Last Minute Changes

[remulasce]

Wasn't too involved before 2010, so can't comment past "of course".

2010: Kicker did not work when robot went into crate. Partial redesign of it before week 1 SD regional. Intake still didn't work. Complete intake redesign before LA regional. Changed kicking element (angle + reinforcement) and increased kicker power between SD and LA, and then again between LA and Champs.

2011: Intake & minibot did not work at SD. Redesign minibot, adjust intake for LA. Intake still sketchy in LA. Redesign for Champs. Minibot too slow during elims at Champs. Remove and replace with 1114's prototype deployer between matches.

[JohnSchneider]

When we arrived at Bayou and ran a practice match we discovered we had made a calculation error in our drivetrain, and the thing wouldn't turn on carpet.

The only way we could fix what we had done, was a spontaneous co-axial drive system.

Using entirely borrowed and scrounged up parts from other teams we were able to assemble in just 2 hours, a whole new drive setup, geared completely different taking up no more room on the robot, and having a pretty cool engineering aspect displayed.

[Nemo]

In each of these last two years we have put a lot of time into significant upgrades mid-season, and that has been really fun and rewarding. Like some people have said, the build season basically lasts until the end of your last competition if you want it to.

2011: Complete redesign of minibot and deployment for second competition. Minibot went 9 for 9 in qualifiers! Redesigned minibot again for champs and also brought a plastic piece to clamp onto our elevator spool to increase its diameter and speed it up.

2012: Switched a set of wheels before our first competition to improve turning. At the second competition, installed a new shooter and a new bridge manipulator.

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by JABot67

"They procrastinate so much, no wonder they're the Heroes of Tomorrow!"

This reminded me of something similar that Dave posted long ago about building the technology of tomorrow, sometime late tonight.

It probably should be an FRC build-season mantra: never put off until tomorrow what you can do tonight.

[stuart2054]

Originally Posted by burnzkid

Anybody else have any last minute changes? Our robot ended up being 10 pounds overweight (we never weighed it with the electronics board) so we had to ditch our only way of getting over the beam, leaving us only with the harder option of the balance bridges. Did anyone else have any last minute changes to their bot that resulted in a major change of strategy?

Changes are inevitable, reading the rules etc... doesn't always give you a good idea of how the strategy and game will effect your thoughts on design.

2011 We had a great deployment mechanism and a decent minibot (4 seconds using the gearboxes on the motors) ready after the build season. After scouting Kettering and seeing the 2 second direct drive units we went that direction and had the new ones ready for our first competition (W. MI district) and it worked for us well on to MSC and St Louis.

2012 Our original idea for balancing 3 robots was to be a robot "car hauler" and have a robot on top of ours. After the West Michigan District where we did not see many robots suitable to ride on us, We built a "stinger" to replace our ramp appendage for Niles district. If we had not had the ramp idea we would not have had the room or weight to have the stinger. We still have the ramp and could rapidly change it in the pit but I think the stinger is much more useful as we can rapidly co-op balance in the seeding matches and the ramp was only an end game piece.

[Jeff Waegelin]

One of my key FRC philosophies is: if you aren't improving, you're falling behind. What is successful in Week 1 may not cut it by Championship, so continuous improvement is an absolute necessity! After each event this year we had a full team meeting to discuss what went well and what we could improve for the next event.

Since we "finished" our robot, a couple days before Stop Build Day, we have changed pretty much every subsystem at least once, be it a subtle or drastic change. Among other things, we went through:

• 4 iterations of our shooter hood
• 2 shooter gearboxes
• 3 versions of the "stinger"
• changed our wheelie bar to a wedge
• changed the number and type of wheels

It's a very different Scorpion than we first put together 7 weeks ago. Iterative design has always been a big thing for 148, and this year was no different!

[Alex Cormier]

Originally Posted by Jeff Waegelin

One of my key FRC philosophies is: if you aren't improving, you're falling behind. What is successful in Week 1 may not cut it by Championship, so continuous improvement is an absolute necessity! After each event this year we had a full team meeting to discuss what went well and what we could improve for the next event.

Since we "finished" our robot, a couple days before Stop Build Day, we have changed pretty much every subsystem at least once, be it a subtle or drastic change. Among other things, we went through:

• 4 iterations of our shooter hood
• 2 shooter gearboxes
• 3 versions of the "stinger"
• changed our wheelie bar to a wedge
• changed the number and type of wheels

It's a very different Scorpion than we first put together 7 weeks ago. Iterative design has always been a big thing for 148, and this year was no different!

Do you have any information on what made you change the drive train and pictures to document the change?

