Practice Robots
 

I was thinking about practice robots the other day, and had a few thoughts:

-It seems that building a second robot is of an obvious benefit to teams that can afford to do it in that it gives them the opportunity to work on driving, coding, and even making mechanisms that can be transitioned to the competition robot using withholding allowance weight.

-Unfortunately this is a financial hurdle many teams have a hard time realizing. Even teams that can afford to make a 2nd robot probably have other things that could benefit from the funding spent to do so.

-The practice robot is beneficial to student learning in that it gives a platform to work on and learn from.

-There is are some feelings of unfairness from teams that are unable to build a second robot, and this is understandable, but those teams that have the resources to build a practice bot shouldn't be handicapped because of their effective fundraising either.

MY PROPOSAL: What it every team had a practice robot. How? Use he competition robot. After 6 weeks no modifications may be made to your robot. You can still use it to practice driving and coding. There would still be a stop build day, but without the bagging. Parts that are damaged or worn out could be replaced with identical replacement parts only during this period. Basically you act as if your robot at the end of build is off limits just as if it were in a bag, but the robot as it is at that point can still be programmed and practice driven.

What do you think? Would this be a fair modification to future rules?

Re: Practice Robots
 

Dead horse...

Re: Practice Robots
 

For those of you new to CD that may not have been aware of prior discussions on this topic. Here is the main thread that discussed this.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=116658

I'm familiar with the arguments for and against limiting the build season to 6 weeks and personally I like the 6 week limitation. However using that robot for drive practice and eliminating the need for practice robots... I can't remember seeing that discussion. (I have only been here a few years though)

Re: Practice Robots
 

We also use our practice robot to iterate hardware.

For example, last year, we developed our catcher and made substantial improvements to our drivetrain after stop build day on our practice robot.

Re: Practice Robots
 

Having a sheetmetal sponsor is also quite an advantage. Having many experienced mentors can be said to be a bigger advantage than having a practice robot or a sheetmetal sponsor. Working to gain these "advantages" is something all teams should do, as hard admit might betk gain them. Limiting what teams can do with resources they've worked to earn is lowering the floor, rather than raising the ceiling.

Re: Practice Robots
 

Having good sponsors, and mentors is a huge advantage, but I don't see any easy way to provide teams with that. However they have a perfectly good robot that can be used for coding and driving sitting in a bag in the corner of the shop.

I'm not proposing that you not be allowed to build a practice robot (lowering the ceiling) I am thinking that this is an easy way for lower resource teams to learn more and be more competitive, with out affecting the more well off teams.

Re: Practice Robots
 

This GREATLY affects some of the better off teams. We plan to design, build, and add one or two entirely new subsystems after stop build day. This is only possible because we have the practice bot to test and iterate so we know that all 30lbs of additions we bring to the event work.

Re: Practice Robots
 

I think you're missing the point, buddy. It isn't something you can provide to teams. You can provide resources showing them how to do it, and information regarding the best methods of achieving these things, but in the end it's something every team has to work hard for. You can't just give good sponsors and experienced mentors to teams, the teams have to actively work towards those goals themselves. In a program like FIRST, getting good sponsors and experienced mentors isn't all that hard if you work hard towards these goals. And I mean really work towards them.

I meant no modifications to your competition robot. If you want to build a practice robot this wouldn't prevent it. That was in regards to the competition bot.

Re: Practice Robots
 

Of course, there's always the problem of how to actually enforce these rules. With the current rules. there's a lockup form that you sign, with attestation from an adult mentor/teacher/whatever that you've complied with the rules (which is fairly easy to verify - is the serial number of the tag the same as what the mentor said it was?). Mentors can't attend to the robot 24/7, so this is a good way to make sure that rules have been complied with. In these proposed changes, how do you ensure that compliance?

Admittedly, there could be some less honest teams that completely ignore the current rules and bag the day before competition and falsify records. However that goes against Gracious Professionalism and the entire ethos of FIRST (and should be fairly obvious that they had an additional 1-6 weeks of time with their robots)

Re: Practice Robots
 

Some "problems", similar to the current "problem" of practice bots, could be created as a result of doing this (if it were done).

1. Teams that are near week 1 regionals (like my team), would get much less time to practice than teams near later regionals. Teams that build current practice bots can use them to improve their robots before a regional, even a week 1 regional, so this is less of a problem for them (they can continue improving hardware over a week).

2. Teams that are better off would still be able to make practice bots. While other teams wouldn't be able to improve their robots after build season, the more powerful teams would be able to. While teams would get the same amount of drive practice, the better teams would still get the ability to build for a longer period of time.

Re: Practice Robots
 

Teams building practice robots would continue to build practice robots under this scenario. A huge benefit to having one is being able to implement new/improved systems with your witholding allowance at your next regional.

Re: Practice Robots
 

I can assure you that it is not as simple as just practicing and programming without modifying and working on your robot. Even if you try not too things will brake and you would inevitably work on your robot.

Re: Practice Robots
 

It would be kind of weird to have the robot out and driving around, yet be forbidden from making any mechanical tweaks to anything.

