The 6 Week Build Season and 'Mentor Burnout'

[Nemo]

A bunch of things gnaw at me. Here's a big one:

Competitive teams will be "forced" to spend more time than they already do if we had an open build season.

If that's true, then those same teams are already "forced" to build a practice robot and continue working on their 30 lbs of parts. It changes nothing.

I am pretty frustrated that when people are confronted with the concept of more flexibility, they twist it into the fatal certainty that they will be "forced" to work to the point of exhaustion.

[Bongle]

Originally Posted by Nemo

If that's true, then those same teams are already "forced" to build a practice robot and continue working on their 30 lbs of parts. It changes nothing.

Which is why you see nearly all the "pro-6-week" posts including "remove the withholding allowance". Because you're correct: we already ARE forced to work for 4 months straight to stay competitive. I for one would like to be able to be competitive WITHOUT having to work for 4 months straight. This year, other commitments forced me to not be able to work past mid-february. I felt like I was abandoning my team, even though I had been there most weekday meetings throughout build season.

2012 was the same way: we met at nearly the same tempo between mid-february and mid-march, because the shooter needed tuning/lightening and the aiming code needed changing.

2011 was the same way, but even more intense because we qualified for championships and were doing a "big year": mid-feb to mid-april was minibot revisions, claw revisions, gearbox revisions, code revisions, vision system revisions.

In each year, the revisions that we did between "end of build" and competitions made pretty enormous upgrades in our robot's capabilities and kept us competitive. If we hadn't, we would have done much worse.

The people saying "make it 4 months officially, it'll make it easier" are ignoring a truth: it already is 4 months. It has already burned me (and I'm sure, others) right out. Allowing MORE access to the robot would make it even worse. We have seen the 4 month build beast, and it is awful.

[Nemo]

Here's another one that bothers me: we shouldn't lengthen the build season, because teams just waste the first part of it anyway, in spite of working hard during that period of time.

Here's what is in question:
1) Would the longer season result in worse burnout?
2) If so, is improved robot performance worth the cost?

Here's what is not in question:
1) Would a longer season result in better robot performance?

You can argue that some teams will insist on shooting themselves in the foot no matter what by wasting time or following bad processes or designing beyond their means, but why on earth would that sort of pessimism be the basis for the FRC rules? If you think the longer season wouldn't improve robots due to complacency when the deadline isn't close enough, then FRC might as well shorten the season. Or teams can simply take the first two weeks of the season off and find out if it makes any difference.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by Bongle

Which is why you see nearly all the "pro-6-week" posts including "remove the withholding allowance". Because you're correct: we already ARE forced to work for 4 months straight to stay competitive. I for one would like to be able to be competitive WITHOUT having to work for 4 months straight.

Removing the 30 lb allowance isn't enough. You'd also need to ban practice robots.

[Ed Law]

Originally Posted by Nemo

A bunch of things gnaw at me. Here's a big one:

Competitive teams will be "forced" to spend more time than they already do if we had an open build season.

If that's true, then those same teams are already "forced" to build a practice robot and continue working on their 30 lbs of parts. It changes nothing.

I am pretty frustrated that when people are confronted with the concept of more flexibility, they twist it into the fatal certainty that they will be "forced" to work to the point of exhaustion.

Very good point. Unfortunately some people are arguing against a change because they "think" others will do this or do that, that they have no control over themselves and they will work themselves to death.

I told you what I will do with my team if we have unlimited access. Tell me what you will do with your team, not what you think other teams you don't know anything about may do. Otherwise this discussion here is meaningless.

[Bongle]

Originally Posted by Nemo

Removing the 30 lb allowance isn't enough. You'd also need to ban practice robots.

