Re: Beatty and Kingman
 

Kingman is pretty fast to the goals, but, at least at the SCRRF scrimmage, they rarely managed to grab two goals. If either had been moved by the other team, they had trouble even grabbing one. Thier grabber requires precise alignment, and appears unforgiving. I only saw them ablt to do their "grab two and spin" trick once, although driving skills may have improved since SCRRF.

Once they grab two goals, they have them solid, and with a combined weight of almost 500lbs, they are very hard to move. However, they were not able to "consistently control two goals."

Kingman also had illegal pneumatics on their bot at SCRRF (they ordered custom ones from SMC, not available through the order form in the kit), I think with a <1" bore. They claimed they were legal, and I saw them basically yelling at inspectors who claimed otherwise. They may have swapped them out since then, as many teams don't have their robots to spec by the scrimmages, but we may see them DQed from competing yet.

I don't mean to rag on Kingman here. They have a great bot, and have done an excellent job. I'm just accentuating the negative in this report since everyone has already seen how good they can be.

----EDIT----
New information added below 04-03-2002 at 12:55 AM. Above message unchanged.

I have since been corrected on the issue with the pnuematics. These pistons I was referring to are actually gas springs. I was just going on what I was told by members of Team 60, who claimed at the time that they were pneumatic pistons, not gas springs, and that they had custom ordered them. After seeing the arguments with the inspectors and team 60, I asked their driver about the pistons when we were teamed up with them, and this is what I went by. I'm sorry I got the wrong impression from what they told me, and I was just trying to present all the scouting info I had on 60 (I just copied and pasted from our scouting database).

I was not trying to put down or bash Kingman or their excellent robot. I was just posting what is in our DB, which lists the strengths and weaknesses of each robot. Since the strengths had already been posted, and I had nothing new to add, I just posted our weakness column. I just hope I didn't offend anyone, by making an honest mistake.

Pneumatic Cylinders
 

Zan,

What you are referring to are shock absorbers and are not pneumatic cylinders. The judges at the SVR recognized this and I can assure everyone we have done nothing illegal and will not be disqualified at regionals.

no one ever thought they were smc
 

i was one of those judges, BUT i never thought they were custom ordered from SMC

they dont look like smc cylinders and they DONT have any tubing going to them

if you would have asked them, i am sure they would have loved to explain what they did and the true legality of them

dont jump to conclusions when you dont truely know any of the facts

TC

Can't We ALL get along
 

People why you have to start fighting over little things like that. This is ALL a learning experience so lets make it fun for everyone. This threa was intened to ask about a particual robot. NOT to start BASHING them down to the last bolt.

I am shure that both 60 and 71 are comepletly LEGAL robots! Why you ask?

BECAUSE THEY WANT TO PLAY AND NOT SIT ON THE SIDELINES!

Also regarding Beatty (all my viewpoints are purely objective):

At the competition, they were dubbed "The Beast." With everything in functioning order, they were virtually unstoppable. Of course, that was with everything in working order. They had their fair share of problems.

In short, no bot there could outpower them. Not even the Technokats who had their share of problems... It will take good strategy to win against them.

Dima is completely correct...also I had the shock absorbers explained to me in detail...they are perfectly legal. And were also checked with first. So please people...before jumping to conclusions ASK the team in question....and TRY to get along. I look forward to seeing people at LA that are going.

I talked to the inspectors in SV personally, they are fair people and they said the pneumatics were legal. Those of us who know Glenn know that he would never put an illegal device on his robot to win.

BTW...it was explained multiple times to the inspectors at the scrimmage that it WAS legal...the inspectors kept ignoring the explaination however. unfortunately. at least in the case you are referring to zan.

People, please listen. AS the head ref of the SCRRF, I am begging, pleading with all of
you people present there to put our past differences behind us. Many mistakes were made
and lessons learned in the competition. We hope those lessons will create a better FIRST.
However, there are some of us that keep opening old wounds up and starting new ones. I
beg you people to keep your opinions to yourself and not post them on Chief Delphi if
they have a chance to hurt people. Many people and teams have been hurt by the actions
of a few SCRRF members that wont leave well enough alone or get their facts wrong in
their posts. What's happened in the past is in the past. There is no changing it. WE all need
to look to the future, where we can overlook our differences and the spirit of gracious
professionalism will prevail.



Sean Roberts
Head Ref, SCRRF
Someone who wants gracious professionalism to win out!

I really wish team 992 would just drop the "illegal pneumatics" thing already. they were teched at SV and passed without having to remove them. the fricking things are legal. the dead horse is throughly beaten. I may be wrong, but I sense a bit of robot envy here.

I just want to say that I was not trying to put down or bash Kingman or their excellent robot. I was just going on what I was told by members of Team 60, who claimed that they were pneumatic pistons, not gas springs, and that they had custom ordered them. After seeing the arguments with the inspectors and team 60, I asked their driver about the pistons when we were teamed up with them, and this is what I went by. I'm sorry if I got the wrong impression from what they told me, and I was just trying to present all the scouting info I had on 60 (I just copied and pasted from our scouting database). My bad.

Again, this had nothing to do with hard feelings or old wounds. I was just posting what is in our DB, which lists the strengths and weaknesses of each robot. Since the strengths had already been posted, and I had nothing new to add, I just posted our weakness column. I don't think that this alone deserves the board jumping down my throat and accusing and my team and I of all kinds of things. You can say my facts are wrong without making it a subtly veiled personal attack.

