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

It all boils down to the word created. If the rule had said materialized, things would be so much simpler. FIRST really needs to hire a linguistics analyst. I mean this is a matter of existentialism. Once a design idea is thought, it's already been created. How do you supply proper source for that?

Re: FRC Blog - Some Tidbits Before Kickoff
 

+1...