"Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Preface: I truly believe that one has to be VERY VERY careful before posting something like what I am going to post, but I think that what I saw this weekend at the Great Lakes Regional gives me little choice. There needs to be some very drastic changes in FIRST's rules about "spare parts."

There were a number of teams that brought their "practice robot" to the GLR. Personally, I think this is a smart move. Since your practice robot and your competition robot should be identical, it's great to have EVERY SINGLE spare part with you and available at a competition. For the teams that decide to invest the additional manpower and resources into such an endeavor, the benefits are VERY significant. The fear of missing a round due to not having a spare part available takes a great deal of stress off during the competition. [Edit]However, it should be noted, that this is NOT ALLOWED PER RULE R09[/Edit]

What I found to be absolutely frustrating, terribly ungracious, and incredibly heartbreaking is the teams that brought in their "practice robot" which was actually a SIGNIFICANTLY UPGRADED machine and replaced ENTIRE MECHANISMS on their "competition robot".

I consider myself to be rather lenient on a lot of rules. If you didn't have time to get some cool colored Lexan sides before your robot shipped, and brought those along and swapped them out, which I saw a few teams do, I have NO problem with that. If you even brought powder-coated parts that were identical to those on your robot, I turned a blind eye. Honestly, if you had a part that you even wanted to "tweak" because, it just wasn't working right by the time you shipped, I'll get over it.

However, there were teams that had non-functional robots, who brought in their "practice" robot's assemblies, and suddenly had a not only fully functional robot, but one with an additional 2 weeks of upgrades.

Has anyone else noticed this?

I think that there's only one way to ensure the fairness to all competitors, by adding the following rule:

• You must ship all spare parts with your robot, and you are responsible for the associated additional shipping charges. You may only bring in raw and "off the shelf" materials to the competitions.

FIRST counts on teams to be gracious and professional, but from what I saw at the Great Lakes Regional, I was truly discouraged. There's no way to fully monitor the "spare parts" system that is in place now, and teams, both well respected veterans, and newer teams, are blatantly cheating.

I understand that teams with a well thought-out game plan can get a non-functional robot up and running with a whole Thursday of hard work- I saw this happen. A lot of teams bring in raw materials and finished the last touches (or even the main functions!). Congratulations to them for quick work! However, let me ensure you that this was not the case for a number of teams.

While perhaps it's too late to make changes now - I firmly believe there needs to be a complete overhaul of the spare parts system for next season to ensure fairness for all teams.

I plead that we remember six weeks is six weeks.

Matt

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

any system is good as long as the rules are followed - if someone wants to cheat, they will find a way.

according to the current rules, you were allowed to bring spare parts as long as they were fabricated BEFORE the ship deadline (thats why its called a DEADLINE! if you miss it, your team is DEAD! :ahh: )

I think the provision to bring spare parts with you, instead of forcing teams to ship them in the crate, was simply to keep shipping costs down - esp since FedEx was SO nice to give teams all that free shipping this year.

Ship the bot, carry your spares with you on the bus

but as stated in the present rules you are not allowed to bring any assemblies: period!

Personally I would like to see the rules stay the way they are - making everyone ship all their spares will only add to the shipping costs for all teams - and if someone wants to cheat and sneak in assemblies that were built after the deadline, we would have to go through an exhaustive inspection process where a judge must be present when you open your crate, and inspect your bot and mark each part, then inspect all the boxes you bring into the arena to make sure you did not sneak any assemblies in.

Do we really want to do this? thats starting to sound like a robot building contest - thats not why we are here (remember?).

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

FIRST is aware of the situation that happed at the GLR, and should be taking steps as we speak to correct the problem.

The major problem was an unnamed team using their practice robot all day on Thursday during the practice rounds. The referees conferred, and though there is no rule against it, we all concluded that it should have been an obvious understood that the practice robot does not go onto the playing field. However, there being no written rule about it, we could not disqualify said team.

As for the question - did they use prefabricated parts from their pratice robot on their competition robot - the referees asked the team, and hopefully they showed gracious professionalism and were truthful when they answered that they had NOT made a parts exchange. Unless anyone can bring proof that they were not honest, there is nothing that FIRST can do about it.

On a personal note, I am shocked at the lack of respect this team showed the competition. Other teams were forced to skip their practice rounds to fix and upgrade their robot, and I think the team gained a significant advantage by skirting the rules with this move. As Dean said - we should look at the rules as engineers would, not lawyers. It is my personal belief that the robot you practice with on Thursdays be the same one you are required to get certified for the competition.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

If its gonna cost more to ship your fabricated spare parts then you should just do some more fundraising. It doesnt cost too much more to ship more weight, an extra fundraiser would cover your costs.

I myself am dissapointed in the way some teams can opperate. I right now want to fix a problem we had with our wench system, but if we do you'll see us fabricate the parts at our next regional.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I know the team you speak of, and i disagree with this. They also used the practive bot for something else, but I won't elaborate. I diagree with this hole heartedly, especialy the act that was worse than just using it during the practice day. But I can't complain, my team went to the semi-finals, so it obviosly didn't effect us!

I would like to see some type of provisions for this in the rules, however. Pictures of part you will be bringing shipped with the robot maybe? Negligable wieght, and proof of prior construction. Also, maybe more stickers on the robot to prove it has passed inspection, there for no worries about switching out a part that has the sticker on it.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

This is correct. Just for clarity:

Quote:

Originally Posted by R09 (Emphasis Added) During the six week period following Kickoff

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Wouldn't bringing a practice robot be against FIRST's rules? Even if it is identical to your competition robot?


<R09> During the six week period following Kickoff: You may fabricate spare parts for replacement purposes of items on yuor robot as long as they are exact replacements of parts on the robot you shipped to the event. They must be brought to the event in a completely disassembled state as individual components (no bolt-on assemblies)

Even if a practice bot is identical to the competition robot, you can't bring it to competition unless it is completely disassembled. So the team(s) that brought their assembled competition robots to the event were actually breaking the rules, werent they?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

We brought our practice robot to Ypsi, but we left it in the hotel the whole time and never brought it to the competition site. Great for midnight programming and driver practice :p

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

You can bring a practice robot to the competition, you just can't use parts from it. Let's say that the real robot is in bad mechanical shape, so the pit crew is frantically working to make the components perform properly. Meanwhile, the programmers could be working on autonomous mode, or any kind of programming, and debugging everything on there, so that when the real thing is "done" they know what exactly they need to do to get it to 100%

Cory

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

But what's to stop a team with two identical robots (one working perfectly, one having a lot of mechanical issues) from placing the "perfect" one in a match rather than the broken one?

I'd like to think teams would be more professional than this and know it's completely against the rules. But I know there are still some teams out there who would do this.

If it's not illegal to bring your practice bot, fully assembled, to a competition, I think it should be.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I'd agree with you by the way the rules are written... but it's something I wouldn't want our team to do.

I wouldn't (personally) want any shread of doubt in anyone's mind about our teams intentions and use for that spare robot. It approaches a grey zone, and when it comes to reputation... I wouldn't want to mingle 461's name along the very few bad apples who might have other intentions.

Matt

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I also have a problem with practice bots at competition. The only way I believe to allow this is to have said bot shipped with real bot. They should be identical in all ways. If you then want to change out parts that would be OK. However if they are not identical then the rule of weighing in all other functions must be followed. I believe that if FIRST knows about this problem then they will fix it. It may not be this year but they are very good at listening and fixing problems.

BTW - Last year I did see a practice bot at comp that was shipped with original.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

The biggest problem I see with this is noticing it. Unless the team is involved in the elimination rounds and their robot suddenly goes from battered to perfect shape, very few people would notice a difference, and the team wouldn't be punished.