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by stuart2054

2012 Our original idea for balancing 3 robots was to be a robot "car hauler" and have a robot on top of ours. After the West Michigan District where we did not see many robots suitable to ride on us, We built a "stinger" to replace our ramp appendage for Niles district. If we had not had the ramp idea we would not have had the room or weight to have the stinger. We still have the ramp and could rapidly change it in the pit but I think the stinger is much more useful as we can rapidly co-op balance in the seeding matches and the ramp was only an end game piece.

Watch out for the module rule. Talk to the lead inspector if you're planning to switch one for the other.

[Joseph Smith]

In 2011, we didn't have a minibot or deployment until our second competition, and we were constantly tweaking it.
This year, we added pneumatic "Stingers" to our robot to aid balancing, and removed our shooter hood adjustment system in favor of a fixed hood, and added a second pneumatic tank.

[PAR_WIG1350]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

Watch out for the module rule. Talk to the lead inspector if you're planning to switch one for the other.

As long as they don't change their minds after competing with the ramp, the change from stinger to ramp would be counted as a modification, not a second configuration. If they did want to be able to play their first match with a stinger, their second with the ramp, and the third with the stinger again, then they would have to comply with the multiple configurations rule.

[R03]
The Robot weight may not exceed 120 lbs. When determining weight, the basic Robot structure and all elements of all additional Mechanisms that might be used in different configurations of the Robot shall be weighed together.

Surprisingly, This is the only rule to mention this with the exception of this:

[R19]
The Robot (including items intended for use during the competition in alternative configurations of the Robot, excluding items permitted per Rule [R26]) must be bagged or crated (as appropriate for your event), and out of team hands by the shipment deadline specified in the FRC Administrative Manual, Section 5.

Which basically means that if you have a modular system with multiple configurations, the modules for that system are not exempt from the withholding allowance. However, this is redundant since the withholding rules this year are worded such that any fabricated item meant to be used on the robot, even replacement parts, count towards your withholding allowance.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Jeff Waegelin

• changed the number and type of wheels

I'd like to know how you made your robot modular enough to change that one. Usually for our team, our frame has a massive amount of welds that make it short of a miracle to change our wheels, lest they are fairly similar in dimension. Though, with it being 148, I'd bet money on your frame being amorphous metal controlled by thought alone.

[burnzkid]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Though, with it being 148, I'd bet money on your frame being amorphous metal controlled by thought alone.

Seeing teams like 166 at our regional this weekend, this isn't far from the truth.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by PAR_WIG1350

As long as they don't change their minds after competing with the ramp, the change from stinger to ramp would be counted as a modification, not a second configuration. If they did want to be able to play their first match with a stinger, their second with the ramp, and the third with the stinger again, then they would have to comply with the multiple configurations rule.

Originally Posted by [R03]

When determining weight, the basic Robot structure and all elements of all additional Mechanisms that might be used in different configurations of the Robot shall be weighed together.

That's one valid interpretation, however it's also plausible that [R03] applies as soon as the team forms the intent to bring a second mechanism.¹ This issue has been discussed among inspectors in the past (and possibly at the GDC level), but I don't know of any such discussion this year.

In that situation, I'd like to give the team the benefit of the doubt with the most lenient interpretation consistent with the rule, but I'm not entirely convinced that the modification vs. module dichotomy can be stretched that far. There's a continuum between a modification entirely conceived and built from raw materials at the event, and a prefabricated module; how do we decide where to draw the line? The rule doesn't really give any guidance.

I'm inclined to think that if the team intended the part to be used on the robot as a replaceable module, and prepared it in advance, it was their obligation to understand that [R03] might be applicable, and plan accordingly.

For modifications undertaken from materials gathered at the event (which were unlikely to have been originally intended as robot parts), I've previously ruled that they were legal, provided the modification wasn't going to be reversed at the event. (The status of the modifications/modules at subsequent events would depend on what the team did and intended to do with them.)

¹ I mention that because of course a strict reading of that rule makes no sense—just about anything could be added to a robot, but it's not practical to weigh it all.

[MichaelBick]

Originally Posted by CalTran

I'd like to know how you made your robot modular enough to change that one. Usually for our team, our frame has a massive amount of welds that make it short of a miracle to change our wheels, lest they are fairly similar in dimension. Though, with it being 148, I'd bet money on your frame being amorphous metal controlled by thought alone.

148 builds out of riveted sheet metal. Though this makes it cleaner and easier to do, it is till a pretty large endeavor. I imagine they replaced the whole bottom of their robot.

[klutzygirl16]

At our second regional we had to lower the rod that we used to stop our drawbridge from lowering too soon when we raise our dumper mechanism. Because of that for one of the matches we couldnt shoot. We had to lower it because it couldnt fit into the box. After the next match we fixed it so that it could work and still fit in the box. At the first regional we had angled our front fender to help ead balls in, we fixed it, it didnt really change our game though