Re: WiFi in pits
 

From my understanding all the Purdue FIRST scouting was done on laptops that were wired together.

As for the wireless rules, I think FIRST is fully aware of the technical issues with using 5Ghz spectrum and the potential for interference from non Wifi devices. I don't think you will see FIRST come down hard and enforce the rule unless someone is caught intentionally interfering with the field system. That does not mean you shouldn't respect the rules set forth by FIRST even if you are technically sure it wouldn't interfere at all.

In the past the FTA would stop by your pit if you were caught using the radio but I didn't hear about that happening at all this week.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

When we asked them if it was wifi they said no, however they also said that it was not hardwired. I'm not saying they were doing anything illegal I was just wondering what it was they were actually using (infrared maybe?) We did not talk fo very long since it was right before elim picking so we my have not gotten the whole story, however I know that we could benefit from the type of scouting program they had as well as others.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

After the weekend of scrimmages it became very obvious that it would take many people to scout each match effectively. Many more than we could bring to Cleveland

The Purdue teams very generously allowed us to join in their scouting alliance. There were many pairs of eyes watching each match. The scout teams were in the stands networked together via wire.

I don't know the final numbers but by Friday afternoon the database was correctly predicting the outcome of 90% of the matches.

Big thanks to the Purdue teams.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

That is correct. The Purdue FIRST scouting was managed through Ethernet connections on either the 48 or 24 port switch (although supposedly there was a wireless router that I didn't notice). Each laptop on this network would have the scouting sheet (Microsoft Excel) and would FTP to one of the laptops which would import them into our database (also on Excel).

Since I didn't make it, I'm not sure if I can give you the actual file but I can probably whip something up in Access that would do a decent amount of what was on there.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

What I'm saying is that regardless of the rules, there were several wireless networks which existed at Buckeye. I think two of them were probably pre-existing networks associated with the venue, but several of them were not. There were many computer-to-computer networks which were obviously not supposed to exist (such as a team ____ laptop connect). Had FIRST simply scanned for networks, they would have found some interesting stuff. I was only using an a/b/g card to scan, but somebody else had an a/b/g/n which picked up over 100 networks at one point.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

FIRST does scan for networks continuously, and sets up their own networks accordingly. The fact that we can coexist with existing infrastructure shouldn't be a surprise.

Also note that the field creates and destroys 6 networks each match.

Lastly, note that FIRST has merely asked that we don't contribute possible interference: NOT that all possible interference must be eliminated. "They did X so I can too" is an invalid argument, because interference is additive (and severely non-linear).

We've had many industry heavy-weights weigh in on this (including one who leads one of the 802.11 task groups), and the decision has been made to be cautious.

Lets not go down the "they can't enforce it so I'm going to do it any way" path. Even if they can't enforce it, it is a really skeezy thing to do. If they can enforce it, do you really need to be the one that finds out how?

Some jerk decided to interfere with the IR transceivers last year. He attempted to screw up several matches before being "firmly asked" to leave. Don't be him.

Re: WiFi in pits
 

http://regional.purduefirst.org/?page=faq
Well, I'm not sure if this is out of date or not, but it seems that access to the exisiting infrastructure is being provided (at Boilermaker). Also, it seems to be actually more of a safety hazard to go the other route and have a port switch with cables running to every computer necessary. Trust me, when you have six ethernet cables and about 10 power cords running in an area of the stands, it is getting to the point of ridiculous.

Regardless of the creation and destruction of the networks, I'm talking about 100 existing at the same time

Question: How much interference is there really between the 2.4 and 5 GHz bands? If I remember correctly, the field is set to lock into the 5 GHz, and most wireless at this point is 2.4 (along with microwave ovens and that such).

Oh and could you address all of the other networks? The field communications only use 802.11n, but I was picking up about 7 networks on a/b/g.