Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

I wanted to do something that we did in Philly and NJ this year that we borrowed from FiM. (And this is just to add onto what Eric said about stress on volunteers)

A lot of large teams have about 3-5 students and extra adults volunteer when they get to the event. It would increase the number of volunteers by a lot if all teams could do this at their competition.

This year we aim to have about 6-10 student volunteering at our regionals.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

A couple of things would like to say in reply to this is that:

1. FLL robots just turn it on and ready to go. No connecting with the field or boot up time required.

2. FLL events have run overtime. Every event I attended or have volunteered at which comes to around 8 or 10 have all run overtime. One had a power outage for 10 minutes but everything went on. Lights were out for light sensors too bad. And the other had a fire alarm go off. But all have gone over at least 45 minutes ranging to 1:45 minutes.

3. Also, due to FLL tables being so small, they can run a match and set up for another. FIRST cannot unless they decrease the field size.

I really don't predict seeing anything quicker than 5.0 minutes for a turnover for a while.

Also, our team had a rules expert in 2008 and possibly in 2007. This past year we didn't as there weren't a ton of rules. It worked well, all they did was read over the rules and look at the changes FIRST made. But all of our team every year goes over the rules and creates a list of rules that are unclear which need to be discussed more.

And FRC does have the your too late, you don't play rule.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Well, that or have two fields...GTR did this for a few years. In 2006, the matches alternated every 3.5 min, with at least 7 matches for 74 teams. The schedule was so fast that match results for each round had to be announced after the next match (on the opposite field).

This is an option at some venues—Greater Toronto, New York, Connecticut and Houston spring to mind.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

No offense, but the posters in this thread are a veritable Who's Who of FRC. Al is only one of the serious multi-year heavyweights who have chimed in here. Any thread (and I am just skimming here) that attracts Robert Steele, Al Skierkiewicz, Kevin Ross, Mike Martus, Mark McLeod, Paul Johnson, Jane Young, Greg Needel, Mike Betts, Cory McBride, &c, &c, is one that is both being taken seriously, and is a serious topic. The fact that the Godfather of Washington State FRC (Kevin Ross, the face that launched 50 teams) has violated his nearly-perfect record of not posting on CD is a sign of what is up.

I'm not surprised that rookies aren't posting. They are probably afraid of being crushed by giants.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

I'm hoping Los Angeles (Long Beach Arena) will host a double-field regional soon. The energy of an event with 70+ teams on two fields is amazing.

Some of my best experiences in FIRST occurred at the GTR in 2006. Nearly constant game action played in the hockey area was so intense. The twelve-alliance elimination round kept action going on both fields until the finals.

A two-field "Super-Regional" event is a great way to allow a large number of teams to play a lot of matches in two days. The hard part is getting the right venue and volunteers needed to pull it off.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Speaking of Los Angeles...

As a post-script to my earlier post, the fastest time at L.A. last year, in a very easy-to-reset game, was about a minute and a half from the end of the match to the next match being ready other than controllers--field reset and most of the teams were off the field, so the only thing we were waiting for was the control system, which took another minute or two. This was on Saturday morning.

However, unlike 2007 and 2008, there was no waiting for the computer or relatively precise placing and/or counting. Just "Are there 10 balls in this bin?" and keeping teams out of the bins until we'd accounted for all 120 moon rocks, 8 empty cells, and 8 super cells. (Oh, and making sure that the scorers, who unloaded the trailers, had non-full bins to drop balls into.)

