[FTC]: Technical Question
 

Are we allowed to use VEXplorer MECHANICAL parts for FTC?

Thanks

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

You are allowed to use the metal, just not the motors.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

Yes, but please don't use the vexplorer arm for our claw =.=

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

who said anything about the vexplorer claw :D

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

As good of an Idea as it is to use the claw (trust me I wanted to use it on our robot) I think using a rebuilt claw is "cheating". I know it's not against the rules but it's a cheap way out. If you want to use a claw. BUILD IT. We chose not to use it because we felt it isn't fair.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

Sometimes, however, the cheap way out is the best way out. From the FRC side, we could've spent the better part of our six weeks and a few hundred bucks finding means of machining two-speed gearboxes and doing so, but it worked better for us to shell out a bit more for the AndyMark Super Shifter, an off-the-shelf gearbox. It met our needs better, so the fine folks in Kokomo got our business.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

It's certainly your prerogative to use whichever parts you want, but I'm with Billfred, if it's functional, priced right, and legal, I'll do that. We bought a Vex claw, but didn't use it because it didn't work that well. If it had, it would still be on the robot. Another good comparison would be omni wheels. How would you justify using factory omni wheels?

Not a knock on your opinion, but I would have been happier if you had just said something like, "we built our own claw because we thought it would be more fun (or it would work better)." You seem to imply that a team using the Vex claw would be cheating, and I strongly disagree with that.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

Hmm, honestly I disagree with this. Engineering isn't about reinventing the wheel. It's about doing things effectively, efficiently, and with the best design to meet the needs.

My feeling is that if it meets the needs and it is cost effective then use it. Spend the time you would have done making another part of the robot better, developing better code to control the arm, or working on more sophisticated strategies.

Most highly complex systems are currently build from a majority of of off the shelf parts with a minimal amount of custom parts and software to tie it together.

Using it and figuring out to best use it are two different skills.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

You really think that? If so, then why are there huge arguments about Gracious Professionalism and about mentor/engineer built robots? If its made ina factory should you be allowed to use it? Would you use a prebuilt arm for FRC if you were allowed to? And if yes (unless you can't afford to build your own) then I think that that's really just sad.

Also, what if a team can't buy the VEXplorer kit due to a small budget such as most FVC teams? Frankly, I don't see why using it should be allowed. I'm with fredliu on this one.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

A set of small omnis is $20 -- the same as the claw. Let's ban those. Let's also ban the large omnis($25), the shaft encoders ($20), extra servos and motors ($20 each), aluminum parts ($100), rack and pinion gears ($30), tank treads ($30), the tank tread upgrade kit ($25), extra wheels ($30), chains and sprockets ($30), the larger chassis kits ($21 to $34) and the ultrasonic range finder ($30). Allowing the use of these extra parts is not fair to the teams that cannot afford them, either -- and they cost the same as or more than the claw. I don't know why you are picking and choosing what should and should not be legal?

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

Good question, one probably for another thread.

Depends--would it meet our needs better than the alternative of building our own?

To each their own.

Rick beat me to it.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

uhh sorry guys for the misunderstanding. I'm mentoring VEN's team. The reason I said not to use the claw was because I didn't think it would work well given the design of our robot.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

yea but its pre-made. That's really the only thing that bugs me. We didn't use it because we thought it would make other teams mad or something, so its not that I didn't consider it either. But yea, i see your point and I'm sorry for sounding a bit rash on that. its not like i'm going around sayng "no" to people who used it and giving them negative rep. or anything. Just saying that it seems kind of unethical.

But in this case..yea "to each his own."

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

I 100% agree. I understand that it is not illegal to use it. I just feel that it's a cop out because of the fact that it's so much pre-made. If you are going to use a claw, which I feel is a good idea, build one. Dean Kamen always likes to see innovation. I claw well built will be more innovative rather than just sticking a pre-built think on a fully unique robot.

Re: [FTC]: Technical Question
 

I love the claw not for being a claw (I would never use it as a claw) but for what you can get out of it. Anyone that went to the New York FTC regional and watched our robot could see some vexplorer claw in use in the beginning of every match.