I don't like the idea of putting the practice robot out onto the field, but I don't see a problem with building a practice robot...Still, if it's just meant to be used by the drivers and programmers, build it that way. Our second robot - which I don't think will be traveling with us to Detroit or South Carolina - is literally a chassis and a drive train. None of the manipulations, none of the pneumatics...just the basics, along with added weight so it handles more like the real thing.

Maybe FIRST should have a rule that your practice robot is JUST a chassis and drive train - if one of those goes out onto the field, I'm sure someone would notice. :)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

In my humble opinion, this is a problem that no rule will ever resolve or govern. This is a societal ethics problem. Unfortunately, we CURRENTLY live in a society where bending the rules is the norm instead of the exception. As one football announcer put it, "it's only a problem if you get caught." In general, the engineering community has always maintained high ethical standards. The defense of this last statement is a book upon itself.

The solution to this problem is to have open discussions just as Matt has done here (thanks Matt) and discuss why our community (& ultimately our Society) should follow the spirit of the rules and not the letter of the rules. One day, football coaches will be teaching their players NOT TO BREAK THE RULES REGARDLESS of the consequences. This will be a result of a lifelong mission of folks in various communities like FIRST, Ultimate (www.upa.org), engineering societies, etc. desiring to live in a society where there are more builders than rule makers.

The solution to the specific problem that is addressed above is for FIRST (maybe the regional director) to discuss gracious professionalism with the mentors of any team that chronically "bends the rules."

This is the Reader's Digest version of what I'd really like to say on the subject. Just egg me on a little and I'll slam all the football and basketball coaches that teach their players how to hold without getting caught along with the prosecuting attorneys that ignore the facts to get a conviction.

Take care,
Lucien

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Well, please let me reply since I am sure that we are the team that everyone is speaking of.

1. Yes, we brought our practice robot into the GLR.
2. Yes, we used our practice robot during the practice rounds. 2 or three of the rounds I believe it didn't even move.

I know I speak for my entire team in apologizing for breaking the rules about this. I was not aware of the rule but should have been and it is my fault and I am the one to blame. As soon as we were told we were in violation of the rules, we removed the practice robot from the building.

However, I can say exactly what I told the judges who confronted me. Absolutely no parts that were on the practice robot were used on the robot we shipped. ZERO.

This is what was done to our shipped robot on Thursday:

1. One gear that was on the elbow was replaced to increase the gear ratio.
2. The robot controller was swapped from the prototype electronics board to the real board which is not a violation of the rules.
3. We added a pneumatic brake to our winch. This had been part of our robot before it shipped (someone from 469 might be able to remember it when they saw it), but we removed it because we didn't think we needed it when we shipped. Later, we found that we did and on Thursday, our machinists re-fabricated the bracket in the PICO trailer (along with helping other teams make parts for their robots).
4. We added a piece of aluminum tube to the bottom of the winch mechanism to stop the plate from flexing.
5. We added the rubber rat to the control console.
6. The rest was programming and electronics work which we did to the shipped robot as we debugged it in the pit on Thursday.

The first round on Friday, our autonomous mode was unknown, so instead of taking a chance of damaging the robot, we did not even bring a robot to the round.

Again, I sincerely apologize for our acts at GLR but can honestly say that we did not mean any harm. I take full responsibility for our actions.

If anybody wants to disagree with anything that I have said, please feel free to post here or email me at dfwjr1973 @ hotmail.com and we can discuss.

Also, No Remorse, I am curious to you comment, "They also used the practive bot for something else, but I won't elaborate". Could you please contact me. I would really like to know what you are talking about.

Sincerely,
Donald Wright
Project Engineer for Team 830

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I watched this exact thing happen last year at The Buckeye Regional. A team brought in their "practice" robot and I watched all day as they systematically took parts off it and put them onto their competition robot. They ended up going on to the finals I believe. It didn't seem fair. I see that team went to GLR this year, I hope they didn't do the same thing again.

This year, as always, we will be brinning a supply of backup parts, but they are identical to the ones found on our robot and hopefully won't be needed. That isn't unfair, it just smart. The only thing we put in our crate was the robot. We even took off the practice signs, & yes we made new ones. The team number is a little bigger on the new ones.

You just have to remember why you are doing this. Winning is great, but if you can teach the kids a good lesson, that is so much better. I don't think this team you and/or I am talking about is teaching a very good lesson.

You've gotta love engineers
 

This is what I love about the engineering community. Team 830 is part of the solution and not part of the problem!!! We will all make mistakes; it is what we do after our mistakes that defines our character. Thanks for the explanation Donald.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Please see my post here:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...076#post236076

Again, I'm sorry.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

This same thing happened at St Louis. The fact that this happened at least twice (maybe more?) is a strong indication that FIRST will have to make the prohibitions against this practice absolutely clear and unambiguous. This may be intuitively obvious to some teams, but not others, so here we are...

-dave

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I'd like to commend Mr. Wright for his full disclosure of what went on with his team's practice robot at GLR. It takes courage to admit you did something wrong, and not just deny everything flat-out. Thank you for telling us the full story.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

It was definately the right thing to do 830, your apology has been accepted by me Mr. Wright.
Even though 830 did violate the rules I don't think their violation is nearly as extreme as the other teams who were swapping upgraded components as Matt Adams has described. I want to hear more on that subject. I don't think the CD community will be nearly as accepting of that type of conduct.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

This may have been a problem at GLR, but I can say that I did not see 830 participate in anything illegal with the spare parts. I was in the pits most of the competition, and they were our put neighbors. Any team that had a spare bot could have made the same mistake they did, but they took care of the problem right away once they found out what it was. I NEVER saw their practice bot "lightened up" from it losing parts. They played fairly and in the spirit of the game, and had a great robot.

This thread was in no way started to "slam" team 830, because everyone on our team knows that they competed graciously. Good luck to ya guys at Grand Rapids, kick some robot~!

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Just for the record, the team i was speaking of DID use their spare for more than just parts, and MORE IMPORTANTLY was not 830, I too commend them for thier apology, and eagerness to comply to the rules when confronted

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I inspected team 830. It was not until late in the day Thursday that I realized that they were running their extra robot -- to be honest, I saw at least one other team with their spare robot there -- I also saw that team asking if they could run their spare robot on Th -- they were told no.

Here is how I would have dealt with it at that point. I knew 3 things,
#1 the other team had been told no.
#2 they made no secret of their second robot and
#3 they had not been told to escort their robot to the door.

So at that point, knowing what I knew about the other situation, I just decided to ignore it.

I guess things later blew up a bit.

I have not liked this rule from the beginning but I guess if it is here to stay so be it. We need to get a little more legal to make it fair (and clear).

Joe J.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I'd just like to clear the air that my original post had nothing to do with team 830's actions... and though they made great strides in improving their robot over the course of the competition, I didn't witness anything that had me second guessing their practices or gracious professionalism.

Matt

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I personally disagree with this rule in some senses. Our team created 4 tracks for our robot incase we broke or something horrible happened. So this rule would state that we would have to take apart our 2 spare tracks?
Our 1 track
I don't know about you but that just isn't going to happen it took DAYS to put together and if we broke our track match 1 we would they have a robot that didn't work and we could go home on thursday. The rules are stated for someone to CHANGE a complete arm, drive system, or any other part (IMHO); replacement parts should not be a problem. If 1 team can make a second robot in 6 weeks whats the problem with them using it for parts on the robot they shipped? Some things that are created in the 6 weeks just cannot be remade to work in a couple hours.