So, 2.25 minutes to run a match + 1.5 minutes to clear = 3.75 minutes just for field stuff, no controllers. Unless the controls are faster than around 15 seconds to boot up, there is no possible way to run a 4-minute schedule. 5-minute, sure--if you're in a time crunch.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Ok,
My time to chime in. (You miss so much when you're working, I am going to have to fix that!)
It sounds like everyone is on board to wanting more matches and it also sounds like everyone realizes that this is not a simple, one bullet solution. So that is good. If we are going to go for 10 matches then a few things need to happen and speeding inspections is only one of those.
As an inspector, I welcome teams who have a student who is the rules guru and who is present during the inspection. Gold star for those teams. Those inspections usually run no more than ten minutes and pass the first time through. Getting into inspect early is another place to set your sights. But there are other things we have to think of as well. How about being on time for cueing and taking the field quickly? How about shorter opening ceremonies on Friday?
I am going to add a list that most of you know but might help in the future...
A team came come and check weight or size the robot at any time for free without it needing to be official.
A team can disable a non-compliant robot part until they can make it compliant. (the non-functional decoration rule or ballast as the case may be) Thus passing inspection and playing and then reinspect.
A rule question by an inspector can/should be brought to the Lead Inspector for check. This might prevent some of the lengthy rework some teams have reported.
Changes to a robot anytime during the weekend (except repairs) should be reinspected as they occur prior to taking the field.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

What if we do this:

Lead Inspectors assign pre-weighing time windows to each team? Then, each team is required to come over to get their robot weighed, even if they are not quite ready. This can be done in staggered time segments, so not all teams are doing it at the same time.

What this will give us are these things:
1. Teams who are severely overweight will notice this surprise earlier in the day, and fix it quicker.
2. The inspectors can look at other issues (safety, wiring, bumpers, # of motors, etc.) while the robot is getting their pre-weighing. Covering these issues can be the "pre-inspection". Again, if something is severely out-of-whack (5 Window motors, etc.), then it can be addressed early.
3. Teams would also put their robot in the sizing box, since it's right next to the scale, and see how close they are to being within the size limitation.

I'm willing to implement this "required", scheduled pre-weighing at the Boilermaker Regional, where I am LRI.

What do you all think?

Andy B.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Andy,

Taking your idea a step further....have teams sign up for inspection slots, much likle practice field times. Experienced teams who feel they are 'ok' may defer until later. Rookie teams would be encouraged to sign up for an earlier slot. Teams that haven't signed up for a slot would be the cause for a quick 'pit visit' by an inspector to look for any issues that need resolution or a need for mentor assistance from another team.

You could reward teams meeting inspection goals with one of your new T-shirts!

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Since this thread is covering other ways to gain time, i'll bring up the awards ceremony. FIM had no awards friday and only 3 members per team to accept the,do i dare say, the smaller awards. They did have team pictures on screens during the presentations. Only chairmans,1st and 2nd place and rookie winners could come down as a team. It was fast, efficient and teams stuck around for the whole thing. I wasn't sure if i would like it but it did work and as someone pointed out to me, in three years there will be a whole new batch of students and that this will be just the way it is done.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

That's what we did in Israel last year. We had to run late on our 'Friday' because of field issues, but actually got extra matches in. The awards went smoothly...we ran them like Championship does, spacing them out. We honored the entire team with each award, but it still ran on schedule!

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Agreed. We have 2 students designated that do the inspection. We then have the lead mentor and the other student leaders (mechanical sub-team leader, etc) within earshot. The two students are the only ones allowed to interact with the inspector unless they ask for assistance from a standby. All too often I see teams try to inspect with a full pit of people either working on other things or all trying to interact with the inspector. Since we started doing it this way we have only failed an inspection due to weight (the max was 123 lbs, well within our shop scale's margin of error).

We also require all the students to read and understand the rules. The only exceptions are animators, they have their own rules to contend with.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Just wondering, do all inspectors at each regional know that you can allow a robot onto a field with, let's say, a manipulator, unplugged and non functional so that the team may still at least drive around? NJ is pretty good with that, I remember in 08 we played our first two matches just driving around and having all manipulator motor pwm's unplugged. It would help teams get inspected in sort of a part-whole method without really losing matches.

Case in point- http://www.thebluealliance.net/tbatv/match/2008nj_qm14
(Its sad that this is what I do when I'm at home with the flu)

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

I'm not a lead robot inspector any more, but based on my experiences in St. Louis and on helping Al, Andy, and others at FRC events over the years, I think getting robots to the inspection scale earlier on Thursday would be one of the best ways to ensure that all robots comply with the rules and to minimize no-shows.

