YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

You Make The Call (YMTC) is a series of situations where you can be the ref and make the call.

Based on the 2004 rules, can a team begin cutting metal before Christmas for parts that will go on their 2005 robot if they are only making parts that are duplicates of commercially available parts & assemblies?

You Make The Call!

Author's note: This YMTC was motivated by the now available AM Transmissions that has been discussed at the Andymark.biz post.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

i say no. no matter how close the team-produced part is to the commercial part, they're still fabricating parts. rules are rules, and fabricating parts outside of build period and competition is against them.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I say yes. If it's a duplicate of what is available commercially then what makes cutting it different then buying it. Other than possibly the fact that buying it pre-cut more costly.

Allison

Edit - I'm not thinking yes to something like "well lets cut plates for our gearboxes now, because we could buy them if we wanted too." I'm thinking "We have this large pile of scrap materials so let's cut off what we can use and throw it into one pile, and throw all the stuff we can't into another pile."

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Is precutting metal any different than buying a plate of aluminum and specifying a custom size you want it cut to?

I don't think so.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Any metal cutting means its not an off the shelf item and should not be made. Making prototypes, upgrades to old practice robots, new test bed robots even would be fine but all metal cutting should be done after the kick-off.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Ditto. It doesn't matter if it is commercially available or not. Fabrication IS fabrication and that is not allowed. If they want to purchase then that is up to them but NO building.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

That's eactly why its different. Cutting before may allow a team to save money giving them an unfair advantage over other teams.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Not so. You can not purchase new, but only re-use COTS parts, and only from last year. Notice in <R09> that COTS parts from two years back would not be allowed. It says "from previous year's robots"; is does not say "from previous years' robots."

Dontcha just love trying to obey rules written by engineers? :rolleyes:

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

<R09> Teams must fabricate and/or assemble all custom parts and assembled mechanisms on the robot by the
2004 team after the start of the Kick-off. Mechanisms from previous year’s robots may not be used,
however, individual off-the-shelf components from previous year’s robots may be re-used to save the cost
of re-purchase of these parts IF they meet ALL of the 2004 Additional Parts and Materials Rules.

I am not sure of what you are saying Jack. If you want to use off the shelf parts from last years robot then that is OK. The mechanisms are not to be used and nothing is to be pre assembled before kickoff. I guess that some people don't understand that no means no.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

If you're cutting a piece of metal from one big rectangle into two smaller rectangles, go for it, because you're not doing anything that would be designing or whatnot. I mean, if you have a big piece of aluminum, but need a chunk off of it for something now, and you're saving the rest for build, then what's the big deal?

However, if you're doing any actual design, like figuring out what kind of base you'll want (I don't know how you do that before kickoff, unless you're RAGE), then no, you can't start prefabricating parts.

There's no real option for this, so I didn't vote above.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

The way the earlier posts this were written it seemed to me people were condoning a "Cut your materials to size now and wait until kickoff day to weld it" plan off action. Not cutting a piece of material to use it for something else now or even cutting down say a 20' piece of box Al so it fits in your storage area.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Let me start by saying that I hate "slippery slope" arguments. I think that it's the acme of foolishness to say that "If we allow (thing we're arguing about) x, we won't be able to prevent (thing everyone knows is wrong) y". If x, whether it's a ban on assualt weapons, double parking in the quad for less than 15 minutes, or pushing back against the strictest and most important rules in FIRST, isn't noxious enough to be struck down on its own vices, then we ought to let it happen.

That said, what we have here is a clear case of the slippery slope in action. For the past few years, we have seen an increase in the way we as a community are allowing ourselves to build parts. While the rules explicity address some of these ways(such as the addition of suppliers other than Small Parts), others, such as AM.biz, extreme collaboration, and the bringing of practice / spare parts robots to competitions are not, and have been driven largely by the FIRST community itself.

This cavalier attitude towards the building rules has now slipped and slided to the point that people are trying to justify cutting metal on their robot before the season begins. Don't. It's cheating. If you cut a piece of metal to use on your robot before the kickoff, you are a cheater.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

<slight sarcasm>
Hey Kris,

I like the slippery slope argument, so I use it a lot. But don't you think it's a little hypocritical to first say you hate it, and then proceed to use it? If you are philosophically opposed to the use of this argumentum, then keep yourself away from that slope, and use some of those God-given brain cells to fashion an argument that doesn't conflict with your chosen philosophy. :rolleyes:
</slight sarcasm>

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Mark, the difference is the rules forbid you cutting the metal. That is part of fabrication. I am sorry if I offend but this is a black and white issue. White, you follow the rules and do NO work on the robot till kickoff. Black, you throw away gracious professionalism and sportsmanship and cheat as stated by Chris.

I once had a plaque on my wall that said something like this. I live by my standards, if I decide to do something against my standards I lower them so that I do not feel guilty. This is happening so often in our society. I believe that FIRST has higher ideals and that sometimes we must raise our standards to meet those of FIRST.

On the other hand, and only to throw a wrench into things, the 2005 rules are not out yet. That means that you can work to your hearts content without feeling guilty. However once the rules come out and if like last year say no building before kickoff, then you would not be able, with a clear conscience, be able to use those pieces on your robot. The call is yours and you may be the only one who knows what your actions are. Remember that if the students know what is done and we do nothing to correct the problem they will receive a lesson. I hope that it is not a bad one.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Prototype your brains out now, but if it's going to be shipped as a part of your 2005 robot, you'll have to make a new one after kickoff.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Not at all - to avoid the use of the slippery slope, one has to allow the things that I mentioned (previously non-standard methods of building), but draw the line and vigorously defend it when it is merited.

I have never had a problem with the new methods that wasn't a problem with the method itself. Of those things I mentioned, I've only actually spoken out against bringing spare or practice robots to competitions, because I didn't feel that it was possible for a team to have a robot to practice with for many weeks without modifying it, and therefore running afoul of the spirit and letter of the law. If I were a slippery slope subscriber, I could have argued against every single one of those changes on the grounds that it would have led to where we are now - where people think that it's ok to build robot parts before and after the 6 week build season. But those changes themselves weren't problematic - this one is. So, I think we should allow the others, and protest against those who would make this change.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I think the main thing you are all missing here is the basic question: What is raw material?

For an example, is a 6.2" x 3.8" piece of 1/4" thick aluminum plate raw material just as is a 4'x8' sheet of it.

Or maybe if you buy that small precisely cut piece from the metal store it is raw material but if you cut it youself from the large sheet then it is fabricated? That wouldn't make sense.

Metal stores sell cut to order sizes very commonly and readily and thus I would classify cut them as "off the shelf" It is just like when you order a Cheeseburger no pickels, it is made just for you but it everybody gets it their own way.

But, say you took a side of beef and made your own cheeseburger, or in this case the plate of metal and made your own little rectangle. Would that be fabrication. I would think no since it would be exactly the same process as what they are doing at the store.

