View Single Post
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 31-10-2016, 09:34
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is offline
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,581
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Legality of purchasing Planetary Gearboxes from alternative sources.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ToddF View Post
Please note that even if the gearbox is perfectly legal mechanically, for you to use it on a competition bot, it must be purchased from a legal vendor. Section 4.1 (pages 3 and 4) sets forth criteria necessary for a company to qualify to be a legal vendor. Aliexpress.com may not qualify. In fact, I seriously doubt it.
I am probably missing something really huge and important, but I do not believe the rule says the part must be purchased from a legal VENDOR, but merely that the part must be a standard part commonly available from a VENDOR.

Quote:
Originally Posted by 2016 Manual Section 4.1
A COTS item must be a standard (i.e. not custom order) part commonly available from a VENDOR for all Teams for purchase.
If the rule were written as you suggested, that would mean teams could not sell or even trade COTS parts with each other, which is clearly legal and intended to be legal. The important thing is not where the team actually received the part, but if the part is equally accessible to all teams through a VENDOR.

Teams should note that regardless of how much the team paid for the part, they must list the part in the BOM at the fair market value price that any team could pay for the amount of the part they used on the robot (unless the part is KoP, etc).

As for these specific gearboxes - if you wanted to go this route, I would seek out some documentation from AndyMark specifying that these are identical to a specific AM part number. If the only difference really is the part number marking, I believe this would be considered an equivalent COTS part under Example 4 of the 2016 blue box on page 4.

Quote:
Example 4: A COTS part that has non-functional label markings added would still be considered a COTS part, but a COTS part that has
device-specific mounting holes added is a FABRICATED ITEM.
But really, unless your team is really desperate for those few extra dollars, support our good friends at AndyMark with your business.

The motor rules themselves are more complicated - if those motors don't have identical part numbers already printed on them, I wouldn't push your luck. I'd just use the gearboxes and attach a definitely legal motor to them.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
...2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
---
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
...2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design
...2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
...2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
...2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 Minnesota 10,000 Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)

Last edited by Chris is me : 31-10-2016 at 09:36.
Reply With Quote