Well thats my 2cents on this matter

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

If you created the spare tracks during the 6 week build season, then you may ship them with the robot and use them as is. However, if they were made after the 6 week build season, then you must remake them from raw materials at the competition.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Because of a heavy crate we couldn't ship anything but our robot. Yes you are correct we could have put them in the crate.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Thanks to everyone for the support and understanding of the issues.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I think that this was a very informative thread. I also think that there was a little too much finger pointing, name calling, and crying. WE are all on a F.I.R.S.T. team for a reason. Alot of people are getting blind sited by what our primary goal is. I think that in the future we should continue to disscuss these issues but should should be a more carefull woth the accusations that we throw around. Many people were blaming this whole situation on one or two teams when actually it was a simple miss-understanding. We have all done it cut them a break PLEASE. I'm sure that they feel bad enough.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I agree with the last post.

If you see someone doing something you think is against the rules, you have two options:

1. get a judge and confront them - straighten it out right there- 99% of the time it will be a misunderstanding on someones part, corrective action will be taken, someone will learn the rules better, and that will be the end of it

or

2. if its not a big deal, then let it drop - and that means let it drop everywhere and forever.

Coming on this forum or anywhere else and making induendos, or accusing a team of cheating without backing it up with names, dates, team numbers, witnesses, does nothing but get people upset, and gets other people angry at teams who may or may not have been doing something wrong.

If you saw a team doing something and you want to know if its against the rules, you can simply ask: is it ok to bring a practice bot to the event and use it on thurday?

is it ok to use assemblys from a practice bot on your real machine?

there is no need to say that you saw someone doing this - because the event is over and you cant do anything about it now - but with the rules clarified you can do something about it WHILE its happenings at a future event.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Even if you do have names, team numbers, dates and witnesses, I'd say don't post unless you confronted the offending team, or asked a judge to, and they continued with whatever upset you. Misunderstandings should be off the table before the entire community is brought into it.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I am really proud of you all for handling this thread so awesomely :)

Sometimes stuff happens at regionals that you need to question, but may not have time to do so during the competition. I understand that if you see something that may be a violation that you should talk to an official immediately, but sometimes things happen that won't allow you to take the time out. We all know how crazy regionals can be. But what happened happened, and we can't go back and change it. But we can set a precedent for the rest of the regionals, and we can only do that by talking about it.

Try as we might, CD is sometimes the only contact we have together concerning FIRST issues. I am personally frustrated with the lack of updating on the FIRST site, and I am really happy with how the CD community has pulled together to make sure that as much information as possible is distributed. I feel that if a question needs to be brought up, that it is done as respectfully as possible, and that we all work to come up with a solution and a way to deal with any other issues that will come up later at regionals. As long as it is done in a respectful manner, I see no problem with bringing up an issue that occurred at regionals.

I was talking to my class dean last week concerning an issue that happened with another group I'm involved with at Babson. We had a raffle drawing, and they all said that they would show up at the radio station for the drawing, but it ended up that none of them showed up and they didn't make any effort to contact me and explain their actions. It really hurt me because it turned out that the winner was a member of the committee, and said he would show; so when the radio hosts called him to tell him he won, he said he wasn't doing anything...even though he lives two floors above the station.
She knows of my invovlement in FIRST, and I told her that I would never expect that issue to come up if the students involved were FIRSTers, because FIRST teaches responsibility. If something sketchy happens, we're not afraid to bring it up - not because we like to witchhunt, but because it shows that we care about the community and believe that in making the competition fair for all, that we will make sure that every student is getting something positive out of the experience.

So, I hope you all don't think Im just blabbering on about something off-topic, but I am seriously proud of how this thread was handled and of the community as a whole for working out this issue...you guys rock!

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I think this thread brings out a very important issue. What can you bring and what can you upgrade on that Thursday? Can we add additional sensors? Can we replace a sprocket? I assume we can drill holes. What are examples of things we can't bring or do?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Seems like I'm always playing devil's advocate on these threads.

Why is it a problem to bring a practice robot to drive on practice day?

What is the advantage this team gained? One day of driving a practice robot on a real field? If they had modifications to make to the competition robot that took all day thursday and made the decision to do that, that's all they would have sacrificed if they didn't have an extra robot.

I'm not aware of any requirements for the robot you field on practice day, other than they check to make sure it can't damage the field. You don't have to complete inspection prior to practice - how many teams put a robot on the practice field that was overweight, outside the size limit, didn't have 4 team numbers, etc.? Are they equally as guilty?

They had an extra TWO WEEKS since the robot shipped for driving practice and tweaking at home - is that fair to the teams who didn't have the resources to build 2 robots?

What about the teams who go to 2, 3, or 4 regionals - they get all those extra practice days, is that fair to the teams who only go to 1? (we've beat that question to death in other threads but it's a similar point).

At the Central Florida Regional they didn't have a practice field setup - just carpet - so we couldn't test modifications to our lift mechanism until we were on the field. If teams bring practice fields to other regionals to try things out, is that fair to us?

The intent of the rules is to try to level the playing field, but there is no way it will ever be fair. We all know that, Dean admits that, and we accept that. Somebody early in this thread said they should have known it wasn't right - I disagree. As they stated, they followed all the rules in regards to spare parts. Don't make up other rules just because someone else is taking advantage of their strengths, in this case the resources to build a second robot.

Team SPAM is probably a middle tier team as far as available financial, engineering and manufacturing resources - sufficient to be competitive but nowhere near enough to build 2 'bots. I don't begrudge anyone who can - I envy you and applaud you, because the bottom line is, it's not about the robots. It's about inspiring the students, and when my students say "WOW" about what your team has done, it's a good thing.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

There was no finger pointing. No one accused anyone. There was no mention of team numbers. 830 came forward and admitted wrong doing themselves. Kudos to them; however, this thread when originally started with other teams in mind. It was about swapping mechanisms from the pratice robots, which supposedly some other team have done.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Its unfair because in engineering you always have to make tradeoffs

if your bot needs work then you cant pratice

if you decide to start making changes to your bot that will keep it from running on thursday then your team will get no practice

if you shipped a bot that still needed work then your team will get no practice

allow a team to build a second bot, and continue to work on it after the ship date, and bring it to the regional on the bus, and use it on the field to get practice

while the other teams have to decide which is more important, modifying the bot or meeting the practice schedule

Its clearly an unfair advantage to more heavily financed and supported teams - I know FIRST is unfair on some levels, but we dont have to make it worse by letting well funded teams do whatever they please, taking every possible advantage over the little guy.

besides, FIRST has a very clear definition of what you teams 'robot' is and what its not - your practice bot is NOT your teams robot

why would you think you can bring something else to drive around on the playfield? can we drive our bus on the field? why not? its not in the rules either?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

That's all really nice Ken, but it has nothing to do with the rules - you can't make up your own just because you don't like it.

I would guess that your bus would damage the field, and as such the ref's wouldn't allow it on the field.

You did actually make one valid point in that post that caused me to look and answer my own question - from section 7.1 in the rules "The purpose of the Practice Rounds is to allow each Team a chance to run its Robot on the Playing Field prior to the start of the competition matches." That's the answer - I would agree that there is a clear definition on what your robot is, and the practice round is for that robot. Therefore, the rules state you must drive your competition robot "THE robot" in the practice rounds.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I have to say I disagree with this intrepretation. Yes, I am disagreeing with my own opinion after a night of sleep.

I guess it comes down to the definition of "component."

I heard a plea from a college student on 1466 talking about making spare tracks for his drive system. To me, I think that's a really smart move, due to the amount of time it takes to create this tread. To me, tread is a "component" just like a roller on a small ball gatherer is, and just like a wheel with a couple plastic hubs are.

Below is a picture of our robot this year... I've highlighed the small ball roller that's used to pull the balls into the cage, our entire big ball arm, and the sprocket with a custom bolt on hub on the top of our big ball arm. One could possibly define either of these as "components" or "bolt on assemblies".


FIRST needs to clarify this formally before this weekend so everyone can play within the bounds of the intended rules.