But howabout making an aluminum sprocket? Is that fabrication? What if you can buy the exact same sprocket? If it was exactly the same (by exactly I mean if it was used on the Mars Rover and you replaced it with your own it would work the same) then I would say that it acceptable. But who would fabricate something the exact same as they could easily buy? Perhaps only to save money, so now the issue is how is it counted in the budget? Now say they are making a #25 43 tooth aluminum sprocket, but all that is for sale is the same model in steel. I believe that would be fabrication.

I see fabrication (loosely classified) as bending, cutting on an angle, drilling, milling, facing, turning, and hardening.

I would see raw materials as being cut on 90 degree angles only and through the entire thickness of the material (so you don't take a 3x3" block and cut a 1.5" by 1.5" little block out of it to make a step), in the orientation that the material is normally cut (for example if you had a way to cut 1/4" plate in half to make 1/8" plate, that is not normal and it would be fabrication), to within reasonable industry tolerance,s regardless of whether it is done by a metal supplier or by a team.

Let me make the above sentence a little simpler. If you can buy it cut a certain size from the metal store, then you should be allowed to cut it to that same certain size yourself and it would still be considered a raw material.

In any case though, I don't know why there has been so much worry on these boards about people cheating or pre-season fabricating lately. Do you just think it's unfair because if they can do it without getting caught you want to also? Or is it unfair because your behing left behind by follwing the rules.Each team interprets the rules in their own way and they will decide amongst themselves how closely they will or will not follow the universal interpretation and/or spirit of the rules.

Following the rules or not, anyone who fabricates before the build is taking a huge risk. A risk that certain elements of the game and the rules will not change. But on January 8th, everything could change in an instant. Yes there have been trends and similarities in the past years (and that is why we do offseason designing and prototyping) but nothing is gauranteed to be the same. There is no rule that the field must remain square. They might say no wheels allowed. They might say no motors alowed for drive systems. They might say everyone must use the gearbox provided in the kit. There might not even be a gearbox in the kit.

So everyone who does pre-season work, regardless of whether it is legal by your interpretation of the rules, is taking a risk that all their work will be thrown out the window on January 8th.

It is impossible to design a robot (or even major compnents of the robot) that will play the game well and how you want to play it, before you the game is ever released.

Please keep in mind that these are my own ideas and you will probably find lots of flaws in my reasoning but I threw it out there to start the discussion anyhow. Also, being my own ideas, what is expressed in the above is in no way intentionally reflective of the actual game rules from past or future competitions.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

From the 2004 Rules(which may of course change in 2005) -

"5.2.5 Design and Build Rules
<R09> Teams must fabricate and/or assemble all custom parts and assembled mechanisms on the robot by the 2004 team after the start of the Kick-off."

From Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary -

"Fabricate - CONSTRUCT, MANUFACTURE; specifically : to construct from diverse and usually standardized parts"

What's to interpret? The answer should be pretty clear. "Teams MUST fabricate and/or assemble...AFTER the start of the kickoff". No interpretation necessary. Unless we are to be like Bill Clinton and debate what the definition of the word is is.

Besides, my interpretation or your interpretation of the rules doesn't matter. The only interpretation that matters is that which comes from FIRST. And that is clear to me anyway.

Even fabrication of spare parts after the build period was made crystal clear last year. The official FIRST response to a question posed in the Q & A said you put your tools down when the robot is shipped and pick them up again at your first competition. Not much to debate their either.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

From my own interpretation of the rules I think the arguments against cutting before the season are all very valid.

My own $.02 - What is your purpose for cutting the pieces before the season starts? If it is a matter of saving space in your storage area or for use on a prototype, more power to you. If, as it seems from the original question, it is to gain an advantage over other teams by removing some of your fabrication work from the build season, that sounds like a violation of the rules and the spirit of FIRST.

Right now I have students brainstorming possible drivetrain configurations, possible body designs, and many other things. Some have gone as far as to draw up a possible cut list for materials. That, however, is where it ends. After the kickoff, our strategy team will look over the brainstormed ideas, choose what appears to work best for this year's game, and begin fabrication. AFTER the kickoff!

Like Dean said at last year's kickoff, don't make rule interpretation a thing for the lawyers. Think about the spirit of the competition. In the end we will probably never know if you decided to cut before the kickoff or not. That's a decision that will have to be made by your team. Hopefully it is a good decision.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

This is a good point. So maybe fabrication is "cutting material with intent to use for a specific purpose on a robot" and such an action would render that piece of material "fabricated" and it would no longer be raw. But size reduction for storage purposes would keep the material defined as raw. I'm liking this concept.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Oh, this is going to be a good YMTC year! Remember, you are an official and are to interpret the rules.

For example, Tuba4 referenced rule 5.2.5 Design and Build Rules <R09>

Teams must fabricate and/or assemble all custom parts and assembled mechanisms on the robot by the 2004 team after the start of the Kick-off.

This rule does not apply, in my opinion, because the parts in question are not custom.

Please allow me to give a scenario that may make cutting metal in December seem palatable.

Team 4444 has some money in the off-season and purchases $2,000 worth of AM Transmissions in November and then implements them on their 2005 robot and practice 'bot. Team 8888 barely had enough to pay the entry fee but has the wherewithal to visit every machine shop in the community with AM Transmissions CAD Drawings in-hand asking them to PLEASE make these parts. Team 8888 is successful and finds two machine shops that make two transmissions each.

Each team is starting out on the same footing come January 8th with two transmissions in-hand but it seems that folks think that team 4444 can use them on their 2005 robot whereas team 8888 can not.

So, by the rules, I don't see why 8888 can not use the transmissions. Moreover, if 8888 built the transmissions themselves, I contend that it would be more of a learning experience for the students than if they bought them from AM.

Finally, I thought that it would be a good idea to contact local machine shops and see if they would manufacture a bunch of AM Transmissions and we would just give them to the Greater Houston Teams (about 15). We would parse the work out to several shops and each team in Houston could be shifting by January 10th. We would also set up tours of the machine shops for the students to see exactly how the trannies were built. Since machine shops in Houston traditionally have a slow period in December, this would be a perfect opportunity to introduce the shops to FIRST and get them involved. Of course, you know the long term plan: get them to support a team. A special thanks to AM for releasing the drawings or this idea could never get off the ground. Regardless whether the teams can use them on their '05 robot, I am going to initiate the effort hopefully to help some teams out.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I say yes.

Just price it as the exact same amount as the one off the shelf.

Done-n-done. :D

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

All rules that I've seen quoted in this thread have applied to PAST years' games, and are technically not the 2005 FRC Rules. We will not officially know whether or not components fabricated before the afternoon of Jan 8, 2005 until the new rules are released. I have no reason to believe that they will change, I'm just saying this in the spirit of not "knowing" the rules for each coming season.

-Bill

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Before debating in this kind of argument, we need to know what we consider to be 'pre-fabricated' and 'non-prefabricated'. If we cannot effectively describe what exactly it is we are for or against, then we will continue to misunderstand each other.

A component will be defined as something that has a specific function or use on a robot, and has multiple parts which make it function. Ex: a robot's chassis or a robot's arm.