As for the big-picture being discussed in this thread: I fully support FIRST's goal of scheduling at least ten qualifying rounds for each team. And I agree with Kevin Ross' core idea back in post #41: getting to that goal will require us to change the way we think about Thursday.

I would support a rules change to add the requirement that Andy suggests. However, I don't think it would be a good idea to add this requirement at some events but not add it at others.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

I have seen many great ideas....
Let me start something that might resemble a list of them:
(In no particular order...) Please add whatever I have left out... its been a long thread so far.......

1. Pre-ship voluntary or mandatory inspection.
2. Travelling help from other teams in pre-ship inspections.
3. Starting qualifications at 3:00 PM on Thursday and going later on . Thursday and Friday.
4. Portable scales/Extra scales at event
5. Mandatory or voluntary FIRST Rules test by each team
6. Team Student GURU who is present at inspection
7. No Awards ceremony on Friday (or abbreviated)
8. Gain time by not having entire teams come up to receive awards....
9. Increasing matches by decreasing the reset/schedule
10 Mini or partial inspections
11 First Regional full inspection.... 2nd regional.... mini-inspection
12
13
14
15
16

Help me fill this out!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
It is tremendously encouraging to me that we have so many wonderful ideas..
We seem to like a tough challenge.... hmmm where I have I heard that before..???


GO FIRST

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

In my experience, there are many FIRST teams who believe that getting inspection done in one-shot is the most desirable approach. Hence, some teams claim they aren't ready for inspection until late Thursday afternoon. If you show ready for full inspection, awesome! I've even had rookies express concern that if they don't pass inspection (the first time through) they're not allowed to play. I don't know where that notion comes from (I don't see anything in the rules that suggests you only get one opportunity), but it's out there.

As suggested before, anything that gets teams to the sizing box and scales early on Thursdays will speed up the overall inspection process. This will also help catch major problems (i.e. improper bumpers, illegal motors, etc.) early enough for teams to resolve them by the end of the day. In last year's regionals, I walked through the pits early on Thursday encouraging teams to get to the scale/sizing box ASAP, did a quick look at their bumper configuration and looked for other other potential "gotcha's". I found a few robots at each regional that needed significant rework to pass inspection. If they waited until they thought they were ready, they might not have made their first matches on Friday.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

I did the same thing. Found two bumper perimeter infractions and suggested remedies. The teams later passed without too much of an issue.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

We talked about this thread in our meeting today and we had some interesting ideas. First, would each team be willing to have members who aren't really involved in anything in particular during competitions volunteer at the competition instead? (i.e. animators, no offense but ours weren't opposed to the idea, or newer team members/mentors who don't really help out scouting/in the pits and are looking for something to do.) If each team donated some man power, it could limit the turnaround time for volunteers on the matches, and allow for shifts during the day, and more inspectors to help out teams struggling with the rules? This would speed up the competition and allow for less stress on volunteers, who work on getting competitions done on a faster turnaround, with the additional help of more people? Also, possibly FIRST could comply by making two entrance bays on one side and two exit bays on the other side to limit traffic on the field? The idea of less of an awards ceremony would provide some of the extra time needed to complete the matches, and I wouldn't be upset if we were to go to this format. Lastly, the ability of a team to disable a non-compliant robot part until they can make it compliant would be a huge help for teams who were not rules sticklers during build and did end up using the wrong part.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

12.First issued inspection check list.
Perhaps First could supply a standard inspection list at kick-off with the understanding that things could change as the rules get kicked around. Similar to Fim's last year

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

That is an idea. Some notes on your post:

There are 4 gates built into the field. 2 are always entry, usually the side towards the audience. The other two vary: Sometimes one is closed, sometimes they're both open, depending on the event. Either way, there's a bottleneck coming out to the pits.

Team members as inspectors: FiM is doing this. However, I would note that you really need to have people who know the rules inside and out for this. If I were a lead inspector, I know I wouldn't want somebody who didn't know the robot rules well enough to locate the rule. Also note that they won't be inspecting you... but knowing the rules that well, you should fly through inspection!