Matt

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

you might argue about the meaning of component

but "completely dissassembled state" is pretty clear

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I'm going to go with Ken on this one...
1466 made a design decision to use treads. They knew rule R09 stated:
If they wanted those treads to be avaliable as an assembly than they should have shipped them.

I do think FIRST should put out a team update and define a component and an assembly. Here's my take:

A component is a part not held together with fasteners (mechanical, chemical, spritual, whatever.) They are allowed.
An assembly is a collection of components put together using fasteners to serve a specific function. They are not allowed.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Thats my problem with looking at the rules with common sense and using gracious professionalism.

This thread has shown that the rules need to be defined further. You could even say more lawyer-like. Otherwise teams will just bend them... to the point where they are swapping upgraded mechanisms (the purpose of this thread).

I don't you about you guys, but I'm starting to feel like following gracious professionalism is like having walk all over me stamped on my chest. Since I follow the GP mind set, I'll just smile and wait for another team to do it.


BTW: Yes, we did bring our spare wheel to BAE dissasembled. Hub, tube, and wheel.


EDIT:
No, I would tell them they can use their pre-assembled, non-component treads. I will know that they would like to violate the rules, and I will let them violate the rules because that's what GP is about... right?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Disassembled means disassembled. Any spare assemblies we brought to competitions were packed in our crate at ship time and then shipped in the robot crate to the next regional. If we brought any other parts to the competition, they were all in disassembled state. Some parts were 2-3 pieces welded together, but that was as disassembled as we could get. I am hoping that all other teams did the same, or they will do the same next time.

As for purchased parts (wheels, etc.), I figure that you can bring them as an assembly, just like they were purchased.

GP means following the rules. Also, it means changing your ways if you did not know that you broke a rule.

Andy B.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

the spare parts rules only apply to custom fabricated components and assembiles - parts you FABRICATED yourself

we didnt fabricate the skyway pneumatic wheels, so we dont have to dissassemble them

we didnt fabricate the chain on our bot, so we dont have to take each link apart

the point of the rule is to discourage teams from making very complex assemblies that are prone to being broken - if they are going to break the spares are going to break - are you going to bring a spare for each match?

its simply good engineering practice - dont builld something custom if you can get the same function from a commercially available off the shelf product - dont build something that is unreliable (breaks) when being used - dont build something that is expensive or difficult to repair or replace

THATS what FIRST is trying to convey here - be in the robust machine business, not in the spare parts emporium business :^)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Yes, I would. In a heartbeat, and with no guilt. Look folks, we all know what the rules are. FIRST was even very specific about issues like this. Update #11 makes a point of stating:
If the team mentioned above wants to have custom treads on their robot, and wants to have a spare set for the competitions, then they have a simple choice to make. Either make a spare set of the treads, fully assemble them, and throw them in the box with the robot to have as ready-to-go spares; or bring the individual components of the tread assemblies (note: individual components include unmodified off-the-shelf items such as wheels [with hubs] and umodified chains - Andy Baker has the right interpretation), and then assemble them on site. Under the rules, there is no other choice. If they show up at a competition with an assembled set of treads, that they did not ship with their robot, then those treads cannot be used in the competition.

If all the teams that manage to work within this set of rules can make it work, why in the world should we make an exception for those that cannot stay within the same constraints? A majority of teams have found a way to make their robot design and spares policy fit within the rules that we have all been given. I believe that they should be acklowledged and congratulated - and their efforts should not be tainted or trivialized by someone else's inability to play by the same rules. A small number of teams are trying to make the rules fit their own robot design and spares policies. FIRST has made it clear that this will not be accepted.

-dave

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

While I believe that we violated the intention of the rules by putting our practice robot on the field for practice, it was because of a misunderstanding and it will never happen again.

I hope most of the teams that are violating the rules are doing it because they misunderstand them and not because they are trying to bend them. Even the fact that this discussion has gone on so long back and forth between respected members clearly shows that this is a gray area that probably needs to be clarified.

I assume that anything that is added to a shipped robot must be fabricated at the competition, from purchased parts shipped with the robot, or brought to the competition.

For example...we changed a gear in our arm. We made a brake bracket out of aluminum in the PICO trailer and added a purchased cylinder to it and screwed it to our winch. We made little aluminum covers out of painted sheet aluminum that we cut, bent, drilled, and screwed to our robot at the Regional. We bought new nylon strap Friday night at REI and Saturday morning, cut it to length, added the eyelets, and attached it to our robot after our original strap that shipped with it slipped off the pulley one round and got caught in some gears.

Since all of the changes we made were fabricated at the competition from common purchased parts, I assume this would all be legal.

We spent a lot of time making all the parts on our robot so that we coule easily make and replace them at the competition. We think that is one of our strong points. Although it was a good thing our mast screw mechanism broke because that was a weak link that needed to be found out because it would be hard to repair.

So, that brings me to my next question. Ironically, the screw drive nut on our practice bot broke right before we took it out of the arena. The screw drive nut on our real robot broke in quarter finals. So, we now have to fix both.

So, I am keeping in mind that however we repair our practice robot, we have to be able to make the same repair at Grand Rapids on Thursday. This means any fabrication too. So, I will be bringing bare material (sheet aluminum, tube, nuts, bolts, etc.) and even though the design was done here in the time between regionals, and we can try the design on our practice bot, it will be entirely fixed at the competition on Thursday. I will not be bringing the "fix" completed in with me. It will be made at the regional.

I assume I would not be in any violation of any rules. Am I correct?

Thank you.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

In the example you give above, I would say that you are acting both within the spirit, letter and intent of the rules. All your fabrication, both in the case of the changed gear and the screw drive nut repair, is being done on site or at facilities open and available to all the competition participants. All the fabrication is being done within the time frame of the competition. All repairs/spares are made from component materials, and not built-up assemblies that have been built off-site. So, it looks like you are OK.

Which is exactly my point. You guys had to figure out a way to repair your machine, and you managed to find a way to do it within the rules. The fact that you did DESIGN work off-site is fine. Even using your practice robot to work through the design is OK, as long as you don't use any of those parts on your competition machine (and you have clearly indicated that you won't be doing that). The fact that you were able to find a way to do this, within the rules, is to your credit.

And the fact that you were able to do this provides an existance proof that it can be done - within the rules. If these teams can do it, why shouldn't we expect ALL teams to stay within the rules regarding spare parts?

If they are violating a rule because they do not understand or misinterpreted the rule, then then can be gently informed of the problem, and will probably respond as gracefully and honestly as Team 830. If they are knowlingly violating a rule (hopefully a VERY rare occurance) then they should be called on it.

-dave

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cory
Guys, use some common sense... they took MASSIVE amounts of time to make those treads, can you honestly go to them, look them in the face, and then tell them that they have to disassemble their treads and put them back together?

<dlavery in response>:
Yes, I would. In a heartbeat, and with no guilt. Look folks, we all know what the rules are. FIRST was even very specific about issues like this. Update #11 makes a point of stating:
Quote:
"FIRST staff and volunteers will vigorously support and enforce the 2004 rules as written. A team's excellent and creative work that may not align /be in agreement with the rules will be acknowledged as excellent work but will be disallowed."


Well said, Dave.

I'd like to add one thing, though. Responsibility for complying with FIRST rules belongs to the teams. I think of it as similar the tradition in the game of golf, where players (at least the gracious professional ones) call penalties on themselves when they break a rule. FIRST staff and volunteers must rely on the gracious professionalism of the teams to determine if all components comply with R09.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I think that there are a few different points of view being discussed here. some people are talking about bringing spare "parts" (the letter of the law) and some people are talking about spare components (individual reading of the rules). The main point of this discussion started when someone witnessed a team putting upgraded mechanisims onto thier robot from a practice robot. There is a difference between bringing and making BACKUP parts, going to 2 or 3 regionals and improving a system at the regional and keeping a robot back at your shop to make changes to while other teams robots sit crated and still.