A part of a component will be defined as something that has a specific purpose within a component -- something that has been intentionally altered in such a way as to serve it's purpose in making the entire component function as a whole. A part does not have a function standing alone; it must be part of an assembly to have a purpose.

A raw material has no specific function for the robot yet. Examples of raw materials are: aluminum, steel, plywood, lexan...etc.

.................

Something that has not been fabricated before kickoff:

1) Is not a component that is intended to/will be used on the 2005 robot.

2) Is not part of a component that is intended to/will be used on the 2005 robot.

3) If it is a component or a part, then it is commercially available. Ex: motors

4) Is a raw material. For example, a piece of aluminum may or may not be available commercially in a specific size, but since it has no specific function for the robot yet, it is still not a prefabricated part.

..................

Something that has been fabricated before kickoff:

1) Is a component that is intended to/will be used on the 2005 robot. Ex: an arm or chassis.

2) Is a part of a component that is intended to/will be used on the 2005 robot.

3) Is not commercially available and must be fabricated by hand for a specific use on the 2005 robot.

..................

So, according to the definitions above, I do not think it is ok for teams to be fabricating their own parts/components before kickoff. It is unacceptable and unfair to other teams. It is against the rules.

I am sure that I have not thought of everything, but I think the difference between prefab and non-prefab should be pretty clear. Teams should have six weeks to build their robot...no more and no less.

-- Jaine

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I say we stick to the spirit of the rules. If you've got to cut some aluminum to get it into your storage closet, cut away. If you're going to cut some aluminum to start on your robot, smack yourself upside the head and sit on your hands until Kickoff.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

This is a good idea, but I suggest a twist to keep things "legal" with regard to FIRST's most current rules (2004). Get prints to the machine shops and have them prepare their mills and lathes. They can even make some practice parts to be sure that they are correct. Then, on Jan. 8th, have them start cutting metal for the competition parts. Heck, the CNC code could already be in the machines (teams already do this). Within 3-4 days, parts should be complete. This effort would take the same preparation, save some purchased parts cost (compared to buying them), give the students the same experience, and you would be sure this was legal. You could even make 1-2 "non-competing units" before the ship date to make sure things work out. This is what we have done during the past few years.

Andy B.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I agree both with Jaine and how she went about it. I realize this is just a 'me too' post, but for the purposes of this thread I believe it is appropriate.


Wetzel

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I think this is what FIRST is trying to get rid of. Remember last kickoff they said they are trying to make rules clear so we can stop being lawyers and just build the bots? I believe one of the spotlights here reads "stop being lawyers and start being engineers!"

So lets look at it simply:
1) Did you buy it? No? then that means you made it outside build season, against the (last year) rules, so be ready to make another one when Jan 8th hits. If yes, go to 2
2) Is it still the same as when you bought it? No? then the only way you arent breaking the rules (from last year) is if it's been cut for storage otherwise you'll have to make a different one for your official robot. If yes then you are within regulations

So relating to that post I saw where a team takes the AM shifter plans to machine shops to have them built: they bought them, not made them; meaning they are legal in my mind. Any other team could do the exact same thing. On the other hand, not every team can make their own transmission, but they have the ability to buy them, placing them in the "off the shelf" category (whether or not every team can afford them is another matter, but not actually relevant as the team still has the ability to buy one)

Thats my opinion.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Where do we start here?!

First, assuming the rule is the same in 2005, it does apply because the parts ARE custom parts. Your fictional team 8888 was walking drawings around and having parts fabricated by someone other than the original manufacturer. It would be a one off or small quantity job, not something the machine shop would typically make. That indeed makes them custom.

Second, we should not be in the business of making something that runs contrary to the rules "palatable". If an action is, as it appears here, not allowed, then in the spirit of gracious professionalism, we should not be doing it. Note that I said should not be doing it. There is no way to adequately and equally police each and every thing in the rules.

Third, the scenario you put forth would be correct. Under the 2004 rules, team 4444 could purchase transmissions before kickoff and use them while team 8888 could not use transmissions they fabricated or had someone fabricate before kickoff. Is it fair? Maybe or maybe not. But it is what the rules seem to dictate.

And finally, I would contact FIRST, before you go and have 15 or 20 or whatever amount of transmissions fabricated before kickoff, for an official ruling. It would not be a good thing to publicly announce you are going to do something, do it and then find out it would not be allowed by the rules.

We are in the business of teaching our students. One of those things should be respect for the rules, whether we agree with them or not. And whether they be the rules of FIRST or the rules of law and life. Would you suggest to your students that they drive 65mph in a school zone? I hope not. Would you advocate that your under age students drink alcohol when not permitted by the laws of your state? I think not!! Then let's have the same respect for the rules of FIRST!!

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Be cautious with this reasoning. According to prior years' rules, the relevant test is not merely that the assemblies were bought. They have to be bought from a source which makes them generally available for sale. Unless the machine shop agrees to sell shifters of that design to everyone who wants one, it looks to me like your example counts as fabrication, not purchase.

If the shop builds it for you after kickoff, of course, everything is okay.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Kris,
I want to address a few of your statements. It is unjust to lump AM.biz into the same group as "extreme collaboration". As the name implies this is a business just like Johnston Motor or Fafnir Bearing. The company makes premade assys that are subject to the max dollar rule each team must follow. Premade assys. purchased by teams are rarely if ever, assembled or manufactured after kick off.
Extreme collaboration is a subject that has been discussed in other threads throughout this year. Search for those threads if you want a better understanding of the issue.
The bringing of practice/proto robots took a bad rap last year. All of those robots that I saw (and the one we brought) contained spare components assembled by this year's team under the rules. I hope you are not asking that we disassemble a perfectly good practice robot in order to bring spares to a competition.
Finally, there is a big difference between starting on components before kickoff (even if they are functionally equivalent to ready made) and working after kickoff. Ready made components available to every team after kickoff are subject to the same pitfalls of back orders, shipping, and cost. Equivalents are not, especially those fabricated before kickoff. Cutting a large piece of aluminum plate into smaller pieces is fabrication, plain and simple.
With that said, I am all for using the fall to instruct and practice the techniques needed to be safe and productive during build. The components cannot be used on the new robot but the skills learned can be invaluable during the rushed build season. Count me as a resounding "NO" to any work on the 2005 robot before January 8, 2005.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Regarding "extreme collaboration" from last year, we need to keep in mind that these teams were approved by FIRST to do this. Also, one of these collaborating teams won the Chairman's Award at the Championships (kudos to 254).

So, while some may think that this is wrong, FIRST has approved and awarded it.

Andy B.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I believe that it is ok for a team to begin buying parts and supplies but it is a clear violation of the rules to begin maching or build any part that is to be used in the competition.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I think we are all pretty much in agreement that there should be no work on the 2005 robot prior to kickoff. I believe the problem is deciding exactly where to draw the line at what is considered fabrication.

