light visibility

[Erinn888]

We know that the light has to be visible 99% of the time and the top 4 inches have to be visible, but can we fold over the light after the match has started so we can go underneath the bars at the sides of the fields? Or can we have the light sink into the robot as we go underneath the bar and have it reappea after we are under the bar. We understand that the light has to be mounder upright, but can we fold it over after we started or not? If so, do we have to fold it back up?

Any input greatly appreaciated.

[Jay5780]

To me this is rather vague, but I saw this\ on the forum.

[ChrisH]

Yes, FIRST was very clear that the light may be retracted when going under the bar but should be visible and exposed at all other times. They will allow a "reasonable" amount of time for the light to be retracted and extended. They indicated something on the order of 3-4 seconds, as 99% of 120 seconds would only give a little more than a second for the light to be inside the robot.

[pauluffel]

Another important thing to note, you can"t have the light come into contact with the bar. It has to move down before it touches the bar (so you can"t have it on a spring hinge where it will be pushed down by the bar).

[Harrison]

If your bot has clear lexan sides, and the light can be 100% visable thru the lexan 100% of the time, FIRST wouldn't care that the light isn't on top of the bot....would they?

[OneAngryDaisy]

They're rather picky about things of that sort.. I wouldn't take any chances with that because you wouldn't want to have to remodel your robot right before a competition starts..

I still remember having to rip off a window motor at VCU last year because it was illegal..

[Jnadke]

Originally posted by Harrison
If your bot has clear lexan sides, and the light can be 100% visable thru the lexan 100% of the time, FIRST wouldn't care that the light isn't on top of the bot....would they?

On our 2002 robot we have our light mounted on a chunk of polycarb inside our robot... and our robot is encased in polycarb...


We got through all inspections with no problem whatsoever. The referees could see it fine.

[Harrison]

Thats the bot I was thinking of when I was thinking of putting it inside this year...hehehe

Thanks!

[HolyMasamune]

Originally posted by Erinn888
We know that the light has to be visible 99% of the time and the top 4 inches have to be visible, but can we fold over the light after the match has started so we can go underneath the bars at the sides of the fields? Or can we have the light sink into the robot as we go underneath the bar and have it reappea after we are under the bar. We understand that the light has to be mounder upright, but can we fold it over after we started or not? If so, do we have to fold it back up?

Any input greatly appreaciated.

Just a reminder, I think it says in the rulebook that the light has to be right side up, which means you can move it up and down but you can't turn it on its side.

[LBK Rules]

Ask FIRST.

[ChrisH]

According to Update 5 the top 4" of the light must be "exposed".

I attempted to post a question on the FRC (Jive) group asking A) if having the light in a robot with transparent sides was acceptable and B) if it wasn't acceptable would the rule be enforced. Achieving the required exposure was basically going to put us back at square one in terms of frame design and I didn't want to redesign our frame for nothing.

The moderator declined to post my question, probably because of part B. However numerous other people have since suggested the same thing and been told NO. Transparent sides are not acceptable. Even a transparent protective cover is not acceptable.

Exposed means exactly what it says.

A moderator did respond to me personally and say that "any team that does not have it's light exposed will be assessed two minor penalties". As I recall three minor penalties = a DQ. So while you could technically compete, the slightest misbehavior on your part would result in a DQ.

As a team, we decided that in the interests of Gracious Professionalism and because complying with the rules is "the Right Thing To Do" that we would ensure that we met the requirement. We will not try and scrape by or just take our penalty and compete anyway.

We have resolved our issue by figuring out a very elegant retraction mechanism. It kept us from having to redesign our frame. I'm not sure if you can do the same or not, our mechanism depends on a feature of our robot I have not seen discussed here, so I'm keeping quite for now.

Since the response from FIRST was a private message, it was obviously not meant for public consumption. If it was they would have used the FRC group. So I will not post it here without getting clearance from FIRST. But I thought you all should be aware of the major points.

You should also be aware that last fall I volunteered to be a technical judge at one of the competitions. I won't tell you which one, but I will tell you that I will be packing a 6" scale.

Consider yourself warned on this issue....