This reminds me of another experience I had with teams bending the rules. A few years back I watched a team take their robot out of the competition facility on Friday night. I had watched this team during practice and saw the trouble they were having with their ball pick-up mechanism. The next morning the robot had all new components and even new signs. When I asked one of the students what they had done he told me, "we took it back to our school and worked on it all night long." The new system worked excellently, this team went on to do well at the regional and very well Nats.

This situation was not and is not fair. Part of me looks at the rules and thinks "they are breaking the rules, I should do something about it." The other part of me looks and sees kids working very hard to perfect something they are proud of. It's not a tough decision to make. I just wish these team's mentors could see the lesson we all want them to see. Do your very best, just do it fairly.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

So how does software fit into all of this? IIRC FIRST specifically allows us to keep our controllers so we can work on software, but that seems to violate the principle behind the spare parts decision.

Yes, all teams have the same physical resources WRT software, (a laptop and a compiler), but because the regionals are spread out we all have different amounts of time. So it doesn't seem entirely consistent for FIRST to encourage us to work on software after the ship date but not to build spare parts.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

because you can put a piece of metal on a machine and fabricate it into a part, and you can tell when its done

but FIRST knows that SW is never done, the rev number just increments forever

Only off-the-shelf & raw materials brought to the pits
 

I am now in favor of a future rule that states, "Only off-the-shelf and raw materials may be brought to the pits."

The rules currently allow teams to

1. Manufacture a gravelator in the 6 week period
2. Not ship the gravelator
3. Use the gravelator to practice
4. Disassemble the gravelator
5. Bring the gravelator parts to the competition
6. Reassemble the gravelator on Thursday and put it on their 'bot

This is certainly within the letter of the rules but I contend that this violates the spirit of the rules. To the extreme and somewhat ridiculous, a team could conceivably ship a block of aluminum, practice with their real robot after the ship-date, disassemble it, and then put it back together on Thursday of the competition. I reviewed the robot and shipping rules and can not find anything to contradict this. Please set me straight if I overlooked something.

Basically, if the "don't bring any modified parts to the pits" rule was enacted, this would eliminate any questions about when parts were manufactured. Yes, this means that any parts that were manufactured/modified in the six week period would need to be stuffed in the crate with the robot if a team thought they may use them at the competition. For those who are going to argue that their crate will weigh more than 400 lbs. if they have to stuff it full of spare parts, just consider it another engineering challenge ... or fundraising challenge.

Now in favor of the anti-gravelator rule,
Lucien

Re: Only off-the-shelf & raw materials brought to the pits
 

I would check out Rule R09 in the robot section.
During the six week period following Kickoff: You may fabricate spareparts for replacement purposes of items on your robot as long as they are exact replacements for parts on the robot you shipped to the event. They must be brought to the event in a completely disassembled state as individual components (no bolt-on assemblies).

You can only make spare parts which are exact replacements for what you shipped. If you shipped a chunk of aluminum, you can only bring spare chunks of aluminum. Seems pretty clear to me.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Duly noted & I was mistaken. I still don't like the idea of shipping one 'bot while walking in with a practice 'bot disassembled and having the opportunity to "selectively" assemble it on Thursday.

Lucien

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Let me propose a rules change for next year that addresses the issue of cost of shipping only, for those who want to stay within the intent; it would be impossible to enforce and relies on GP, but so do many other rules:

Spare subassemblies fabricated during the 6 week build period may be crated/boxed and sealed prior to the ship date and carried to the competition in lieu of shipping in the robot crate.

This would allow teams to build complex robots and spare parts but not have to foot the cost of shipping the spares.

Noone currently watches us uncrate our robot; noone would know if our spares were in the crate or in a box next to it that we brought with us - it's enforced by GP. This change would only help those who stay within the rules anyway by cutting a shipping cost.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

How about we just get rid of the 6-week rule and allow teams to keep their robots? All of these problems would go away.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Because then Dean couldnt say "And they all had only 6 weeks to do it..." :p

Seriously, though...that is an idea. But how do you handle people complaining about teams whose first regional is later in the regional schedule? And how would that affect membership into the earlier regionals?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Dean wants to see this is as a challenge. More time and you would have too much time to test, all the bugs would be worked out. On a more serious note, not everyone likes to spend every day of the year doing this. The 6 week schedule keeps everyone on the same playing field. How many mentors or students would you have if they had to devote more than 6 weeks doing this?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I have a hard enough time getting people to show up one night a week for 6 weeks...let alone 4 months.

I also think that getting rid of the six week limit would just but a bigger divide between the upper tier and lower tier teams.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Please don't dilute this thread with a discussion of 6 weeks or no 6 weeks -- there are other threads that address that.

The focus of this thread is the 2004 Spare Parts rules as they are written.

Thanks,

Aidan

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Aiden,

Someone else porposed a rule change for next year to help alleviate the problem. I was simply doing the same. What is the point of having this thread if not to come up with solutions to the problem for future years?

As long as you have rules of this nature, some teams are going to cheat. It's that simple. Formula 1 racing used to have the same problem with electronic aids - they couldn't effectively police them so they decided that the best thing to do was to just make it legal so that all teams could do it (and not have to worry about rule interpretation, ethics, etc.). I'm proposing a similar measure for FIRST. It's pretty obvious that it can't be stopped and that some teams are doing it. Therefore, I propose that we let all teams do it.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

by the same logic you could say that as long as you have rules, people are going to cheat

therefore eliminate all the rules?!

isnt that like throwing up your hands and giving up?

Since FIRST is suppose to be an emulation of a real engineering program - maybe we need to factor that into the spare parts rulings

maybe raise the robot materials limit to $4k, but include the cost of spare parts in that?

in the real world, if you sold a car with a 3year warrenty, and you had to give the owner a new free engine every 6 months your company would be out of business in a year or two

we need to find a way to inject that reality into FIRST.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Where you are concerned, I AM thinking about throwing up my hands and giving up... (just kidding).


I think the point is being missed. Plenty of rules are very easy to enforce. Others are impossible. I'm just saying that we should consider getting rid of of rules that can't be enforced.


For instance, rules that are easy to enforce:

- robots must weigh <= 130 lbs.
- robots must fit in 30" x 36" x 60" box
- only kit motors can be used
- robot must be wired a certain way
- no materials from the exotic material list
- robots may not break the plane of the HP chute
- etc.


Rules that are difficult (if not impossible) to enforce:

- disassemled parts must be made before 2/26/2004
- You must do your own machining, or you must account for the time (unless students were involved).
- Cost of manufacturing (if students weren't involved).
- Certain material costs.
- You may not have a backup robot (this is not a current rule, but if it were ever implemented, it would be nearly impossible to enforce).
- etc.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

FIRST is in a real bad situation.

They intentionally make the rules vague so they can bend them at any time. They claim the rules should be followed with common sense rather than a judicial sense.
Gracious professionalism keeps us all looking the other way if a team breaks the rules. To the point where we'll allow a team to break a rule and then compete agaisnt them knowing they broke a rule. Why don't we tell anyone? Because you're supposed to be GP. If you were to tell, who would you tell? There should be a FIRST police officer, but there's not.
FIRST has been designed from the ground up without a set of checks and balances. There are no consequences for breaking the rules. FIRST just hopes people will be honest, a blind faith if you ask me.

Teams will continue bending and breaking the rules, gracious professional teams will continue looking the other way.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Actually...it's called life. Some people follow the rules, others bend them. Hopefully FIRST is mostly comprised of people that follow them so that the students that they are involved with will learn to follow them too.

Listen. The rules are what they are. I am not going sit around and spend time trying to make sure other teams are following them to the letter. I'd rather spend the time with my students helping them build the best robot they can within our understanding of the rules. If we get beat by a team that broke the rules and cheated, that's fine. We did the best we could do without cheating and I will never feel bad for that. If we break the rules, it is an accident and I hope that someone lets us know so we stop.

