Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

We strapped a phone onto our robot (with LOTS of zip ties and tape) and filmed the whole match from the robot's perspective. I am the one with the blue shirt with the belly:rolleyes:

The flick of the ubertube was on purpose

This was the match where we broke down because the cRio lost power momentarily and rebooted so we were sitting ducks for the last half of the match.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tDpnRhmhW7A

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

That is really quite cool, though I would like to see a full match with that!

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

I think next year we will make an actual camera mount so we can do this every match ;)

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Hope the robot didn't logomotion-dial someone... would be more confusing than a pocket-dial.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

I think there's a safer way to do this. ::safety::

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

I would love to do this in a few weeks. This would be great footage for a promo video. One question: Is this strictly legal?

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

:D :p We never asked:rolleyes:

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

I think technically you need to get approval from FRC Engineering for doing this during an official match. It is usually allowed as long as the video is not viewable in the player station. This requirement does not apply to the cameras supplied in the KOP or approved for use in vision systems.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

It is perfectly legal. My team uses a little flip video camera and mounts it to our arm or chassis to get a field view of the game.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Perfectly legal? Think again....

<R35> Items specifically prohibited from use on the ROBOT include:
A. any battery other than, or in addition to, the one primary battery permitted by Rule <R34> the MINIBOT battery, or a battery contained in a COTS computing device,

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

As Jack has pointed out this is not "perfectly legal". Wireless cameras need to be approved by First engineering and at a minimum need to be checked over by the Lead Robot Inspector prior to their use on the robot. If you used this, you risked a DQ for you and your alliance for not having the camera inspected. While your LRI would likely have given a green light on this use of your phone, it is not legal to just add things without reinspection. Remember, you can be challenged and reinspected at any time.

<R84> All decorations must be on the ROBOT at the time of final inspection.
<R88> If a ROBOT is modified after it has passed inspection, that ROBOT must be re-inspected.
<R89> FIRST Officials may randomly re-inspect ROBOTS participating in competition MATCHES to assure compliance with the rules.
<T03> A TEAM will only be allowed to participate in a MATCH and receive qualification, ranking, and Coopertition points only if it has passed inspection. If it is learned after the start of the MATCH that a TEAM did not pass inspection, the TEAM’s entire ALLIANCE will receive a RED CARD for that MATCH.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

That's sort what I was wondering. The whole"rules are for those who get caught" thing makes me nervous. We will be asking before we do this. Thanks for the replies.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Kind of scary that an alliance partner could pass inspection, make a modification like this, not tell anyone, and then my team could be DQ'd because of it. What kind of interrogation do teams need to do with each during queing?

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

In quals your partners DQ/red card does not affect the win or your qualifying points if I remember correctly.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

That's a good point. If they have passed inspection once, but not passed a re-inspection after a modification does <T03> apply?

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Aaron,
Simply ask if the team has made modifications since they last inspected. If not, go get an inspector to check the robot over in the queue.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

In Philly 2008, we added a camera to our bot for 1 Qual match. Beforehand, I asked the LRI and the FTA. They approved it for 1 match since it was for our internal sponsorship purposes, it a non-wireless camera and its use wouldn't add time to robot resets between matches. I used some plasticy foam to make a housing for the camera, put it in an obvious location, and started recording while we were in queue.

Put some common sense into anything you put onto the robot field. It's much better to ask and be told 'no', since there is no forgiveness for this kind of thing.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

<T03> gets around that by assigning 3 red cards for one team participating without getting inspected--one red card per alliance member.

I would also figure that that not getting reinspected after a modification means you aren't inspected, invoking a <T03>. Just to be on the safe side, assume that; if you like living on the edge, assume the other way.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

To put the burden on a third party to make sure they are inspected seems a bit off target if you ask me. If the robot has an inspection sticker, I would assume it is ready to go. It is up the the team that made a "modification" to make sure they are reinspected. This is like you getting the ticket for a person's expired tags in the other lane while waiting at a spot light...

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

wilson,
It is one of the prime reasons we do finals inspections. Too many teams are making mods without checking. While few in number, the changes can and do put the teams overweight.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Regardless of legality regarding power and wireless communications, I could argue that if your robot is at 120.0 lbs, and you strap on a 0.2lb anything, you've just given yourself an illegal competitive advantage.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

My 2 cents: The rules specifically ALLOW a battery contained in a COTS computing device on board the ROBOT. A cell phone with its internal battery would qualify under this rule. So long as its not making unauthorized wireless comms (put it in airplane mode), I think it falls under the rules for Non-Functional Decorations.

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

:rolleyes: 119.4lb was our post qual weight...

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

I could always be geared for 16 ft/s using 2 CIMs :ahh:

Re: Logomotion: From A First Person Perspective
 

Weight is not the only consideration when inspecting cameras added to robots.