View Single Post
  #66   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-03-2014, 21:33
Retired Starman Retired Starman is offline
Registered User
FRC #3573 (Ohms)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Stone Mountain, GA
Posts: 169
Retired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant futureRetired Starman has a brilliant future
Re: New robot rules at Peachtree

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall View Post
I agree that foreknowledge of the interpretation of R8 is definitely a good thing, as is the opportunity for discussion here.

I just want to be clear that if the policy is strictly an R8 interpretation (the preamble to the policy references R8 along with other things), that it is only being applied in situations where R8 has force. The robot rules offer no fair and practical way to mandate compliance until (full or partial) inspection or gameplay occurs,1 and as a result, the robot rules are inherently ineffective at regulating pit and queue safety.

If the intention is instead to promote safety at all times, then the policy should be enacted under the event's authority to make the competition safe for the public.2 But this removes the option of applying the penalties specified in robot rules.

From the explanations provided here by the staff of that event, I think it's (properly) intended as the latter, but being confused with the former because R8 was mentioned in the preamble to the policy. Except in the most exigent circumstances, I think FIRST and most participants expect that events will not interfere with the competition formula laid out in the game manual—and that's why the invocation of R8 was problematic. And that's why I'd like a clear statement one way or the other.

1 For example, it's foolishness to believe that a robot taken apart for maintenance should at all times comply with the robot rules.
2 For example, events can make rules like "no smoking" or "no walking under the bleachers", but these are distinct from the competition rules in the game manual.
I'm not quite sure just what you are asking, or why it matters, but after reading your question several times, I'll make a stab at explaining to you the nature of the situation.

FIRST is committed to providing a safe environment for robot competitions--see http://www.usfirst.org/roboticsprogr...-manual?id=470, the preamble of which says, in part,
"Instilling a culture of safety is a value that every individual in the FIRST community must embrace as we pursue FIRST’s mission and vision. FIRST Robotics Competition (FRC) has adopted safety as a core value and has established the framework for safety leadership in all aspects of the program."

So dedicated is FIRST to safety, that they have produced a Safety Manual, which can be found at http://www.usfirst.org/sites/default...%201.31.14.pdf

Several items from this Safety Manual are of importance to our discussion here, including:

Under General Safety,
"Keep full control of robot at all times."

and

Under Stored Energy
"Plan the required activities when servicing or making repairs to the robot. Make sure all team members are aware that work is being done on the robot. Address the following:
Avoid working on an energized robot during repairs unless necessary.
Electrical Energy: Disconnect the electric power source.
- Best Practice - Always de-energize the robot before working on it by opening the
main circuit breaker (“re-set” lever is released) and unplugging batteries.
Pneumatic Energy: Always vent any compressed air to the atmosphere.
- This applies to all parts of the pneumatic system.
- Open the main vent valve and verify that all pressure gauges on the robot indicate zero pressure.
Miscellaneous Energy Sources:
- Relieve any compressed or stretched springs or tubing.
- Lower all raised robot arms or devices that could drop down to a lower position on the robot."

and under Post Match:
"- Relieve all stored energy and open the main circuit breaker on the robot.
-Ensure that the robot is made safe prior to lifting it off the playing field, no dangling parts, etc.
- Remove debris from the playing field.
- Use the above “Pre-lift” and “During the lift” procedures.
- Use the gate opening to exit the playing field. Climbing over the railing is prohibited."

Clearly FIRST expects safe conditions be maintained and has pointed out items in their safety manual which have been reiterated by the Peachtree LRI in his announcement to teams.

Further, FIRST has Safety Advisors at events whose job includes watching for unsafe conditions where ever they find them.

The Peachtree LRI is taking his responsibilities seriously in light of:
-The Robot Rules-Specifically R-8
-FIRST's own TEAM Update for 2-18-14
-Pronouncements from other Regionals
-The fact that high energy discharges have caused minor injuries at other regionals
-Discussions among LRI's in their closed Forum
-Concurrence of the Peachtree Planning Committee which took approval action at its meeting of 3-12-14 (I know since I'm on the Planning Committee, as is the LRI).

Robot Inspectors are just one part of the team which puts on the regional competition. They are charged with making sure robots are first and foremost, SAFE. The Lead Robot Inspector (LRI) is responsible for being the final word on rule compliance, including R-8. If you need a reference, see Section 5.5.2 of the Rule Book, which says:
"5.5.2 Eligibility and Inspection Rules
At each event, the Lead ROBOT Inspector (LRI) has final authority on the legality of any COMPONENT, MECHANISM, or ROBOT. Inspectors may re-Inspect ROBOTS to ensure compliance with the rules."

Note that R-8 and Section 5.5.2 do not specify a limitation on the LRI. Thus anytime the LRI becomes aware of a safety issue with a robot, he may take action. It doesn't matter if the robot has been inspected or not, whether it is in the pit or on the field, or anywhere in between, if the robot is creating an unsafe condition, the LRI has control of the situation. Further, if a Safety Advisor sees an unsafe condition anywhere in the venue, he can move to solve it. Others seeing such unsafe conditions should report them. The important thing here is to keep the competition safe.

In your discussion, you appear to be creating two mutually exclusive conditions, either the announcement is made under the authority of the competition, or in situations where R-8 "applies". Let me tell you, R-8 applies at all times the robots are in the venue, before inspection, after inspection, on the field, in the pit, or in between. Your robot needs to be safe at all times and under all conditions. This is not an "R-8 "vs. "Event Authority" dichotomy. Everything which happens at the event happens under "Event Authority" and the LRI is the one designated to be responsible for safety issues at the event dealing with the robot design and operation.

Regardless of how you want to view the authority, the end result is that if your robot comes to the Peachtree, the LRI and his inspection team will work with you to make sure your experience is a safe one.

Dr. Bob, Peachtree Planning Committee Member. Robot Inspector, Mentor, First Ambassador and Volunteer
Chairman's Award is not about building the robot. Every team builds a robot.
Reply With Quote