Let's police ourselves and stop asking FIRST to babysit us. If you see a team that you think is breaking a rule, just mention it to them in a polite way. Hopefully it will lead to a good discussion IRL like this one here and everyone will come out better than if you just bottle it up and create a new thread the day after the tournament is over.

It's all about communication. If we all communicate half as well in real life as we do here on CD, instead if a 60 message thread about breaking the rule, we could have a 60 thread message thread about how great a tournament or match was.

Don

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I think I agree with Chris on this one, you can weigh a robot and then make a team lighten up or not compete, but how do you check whether a team has worked past the six weeks? The only way to know is through allegations and that leads to all sorts of misunderstandings and misinterpretations. 130lbs is a solid figure, you're either under it or not and there is absolutely indisputable evidence. So much of Gracious Professionalism relies on trust and if FIRST, or the teams all spying on each other to make sure we're following the rules than the whole competition will fall apart. Thats why the background check thing was so infuriating - FIRST wouldn't trust teams and mentors and that leads to all sorts of nasty things happening.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Engineering is built on ethics. There will always be people who have problems with being ethical and will make FIRST look bad. FIRST can keep innovation and give us so much freedom in our design and tighten down the rules for those that can't follow them too. We all know when someone is breaking a rule. You have several options:

1. Approach them, they may not know the rule or there may be a misunderstanding. FIRST has a lot of updates and like has been said before everyone gets tired by the last week and may have missed that update. A lot of teams will be glad to change to be within the rules if they know they have broken them. I know this can be hard but will generally be the best way.

2. If they blow you off you can approach a FIRST official. They are your police. They are there to make sure things go as smoothly and fairly as possible. They will look into it and make a judgement, whether it is correct in your thoughts they hold the final judgement like the refs do. At least here you can get it off your chest and feel better that you did all you could to create a fair playing environment.

3. Ignore it. Rules are enacted for certain purposes. Sometimes there are exceptions to the rules. On that note I want to say how much I appreciate the sportsmanship of 498, 696, and 80. Allowing someone compete even outside the rules is awesome. This also came up when a team from BAE regional took a part offsite to drill one hole (they didn't know they were breaking a rule). Sometimes people get over-penalized if they are held to the rules. It takes real Gracious Professionalism to let these rules slide in these exceptions.

4. There are many cases in what someone is doing isn't illegal but just wrong in a ethical standpoint. Collusions were an example of this. To counter this the best measure is to post opinions here on CD and get a general consensus on what the group feels and what actions need to be taken. You may have groups that don't agree and still have problems with it afterwards but you must take steps to convince people that even some things that aren't "illegal" are wrong.

There may be other options, including the FIRST forum and by making decisions to not associate, but these are the main ones. I beg you to be both gracious and professional when you approach teams and people about this. The whole if you accidentally did something illegal, I'm sure a lot of you have, and someone else approaches you. So be nice.

And for all of you thinking about bending rules out there. Your reputation lies on how you do things. This professionalism part definitely applies here.

Play by the rules and be nice and we'll all have a lot of fun.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

We brought our mostly-assembled practice robot to GLR. It sat in my truck. On multiple occasions we went out to the truck and "harvested" parts from the spare robot. In every single instance the parts we used were (1)fabricated before the ship date or were off-the-shelf components, and (2)used only after they were fully disassembled down to individual pieces.

In one match, we blew a tire innertube. We took a complete wheel/tire assembly from the spare robot, fully disassembled it down to individual parts, and used the tube and tire tread on the competition robot. Even though the wheel/tire was identical to that on our competition robot, and it had been built up before the ship date, I stood there and watched our students tear it down to the individual parts.

I think in doing this we followed the letter and intent of the rules. Was there a bunch of non-value-added-assembly-and-disassembly? Yes.

I don't think there should be a problem with bringing a fully assembled spare robot to the comp, as long as the parts are disassembled for use.

Ken

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Team Update 15
http://www2.usfirst.org/2004comp/tmup15.pdf

Don't bring the robot in the facility with you.

[edit]If you're going to be entering a grey area... ask someone at FIRST. Don't risk your team and hard work by reading too far into this update.[/edit]

Matt

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Yep. If you are reading this message and haven't read Update 15, go and read it before posting. It's pretty clear cut.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

hey if Im reading TU15 right, if someone brings a machine shop trailer, or if someone opens their machine shop up to all teams

then you can work on parts from 8am thursday until the pits close of saturday

in otherwords, a local team could host a 72 hr machine shop marathon at their facilites

THATS pretty cool - in the past I believe we were not allowed to take parts out of the building an work on them overnight in the hotel - does TU15 indicate a change to that policy now?

(they close up one can of worms and open another one! :^)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Yes, I think by wording it the way they did, it's a can of worms. I don't think they meant you can take parts out and work on them if a machine shop opens it's doors for 72 hours. It would be cool, but I don't think it's what they meant.

I'll be doing all my work in the pits...

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I just search all the manual for:
hotel
remove
overnight

and I cant find anyplace that says you are not allowed to take parts from your bot out of the facilities overnight and work on them - was this another one of those rules from previous years that has been dropped?

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Hmmm....good point... I don't know.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Personally I think it would be a great idea - what a super way for teams to work together if they are able to goto a teams local facilities and make mods or repairs after the pits close at night

seriously, this is chairmans award material!

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I don't see how you can be reading the same update I am reading!

I am serious. The bit about working on the robot after the ship date is specifically titled "At Events" If this is not enough, it says you may work in the pits or a facility open to all teams. Also, FIRST says you have to meet insurance and others requirements, including using the official desk to request work (even your own work).

It is silly to think that you can have your hotel room meet these requirements.

It seems to me that there is enough to worry about with regard to these rules without conjuring up frivolous ones.

Joe J.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

because of the times they listed: you are allowed to work on your bot from 8am thursday to 5pm on saturday.

thats what it say - the machine shops are sometimes off site - and it says that teams can use their own local shops as long as they are open to all teams - which is not physically 'at the event'

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

PLEASE let me clarify since I can't seem to figure out how to edit my post. I absolutely do not mean my current team when I talk about it being difficult to get them to show up. I am talking about trying to get some new people from my work to try and join in...

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

We've lost.

It is now official.

The lawyers have won.

The fact that this recent discussion since Update 15 is even taking place illustrates that even a well-intentioned group of engineers and would-be-engineers can never avoid looking for loopholes and ways around the rules. Thus, lawyers are necessary. If this trend continues then we are doomed, as our entire social structure will eventually grind to a halt as we require arbitrators just to discuss grocery lists.

I cannot think of a more blatant example where a ruling from FIRST is about to be bent and perverted in a more irrational manner. It is intuitively obvious that a machine shop made available to teams in support of a competition event would have operating hours limited to the active hours of the event. To even suggest that teams could host a "72-hour machine shop marathon" off site and outside the control of the event is silly. At the close of every day at every event, the pit announcer always makes it clear that teams must put down their tools, stop working on their robots, and take some time off. Why in the world would anyone think that the rules would be any different for a team-provided shop?

And please don't use the "well they never said we couldn't!" excuse! FIRST never explicitly said that I could not bring a Boeing 747 to the event site and put it on display in the center of the play field either. But it is intuitively obvious to even my 4-year-old neighbor that is not acceptable, and would not be allowed. So why are we apparently unable to make the same distinction when it comes to something like this?