Which is why all my posts have said "make it so the operator control software doesn't work between mid-feb and the 1st week of competition"

Even better alternate: make it so the cRio firmware won't run between mid-feb and at competition. Have a "competition dongle" or something that must be installed at competition to make it work. Permit cRios to work after the championship date. People could use past year's firmware all the time (so past robots would be available for demos and whatnot), but if they flash to whatever the latest firmware is, it'd be restricted to the current season's dates. This could also be used to enforce fix-it windows.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by Bongle

Which is why all my posts have said "make it so the operator control software doesn't work between mid-feb and the 1st week of competition"

Althought I disagree, I have to give you credit for having an argument that's internally consistent.

You'd probably be better off banning practice robots if you want to keep people from working after bag day. Your solution doesn't prevent people from working in March, for example.

[pfreivald]

Banning practice robots isn't a consistent part of my argument, certainly. If there was no withholding allowance, a practice robot would allow you to do just that -- but there'd be no need to meet at the grueling build season schedule... You could scale back a LOT and still be competitive.

So I think people are, in essence, correct: it's already a four month schedule, and addressing burnout would include eliminating the withholding allowance. Otherwise, when we got knocked out at Buckeye this year, I wouldn't have simultaneously thought, "Awwww" and "Thank God".

[DampRobot]

Originally Posted by Bongle

Which is why all my posts have said "make it so the operator control software doesn't work between mid-feb and the 1st week of competition"

Even better alternate: make it so the cRio firmware won't run between mid-feb and at competition. Have a "competition dongle" or something that must be installed at competition to make it work. Permit cRios to work after the championship date. People could use past year's firmware all the time (so past robots would be available for demos and whatnot), but if they flash to whatever the latest firmware is, it'd be restricted to the current season's dates. This could also be used to enforce fix-it windows.

This would have two effects. First, it would put an end to the current allowance in the manual that lets teams develop software at any time. Not allowing them to run it on the C-Rio pretty much stops them from being able to test it and work on it in general. Let's face it, software often gets pushed to the very end of build season (and beyond). Maybe the goal is to make everything fit into 6 weeks, and if it doesn't "too bad," but I for one don't think it's a bad idea to let programmers tinker with the code before competition, build season or not.

Second, this wouldn't do anything to stop practice robots. If this restriction were in place, I would advocate very heavily on my team for them to create a practice robot, and run it with either an old C-Rio or a Arduino or something. Practice robots aren't just for practicing, they're mechanical systems development tools too. And it would create a massive "they're cheating because they're using a practice robot!" uproar when top teams do just that to stay competitive.

[Nemo]

I think this could be a better thread if people acknowledged certain self-evident truths. I'll start by agreeing to a few:

1) Mentors (and other people involved in FRC) do get burned out and it is a problem for the long term sustainability of FRC.

2) If the build season went into March and April, it would have affect other things people want to do during those months (more than it does currently).

3) In an open build season, some teams would work very hard the entire time.

4) Most teams would probably put in a higher number of total hours if the build season was longer.

5) As a result of a longer build season, some individuals would end up putting in enough additional time to cause issues in their lives.

Here are the ones I'd like other people to acknowledge:

6) Teams get to choose how they want to run themselves, including setting their own schedules.

7) It's possible to meet fewer times per week over a larger number of weeks and get the same amount of work done.

8) It's a problem that so many teams' robots can't play the game, or can barely play the game. More time to work on the robot would help many (though not all) teams overcome this problem.

9) An open build season would reduce some team expenses for some teams, including expedited shipping and practice robots.

10) Many teams already work very hard after the bag deadline.

[Bongle]

Originally Posted by DampRobot

Second, this wouldn't do anything to stop practice robots. If this restriction were in place, I would advocate very heavily on my team for them to create a practice robot, and run it with either an old C-Rio or a Arduino or something. Practice robots aren't just for practicing, they're mechanical systems development tools too. And it would create a massive "they're cheating because they're using a practice robot!" uproar when top teams do just that to stay competitive.

Easy:
1) If you're using an arduino, you're already restricting yourself so heavily that you probably won't learn much, so I don't care. You certainly wouldn't be able to run/test PIDs, vision, or other really complex systems.
2) If you're using an old cRio, WPILib could be modified slightly each year so that it becomes very difficult to update and maintain your code between the "2013 code on 2012 crio" and "2013 code on 2013 crio" versions.