Team members as volunteers/ volunteers in shifts: This could be workable. Talk to your regional volunteer coordinator. I don't think it will be the entire solution, though. While it can help to have a second set of crew around to take over in a pinch (i.e. matches through lunch), it won't speed things up to more than about a 5-minute turnaround, sustained.

Team ability to disable a bad part: If this is known, it will help. (i.e. "We will pass you, provided that this part is disabled." Inspectors then inform the queuers and refs that team XYZ has to keep their A device disabled until further notice.)

Another option is to have a "SOS squad" to look for people who need help. They find a team that's swarming their robot working and see what they need, then help them with it if possible. I've routed help to other teams several times.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Perhaps taken from a pool of the top scorers on the hypothetical test?

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

The problem is teams might not know who is available for volunteering until you get to the competition, so maybe the actual volunteers are inspectors and the volunteers from teams at the regional become replacements and extras for field reset to allow for more inspectors. Thus avoiding the test and achieving the goal of more volunteers to inspect and to clear field to move matches along.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

That's the other thing. Inspectors are needed mainly on Thursday, Friday morning, and Saturday around noon. When they aren't needed, they're on the field or wandering around helping teams. So you've already got spare personnel.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

FiM rules required every team to supply 2 full-time volunteers at every competition. Most of these were what we could call semi-skilled labor. But there were a host of volunteers for important positions, many of whom had done it in prior years without being "mandatory volunteers". For example, Mike Martus was an inspector, all 6 weeks if I remember correctly. Other experienced volunteers filled positions that formerly might have been supplied by FIRST, such as FTA.

We did get a few new people in positions like referees; if the game had been played with 6 or 8 refs instead of 4 this year we would have needed a lot more. Most of the official scorers were newer volunteers. And we had some new people in important but less-glamorous positions like lead queue.

Regarding field entrance and exit patterns, often one of the gates can't be used because there isn't enough room in an arena. The teams have to exit to only one end, because the score table would be in the way of robots and carts if the other gate was used. And since in this year's game there was no red or blue "end" for robot placement, that led to many crossing patterns as the robots entered the field.

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Bob,
I'm wondering if it would be helpful to start a thread that is just for the list and additions to it.

This thread continues to have thoughtful input and is being followed and discussed outside of CD. I had a discussion regarding it with our lead mentor, Mr. Bertucci, today after BEST build. There's some good stuff here.

At the same time, your list doesn't want to get lost or drowned out in the discussion.

Just a thought.
Jane

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Ok, I've only skimmed this thread - 9 pages is a lot. Please forgive if I repeat something already brought up.

Tasks expand to the time allowed. If we had matches start in the middle of Saturday, there would be teams still "almost ready" to be inspected on Saturday morning.

Set a new inspection deadline and stick to it. It may take a regional or two (or a season), but teams will adjust. Many don't like that we are not getting a control system this year with our registration, but we will adjust. Many don't like this rule or that, but in the end, we comply.

The problem with teams not being ready for inspection is really best dealt with before Thursday.

I like an on-line Pre-Ship Self Inspection due prior to ship date, with an "electronic signature". Teams with problems could be identified and get help ASAP on Thursday.

Just my thoughts.

-Mr. Van
Coach, Robodox

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Jane this is an excellent thought.
I will figure out how to do just that... So that others can add their ideas...
Do you have any suggestions how we might do this... I don't want to have two parallel threads going.... any suggestions from moderators?
????

Re: Need for Inspections Rules Changes
 

Bob,
I would suggest that you start a new thread with a very specific title addressing this list.

Then in your opening post, state what this list is and what its purpose is. Copy/paste your list in your post. You can include a link to this thread stating that the list has developed from the discussion in this thread. That simple. Clarify that the new thread is for list suggestions/additions only and if anyone wants to continue the discussion, to move to the original thread - this one.

Also, I think you have had some responses to the list in this thread so make sure that they are added to the list.

If you have any questions about my suggestion, send me a pm or perhaps the mods can better address it.

Jane