OK, so here is the deal - if ANYONE honestly believes that it is now OK to have a team-provided machine shop up and running during the off-hours of the competition event, I will take personal responsibility to work with FIRST to generate a new rules update (#16?) that specifically addresses this issue, and have them will spell out, in excruciating detail, the exact hours (down to the nearest nano-second, as determined by the atomic clocks at the U.S. Naval Observatory) of permitted operation. And we will show that we are incapable of applying common sense to an issue like this. And we will force FIRST back to the position of publishing an encyclopedia of rules every year at the kick-off because we can't be trusted to do the sensible. And we will then all whine about how there are so many rules that it is impossible for the entire team to understand them all, and how we have to fully dedicate one team member just to reading and interpreting the rules and ensuring we are in compliance.

And the lawyers will win.

-dave

p.s. 8am Thursday through 5:00pm Saturday is only 57 hours, not 72.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Dave,
Are you okay? I could almost feel you seizing up and the blood rushing to your face on that last rant. I'm not exactly sure how to address the issue of lawyers winning, I didn't know they were playing. Seems to me that if everyone simply stopped being judgemental of what the true meaning of a rule was (ambiguous ones and painfully obvious ones) then everyone would be better off. Seems to me that we make more out of breaking rules unintentionally than is necessary. I just won't spend any more of my time wasting it trying to convince people that my interpretation of a rule is better or more accurate than theirs is. FIRST is what it is - Some teams will interpret things what ever way they want to. I can't do anything about them - nor do I think I want to focus my attention on them. Those that do things that might not be considered gracious, nor professional - will do so either out of ignorance or by choice. I forgive everyone that unintentionally has broken any rule - I trust that once they found out they broke one, they wouldn't continue doing so. I can't and won't ever convince those that break the rules by choice that they are wrong. I cannot determine when the lawyers are winning - frankly I just don't care if they win as long as my students learn, get inspired, and have fun doing so.
Let's stay positive and everyone will win

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

It's obvious from many of the questions that were posted this year, that many teams look for loopholes in the rules/guidelines. At the kickoff, Dean gave a demonstration of "straddling", but there were still questions about straddling and other issues that were probably obvious to many, but clearly weren't obvious to all: what is hanging? is a servo a motor or electronics? do we really have to leave those blue wires?

If we really want teams to interpret the rules from a common ground, the manual should provide clear principles behind the rules. Consider a young team who feels that FIRST is all about working hard, getting no sleep, and persevering through adversity. They could easily interpret the rules about construction time to mean "work really hard for 6 weeks; then work non-stop from Thursday to Saturday at the competition." While an off-site shop has to be shared with other teams, they might not see anything wrong with staying up all night using hand tools in their hotel room. I don't think that implies any malice; it's just a lack of understanding of what the rule is really after.

Perhaps a page should be added to section 1 of the manual, after the description of GP, describing guiding principles behind the rules: safety (mechanical and electrical); GP (not hindering or destroying robots or field); design resources (why is there a budget; why can't we use the drive train we built last year; why can't we build spare parts after we ship). I think that people who have been with FIRST for a while have developed an intuitive sense for the "spirit of the law". But we can't assume that everyone has that same insight.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Dave - im really sorry if we are pushing your buttons here

you have to understand one thing - there are a lot of us out here who LOVE this stuff- not parsing the rules - im talking about FIRST, getting our bot to be the best it can - thinking through every little detail and trying our best to give it our all.

Some of the best times I have had on FIRST was leaving work on friday afternoon from Xerox, going to the Xcats site, and working on the bot straight through till sunday morning - mentors and students (the weekend before shipdate)

there is something about being in survival mode - something about a challenge - something about being competive that bonds people together

or another time, at epcot, after the championship was over on saturday, sitting by the pool with another engineer late at night, talking about how we could talk Xerox into starting a second team - and we decided, if Xerox wont do it why cant the two of us start a new team by ourselves? (Xerox did start a second team the following year, and that other engineer DID start a third new team - Jeff Debes and team 1450)

or this year at pittsburgh - our bot was drifting to the right in auton mode - even though we have a closed loop gyro compass - when I did the last room check on the students thurday at midnight, I hit the sack, and suddenly it came to me - why our bot was drifting the right - do you think I was able to sleep after that? no! out comes the notebook PC and Im looking at my code in the wee hours

and its not just FIRST- its engineering - Ive had plenty of jobs where we pulled all nighters - or worked straight through a weekend to get ready for a trade show or a product lauch date

we are not trying to find ways to keep working on the bot to get an advantage over other teams, or to make life miserable for FIRST

we do it cause we LOVE it! you cant put a clock or a timer on something like this - you cant tell people "now go out for dinner and dont think about this till tomorrow at 8am"

(we love you too Dave - Dave? Stop banging your head on the keyboard Dave :^)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Ken's observation represents a literal reading of what the black and white says. The counterpoint relies on an interpretation of those rules to expland their meaning, primarily based on previous year's experience (what has been dubed "common sense"). If we read and write the rules so that the newcomer may take them literally and understand whats going on-- thats fine. If we read and write the rules and ensure everyone understands that a great weight of old-time momentum, past precidence, and unwritten rules apply-- that could be fine too. The transition, however, is killing us.

I understand how difficult it is to write bulletproof rules, and particularly how impossible the feat is on the fly. However, this "commen sense" only can exist in the minds of those who have already played the game. And if KenWittlief and dlavery can't agree on what the rules say, who knows which interpretation a rookie team is going to run with?

More ink has been spilt this year arguing over what "common sense" is than was in the rule book to begin with. Lawyers don't argue over whats written in black and white -- they argue over whats written in grey.

Anyways. My team won't be partying at midnight in the parking lot over by team XXX's mobile machine shop, but if someone else was I wouldn't be able to hold it against them until after someone warns them what we've decided the rule means.


EDIT: While I was typing this WebWader125 probably expressed my sentiments in a more gentile manner.

Theres another competition I do where every year a three page "uP policy paper" has to get passed around to explain rules that used to be in the book, but now veterans all just take for granted. Everyone sort of understands that this document is a ton of work for the one crusader who publishes it, and is a result of holes and ommisions in the existing rules... but one no wants the event rules themselves to break 2 pages (it wouldn't be pretty in the competition manual anymore.)

I'm sure everyone will survive the season, reguarless of whether or not team XXX needs a friendly tap on the shoulder to remind them to wrap it up at 7:00.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

maybe we should forget the written text rules and hand everyone a Yourden bubble diagram instead

THAT we could all understand and all agree to :^)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Darnit, darnit, darnit! That was our plan for the Midwest Regional. How did you know?!?

We had this grand scheme to bring in a 727 (747 was just toooo big!) with "TechnoKats 45" painted on the side and plop it down, right in the middle of the playing field. That would've been AWESOME! We were going for the spirit award, but now Dave has squashed our creative idea.

Hmmm... maybe we'll have to think of something else. Phooey on you, Dave!

:)

Andy B.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Just like you Delphi teams, showing off all those millions of dollars you each get, while you are at it why don't you put a machine shop in the plane and fly it around during non-competition hours, do it over international waters too. :p

In all reality though, people that are crazy on FIRST teams will always be thinking/talking about what to do with their robots, that is their choice. After every Thursday or Friday at comeptition we will all sit down at dinner and talk about nothing but what we are going to do the following day, drivers and coaches will sit down and pound out strategy, programmers will pour over their code, and then we all charge into the pits and get to work. It is part of the challenge, get your ideas together and organized and get it done in the time you have. The time allotted to work on robots needs to be controlled and equal for all teams, that is just the way it is and the way it will be.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Andy,

Forget Dave's interpretation. I think if you could pull it off, the MWR teams would let you slide if you bring the 727 completely disassembled and then reassemble it in there. :)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I don't see how this can be considered to be "ok", and here is why:

When the six weeks is drawing to a close, noone (at least noone that has the resources, planning, and skill to make a practice robot) is doing any serious design. The last week or so is tweaking time. It's time to lighten your robot, it's time to add that extra loop of string or extra bolt, or extra timing correction in your code. For team 118, it's the time for the drivers to practice running the robot to death, and when it dies, we fix it. Sometimes the fix is something simple and sometimes it isn't. Sometimes, after fixing something for the umpteenth time, we come across the design flaw that's causing the thing to fail in the fist place, so we fix that. This is what engineers do when we see something broke - we fix it.