To take from the example above about team 4444 buying AM transmissions and team 8888 fabricating the exact same thing. This is a wonderful opportunity provided by AM and it is great that team 4444 has the resources to purchase these transmissions. However, say team 8888 does not have the same resources and can't afford the AM components. So they get a local machine shop to donate their time and build these components for them. They are built to the AM specifications, they just come from a different place. Now according to the rules (I think, I could be remembering it wrong) team 8888 could have the machine shop build after kickoff and still get the same benefit of the donated time and just include what it would have cost in the robot budget.

My question is why should team 8888 not be granted the same luxury as team 4444 just because they can't afford the AM transmissions. If team 4444 is following the rules then they can't use them until after kickoff, but they do have the benefit of having them on January 8th so they can begin fabrication immediately. Why does team 8888 not have the same right? Why should they have to wait for the machine shop to build the exact same part when they could already have it in their possession?

Let me know your thoughts.

-Kristin

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Yes it is okay to buy generic parts, i.e. gears, sprockets, bearings and raw material. You can get parts that you think you will need as long as any other team could do the same.

Yes it is a clear violation to start matching or building parts for the competition. This violates the intention of the rules as there were last year. Frankly I like the way the rules were written regarding intent for such matter

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I've never publicly found fault with extreme collaboration. My own personal opinions on the subject are that I'd rather be on a team that built it's own entire robot, but if two (or six or a hundred) teams want to collaborate and outsource, more power to 'em. It's a novel, interesting solution to the problem that FIRST has given us.

My point is not that those other things I mentioned are bad(except for practice bots at comp, and I've already harped on that enough), it's that building robot parts before competition is bad. I think that we are in agreement on this point. If the six week build season is an important part of FIRST, then it is important to respect that by not beginning to build before the season starts.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

If team 8888 fabricates it's own version of the AM transmission before kickoff, it would have to be made commercially avaliable to all teams for the same cost in order to be considered a legal part. Even if it's to the exact same specifications as the AM transmission, the stipulation is, to be considered an "off the shelf component," it must be avaliable to all teams at the same price. Anything otherwise is a custom part fabricated for only that team, even if it is just a knock-off of an otherwise commercially avaliable part.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

This is a very touchy subject of which I am willing to debate at any time (and have already done so) but really not the question here. Please people lets not get off subject and open a moderated discussion on what Andy is discussing here.

I also don't see the issue with AndyMark products according to the rules. They are available to all teams at a set price so would be classed as OTS.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

all teams have 6 weeks, to do as much as they can with there robots.

cutting metal is something all teams will have to do at some point and is time consuming. and if all do it in the 6 weeks then its fair.

but if you don't need to cut your metal during the 6 week period because you cut it already.

then its simply unfair . you have an advantage over other teams is not based on effort (such as money with fundrasing) or resources (such as a metal shop) and all those other unbalanced things in the league that give some teams a better opportunity and yet we understand and tolerate in the FIRST community.

As we all know the 2004 rules were written with intent not literacy in mind

DONT CUT YOUR METAL!!!! not yet at least

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

This seems pretty straight forward (based on the 2004 rules):

• If you actually buy the part, it is okay to do so before the 6 weeks -- as long as it is NOT modified before kickoff, you can throw it on the robot.
• If you MAKE or MODIFY anything before kickoff, it can't go on the robot.

These is no confusion in my mind. This seems to be what FIRST intended.

Copying a COTS part still involves MAKING something (or MODIFYING something) and would therefore be illegal.

It's interesting to note:
I've done some cost comparisons and -- making your own version of the AndyMark shifter isn't that much cheaper than just buying one.

The cost of gears/raw stock is about half as much as the AndyMark tranny costs. The difference being that you save TONS of manufacturing time buying the AndyMark Trannys.

Of course... this is where many people would argue: "But our students will get more out of it, if they actually build the trannys themselves." This discussion isn't about that. We've had that debate before... and I don't care to see a rehash of it now. Everyone agrees to disagree. (I disagree STRONGLY with that above statement.)
It all boils down to economics...

Run the cost numbers yourself:
$360 seems more and more reasonable, every time I do so.

John

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

That's a great point. The rules state any machining work done by an outside shop by non-team members must be counted against the $3500 spending limit, even if donated. The amount of time it would take to build these things at the rate of a professional machine shop plus the cost of the raw materials would easily be well above $360.

Re: YMTC: Island Rules
 

Everyone, you are soooooo wise! And I was sooooooo wrong! You have convinced me that the 6 week period is sacred and we should do everything in our power to see that teams do not benefit from off-season efforts other than the knowledge that is gained from those efforts.

Therefore, I propose the following rules be implemented.

RULE 041209-A: A FIRST team must not view, touch, or use any parts constructed or acquired before January 8, 2005 other than those from the approved vendor list (or exact duplicates from an alternate vendor).

RULE 041209-B: A FIRST team can not view, touch, or use any parts acquired from a FIRST-friendly vendor before January 19, 2005 (must be procured from FIRST-friendly vendor ... no alternative vendors accepted).

It's simple and puts all teams on a pretty level playing field going into the season. Here are some explanations on the proposed rules.

• The approved vendor list would include raw materials companies like McMaster-Carr, Small Parts, MSC, Newark, etc.

• The approved FIRST-friendly vendor list would include companies like Andy-Mark, Lu's Crab Base Manufacturing Company, etc.

• To become a FIRST-friendly vendor, a vendor would have to meet certain requirements that would include being able to meet team demand, disclose all drawings and schematics of products, etc. Basically, exactly what Andy-Mark already does.

• The delay between the kickoff and the use of FIRST-friendly vendor items is to take the advantage away from teams that can buy an assortment of mechanisms before they really know what they are going to use to solve this year's game. This will give AM & Lu's CBM Company a chance to get the assemblies to the teams before January 19th. The alternative is to require teams to procure items after kickoff but this is not fair to AM or Lu's Crab Base Manufacturing Company.

• Teams can not use old robots to get insight into the 2005 game. The robots must not be viewed, touched, or used after January 8th. If you wish to teach your team about your old robots then it would have to be done before January 8th. The robots must be "locked up" on January 7th and can not be used until after the ship date. I know that the gut reaction is to say, "WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT!" but think about it for a while.

• Think of this concept as being on an island for 6 weeks with internet access, tools, a bunch of raw materials (aluminum, bearings, wheels, sprockets, etc.), a FIRST kit of parts, along with a FedEx daily delivery from approved and FIRST-friendly vendors. AND 10,458 Krispy Kreme donuts.

Start shooting,
Lucien

Re: YMTC: Island Rules
 

For the first two rules, I can agree with the idea of no parts being used, ...but no parts constructed or acquired before Jan. 8th can be viewed or touched? To put it quite frankly, I think that is rather absurd. If the parts are not are not being used on the 2005 robot AT ALL, then what is the harm in looking at them or touching them? If the part has been acquired or fabricated before Jan 8th, but is not going to be used on the '05 bot... how on earth could this be considered cheating?

I can't imagine what would happen if a part acquired before Jan 8th happened to fall on the floor... I can just see every one trying to cover their eyes, run for their rubber gloves, and try to remove it while looking in the other direction. ...Not to mention the incredible task of removing everything pre-2005 from the shop area and finding a place to lock it up... some teams simply can't pack things up like that.