Also, all you'd get out of it would be practice (on a non-representative robot controller like an arduino or using an old version of WPILib). Since there'd be no withholding allowance in this hypothetical world, you wouldn't be able to tune or upgrade anything unless you planned on manufacturing that upgraded part in the pits at your competition.

It would obviously still be possible to make a practice robot (FIRST can't ban the building of robotic devices), but if rulechanges were in place to make it very difficult and make the payoff uncertain, fewer teams would do it, which in turn would mean fewer teams would feel the need to build one to keep up with the Joneses.

[Bongle]

I should also mention that the firmware-modification solution would be an extremely hard-line approach. I'd be fine with just getting rid of the withholding allowance. Eliminating the withholding allowance gets rid of a large amount of the gains you see from a practice robot anyway (since you wouldn't be able to bring in the revised components you made).

[Nemo]

I've read the entire thread, and I favor open build season. But I'm also sympathetic to the problem of mentor burnout. Here's my proposal:

1) Extend the bag deadline closer to the start of Week 1 events. I suggest Saturday at midnight local time. Now that few teams ship robots to Week 1 events, I don't see a good reason to keep the robot in a bag for those few days.

2) Allow every team a bit of robot access during each week of the competition season; perhaps 4 hours. (Not my idea - but I agree with it) The goal would be to allow some robot work without providing an incentive for teams to be in their shops 24/7.

One could also shrink the fabricated parts allowance, but that becomes less consequential if you have robot access time each week.

[BJC]

I guess my question is this:
How much time does your team need before they are completely happy with their robot and would change nothing else?

The point that I'm trying to make is that with the open build season many people are currently suggesting there is still a finite amount of time and that time is not long enough to make a perfect* robot. As such we will likely continue to work as hard as we do now for as long as the season will allow trying to be our best.

If the season was year round I believe that we would comfortably be able to make the best robot possible for our team without the intensity of the current season.

The point being, if you provide enough time for teams to build such that every second isn't valuable then all teams can afford to take long, sustained breaks from FRC without affecting their performance on the field and the program isn't all-consuming for students and mentors.

Thoughts on this?
, Bryan


*as good as your team can be

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by Ed Law

I told you what I will do with my team if we have unlimited access. Tell me what you will do with your team, not what you think other teams you don't know anything about may do. Otherwise this discussion here is meaningless.

I like this idea.

3847s Current Build Schedule
- 48 days straight (we meet three days before kickoff as well). This is mostly because we like spending time together. We could spend a lot less time and still build the same robot.
- Pretty much 7 days a week during competition season as well unless I'm away at a competition where the team isn't competing.
- 2 weeks are spent prototyping
- the goal is to have the practice robot done by the end of week 4 and then the real robot by about week 5 and half.
- 2 Kitbot Build Days 2nd and 4th Sundays of build season
- 1 Bumper Build (super bowl Sunday morning)
- 1 weekend scrimmage (only a 1/4 field but it still helps)
- a huge amount of time is spent trying to make the practice robot the same as the competition robot and it rarely ever gets that way.

No Bag Day Schedule
- We wouldn't meet the first few Sundays and the initial meeting hours wouldn't be till 10pm or 11pm like they currently are.
- I would be able to go to another team one day each week and help them. I try to do this anyway but it's a lot harder with our normal schedule.
- Without the need to build a practice robot those resources can be diverted to other places. We only need to make two or three of everything instead of 4 or 5 like we currently do. Meaning we would could help other teams machine parts with our sponsor resources since we are using less.
- We would have our practice field open to teams every weekend except for those when we are at competition. We already meet with some teams during competition season but it's only the teams with practice robots.
- One of these practice days would also be a pre-inspection event for local teams. How to enforce this is something I have been thinking about for a while. I think by working with regional directors and organizations that provide funding to teams to put these events in as grant requirements could provide a big incentive to teams.