My point is, six weeks is not long enough for a team to "finish" their robot. We ship a robot because it's due, not because we can't think of anything more to do to it. When a team has a robot for an extra month after the ship date, there is no way to avoid putting on that extra bolt or weld or hole that will make it more perfect. Is that team drastically changing their design? No. But they are changing it. If the six weeks is not the time period for changing the robot, then what is it?

All that said, I see nothing wrong with doing any of this, as long as the practice robot, and all of its parts, stays back home in the shop. Once you bring that robot, or any piece of it (assembled or not), to a competition, you are competing with a machine that was modified outside of the two allowable times you can work on it: during the six week build, or during a competition.

The bottom line is that a part can either be part of a practice robot, or a spare, but not both. Ship the spares to the competition, practice with your practice robot, and show up on Thursday with your tools, your raw materials and OTS parts, and a smile.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Kris,
That is a unique interpretation of the rules. Are you implying that all parts on a practice robot are declared illegal simply because they were used on a practice robot at one time?

A part was either made or modified after the 6-week period or it was not. If it was made during the 6-week period and never modified, then according to the rules, it matters not if it resided on a practice robot at one time. If I bring that part into the competition as a single part, I am allowed to use it.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Kris,

In most cases, I agree with your post. However, with Ken's case in particular, you are assuming too much. You cannot just assume that a part on a practice robot was tweaked or modified since kickoff. If it was, then I would bet money that Ken would not bring that part into the arena.

Over all of the years I have been in this, Ken has been the most picky stickler about rules that I know. He pretty much sets the standard with regard to this kind of stuff. Ken walks the walk and leads by example. Many of us look up to him because of this.

If he brings in a part, it is definitely a spare part that was un-modified since ship date. I don't care if it was on his practice robot or if it was his paperweight on his desk for the past 4 weeks.

just my opinion,

Andy B.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

What about the cases where a team has a practice bot and over the next three weeks drives the heck out of it, developes autonomous modes, and figures out what will break? They then spend pit day fixing what broke on the practice bot on the comp bot and uploading the new code.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

That's the whole point of having a second robot.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

It's less of an interpretation than it's a rant on the way things ought to be. I realize that, as it stands now, it is legal to use practice robot parts as spares, I just think that it shouldn't be.

And I wouldn't cover that bet. The larger issue here, however, is one of perception. As professionals, we must avoid the appearance of unethical behavior as vigorously as the behavior itself. How must it look to a rookie, or a even struggling veteran team, to see a mentor on a well respected, well staffed, well monied team leave the arena and come back with whatever part he needed? It looks like it could be a violation. It looks shadowy. Even if you stopped the person, and confronted him or her, and got a great explanation complete with footnotes pointing to specific rules, it looks wrong. That's what we need to avoid, and the only way to do that is to limit what we bring to the competition to raw materials and unmodified off-the-shelf hardware.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

No matter how many rules FIRST writes, a team that builds a practice robot will have an advantage over a team that doesnt every time. No matter what rules they write. Even if they get so picky as to search bags to make sure no spare parts make their way into the arena, these teams will have an advantage. They will have driven this robot, found out strengths, and weaknesses, and found many design flaws incorporated in the robot, and have plans to fix them. Their drivers will have weeks more training, knowing the capabilities of the robot, how in hangles in different situations, and how long it takes to do each task. Their programmers will have had weeks to refine the autonomous programs and create new ones. None of these are against the rules by ANY stretch of the imagination, but they all give considerable advantages to the teams who are able to build the practice robot. Their pit crew walks into the event knowing exactly what they have to do to improve the robot, the programmers simply have to download the new code and check to make sure that it works on the real robot, and the drivers have loads more experiance driving the robot.

As many people have said, the creation of autonomous mode have pushed the benefits of building this practice robot way higher than the cost. It is becoming a near necessity to do so.

Do I think that a team should have a practice robot sitting in the pit next to their real robot and take parts off of it and put it on the real robot when something breaks? Well, actually yes. If I can walk up and ask that team when they built it, and if they say the 6 week build period, thats good enough for me. I also think that FIRST made a mistake getting rid of the 3 day grace period after an event during which a team could make changes to their design. I think that this was a well needed time period for the constant evolution of a design, and the troubleshooting of problems that developed during a regional. If a few teams abused this and worked even after those 3 days, oh well, they can live with themselves. I dont think that more rules are the answer to this problem, as they will always be nearly unenforceable.

It seems like everyone is forgetting what this is supposed to be about. It's not supposed to be a cutthroat competition where everyone is constantly watching to make sure everyone is playing exactly within the rules. We're all supposed to trust each other, and use the honor system, and GP to ensure that everyone plays nice. Let's go back to the system of 2 years ago (teams have until wednesday after an event they participated in to alter designs and make spare parts.) I think it was better for the teams, the engineering process, and FIRST.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

actaully every single FIRST team already has a pratice robot

FIRST started GIVING them to us last year

remember?

the EDU bot?

it runs the same code - you can use victors and spikes with it

you can use the same input sensors

you can work out your auton code on it

its not a question of whether every team can afford to have a pratice bot - its only a matter of how close it is to their real one.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

A second robot controller like the EDUrobot is a far cry from a second robot, even for autonomous programming. It may be better than nothing, but for learning how to drive a robot, you need something almost identical to the real thing. This is especially important on our team, where we let anyone who wants to drive drive the robot. The EDUrobot is better than nothing, but it's still not really a practice robot.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

I dont mean using the little toy motors and foam wheels - you can use the stock transmissions that FIRST gives you and at least make a frame with drill motor or chalupia motor drivetrain, put the EDU RC on it

it will be more or less the same size as your real bots base frame, it will run approx the same speed, have similar characteristics

and you can put gyros and IR sensors and play with auton mode - at least get it close - better that nothing

then tweak your code to match the motion characteristics of the real bot on pratice days at events.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

You both are close, but it's "intuitively obvious" that those commercial flights are rather boring. I'm partial to the FA-18 and/or the Harrier Jet for superior handling and offensive capabilities. That should get the drive team to the field in style. :)

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Hmm... Sikorsky is a big FIRST supporter and they probably won't need all those Commanches now that the program has been cancelled... maybe they'd lend some out for robot transportation... it seems "intuitively obvious" that it would serve gracious professionalism tremendously to reduce dangerous traffic jams in the aisles by transporting other teams robots by attack helicopter.

Re: "Spare Parts" Rules Are Broken
 

Can you imagine how thick the manual would be if FIRST outlined every single situation, so as to make the rules perfectly, black and white, no questions about it clear? My printer wouldn't be able to handle it!!! :yikes:

I've never heard Gracious Professionalism defined as looking the other way when someone is breaking the rules. If you see something shady going on, tell someone about it! A judge, a referee, the pit announcer -- someone! There are consequences for breaking the rules. Ask any team that's ever gotten a penalty for something at a competition or disqualified from a match.

It's obvious that FIRST does hope people will be honest, and not try to break/bend the rules to gain an unfair advantage. That teams wouldn't bring a spare robot to the competition to swap out parts that they modified post-build. I would hope the same thing. Maybe it's just me, but I've always held FIRSTers to be people who knew the difference between right and wrong, between cheating and being inventive. Call me blind as well, but I thought the majority of us were above that.

FYI: I did a google search for "Gracious Professionalism" and got over 1,200 results. Scanning over the pages, almost ALL were from FIRST's and team's websites. Seems like most people get it. Or at least whoever writes the content for their webpage does.