As for the rules on the old robots, this would make things much more difficult on my team. We always use our old robots to put prototype parts on (after kickoff). Without these robots, we might not know whether or not a part we were making would have worked properly. We also used our old robots to test autonomous code; this was necessary because before the robot was completed, we needed something to test on. We couldn't have waited until the last week to load the program on the robot to see if it worked...we needed to test and debug. We trained drivers extensively this past year using our old robots, and because of it, we were able to be better prepared for the competition. How could looking at or using an old robot be cheating? If the old robot is not going to be used for competition in 2005, how is it a pre-made part if you are not going to be competing with it? For my team, the use of old robots is an underlying key to success in the build season.

Maybe I misunderstood some of what was being conveyed in your post. Maybe you can answer my above questions?

-- Jaine

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Lucien,
I think Jaine expressed my feelings very well. I, quite frankly, am at a loss for words.
So in a word, huh?!?

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Al, that is not like you. Is something else bothering you? :D

The harm is that veteran & wealthy teams gain a HUGE advantage over less experienced and poorer teams. First, the negative of letting you look and touch parts.

• As you pointed out as an underlying key to your success, you use old robots to train drivers, test mechanisms & concepts, determine how to play the game, and test autonomy. All with some other team's robot, not your 2005 team but some team that built it for you. Granted, you may have been part of that team. As for the definition of a 2005 team, I believe that it is the students and mentors that come together on or after January 8th to build a robot to compete in a first competition; not the group that has built robots during the fall and build one for the 2005 competition. It's subtle but important.

• You can use an old part from another robot or off-season work to get your 2005 robot running while you leisurely build the duplicate part just in time to replace it for the competition.

• You get to duplicate a previous teams' mechanisms by duplicating parts that are in your hand. This is significantly easier than the team that has to do it from scratch or from drawings.

Second, the positive of not letting teams look and touch old parts.

• THE PLAYING FIELD HAS BEEN LEVELED SIGNIFICANTLY

• Any mechanisms that a team might use from old robots or off-season work in the upcoming season must be documented (drawings, words, in memory, etc.). Since you can't take drawings with you onto the "island", you must post them to the web (a rule would state all written materials intended for use by a team would need to be accessible by other teams). The result of this would be teams would well document old robots and provide them to the FIRST family. This is the concept that is exciting! Now, old robots would be everyone's robot instead of just the robot of the team that inherited it. This fits in perfectly with Dean's idea of when two people exchange their ideas; they leave with twice as much as they came with.

Jaine, your sarcasm throughout is appreciated BUT since all of the first rules are based on honor, simply putting old stuff in the corner and draping a sheet over it would be sufficient.

While broaching the subject of not touching FIRST-friendly vendor parts before a certain date after kickoff, we must do something about teams using the playing pieces from the remote kickoffs immediately after the kickoff is over. It gives the teams that are the recipients of the remote kickoff field pieces another huge advantage. Since we gain this advantage and we must earn a spot at the championships this year, if it is not addressed by FIRST, we are going to implement a self-imposed hands-off period for the game pieces of approximately 3 days.

Thanks for making me like this "island rule" even more. In the spirit of full disclosure, please let me assure you that I'm not fighting this battle because 118 would benefit competitively; I am fighting this battle because leveling the playing field is the right thing to do. And I have heard the argument that trying to level the playing field will not allow the robots to advance as rapidly. My response to that is that we are here to inspire & educate America's future engineers and to make sure that our program does not significantly detract from the students' other activities. Not to build an advanced robot. As we level the playing field, you'll stop hearing administrators say, "How are we going to compete with THEM?" In a nutshell, by not leveling the playing field, we are discouraging weaker and newer teams to even participate in FIRST.

Have a nice evening,
Lucien

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Lucien,
That is an interesting idea, though I think we should take it at least one step further. I mean, in the interest of leveling the playingfield:

JVN's Rule:
RULE 041209-C - Any participant of the FIRST robotics competition who participated in the 2004 season, or in any of the previous 12 seasons may NOT participate on ANY team in the FRC 2005 season. They may not interact with members of any team in any way.

I mean, this is the obvious next step. How can we level the playingfield without taking those "wealthy", "veteran" teams, just loaded with valuable mentors who have gone through FIRST before down a notch. Frankly, I can't imagine how a rookie mentor can compete with an Andy Baker, or a Raul Olivera, or a Bill Beatty. It's just not fair. In order to give them a chance we need to just eliminate all veterans all together.


OR...

We can realize that (as Dean himself has said) FIRST ISN'T fair, and it doesn't NEED to be fair.

Then maybe, we can all just have some fun building robots in 2005.

John

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

John, I appreciate your use of the excessive to make your point and flippant attempt to cease a discussion with which you do not agree. I'm sorry that I am not willing to lower myself to your level but I will try to answer your concern.

I am not suggesting that the playing field will ever be totally level and I am certainly not suggesting that we should throw the baby (great mentors) out with the bath water. I simply contend that teams should not be able to practice the new game with old robots. The great mentors will be able to take their 2005 team and make them superior without having a base running around on January 8th.

As an analogy to football, some teams in FIRST have 6 weeks (or more if they have a practice 'bot) to practice for their only football game versus some teams that talk about practicing for 5 weeks and only have a few days to practice for that same game. I believe that an average coach whose players practiced for about 6 weeks would routinely win over the great coach whose players only practiced for a couple of days. My proposal only shortens the 6 weeks. Competition wise, I guess by my definition, we will never know if we have any great coaches among us (I know we have great mentors) until they have similar conditions as their competition and their teams routinely perform at a higher level.

As a result of your excessive example, I will alter my proposal to note that teams can not use old robots throughout the entire season thereby not being able to turn an old robot into a practice robot after ship date. In other words, if a team builds two robots during the season, then they can have a practice 'bot but they can not convert an old robot into a practice 'bot.

I'll keep trying ... I'm sure someone will agree with me ... someday ... maybe not,
Lucien

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

C'mon, John, you have to be more creative than that.

Billfred's Rule:
Rule XYZPD-Q - Any recipient of a Regional Woodie Flowers Award must submit to FIRST a DNA sample to facilitate cloning in order to ensure a fair and equitable distribution of mentor talent across all teams.

:)

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Even though this thread is degrading somewhat I will respond. As stated by Dean and the one and only JVN, nothings fair. That being said, I don't believe that any 1st year team expects to be as good as the "powerhouses". The great thing about FIRST is that people try. It is a growing experience. Yes even for us older, notice I did not say more mature, mentors. With the wealth of knowledge that is floating around in FIRST, teams will grow quickly. BUT there is no substitute for experience. We all hopefully learn from our mistakes. To say that we can't use our past to improve out future is silly. Second year teams are not rookies so why would you want to take away a large portion of their learning curve. Also remember that every 4 years every team is new except for the mentors and sometimes even then.

