The rule is pretty silly, and IS a very unsportmanlike disadvantage to handicapped team members, but it also looks nice on TV, so Joe Sixpack can see that the robots are moving and no one is near the controls.

Personally, I think it should be removed - I don't think there is any important benefits to be had from this rule.

this rule isn't a problem.

Think...3 feet. Who is honestly going to run to the controls?
By the time you got into a rnnning stride you would be about 10 feet into the field. 3 feet is one step for most people. And since only a driver and operator ned to get there instantly. What the big deal. With a 3 foot limit could reach and be about 1 foot away from the controls. I'm sorry but I think that you guys are over-analyzing the situation.

Well if she's handicapped wouldn't it be a better idea if she was in the wheelchair to start with and then get out of it. What if something happened and she needed to get away from the control station fast.

My 2c
 

I am 99.99% sure that the purpose of this rule is to prevent people from communicating in any way with the robot during autonomous mode.

Many have been asking the questions 'can we use the e-stop to cycle through programs', 'can we use the e-stop to let another robot pass by' and 'can we reset the robot during the autonomous period'.

In my blunt opinion these questions are from those who are ungraciously trying to redefine the word 'autonomous'.

Given the intent of this rule, I think it is very unlikely that FIRST will allow a 3 foot tether on the OI controls.

It sounds to me like Innovation FIRST does not have a way to control the OI to the extent that it intended to. It seems like if a fix were possible, it would be a very simple one. Perhaps this is a hardware issue inside each team's OI, and not something they can program or fix in the competition control system.

I agree with many that the 3' rule creates a safety hazard, and a problem for those with disabilities. Another solution is needed.

Eric.

Eric gets it.
 

(small flame on).

I am 100% sure that the purpose of this rule is to prevent people from communicating in any way with the robot during autonomous mode.

If everyone is upset about this rule, then you have no one to blame but yourselves. "Who, me?!??" Yes, you. All of you that, from the very first day following kick-off, have been trying to find loopholes, alternative mechanisms, sneaky approaches, and outright cheats to get around the fact that the first 15 seconds of robot operation in this year's game must be conducted solely through the abilities of an autonomous program, without human intervention.

Go back and read through all the threads and messages that discuss how to use the E-stop button to communicate with the robot during the autonomous operations period. Or use an alternative OI. Or send signals from the audience. Or send info from the OI during the human player period. Or send "program selection" information from the human drivers. Or use the optical sensors to send signals from the human drivers. etc. etc. etc.

Based on these messages, it is clear that some people either can't or won't understand that "autonomous" means "AUTONOMOUS"!!! The intent behind the autonomous period is completely obvious - make your robot "smart enough" that it can play for 15 seconds ON IT'S OWN. That means the robot runs without ANY communication from the human operators, team members, folks in the audience, your grandmother at home, or anyone else.

Since some people refuse to abide by the intent of the autonomous period, and insist on creating ways to get around the intent of the game design instead of trying to play the game within the rules, FIRST has been backed into a corner. YOU have forced them to create rules (and this is not the last rule you will see on this topic) that will make it difficult to circumvent the intention of the autonomy period (I hesitate to say "impossible" because as soon as I do, someone will come up with another way to weasel around the latest rules).

If, as a result, you don't like the impacts of this rule, or some advanced OI designs are impacted, or some teams become disadvantaged, that's life. Do you want to do something about it? OK, then the next time FIRST comes out with a rule like "you have to stay behind a line 3 feet from the player station" then don't immediately respond with things like "we can just C-clamp a 3-foot-long shelf on the operator station" or "just use a 3-foot cable to reach the controls" and searches for new loopholes and technicalities. Instead, try to understand WHY the rule is in place, and how you can work WITHIN the rule to design a better robot, build a better team, and have a better experience. In other words, stop being LAWYERS and start being ENGINEERS!

(small flame off).

Personally, I like the rule. Not only do I not think it should be overturned, I would encourage FIRST to make it stronger.

-dave

-----------------------------------------

Y = AX^2 + B.... ehhh, whatever

Eric Reed and Dave Lavery took the words right out of my mouth. I agree with them that this rule was enacted as a direct result of ungracious professionalism (trying to intentionally subvert the idea of autonomous mode) in the FIRST community.

Maybe FIRST will clarify the rule in an update in the future. I do not see anything wrong with 3 feet other then a minor safety hazard...3 feet is like 1 or 2 steps away from the controllers themselves. Not much to worry about. Unless somebody's feet get tangled up and they get sent flying forward!

im sick of watching this. this is so ridiculous. If you can carry a 130 pound robot on to the field you can stand for 25 seconds walk 3 feet and stand for another minute45. ITS ONLY WALKING POEPLE. This is what irks me the most. Stupid ideas when you cant accept the fact that its a rule. If you cant walk 3' to the controls without hurting yourself, then you shouldn't be driving. And the rule is for everyone. so everyone has to walk 3' not just you. so in the half second it takes to walk to the controls, someone who gets there in .45 seconds wont have that much of an advantage. Its not a saftey concern its to prevent cheaters from cheating. Because if its possible someone will try it. jeez stop complaining.

