Modifying robot at competition?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by andya

I asked the inspectors what we can change on the robot. The few inspectors that were there replied as long as we did not go over the set limits, we could make any wanted or needed changes anytime you are allowed to work on your robot as long as you come back after every change and get re-inspected. One inspector was adamant, any changes no matter how small or big needed to have an inspection after said change.

This is what the rules call out. If you make a change, reinspect. (There are some changes that that does not apply to--if you had a 10-lb shooter, a 10 lb blocker, and a 100 lb robot, and you showed up and inspected with both but could only carry one at a time, you wouldn't need reinspection--but those are fairly rare.)

... and appears the rules are subject to the officiating staff’s interpretation and implementation of the rules. I thought, by the rules, what parts you came to the competition with is what you had to compete with as long as the total robot weight did not go over 120lb regardless of the parts.

Yes and no, and not quite. You're raising two points here that are both very good questions to raise.

First, the rules are implemented by the officiating staff. You've obviously read them, so you've seen the part about the Head Ref's decision is final. However, if you can show, say, the regional director, that the official is in direct violation of the rules, or of the standard interpretation, then someone from higher up will have a talk with them about correcting their interpretation and implementation. It's happened before. To take the Head Ref as an example, he can get input from any FIRST officials at the event, including any members of the Game Design Committee that happen to be present. LRIs and Head Refs and FTAs all have contact info for their leaders--and I haven't seen the Lead LRI comment here yet, but I know he's around somewhere. If that lead disagrees with the ref or inspector, the lead wins.

Second, to address the "parts you come with is what you have to compete with as long as the total weight does not go over 120lb" part: You did not read this part of the rules thoroughly enough, I'm afraid. You come in with your robot in the bag, up to 30 lb of fabricated items (not counting batteries, bumpers, and the operator console), your team members and your spirit items. But, I'm leaving something off of this list, because it's not restricted anywhere. And that is, raw material.

You can bring in as much raw material as you can carry, typically in as many trips as you need. I know that's not explicitly called out in the Manual; it used to be, but some rules seem to disappear or become vague every now and again as they become ingrained in the various teams' mentality. It takes somebody asking questions to wake people up and confirm the rule. It used to be not uncommon for teams to come in with a couple aluminum tubing pieces or PVC pipe.

I could go into an example, but I think you get the point. Keep asking questions; we're here to provide answers, even if they aren't official ones.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by andya

One inspector was adamant, any changes no matter how small or big needed to have an inspection after said change.

They are correct. I know in Orlando when we mounted our GoPro we had an inspector check it and asked him to note on the form that he had. Minor change that added no competitive advantage to the robot (aside from the sub 1lb increase in weight that meant we were still something like 10 lbs under) but no reason to chance it. Obviously, there are limits, swapping out a zip tie for a new one or putting new tread on your wheels is probably not a worry. But if you are adding or removing anything substantial have them give it a quick once over. Can't hurt.

[Grim Tuesday]

This can all be solved by a Q&A which I have asked. And now we wait.

Question on T08:

Q610: Please clarify what is meant by "time of Inspection." Does it mean time of initial inspection or any time of inspection? In other words, may a ROBOT add a MECHANISM after initial inspection, be reinspected and compete legally? Assume the ROBOT remains legal after the later inspection.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by EricH

First, the rules are implemented by the officiating staff. You've obviously read them, so you've seen the part about the Head Ref's decision is final. However, if you can show, say, the regional director, that the official is in direct violation of the rules, or of the standard interpretation, then someone from higher up will have a talk with them about correcting their interpretation and implementation. It's happened before. To take the Head Ref as an example, he can get input from any FIRST officials at the event, including any members of the Game Design Committee that happen to be present. LRIs and Head Refs and FTAs all have contact info for their leaders--and I haven't seen the Lead LRI comment here yet, but I know he's around somewhere. If that lead disagrees with the ref or inspector, the lead wins.

There's a reason the rules state "At each event, the Lead ROBOT Inspector (LRI) has final authority on the legality of any COMPONENT, MECHANISM, or ROBOT." (Section 5.5.2)... Very often individuals like the regional director aren't fully versed on the rules or how the GDC has interpreted them, and they haven't been through the same training as the LRI. Additionally, they may not be as familiar with robot design or construction as the inspectors are. As a result, attempting to circumvent the LRI in order to get a more favorable ruling is generally bad for everyone. All of the LRI's have phone numbers for both FIRST and the Chief Robot Inspector, and we certainly feel free to use them if anything extremely difficult comes up. Even if the situation isn't extremely difficult, if the ruling could be at all considered controversial, you can bet the LRI is going to include the Head Ref and the FTA in making the decision. I know I would.

