Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

I refuse to follow rules that don't exist. Why would you do that. Not to mention that they didn't lawyer anything! You've always been able to bag spare parts. They bagged spare parts. There was no upper limit. They bagged a lot of spare parts. They didn't go around anything.

Why are there limits on spare parts? The reason teams feel the want to grab parts from their robot in the trailer is because it's ridiculous not to let them. How many robots has the GDC crippled for an event because something critical broke without a legal spare? Is there any good reason?

+1 on banning "reasonably astute observer." If you had 3 reasonably astute observers they'd have 5 different opinions on what counts as a robot.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Do we have a definition of "event?" If we leave our practice robot in the trailer at the parking lot and walk out there to drill off some parts if needed, is that now illegal?

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Does 3467 need to get their practice robot out of their high school before their district? Would 190 need to move a robot off campus before WPI can hold their event? Good thing 1885 isn't fielding their robot at the event in their high school, they'd have to drop their practice robot off at the local Subway...

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

That depends on when you were planning on drilling off those parts and what those parts are.

If they are COTS parts then there is no issue. If they are non-COTS parts and it is during robot drop off there is no issue. Otherwise there is an issue.

This Team Update didn't make that illegal, it's been illegal.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Unless those parts you drill off are completely COTS parts, this practice has always been illegal. You get to exercise your withholding allowance once, at load-in, not bring in 5 lbs here and 3 lbs there.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Alright, thanks for the clarification!

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

As I understand it, 900 not only ". . .bagged a lot of spare parts" at Palmetto, they drove their spare parts around on the practice field to work on their stability problem. This astute observer sees that as a second robot, no matter what it looked like in the bag without all its complete systems and parts.

Was this group of spare parts inspected for safety before being allowed on the practice field? Did it have a sticker? I can see where having a nearly complete robot for spare parts in a bag on bag day could be legal, but not if it goes running around under power on the practice or competition fields.

I vote for a rule which allows only inspected robots to be powered up and driven around other robots.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

No. Absolutely not. Never. The day we do is the day we've stopped being the Zebracorns.

Every year we (900) sit around and read the rules after Kickoff and then we write up our goals on the board, like a lot of teams probably do... Unlike a lot of teams, one of those goals is always "break the game".

I don't expect everyone to understand that concept or why it is important but it's something we always set out to do... be that by throwing a ball 50 feet, or by building a new robot at an event, or by working with machine learning like cascade classifiers to detect the undetectable, we have a specific goal to do it. It's part of our team's culture and is as unique as our pants.

Those who keep saying that we've violated the "spirit of FIRST" or the "spirit of the rules" are forgetting that this is an engineering sport and it's not tiddlywinks.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Based on a reading of the new rule (emphasis mine):
I would argue this precludes it being anywhere near the venue, even if it is in the trailer and only COTS items are removed. While that WAS legal, I don't think it is anymore. It didn't say bringing it INTO the event, it just says bringing it.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

4761 locks the shop during the event we host and we treat it like we are at someone else's school. The practice robot (not bagged) will be locked in the shop.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Trust me, I'm not forgetting this is an engineering sport. But breaking the rules is not engineering. If I issue a requirement for a contract, and you come back with a design that "technically" meets that requirement, but doesn't meet the intent of what I want accomplished, I'm not going to issue you that contract. Sure, you found a way to satisfy my requirements, but it's not the product I want to pay someone to produce. Engineering involves finding solutions to problems, not merely sidestepping them.


Further still, bringing a practice robot to an event isn't finding a novel strategy that "breaks the game," it's bending the rules. It doesn't even seem to meet your "Zebracorn" design philosophy, as it's not even a design choice. The only cultural value you seem to be stressing with this move is trying to thumb your nose at the GDC (at best).

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Okay, this goes a little too far. AT THE TIME that the team in question bagged their practice robot and brought it to the event, this was an ENTIRELY LEGAL act. It was smart. Less than a day between bag day and load in at the event? Very good idea to bag the practice robot to have at your disposal during the event; it was certainly of more use to them there than being out of the bag for another 18 hours or so. Some degree of rest was probably a better use of that time anyway.

Rules updates should not been applied ex post facto to vilify teams who acted entirely within the rules at the time.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Not that am advocating layering the rules but. That is why mil specs are so long & buyer & sellers have ridiculous terms and conditions. Companies routinely underbid contracts knowing that they will make it up on change orders. Like it or not this is all real life engineering that you need to be aware of even if you choose not to participate.

Back to FRC. The real underlying issue is how to limit the resource requirements of the competition or do we even try. I am not sure either side has the moral high ground. This same discussion goes on in Formula One BTW.

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

Indeed it does. :)

Re: Team Update 14 (2016)
 

No one has been vilified... Frank sent a nice email thanking us for being understanding about the situation and explaining their (GDC) thoughts behind the rule change. I said I have no hard feelings. I think people are reading a lot more into this and making it a passionate and lively CD discussion as always.

If you think we are villainous for our shenanigans then you don't know our team and are just being a whiny jerkface. The Zebracorns complied with all rules that existed (and even some that didn't) at the time of the competition and will comply with all rules that exist now moving forward.