[Lewis Sussman]

Originally posted by ChrisH
According to Update 5 the top 4" of the light must be "exposed".

I rechecked update #5 and could not find anything about the light that uses the word "exposed." Here is the exact wording:

"A momentary “loss” of visibility of this beacon is allowable; however, 99% of the time FIRST requires that the top 4” of the light be visible."

To me, this means exactly what it says. You need to be able to see the light. Am I missing something? Is there somewhere else that says "exposed?" If not, doesn't "visible" mean if you can see it, even through a transparent medium, it's visible?

What do you all think?

[Joe Ross]

Lewis, http://jive.ilearning.com/thread.jsp...06f736564#2785

[Christine_364]

Yeah, on the FIRST forum, they have verified that you can lower and then raise your light while going under the bar, but having your light inside of a lexan covered robot isn't acceptable.... see the links here:


http://jive.ilearning.com/thread.jsp...t=90&trange=15

http://jive.ilearning.com/thread.jsp...65&trange=1 5



Of course, the same question that had been posted a couple of days earlier was answered with an 'you probably won't be able to get away with it.... the judges will probably make you change it, so have a plan to retrofit the light to a more acceptable position if you are instructed to do so at a competition...'

But the later posts most definitely say NO to having it inside of a clear robot..... in their words, "Exposed means exposed, not covered by a clear box."

<sigh>

[Jnadke]

Originally posted by ChrisH
You should also be aware that last fall I volunteered to be a technical judge at one of the competitions. I won't tell you which one, but I will tell you that I will be packing a 6" scale.

Then I suggest you familiarize yourself with the rules.

Rule M8
Robots must use the rotating light provided in the kit to display their alliance color (red or blue). The light must be mounted upright on the robot so that the color is always visible from a distance of at least 100 feet. The light should be mounted to allow easy changeover of the colored lens before matches. See Section 3.2.2 for Rotating Light wiring information, also see Rule C26.

Team Update 5: PAGE 18, RULE M8,
There have been numerous design questions relative to the installation/placement of the rotating light. The purpose of M8 is to insure that your drivers, the referees, the scorekeeper, and the judges can identify your robot and that the audience has some idea of who’s who; and to make sure that it is installed to enable EASY CHANGEOVER OF THE LIGHT LENSE.
A momentary “loss” of visibility of this beacon is allowable; however, 99% of the time FIRST requires that the top 4” of the light be visible.

From the FIRST Forums (Jan 17, 2003)
Question:
If the rotating light was submerged within the body of a robot that had all transparent sides so that the beacon could be seen in all directions at all times, would that satisfy the intent and spirit of the update to rule M8? In other words, can the light be visible through the sides of the robot?

Answer:
Most likely, the light visibility would be somewhat diffused by the transparent body.

The intent is for the judges and referees, as well as the public, to easily recognize your robot. It is important that the judges be able to easily identify your team so that they can give you proper credit toward the non-competition awards. We would like to see consistancy in visibility of the rotating light. Rule M8 say that the light must be "always visible". This can be left for interpretation. It will be the Tech Inspector's call as to whether the light is sufficiently visible if you use your scheme. You should have an alternate scheme ready if your original scheme does not pass inspection. You may have to demonstrate your scheme to the inspectors during the Thursday trial matches to get their judgement.

Nowhere does it say the light must be "exposed". It only says "visible". In fact, only the top 4" must be visible at all times. Last year the components of our robot were rather low-profile, so the light was higher and was able to always be seen. If you can do this with your robot, then I'd say go for it.


It's hard to say, though. I haven't seen this year's light in action compared to last year's. Is this year's light brighter than the light last year? Any objective opinions/testing?

However, rules do change from year to year. I could be wrong, and FIRST could be "cracking down" on "illegal light usage". I, however, highly doubt they're going to pull out a scale marked to the hundredths of an inch, and measure your light visibility. FIRST has done stranger things though....

In the end, if a critical mechanism depends on the light not being on the top of your robot, I wouldn't risk it just in case FIRST makes up their minds. If you want to "test the water", then run your robot through a practice round with the light mounted visibly inside the robot, and ask the judges if they have any complaints/concerns.