If a team shows up with a difficult situation, the LRI's know how to go about obtaining additional opinions and interpretations before issuing a final ruling... That said, the LRI's ruling is final, per the rulebook. It may not seem fair if a ruling is going against you, but keep in mind that the LRI's are all doing their best to rule fairly and to help every team there.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

There's a reason the rules state "At each event, the Lead ROBOT Inspector (LRI) has final authority on the legality of any COMPONENT, MECHANISM, or ROBOT." (Section 5.5.2)... Very often individuals like the regional director aren't fully versed on the rules or how the GDC has interpreted them, and they haven't been through the same training as the LRI. Additionally, they may not be as familiar with robot design or construction as the inspectors are. As a result, attempting to circumvent the LRI in order to get a more favorable ruling is generally bad for everyone.

I picked the regional director as the first person who would be likely to be able to get somebody's attention in a hurry. Note that I'm almost assuming that the LRI is making a ruling that is counter to the robot rules (as interpreted by any relevant Q&As) and sticking to it--in such a case, I would anticipate the regional director telling the appropriate parties to deal with the situation, or at least to hear the team out.

[$G-money$]

I am also a member of the 4212 (Technoferrets) drive team. I had loads of fun this year.
I decided that 269 was made to defend us and to what everyone says about them...i think everything they did was legal. One thing i do not agree with is the Game Manual. Not to take this as a bash, but I think the rules need to be better detailed for events such as these.
I really wanted to have 269 on our team because of their powerful drivetrain, but not everything works out the way you want it.
The first match they kept us from the feeder station for a while and then blocked a couple of our shots (even caused us to break a bumper in the process). In the second match they played outstanding defense, and we weren't even able to touch our feeder station.

[Siri]

The Q&A was answered, by the way:

Q. Please clarify what is meant by "time of Inspection." Does it mean time of initial inspection or any time of inspection? In other words, may a ROBOT add a MECHANISM after initial inspection, be reinspected and compete legally? Assume the ROBOT remains legal after the later inspection.
A. "Time of Inspection" is when yourROBOT is being Inspected. If you make changes to your ROBOT after Inspection, you must have those changes re-Inspected before being considered "legal" again, per [T10].

So yes, (as 173 people expected) such modifications are allowed provided you meet T10.

[karomata]

I don't think that it is that big of a problem. It helps complete the design process because teams see their robots in action, realize its major faults, and correct them. It also helps the game itself progress because it causes almost like an arms race to create the ultimate robot design.

1511 at the Finger Lakes Regional lacked many important driver aids and a working climber. Though modification and prototying on a practice robot, they added a photon cannon, modified climber, improved debug software, and I believe a few other things as well. They then went on to win the Boston Regional. Had they not been able to modify their robot at all, they would have been stuck in the same position the whole season as they were at FLR.

[fsgond]

I hate to say it but I think adding items are allowed. The main reason that I hate to see it is because our full court shooter was shut down late Friday into Saturday when people caught wind that we could do it. The rule states that the modifications must still be within the rule. The field ref does have the right to call for your robot to be reinspected at any time. Also if you were to follow the rule to the letter, you would need to be reinspected every time you added a screw that was not there during initial inspection. In reality we all add items to the robot in good faith that they are following the rules and do not call inspectors over for every little thing.

[DanCreed3692]

Just to clarify, I'm not upset that our team lost. We lost fair and square, as has been pointed out on this thread the final decision lies with the cheif inspector on if the addition is legal, and I support that. I only raised the question to point out the flaw in the (possible) conflicting rules, especially in light of the "during the whole competition event" phrase.

All the teams at the Wisconsin Regional did an awesome job, and we look forward to seeing you all next year.

[markmcgary]

Originally Posted by DanCreed3692

Just to clarify, I'm not upset that our team lost. We lost fair and square, as has been pointed out on this thread the final decision lies with the cheif inspector on if the addition is legal, and I support that. I only raised the question to point out the flaw in the (possible) conflicting rules, especially in light of the "during the whole competition event" phrase.

All the teams at the Wisconsin Regional did an awesome job, and we look forward to seeing you all next year.

Yep. They should fix T08: "At the time of Inspection, the ROBOT must be presented with all MECHANISMS (including all COMPONENTS of each MECHANISM), configurations, and decorations that will be used on the ROBOT." PERIOD. And remove "during the entire competition event." from the rule.

