cRio-FRC in BOM

[Siri]

Originally Posted by RufflesRidge

There would be no reason to write the rule that way if that were the intention. The actual physical source of a part (with the exception of FIRST Choice) has never been important for cost accounting, keeping track of whether the KOP motors or the ones you bought from AM ended up on your actual robot is pointless. That type of accounting would also cause havoc when you have to swap in a spare at an event, do you need to submit a new BoM?

I understand the desire to have an official Q&A answer for reassurance, but I am fairly certain that the "implied phrase" interpretation posted by Cal is correct.

If so, is there a rule somewhere that prohibits using both the cRio-FRC and the -FRCII? Or two (or three) -FRC's? (It may be in the control system stuff that I usually don't try to fully digest.)

I think the confusion is over the phrase "most recent" following the word "any". If "any" refers to any year (which, unless they meant "either" the Rookie or Veteran checklist, I think is the only interpretation), what does "most recent" mean? Logically, it should mean most recent from that year, but [R13] is a mighty weird way to write it. Further, why is this the first time they've used such phrasing/intended such an allowance?

I understand the logic behind the deduction, but a Q&A would make me feel a bit better as well. (i.e. Kevin, I for one would really appreciate your offer as well.)

[RufflesRidge]

Originally Posted by Siri

If so, is there a rule somewhere that prohibits using both the cRio-FRC and the -FRCII? Or two (or three) -FRC's? (It may be in the control system stuff that I usually don't try to fully digest.)

Under my interpretation you actually could use both a -FRC and -FRCII "for free" if you so desired. You would have to account for the cost of -FRC's beyond 1 as that was the quantity on the most recent checklist the -FRC was included on.

I agree the wording is awkward and a Q&A would certainly help put everyone at ease.

[kjohnson]

I'm not sure why the legality of the cRIO is even being questioned...

Originally Posted by R52

Robots must be controlled via one programmable National Instruments cRIO (part # cRIO-FRC or cRIO-FRCII), with image version FRC_2012_v43. Other controllers shall not be used.

As for your budget concerns:

• The original 8-slot cRIO-FRC (with modules) was provided in a previous KOP.
• The new 4-slot cRIO-FRCII (with modules) was provided in this year's rookie KOP.

Therefore, they count as previous or current KOP items and neither the cRIO nor modules need to be accounted for.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

In order to use an item, it must pass ALL FRC rules. Not just <R52>

Originally Posted by nukemknight

I'm not sure why the legality of the cRIO is even being questioned...

As for your budget concerns:

• The original 8-slot cRIO-FRC (with modules) was provided in a previous KOP.
• The new 4-slot cRIO-FRCII (with modules) was provided in this year's rookie KOP.

Therefore, they count as previous or current KOP items and neither the cRIO nor modules need to be accounted for.

[R52]
Robots must be controlled via one programmable National Instruments cRIO (part # cRIO-FRC or cRIO-FRCII), with image version FRC_2012_v43. Other controllers shall not be used.

Check. CRio-FRC and -FRCII allowed.

[R13]
The total cost of all non-KOP items shall not exceed $3,500.00 USD. All costs are to be determined as explained in Section 4.1.3: Budget Constraints.

The following items are excluded from the total cost calculation:
A. items listed on any KOP Checklist (qty is limited to the total listed in the most recent checklist),
B. items obtained via a Product Donation Voucher included in the KOP,
C. items ever distributed to the team via FIRST Choice,
D. any non-functional decorations,
E. individual fasteners, adhesives, or lubricants that are less than $1.00 each,
F. spare parts, and
G. parts of the Operator Console.

Check. CRio-FRCII allowed at no cost (1 on KoP checklist). CRio-FRC is allowed but at cost because qty on latest KoP is 0.

[R14]
No individual item shall have a value that exceeds $400.00. The total cost of Components purchased in bulk may exceed $400.00 USD as long as the cost of an individual Component does not exceed $400.00.

CRio-FRCII -- no issue here (Costing is 0)
CRio-FRC is disallowed due to costing of $535

I agree that it appears to be an oversight ... Again, it'll be an interesting Thursday.

[Nate Laverdure]

EDIT: disregard my first point... didn't make sense! I stand by my second point, which is that:

I agree with nukem... I'm unable to understand how this is an issue.

EDIT2: I interpret [R13] Exception A to mean: items listed on the most recent revision of any year's KOP Checklist (qty is limited to the total listed)

[andreboos]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

I interpret [R13] Exception A to mean: items listed on the most recent revision of any year's KOP Checklist (qty is limited to the total listed)

The 2007 Kit of Parts included four Victor motor controllers. This year's KOP included one. Would up to four Victors be exempt from cost calculations this year? By this interpretation, they would, and a team could include four Victors and four Jaguars without a cost penalty. This is not contradictory, but I doubt it is the intended effect of the rule.