Gah. You need to have your attitude adjusted.

This rule does very little except add an additional safety hazard to the game. It's already a miracle there aren't more injuries, and I just can't see the point in adding on more and more idiosyncratic rules that are patching some problems and causing still more.

If they're going to make it so that the referees need to watch alliance members anyway, why not just make a rule that prohibits touching the controls at all?

For people that design wearable control systems, either rule represents an enormous problem, making such systems impractical. They're usually quite innovative and it seems silly that such a rule would stifle that creativity.

You're not going to walk to the controls, you're going to run. If it's meant to 'wow' the audience by proving that the robots are being controlled by programming, the lull in the game as action stops will do just as well to counter than 'wow.'

It all seems ridiculous to me any of this is an issue. You can't cycle through programs, or communicate with the robot in any way whatsoever. Those should be rules enough.

To tell you the truth....
 

I really don't care! i try not to waste time thinking about it, because even if i did dissaprove, it isn;t for me to worry about. Ever since i started FIRST has done an outstanding job at being "fair" and i can always tell that everything FIRST does has been thought through thoroughly.
So, instead of yelling about it, i'm gonna go get my sneakers on and practise my short distance speed burst's untill the rule is changed, or i go to competition:D

3' line
 

You people are really overanalyzing this. I have read all the posts and after reading Update 7 I posted the question to FIRST. Their answer explains everything. 3' is not a long distance, and I don't envision seeing or hearing about anyone tripping while taking one or two steps at the beginning of the human control period and you don't need to run (it is only three feet). If everyone involved just stays calm and doesn't run, we won't have problems.

Dave :cool:

P.S. For those of you who want wearable controls, don't make it so complex that it takes 5 minutes to put on, just make it a slip on affair.

as i said before, i have a handicapped member of my team who is a potential driver. i think she has what it takes, and i'm pretty sure she can be a pretty good driver. this rule would hinder her abilities to be a driver. why? CAUSE SHE CAN'T JUMP 3 FEET IN .000002 MILLISECONDS! sure, she'd be able to make it in a couple of seconds max, but she can't launch herself like everyone else. second, she can't use a wheelchair, and won't use a wheelchair. why? she's not allowed to according to another FIRST rule, and she'd rather walk then use a wheelchair when possible.

as you can see, this puts me in a very hard postion. i've told her that she can most likely be a driver, if she can drive the robot good in the shop. if we have this rule, it will more or less stop her from being a driver. for the rest of the team's sake, we can't be loosing because she has an unfair disadvantage.

to get rid of this rule, a simple solution. make the E-Stop button work once during the 15 second period. hit it, you're disabled till the beginning of manual mode. it's fair if you ask me. team has one chance to stop a crazy robot. shouldn't be that hard to add in, i would think.

in any case, this rule has made my life much harder, because i don't want to tell my team member that she can't drive because of a stupid rule which is completely unfair to her. this is the most un-FIRST-like rule i've ever seen before. as far as i know, FIRST has been about getting EVERYONE, not just the healthy (as in not handicapped) people. this rule kind of shatters that notion of mine.

darnyi forgot about her, maybe i should of thought..lol
but seriously, this rly stinks for my team, it's just plain unfair to hinder her abailities even farther. Please consider this, that;s all i am going to say..... OH and btw, i DO NOT want a "special case" situation for this. This is not something i want to be put against my team, or even brought up to say we have some sort of unfair advantage.... Comon, i know FIRST would be willing to change this, or atleast contemplate it.... Because this isn't a matter of how much money we have availiable to us, or where we are from, or what our resources are. I don;t mean to be another person who yells about "unfairness in FIRST" just a person who would like some human decentsy in light of a person who deals with "unfairness" constantly.
THANKS

Hmmm.....
 

It seems that there is a rule (GM6) that allows your driver to use her wheelchair in the Alliance Station. If you have her in her wheelchair and use another member to push her to the station, you should have no problem. It seems that FIRST has to be more liberal with their allowance of mobility aids in the alliance stations because of this rule.

Dave :cool:

:yikes: P.S. FIRST has spoken on the E-Stop issue. According to team update 9, if you press the E-Stop button during Autonomous mode, your robot will be disabled not only for the duration of the autonomous period, BUT THE FIRST 30 SECONDS OF THE HUMAN CONTROL PERIOD!!!

If this rule stands, I'm sure FIRST would make exceptions to the rule, especially in circumstances as you described. I think if you simply emailed them, or asked in the team forum they would clarify.

I can't believe that FIRST would discriminate in ANY way against the disabled. Heck, if your friend drives I would think Deano would do everything to make it easier for her. How would she feel about driving from an IBot?

I wholeheartedly agree with M, this rule seems unnecessary. If they simply enforced the stated rule of "no communication with the robot" then it wouldnt be an issue. The new E-stop rule will also change the strategy behind an autonomous shut off. I think the only time a team will push the E-stop button now is if their robot is going to commit autonomous suicide.

Ricksta-
I hope you trip on your way to the controls, just to prove that accidents DO happen, especially to those who are cocky about it. Even the most sure footed people stumble sometimes...