[lcoreyl]

Originally Posted by markmcgary

Yep. They should fix T08: "At the time of Inspection, the ROBOT must be presented with all MECHANISMS (including all COMPONENTS of each MECHANISM), configurations, and decorations that will be used on the ROBOT." PERIOD. And remove "during the entire competition event." from the rule.

I disagree. "Used on the robot"... for the next match? ...for the rest of Friday?

I read "during the entire competition event" combined with T10 to mean "used on the robot" ...from the time of THAT inspection until the end of the event OR until a new inspection is performed.

IMO, reading "during the entire competition event" to mean the robot can only include mechanisms present at the initial inspection is "lawyering" this rule. Again--just my opinion.

Originally Posted by MooreteP

Watching teams engaged in design iteration during the limited window of Thursday practice, then in between Friday and Saturday matches, is like Jazz.

This! I've seen one season of ours rescued by the pursuit of a complete re-design due to major systems failures. The re-design didn't work out either, but it sure kept spirits up heading into eliminations. To me, that is much more the spirit of FIRST...

[Siri]

Originally Posted by lcoreyl

I disagree. "Used on the robot"... for the next match? ...for the rest of Friday?

I read "during the entire competition event" combined with T10 to mean "used on the robot" ...from the time of THAT inspection until the end of the event OR until a new inspection is performed.

IMO, reading "during the entire competition event" to mean the robot can only include mechanisms present at the initial inspection is "lawyering" this rule. Again--just my opinion.

Agreed, neither T08 nor T10 make as much sense without clearly indicating T08 is competition-based; it obscures the intent and limitations of interchangeability. T10 is crystal clear that T08 re-inspections are legal; T08 is just telling you when you don't need to get reinspected. If anything, the concept of re-inspection could be incorporated into T08, if it can be done without redundancy.

Didn't we want a shorter rule book?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Guys, so this doesn't get out of hand let me explain the exact way this is handled by inspectors at all events...
Any team can make improvements to their design as long as the pits are open at an event. (other rules also apply for 2 day events) A team that brings a robot to a competition and decides to change functionality, can within limits. If said team is under 120 lbs and they wish to add an interchangeable mechanism that when weighed with the existing mechanisms is still under 120 lbs., they can add and remove said mechanism at will, match to match. That is exactly what happened in Wisconsin, the added blocker was still under 120 lbs with the robot in it's original configuration. The team chose to remove the mechanism when it was no longer needed in later matches. All robots in the finals were inspected, some multiple times as their configuration changed. Many were checked on the field by the LRI.

When a team decides to change the functionality of the robot and the improvement requires that other mechanisms be removed in order to meet the weight requirement, the improvement is not an interchangeable mechanism, it is a change in design. As such, the team may not return to it's original configuration during that event as that violates the interchangeable mechanism rules. The team can reinstall the original mechanism at a subsequent event. As Tristan pointed out this has been the method used at all events for many years.

When a team designs and brings additional mechanisms to an event, and they wish to interchange them during the competition, all have to be presented at inspection and all mechanisms plus the robot must weigh 120lbs or less.

[Grim Tuesday]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

Guys, so this doesn't get out of hand let me explain the exact way this is handled by inspectors at all events...
Any team can make improvements to their design as long as the pits are open at an event. (other rules also apply for 2 day events) A team that brings a robot to a competition and decides to change functionality, can within limits. If said team is under 120 lbs and they wish to add an interchangeable mechanism that when weighed with the existing mechanisms is still under 120 lbs., they can add and remove said mechanism at will, match to match. That is exactly what happened in Wisconsin, the added blocker was still under 120 lbs with the robot in it's original configuration. The team chose to remove the mechanism when it was no longer needed in later matches. All robots in the finals were inspected, some multiple times as their configuration changed. Many were checked on the field by the LRI.

When a team decides to change the functionality of the robot and the improvement requires that other mechanisms be removed in order to meet the weight requirement, the improvement is not an interchangeable mechanism, it is a change in design. As such, the team may not return to it's original configuration during that event as that violates the interchangeable mechanism rules. The team can reinstall the original mechanism at a subsequent event. As Tristan pointed out this has been the method used at all events for many years.

When a team designs and brings additional mechanisms to an event, and they wish to interchange them during the competition, all have to be presented at inspection and all mechanisms plus the robot must weigh 120lbs or less.

Thanks a lot for this, Al. This is the assumption we've been working under for the last few years and it makes a lot of sense, it would just be nice to see it codified in the rule book.