However, this interpretation is necessary to make the 8-slot cRIO legal, which is clearly the intent.

The interpretation I prefer is this: items are exempt from cost calculations at the quantity they were last included in a kit of parts checklist.

This means that a single cRIO-FRC would be exempt from cost calculations, because the last checklist in which it was included (2011), has quantity one. Victors would be exempt up to quantity one, because one was included this year. Next year, if Victors are not included in the KOP, one would still be exempt from cost calculations.

[RufflesRidge]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Check. CRio-FRCII allowed at no cost (1 on KoP checklist). CRio-FRC is allowed but at cost because qty on latest KoP is 0.

Here's what I don't get about this interpretation. Why use the word "any" at all if that's what they meant? The way you are interpreting that's not allowing you to exclude the cost of an item that was on "any" KOP checklist it's allowing you to do so for items on the 2012 KOP checklist. If that's what they meant that's what they would have said IMO (considering that's exactly what they did in R20 last year).

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by RufflesRidge

Here's what I don't get about this interpretation. Why use the word "any" at all if that's what they meant? The way you are interpreting that's not allowing you to exclude the cost of an item that was on "any" KOP checklist it's allowing you to do so for items on the 2012 KOP checklist. If that's what they meant that's what they would have said IMO (considering that's exactly what they did in R20 last year).

Their wording does seem to be contradictory. As such, I take it as the most restrictive (IE Qty 0). We only have an 8-slot CRio, so we're in the barrel, so to speak ... Hence, my statement that it's going to be interesting on Thursday.

[Nate Laverdure]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

CRio-FRC is allowed but at cost because qty on latest KoP is 0.

Can you point me toward the KOP Checklist with a listed quantity of "0" for the 8-slot cRIO?

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by Nate Laverdure

Can you point me toward the KOP Checklist with a listed quantity of "0" for the 8-slot cRIO?

Page 19

compactRIO
1
Rookie Kit
P/N: cRIO-FRC II
4-slot cRIO with Analog (9201), Digital (9403),
and Solenoid (9472) modules

Highlighted by me.
The only CRio identified in the most recent KoP checklist is the CRIO-FRCII.
There is no CRIO-FRC in the most recent KoP checklist, thus a qty of 0 in the most recent KoP checklist. As per their exact wording (Inside the parenthisis(sp?)), we cannot cost account the CRio-FRC at $0.

[kjohnson]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Page 19



Highlighted by me.
The only CRio identified in the most recent KoP checklist is the CRIO-FRCII.
There is no CRIO-FRC in the most recent KoP checklist, thus a qty of 0 in the most recent KoP checklist. As per their exact wording (Inside the parenthisis(sp?)), we cannot cost account the CRio-FRC at $0.

But the Rookie checklist isn't your checklist. You would have to go back to the checklist where you first got your 8-slot cRIO.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by nukemknight

But the Rookie checklist isn't your checklist. You would have to go back to the checklist where you first got your 8-slot cRIO.

Incorrect:

Originally Posted by BOM Template

This is a sample Bill of Material Template (BOM) for use in the 2012 FIRST(R) Robotics Competition Game, Rebound RumbleTM. All parts required by The Robot Section 4 should be entered into the BOM. The BOM helps Inspectors verify part use and legality on Robots.

Any item that was included in the Rookie KOP but not the Veteran KOP should be considered a KOP item and indicated on the BOM. Costs are to be recorded per Section 4.1.3 of The Robot, which can be found at http://frc-manual.usfirst.org.

Highlighted by me.

[kjohnson]

Originally Posted by Daniel_LaFleur

Incorrect:

I'm aware of that statement, but at some point in the past you still had the 8-slot cRIO-FRC on your KOP checklist.

Here is the "most recent" version of the KOP checklist that included the cRIO-FRC. Page 7 of the 2009 KOP Checklist.

[Daniel_LaFleur]

Originally Posted by nukemknight

I'm aware of that statement, but at some point in the past you still had the 8-slot cRIO-FRC on your KOP checklist.

Here is the "most recent" version of the KOP checklist that included the cRIO-FRC. Page 7 of the 2009 KOP Checklist.

Correct.

But the wording is "Most recent checklist", not "Most recent checklist that the item was on".

Personally, I hope your interpretation is taken. Otherwise, we're going to have lots of issues at GSR on Thursday (My team included).

[DonRotolo]

Everything in this thread is an early April Fools joke, right?

I mean, you can't seriously equate "Not on the list" with "On the list with a quantity of zero". Those are not even close to the same.

It's threads like this that has the GDC pleading with us to stop "lawyering" the rules. I mean, seriously. Sheesh.