Back to the thread question. I find it interesting that 18 % of the teams that responded say that it is OK to cheat. That is why we need these rules. There are probably many more out there saying or doing what is definitely against the rules. Yes to be the best we must push the limits but to deliberately break the rules is another issue. I know that as you step into a grey area things are no longer black and white but just different shades of grey. That is what we all must be very careful of.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Ok Lucien,
I have had a night to think it over and I have a response, toned down though it is...
Rather than pinpoint each item I would like to disuade your fears in what seems to be your underlying concern. Team #111 believes fully in the FIRST Rules and we follow them as best we can, ALWAYS. We teach this to our students, parents and as mentors we remind each other of the rules, goals and ideals of the FIRST program. (We carry rules books throughout the season, both printed and electronic) We do not use parts from previous year's robots on our competition robots, ever. As a matter of fact, I think that if you examine our robots you will find that although similar, each year's parts are a distinct improvement over the previous design. (Thanks' to Raul and his team) Furthermore, those teams that I consider close friends (and after ten years that is a considerable number) would never think of doing something that violates the rules. Frequently we communicate with each other and FIRST to insure the correct interpretation. Should you look into the past, you would find that winning teams are extreme in their interpretation and implementation of the rules. If we are such a model for other teams we need to be honest and fair. Finally, it is our experience which we share with other teams at every event we attend. It is not only Wildstang but any team will lend assistance when asked or not. This program is to insure that all students are exposed to the fundamentals not just the teams you consider special. If you ask for my help, I am bound to assist, if you ask for my strategy I am bound to answer, if you ask for my designs I will gladly show you and provide drawings if they exist. If during build season, you have a problem, I am bound to do whatever I can to help. My teammates and I (and I consider all FIRST teams to be my team) take these ideals seriously. When you ask for an opinion you will get my answer tendered with my experience and those of the people I respect and work with.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Remember kids, whenever you see a post like this just ask yourself -- WWABD? (What would Andy Baker Do?) It was that question which caused me to delete every response up to this point.
(Let's try one more time...)

I guess at this time, my only question is this:
How come whenever there is a discussion about "leveling the playingfield" it involves tying the someone's hands behind their back?

The solution is not to decrease the level of veteran play -- This doesn't seem like what FIRST is about. I believe the solution is to INCREASE the level of rookie play. If the gap between veterans and rookies seems too large, perhaps we need to "raise the rookies". Instead of asking ourselves how to limit the veterans -- ask yourself "How can we help the rookies kick butt...?"

Lucien,
You seem to believe that robot practice during the 6-weeks is somehow the magical factor needing adjustment. So, ask yourself how we can give rookie teams more practice (for the big game).

Why can't rookie teams take the drivebase included in the KOP and practice with that? We (229) haven't used it in the past, but I know many teams have used it to great effect. Isn't it supposed to be up and running in a few hours? (I'm almost positive I saw some video of Blair in 2003 and Vince in 2004 building one in an hour...) What is stopping rookies from practicing with that?

If this drivebase is inadequate (is it?), maybe FIRST should consider a newer, more competitive version. Certainly this seems like a better solution than rules which disallow veterans from using their resources.

Hopefully I will be able to someday rise to Lucien's "higher level" -- Until Then,
JVN

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Exactly, eventually limiting the veterans will limit the rookie teams. Rookie teams are supposed to learn from the veterans, and if we cannot improve our practices by learning from past years we cannot help the rookies learn. Every year teams post white papers, mentor teams, assist at competitions and do other things to help the rookies. This NEEDS to increase year after year. Veterans need to mentor more teams, rookies need to seek help from as many veterans as needed. Sure taking away abilites from the veterans and making everyone start over year after year may level the playing field a bit but it also takes away from what FIRST is about. Inspiration, learning, team work and so much more.


Just because veterans have old robots to practice on doesn't mean it can help them that much. Drive systems can change dramatically year after year, and even if they dont you can't truly simulate a real competition. Drivers truly learn whats expected of them in practice rounds and during the competiton. This can also be resolved with veterans letting rookie teams in their area borrow old robots if they wish. The drive base from FIRST could also help a bit.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Interesting collection of opinion and some compelling (if not always accurate) arguments. In my simple-minded view, the spirit of the "no building or fabrication before kick-off" rule is simply that; no building or fabrication before kick-off! This is true regardless of how the rule is worded. The intent is clear.

Our team has actively been designing test bed robot platforms, modifying last year's robot and prototyping since mid-summer. Are we breaking the rules? No. We are learning about design principles, building teamwork and enhancing our abilities. Everything we have learned will be applied to this year's robot but nothing (and I mean NOTHING) that we have build, cut, fabricated or bolted together will be used on this year's robot.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I would like to suggest everyone do what Al did, take some time to think stuff over before posting any responds.

Lucien, I suggest you create a new thread regarding your purposal of a new rule. This thread was created for a single purpose: Can teams start cutting metal before kickoff? I believe it will be healthier if we stick to that topic, and create a new thread so we can focus our attentions in the new discussion: a suggestion to level the playing field. If you need any assistance moving some post to the new thread the moderators will gladly do so.

Also, this discussion is starting to get personal, and by that I mean it is shifting from debates in front of the public to debates with each other. Although there is nothing horribly wrong with that latter, i feel it is much more benefitial to debate in front of the public addressing points and arguments instead of addressing tones and attitude. If we keep to the merit of the discussion it will be much more constructive.

Ok, back to the topic.

Pre-fab is still fab.
 

I think this will give a BIGGER advantage to the wealthy teams. Those that now build two robots will continue to do so. This will drop the level of the competition down because the lower funded veteran teams (of which there are many) will not be able to use a previous years robot as a practice driving platform, autonomous testbed, or anything else.

Yes being a rookie is hard, but should we make it harder for struggling veteran teams to compete? I think we should work to help rookies compete at a higher level then lowering the level that the majority of teams compete at.


Wetzel

Re: Pre-fab is still fab.
 

It is an unfortunate fact that the wealthier teams will almost always have an advantage but what our team is doing does not require much money. If I totaled it up, since mid-summer we have maybe spent $100.00, and about $75 of that was for the pizza we ordered for lunch.

Since we are a veteran team, we have several old robots and cases of spare parts from previous years that we disassemble, reassemble and modify for the purpose of testing and trying out new ideas. Any veteran team could do what we are doing without spending a dime. We work in one team member's garage with whatever tools his dad has on hand. We don't weld anything and any metal we cut, we use a sabre saw or hack-saw. When we need to connect two pieces of metal, we drill holes and bolt them together.

It doesn't take money, just desire.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I have to agree with John on this one. I was with team 1114 Simbotics last season. We are a very well funded team with a strong mentor base. This season we decided to start up two more teams in the area with the help of our sponsor (GM). We call ourselves NIAGARAFirst.org and have a website by the same name.

We have spent a lot of time this year doing prototyping for the 2005 season. We have involved all the schools as best we could in this project and will give them all the designs and resources they need to re-create it in 2005 rules permitting (we will post a white paper once we know they work and can find some free time). We may even split up some of the building between schools.

We will likely build a practice robot again this year. But it will be available to all the teams in our area for practicing. If all goes well, Newman Brother, a local construction company will build us another playing field this year which will be shared by all three teams.