Andrew, I don't know what you mean about beating a dead horse -- I haven't brought this issue up before. I'm not trying to open old wounds, and Sean, I hardly think that bringing up information I was told by Team 60 at the SCRRF scrimmage equates to still being upset about your ruling -- which I totally agreed with given the circumstances. You forget that we were on an alliance with team 60 in the finals, and have no beef with them -- they were a great partner. I just hope I didn't offend anyone, or, as you put it, hurt many people and teams, by making an honest mistake (fueled in part by 3 hours of jetlag).

Zan...it had nothing to do with seans ruling in this case....it had to do with, well, me. I was present for that inspection. I didnt need the reminder. BTW my sympathies on the jet lag. That always sucks.

Kingman
 

Just like to add that Kingman isn't unstoppable (as long as you don't let them get 2 goals). We were lucky to be seeded 4th so we got to pick an awesome alliance (Gunn-192 and New Technology- 814).

In our first elmination match against Kingman and cheesy poofs, we were able to have new tech race out to the side goal, ram into it and then shove kingman all the way back to their home zone. At that point, we think their motors actually got backdriven and drew major amps to trip their 60amp breaker. They just sat there for the rest of the match and we ended up winning :)

However, in the 3rd elimination match, I'm thinking they switched to high gear right off the bat and actually beat New Tech to the goals. which seemed to work out alright, although it was still hard for them to get lined up to grab 2 goals when going that fast. Unfortuantely, even though Gunn was able to grab 2 goals again in that round, we still ended up losing the match.

All in all, I'm sure Kingman and Beatty are really tough, but they are not completely invincible. It's just gonna take good strategy.

-yimjh
Aragon Robotics Team #840

Pneumatics
 

The question of the cylinders on Kingman's robot boils down to "What are you going to call a pneumatic device?"

If you are going to define it as something that uses air or any other gas under pressure as a working fluid to CAUSE motion. Then Kingman's cylinders are clearly legal. They do not cause things to move, they merely slow them down.

If you are going to define a pneumatic device as something hooked up to the compressor or reserviors then again they qualify because those cylinders aren't connected to either.

However if you change that definition to something that uses air or any other gas under pressure as a working fluid to CONTROL motion then maybe you might have a point. The cylinders do slow the motion of the arms and therefore exert some control over them.

Personally I could not get FIRST to rule one way or the other on what constituted a pneumatic device. In fact they specifically refused to even post my question. When I suggested making my own damper (from legal parts of course) they were emphatic about my not doing so, but again the post was not included in the FRC group (their choice not mine).

Assuming the cylinders are not considered a pneumatic device as under the first two definitions they still must comply with the additional hardware list. This includes anything in the SPI catalog. When I looked through the most recent SPI catalog I had, I did not find any gas springs or cylinders, but I do recall them being present in earlier years because at one point I considered using some. Many catalog houses will continue to stock and sell items from old catalogs even if they are not in more recent catalogs. I do not remember the rules specifying which SPI catalog was to be used, so you could say that you could use anything that SPI ever listed in their catalog. If somebody can point me to the page that Kingman's cylinders are on in whatever year it would ease my mind on that point. In any case, something very like those cylinders could be constructed out of clearly legal materials from the catalog if you wanted to take the time and trouble to do so. So I don't care whether they purchased the cylinders pre-built or not. Just like I don't care whether you purchased your gears pre-cut or hobbed them yourself.

According to Glenn of Team 60, he did check out the cylinders with FIRST before they were used. Though apparently this was done by telephone and so was not posted on the FRC group. It is not Team 60s fault if this did not get communicated to other people who wanted to use similar cylinders. Those teams could have used the same channels.

In summary, I feel that Kingman made what could be called a "good faith effort" to determine the legality of their cylinders before using them. Under at least two of the three definitions above they are certainly legal if obtained from otherwise legal materials. Therefore, I'm not going to argue with them about it.

In fact, if it were a crime to use the cylinders they have, it would be really hard to convict them because they did TRY to find out what the rules were, though maybe they recieved an incorrect intrepretation for their efforts. I realize this legal theory doesn't work with the IRS but most other courts will accept it. (The IRS has been known to prosecute people for doing what IRS agents advised them to do because it was illegal and made it stick)

One final point. In a discussion with another highly ranked team about other issues related to being a top team the comment was made. "If you're good enough people will hate you no matter what, get used to it". My question for everyone else is "Would you be making such a stink if it was Team 605 (last place seed at SV) that was using supposedly illegal materials?"

Personally I admire Kingman for their consistantly excellent performance, and ability to continually think outside the box. They work differently as a team than some, but that's OK. All teams are different internally because they have different individuals on them. They have access to a powder coater so their robots always look good and that's OK too. Their robot doesn't look half so impressive in the pictures before it was coated.

illegal material is everywhere...
 

I have no opinion about the team 60 robot -- I have not followed the ins and outs of the discussion.

BUT...

...What I have noticed this year is that FIRST inspections have really been lax in terms of use of illegal material.

I have had a lot of discussions with veteran teams that are really hot about this topic. There are SO MANY teams running with obviously illegal material it is somewhat discouraging. As one person put it, "I am sweating over the exact alloy and temper of the aluminum I am getting to make sure that it is EXACTLY what Small Parts Inc. would have given me an here is a team running with 10 feet of stove pipe from a local hardware store!"

Yeah, that stove pipe team was probably not going to be a huge factor in the tourney with or without the illegal material, but that is not the point. If veteran teams start cuttting such corners, it really COULD become a factor in whether a machine can be made or not or whether it could make weight or not -- in effect, the outcome of tournaments will start to be affected by the use of illegal material or not.

I think that this is something that we should all bring up to FIRST in the off season.

Joe J.