Of course, it's also nonsensical that we have "stop build" on February 17 and then continue building stuff. Overall, the stop build deadline leads to much more nonsense than sense.

Re: Practice Robots
 

You might as well employ a VEX strategy where there is no stop build day because being able to change/test hardware components is one of the biggest benefits to making a practice robot.

I don't think I was clear with my suggestion. This would have no effect on teams that still wish to build a practice robot. Rather it would allow lower resource teams to use their competition robot for practicing and programming only during the time between stop build day and their competition.while it's true that a practice robot would still give some benefit to higher resource teamsthis would allow the lower resource teams a benefit in programming and practice that they previously would not of had.

Re: Practice Robots
 

yeah, i see your thought now, it does make sense but i doubt FIRST will allow this. I believe they are/should be recreating the real world as much as possible. This is seen in the implementation of the transport configuration, the hard challenges that come along with the game and obviously time constraints. By not interfering with the rules on practice robots they are keeping a real world balance where everything moves forward. Soon enough all teams will have a practice robot just like how now all teams have an aluminum driving chassis out of the box, which didn't exist before.

Re: Practice Robots
 

It would also allow them to break what they had built within the first five minutes of testing, and then be forbidden from fixing it. Except with "exact duplicates" of the part that broke. So it can break the same way again?

Re: Practice Robots
 

God this horse is so dead and beaten it makes me want Taco Bell...
But whatever my 2 cents is that if students earn something, if students take that step towards a business and say "Hey we could use some money" then we should respect that. I can barely ask for extra ketchup at Mc Donalds and here we are asking students to go and ask for money. What you put into the robotics team is what you get out, and when a team puts that extra effort to have gear they have earned it and should be able to use it. I don't mean to throw shade at anyone but one of the patterns I notice is that this argument comes up during the build season when it isn't the most ideal time to secure financial resources. I wasn't originally on the boat of students working in the off season because I believe they should be able to branch out and do a lot, but now that I have seen the impact of careful use of the off season I would thoroughly advocate using that time wisely.

Re: Practice Robots
 

All teams will never have a practice robot.

Re: Practice Robots
 

I don't think so. Robot parts are getting cheaper day by day. The quality of robots has visibly improved over the years...look at 2003 and now. This change is attributed to higher level resources being made more readily available. I'm sure there are companies if presented with Ariel Assist 10 years ago they could have made something to a similar quality of 254's barrage. Each year the bar is raised in general and one day it will be cheap/easy enough that every one can make a practice robot.

Re: Practice Robots
 

There are teams out there that barely have enough funding to build a single robot out of plywood. The entry fee for a regional is $5000. Some teams will just never have the funding to build 2 robots.

Re: Practice Robots
 

I think stop build day will be removed long before even half the teams have a practice bot. Practice bots in general are a waste of time and money but as of now, it's a great way to get a competitive edge. As soon as huge numbers of teams start all having practice bots, FIRST will probably see that it's a growing waste of resources and just eliminate the need for them altogether.

Re: Practice Robots
 

The practice robot doesn't need to be an exact duplicate of your competition robot.

Our practice robot last year was built from plywood scraps, parts from our parts bin, and well designed subassemblies that we withheld from the bag under R17.

Re: Practice Robots
 

I'm not concerned about the cost, parts are getting cheaper all the time. My concern is with the student/mentor dedication required to build a second robot. Many teams don't even have the dedication to build one robot well, so there is no way, even if it were free, that they would be able to build two robots in one season.

Re: Practice Robots
 

Not if you were, oh I don't know, honest?

I have always viewed practice bots as an unfair advantage that only teams with huge resources could pull off. But this year I wanted to find out so we are giving it a shot to see if it is worth it or not.

So far we have spent $500 ($435 for a roboRIO) on it and some extra time. $500 is 1/6 of our budget so this is a big risk for us. We have a small selection of tools, a high school woodshop, three mentors, and 8 regular students that productively build. So far I can honestly say that resources are not holding anyone back once you have been doing FRC for at least two years. Aside from cash we haven't struggled to come up with any of the items that we have needed yet. And one new sponsor will cover the cost we have encountered so far.

As far as how I feel about the process, well, twice the work and twice the practice building seem to equal twice the experience so far. I'll let you know how it all ends up after week one...

Re: Practice Robots
 

We built a practice bot for the first time last year and it was a phenomenal experience, not at all a waste. We built two off season bots last fall, and are trying to get three drive bases done now. It costs money but the kids worked hard to get that money, and I think it is well spent. They have learned so much by building multiple bots.

Anyway, dead horse fer sher. I'll leave it to be debated. But I know the value and unless FIRST changes things I know what we will do.

Re: Practice Robots
 

If I were to try to figure out why my team made a leap like we did from our rookie season to our second season I would have to put building a practice robot down as one of the most important endeavors.

We are not a 'high resource' team - every dollar we bring in the students are responsible for. The High School offers no funding - just the Tech Ed Labs (as I am the instructor). The students are responsible for how the money is allocated and against my advice they decided to invest in a practice robot in year two. The amount we were able to learn was well worth the amount of fundraising and door - knocking we had to do.

Edit: Dang it! I got sucked in anyway!