The expected results:
A strong veteran team
Two strong rookie teams that should kick butt....maybe even 1114's butt
A money savings by sharing transportation and resources
More teams with only a few more mentors
3 times as many kids inspired
More buzz in our area over the FIRST experience...which will hopefully lead to more teams!!

I understand that this isn't possible everywhere but I do think raising the rookies is the better way to go.

That being said...rules are rules. We are very careful not to use and prototype parts on our competition robot and no parts built outside the 6 week period should be used.

This is my opinion...

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I apologize to everyone, because this is going to be one long post. I will try to bold the main points.

Natchez,

You are right that a win-win situation needs to exist. The philosophy of FIRST has provided for this already. Everyone gives to the FIRST community, and the community gives back... all for the purpose of leveling the playing field' and helping those who are less fortunate. Often, my team is on the giving end of this kind of gracious professionalism. However, we are also often on the receiving end when we find ourselves in need. This is the nature of FIRST.

There are a number of white papers posted here on chief delphi to help newer/rookie/even veteran teams to duplicate already existing mechanisms. This helps to 'level the playing field', in your words, significantly. In my view, many people are already sharing their knowledge to those who are less experienced. In fact, sharing of knowledge is one of the most significant aspects of FIRST. I have never, ever, encountered someone within FIRST who has been unwilling to help. To me, this seems unecessary because teams are already doing this; if a rookie team needs help, there will never be a shortage of veteran teams who are willing to give help.

When my team registered our rookie year, we started 2 weeks late, and didn't even have a start on the robot. We searched for teams who were willing to help us, and we were rewarded. Team 237 and 157 decided to mentor us. We actually visited 157's shop, and they gave us much valuable advice on how to get started. They shared their experiences with us and gave us advice about design. In a sense, they were sharing their "inheritance", as you called it, by helping us find our way. Surely, the mentorship of these teams was one of our saving graces that year.

When we were struggling to establish ourselves, I don't think our objective was to 'beat the other teams'. I don't think we were asking ourselves "How are we going to compete with them?" either. I think the main question that we were asking ourselves was this: "How do we have a sucessful first year?"

In our minds, success was not going to be measured in awards or high rankings. Sucess was going to be measured by our ability to meet the six week deadline, have a simple robot that could reliably run every match, and gain experience for future years to come.

Greatness, in terms of the competition, is something that rookie teams are NOT going to achieve thier very first year. They will gradually work their way up to that level as they progress throughout the years. Do you think that today's 'greats', such as 45, 47, 71, and 111 (although there are many more) were perfectly organized, built unbeatable robots, and had perfected designs to work off of in their first year? Of course not.

When each team starts off their rookie year, remember that the 'great' teams of today had the same humble beginnings. It is a matter of persistence, hard work, dedication, and passion over the years that will raise the rookies to the same level of competition as the veterans who came before. Just as a seedling can not grow into a tree in one day, rookies will have to pass through the stages of 'rookiedom' to grow and build on past successes, before they can walk with giants.

I disagree. Reread the above few paragraphs that I wrote, and try to tell me that it was 'some other team'...not my team, that built those robots.

Although the founding members of our team have gone, they have left us with a foundation of past success and experience from which we grow and subsist. Therefore, they are still very much a part of our team, in fact they are a part of our lifeblood...just as much as current, and future, members of my team are. If it weren't for those founding members, we would have nothing to start from every year. More than having built our robots, they have established our existence, they have found support for us, and they have made us a part of our community. They are my team, even if they are no longer with us... they are the foundation upon which we stand.

If we were to lock away everything from the past that might help us, such as robots, parts, and knowledge, does that also mean that we should also throw out our pre-2005 fund raising ideas, our pre 2005 sponsors, our pre 2005 mentors and coaches, our pre 2005 students, and our pre 2005 parent volunteers? After all, according to your argument, anything acquired before 2005 must be hidden out of sight and not touched so that we don't have an advantage over rookie or newer teams. Rookie teams don't have experienced mentors and coaches, previous year's sponsors, or experienced students... so why should veteran teams have that either?

If that argument were to actually be implemented, what do you think would happen? I think that if previous knowledge, experience, and resources were to be made taboo after 2005, then FIRST as a whole would be in serious jeopardy. Many teams would die out. I don't think my team could continue without the use of knowledge from previous years. The playing field would be leveled, thats for sure, but that level would be extinction. Innovation throughout the ages has taken ideas from the past, has improved them, and has made great change possible.

For example: what if, as a math student, you were expected to teach yourself, without help or prompting, what it meant to count, how to add, subtract, multiply, and divide, what fractions are, what squaring and exponents are, realize on your own that you can solve a problem using the letter x, find the Pythagorean theorem on your own, find all of the trigonometric functions on your own, find the area of geometric shapes on your own...etc?

Without help, I don't think that you would get very far. It took humans thousands and thousands of years to find and understand all of that stuff! Without help from the past, how can a math student ever expect to learn all of that on his/her own? Luckily, because lessons of the past have been embraced and built upon, I now have the ability to learn what took people thousands of years to discover...before I even reach adulthood! I have not been ashamed to take knowledge that was acquired before my lifetime and use it to improve my own.

To sum it all up, the concept of 'giving and getting' is alive and well within FIRST. Everyone pitches in to the benefit of the whole. Sharing of knowledge has been what many, many teams have been built upon, including my own. Making a rule requiring everyone to publish their old designs would be redundant, because there are hundreds and hundreds of teams, mentors, and students who are willing to share their expertise with those who have none. It is what makes this competition unique, beautiful even; how many Red Sox fans out there are willing to help the Yankees have a better season...and vice versa? (I'm guessing not too many...)

It is important for us to be able to use the experiences and accomplishments of those before us to our benefit. There is a parable that tells a story of a house that was built upon a rock, and a house that was built upon sand. When a storm came, the house that was built upon sand was washed away. But the house that had a rock for it's foundation was able to weather the storm. We as FIRSTers need to build our houses upon stone; for a rookie team, that means persistence and hard work over the years, as well as getting mentorship and advice from others. For a veteran team, it means never forgetting the lessons that have been learned in the past, and using them for the FIRST community's benefit.

I apologize to everyone, because I think that this is far beyond a "readable" post. But I felt that I needed to adequately convey the meaning of this message.

-- Jaine

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Wow - FIRST season must be starting soon! Looks like the emotion and commotion have arrived just in time. As Kenny posted earlier, some of the posts in this thread are getting pretty heated - not mentioning any names, but as a friendly reminder - please take a moment and think about what and how you are posting. We (Chiefdelphi) encourage open and civil discussion, everyone has a right to an opinion, just stay within the boundaries of common courtesy when expressing yourselves.
My vote was no, but I assumed you meant cutting metal to produce a finished part. Raw stock purchased and then cut to stack or rack easier is not a finished part. The reason for cutting it was to handle and store it - not to make it to a finished part size. This is entirely different in that the rationale for cutting it wasn't to give me an advantage in building the robot.
Sometimes certain raw material purchases are less expensive in larger sizes, there is no competitive advantage in cutting it to smaller pieces.
What disturbs me most about this is that there seems to be a dark undertone (just short of accusations) about some posts. Does gracious professionalism exist anymore, or has mistrust and animosity displaced it as normal behavior? Perhaps that is for another thread.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Everyone,

My sincere apologies if I offended anyone as I lobbed a new idea into the mix. Al, if you thought I was questioning anyone's honor or integrity above, I promise you that I was not. Ken, you are correct about proposing new rules elsewhere and I, without "having the last word", will immediately get back on the subject.

:rolleyes: Lucien gets back on track :rolleyes:

After reviewing the robot rules from 2004, it seems to me that it would be legal by the letter AND spirit of the rules to have parts made for your team just as long as they are duplicates of off-the-shelf products. FIRST seems to have been worried about teams having parts going into last season that are different (custom) from what other teams can acquire through a supplier. Below are the rules that directly apply but reading through the rules reveals FIRST's intent.

<R68> Additional Parts must be generally available from suppliers such that any other FIRST team, if it so desires, may also obtain them at the same price.

<R09> Teams must fabricate and/or assemble all custom parts and assembled mechanisms on the robot by the 2004 team after the start of the Kick-off. Mechanisms from previous year’s robots may not be used, however, individual off-the-shelf components from previous year’s robots may be re-used to save the cost of re-purchase of these parts IF they meet ALL of the 2004 Additional Parts and Materials Rules.

<2004 Part Use Flowchart> Is part off-the-shelf or custom made by the team after the start of the 2004 Kickoff? (See Robot Section) YES==>part can go on 'bot ... NO==>part can not go on 'bot

For example, the 2004 rules allow for a bearing manufacturer (or a machine shop) to give a team a truck load of "standard" bearings without making them available to other teams. Because teams can buy the bearings at McMaster or Sears, the team was allowed to use these bearings but the team had to cost the bearings (charge the bearings that they use on their robot against their $3,500 limit) at the same cost as vendors that could supply the bearings to other teams (Sears or McMaster).

To extrapolate to more advanced mechanisms, the 2004 rules would allow for the construction of an AM transmission by a local shop as long as it is available to other teams through another source; in this case, Andy-Mark.

I realize that this is not a popular outcome and I personally hope this will not be the result of the 2005 rules analysis. What is discouraging is that most of us think that having a machine shop build AM transmissions before the season would be a violation of the 2004 rules when in reality, it would be perfectly legal within the letter and spirit of the '04 rules. CONGRATULATIONS to those who MADE THE RIGHT CALL!!!

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Whack! Whack! I think we've been beating this dead horse long enough for my taste, so with a few final comments I think I'll leave this thread behind.

First, the original question was can we cut metal before Christmas, and to that I'll stick by my previous post--cutting for storage --> OK, cutting for 2005 robot parts --> not OK.

As for the modification to the original question (perhaps the original intent of the question):

While it may not be a custom part (which could probably be debated as well), it does seem to me to be an assembled mechanism. If it was fabricated and assembled completely by the machine shops, I might be persuaded to believe that it didn't violate the letter of the law (that would still require a lot of persuading), but if 8888 then took the fabricated parts and assembled them it would either violate the rule by assembling parts prior to the kickoff or by not being an off-the-shelf part.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

I am sorry but you are dead wrong. Maybe you have a problem understanding what OFF THE SHELF means. That is not something that you get when you give plans to someone and have them build it for you. It means you call a company like AndyMark, order an assembly and they ship it from OFF THE SHELF. You can double talk yourself to death but the fact still remains, OFF THE SHELF means that a company has manufactured and placed in stock a number of these items for sale to anyone who asks. That does not mean a company builds to spec and then ships to you.

Your holier than thou attitude has made me really upset.Trying to justify what you either do or want to do. The fact is that the people that made the right call are the majority of people, that read the rules and said that it is wrong. There are those that said that it is OK to cut metal for stock as long as it is not cut to exact sizes for the robot. They are correct because there was no cutting or fabrication for the robot. Remember that self justification does not make one right.

This will be my last post on this subject I promise.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Steve, please do not be upset with me nor Team 118. Our team has never made, nor do we wish to make, parts outside of the 6 week period. As a matter of fact, it is part of our philosophy not to even procure non-common parts until kickoff. Yes, we do stock standard aluminum, sprockets, chain, and such but we feel that it is part of the students' learning process to decide exactly what you need and procure the parts. UPS Blue loves us :)

Honestly, we really don't have much time in the off-season to think about the next year's robot. We spend two weeks learning the FLL competition and then mentor teams; we mentored over 15 teams this year. We then host, in early December, one of the largest FLL State Tournaments. Also in the fall, we help with the BEST (www.BESTinc.org) kickoff, practice day, and the competition along with mentoring a few middle school teams. We also design and implement the EARLY (www.EARLYrobotics.org) Fall Challenge and host the Houston EARLY Fall Tournament. And in the spring, we do engineering outreach during the build period as well as outside of it. We help with the Texas Botball (www.Botball.org) kickoff workshop in January and host the Texas Botball Tournament in March. Also during the build period, we design and implement the EARLY Spring Challenge and then host the Houston EARLY Spring Tournament soon after the FRC Championships. Our mentors are also very active on the FRC Lone Star Regional Committee and the Houston Robotics Committee, which assisted over 10 FRC teams this year with funding.

So, please let me assure you that gracious professionalism is alive and well on team 118, the Robonauts. Below are some comments that I received just last week from an FLL Coach:

"You and all the volunteers (mostly Robonauts) did a wonderful job. This was an amazing day and my son is still beaming. ... They (Robonauts) have no way of knowing the influence they have been on my son. He has followed this team for 3 years. He even has the Robonaut sign one of the team members gave him 2 years ago hanging in his room. This team influenced him to get into the First Lego League. He has wanted to compete since he was 9. At that time, Battlebots was his favorite show and all he wanted to do was build something big and destructive. One of the Robonauts talked to him about the importance of being Constructive in Robot design. He has not watched the BattleBots shows since. The Robonauts team is certainly made up of a group of young adults that make their families, schools, and communities proud. I know that these teams do not get the recognition that the sports team do, but they do deserve it. Please pass on to the team that they are doing things greater than they could even imagine. They are being positive roll models, and that is hard to find these days."

I'll call it quits on a positive note and get onto authoring another YMTC,
Lucien

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

No, it seems wrong because it is fabricating a part that may be used for the robot before the season begins. By rule, that's cheating.

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Holy thread revival, Batman!

(Remember, folks, check the date of the last post. If it's been since the start of the last season, it's probably a dead or settled topic.)

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

Though I did respond "No" to the poll, it wouldn't help anyway, right? Because no one is exactly sure of what the game would call for, right? So why bother waisting time and effort if you don't know if it's a sure thing?

Re: YMTC: Can teams start cutting metal for 2005?
 

i think you could but it wouldnt be wise to do so because u dont know wat kind of robot you want to play the game