R68: One and only one compressor

[DonRotolo]

The way I see it, R68 is extremely clear that a second compressor (such as another ViAir on the cart, or in the pit, or a shop [120 V AC] compressor) anywhere at the competition is just not allowed.

Am I mis-reading this rule?

Anyone want to take bets on how many teams attempt to use more than "one and only one" compressor at competition?

[Whippet]

I'm betting 1/20. That seems to be the average rate of teams I have seen trying to use a globe motor / more than one compressor / other illegal part in the past. Teams that haven't read the manual in the past will most likely continue not doing so at similar rates.

Of course, I may be surprised this year.

[orangemoore]

There has always been a debate about additional compressors and the way I understand the rule is you may only have 1 compressor supply the air for the robot. That counts for pre-match, post-match, during a match and in the pit.


What I think the rule allows is for teams to use a shop compressor for tools and other thing besides the robot.

[Munchskull]

Anyone know why this is a rule?

[Jon Stratis]

I think it will actually be very low this year, compared to previous years. Prototypes and process pics/vids I've seen so far are much more heavily reliant on motors than in the past... I'm guessing we'll see fewer teams with pneumatic s than normal.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Munchskull

Anyone know why this is a rule?

Part of it is probably fairness, so teams with fewer funds or rookies have the same opportunities as teams that have been around a dozen years. Keep in mind rookies get a compressor in the rookie KoP, so we know that every team has access to at least that one, even if it is old.

Beyond that, I would say there's a big argument to be made for safety, simplicity and inspectability. We need to be able to ensure a system at competition is properly set up and controlled. We don't want compressors being run manually by hooking them straight to a battery. We don't want teams to have the ability to create a dangerous over-pressure situation just for a small advantage on the field. Having a regulated and fixed set up with one compressor and other required parts makes it a lot easier to ensure every team is being safe, and a lot easier to ensure everything is set up legally.

Keep in mind this is not a new rule. It's been in place as long as I've been Inspecting. For example, in 2010 (Breakaway) R75 stated " Compressed air for the pneumatic system on the ROBOT must be provided by one and only one compressor."

[mwmac]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

The way I see it, R68 is extremely clear that a second compressor (such as another ViAir on the cart, or in the pit, or a shop [120 V AC] compressor) anywhere at the competition is just not allowed.

Am I mis-reading this rule?

Anyone want to take bets on how many teams attempt to use more than "one and only one" compressor at competition?

Don, I think there are a couple of points where I might differ with your interpretation of R68. Here is the rule:

R68
Compressed air on the ROBOT must be provided by one and only one compressor. Compressor specifications may not
exceed nominal 12VDC, 1.05 cfm flow rate.

First, in the event that a team suffers a complete failure of the robot compressor would you disallow them from replacing it with a like for like unmodified compressor from the spare parts station or from their own parts drawer?

Second, your interpretation fails to give any meaning to the words "on the ROBOT". IMO the rule is worded to clearly indicate that the stored compressed air in a robot's pneumatic tanks is to be provided by that robot's on-board or off-board compressor not by some other source. The purpose of the rule is, I believe, to disallow the use of a compressor identical to that of the robot's on-board compressor to fill the pneumatic tanks pre-match while keeping the on-board compressor cool and fresh for the match.

Finally, as worded, R68 clearly prohibits the use of a shop compressor for supplying compressed air to "the ROBOT" due to the voltage and flow rate specifications. Shop compressors are not prohibited from being present in the pits under this rule.

[nighterfighter]

Originally Posted by mwmac

Shop compressors are not prohibited from being present in the pits under this rule.

Interesting. In previous years, we have been told to remove our portable shop compressor from the venue.

[mwmac]

Originally Posted by nighterfighter

Interesting. In previous years, we have been told to remove our portable shop compressor from the venue.

Can't speak to your particular experience but electrical power limitations are present at some venues due to concerns about tripping breakers in the pits.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by mwmac

First, in the event that a team suffers a complete failure of the robot compressor would you disallow them from replacing it with a like for like unmodified compressor from the spare parts station or from their own parts drawer?

I highly doubt that! Spare parts are specifically permitted.

The purpose of the rule is, I believe, to disallow the use of a compressor identical to that of the robot's on-board compressor to fill the pneumatic tanks pre-match while keeping the on-board compressor cool and fresh for the match.

Yep, I see it the same way.

Finally, as worded, R68 clearly prohibits the use of a shop compressor for supplying compressed air to "the ROBOT" due to the voltage and flow rate specifications. Shop compressors are not prohibited from being present in the pits under this rule.

Correct. However, if a team were to be found to be using a shop compressor to fill their robot, OR if the venue had an issue (noise or power supply), the LRI would probably head around to all the teams with shop compressors to ask them very nicely to remove their compressors from the venue. And if a team failed to stop using their shop compressor to fill the robot after being asked once, I could certainly see them being told to remove the compressor from the venue immediately (as well as a possible red card for either uncivil behavior or for uninspected/illegal robot on the field).

[mmaunu]

Last year, I specifically asked a Q&A question about this. You can absolutely have more than one air compressor at a competition just like you can have more than 6 CIM motors at a competition. You can only have 6 CIMs on your robot at one time and you can only use one air compressor to put air into your robot...but you can have backups and you can use a different air compressor for different matches.

People always claim that this rule is clearly worded and yet there is always a discussion about interpretation.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by DonRotolo

The way I see it, R68 is extremely clear that a second compressor (such as another ViAir on the cart, or in the pit, or a shop [120 V AC] compressor) anywhere at the competition is just not allowed.

I don't read it that way at all, for multiple reasons. First and foremost, the robot rules govern robots, not tools, except when a rule mentions a tool being used to affect a robot. General event rules governing what you may use as a tool fall are found in the administrative manual, and it contains no prohibition on compressors used as tools. (Obviously, for other reasons, you can't use some kinds of compressors at all.)

If the tool is intended to be used to affect a robot (e.g. to fill the robot's tanks), there's still no violation. The rules do not prohibit thoughtcrime.

If the tool is used to affect a robot in an illegal way, they should fail inspection; if no gameplay is involved, there is no penalty for that, other than the opportunity cost of having to get it reinspected. So if a team uses a compressor illegally, and is caught, they can refill legally to the officials' satisfaction, whether or not the offending device remains in the building (and assuming that it's not a materials/schedule issue that concerns what may be brought to an event).

If the tool is used to affect a robot that is involved in gameplay, the gameplay penalties can be invoked—but even then, none of them prescribe that the offending device be removed from the building.

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by mwmac

First, in the event that a team suffers a complete failure of the robot compressor would you disallow them from replacing it with a like for like unmodified compressor from the spare parts station or from their own parts drawer?

Originally Posted by EricH

I highly doubt that! Spare parts are specifically permitted.

The tangential issue of spare parts under R68 is also a bit complicated (and has been discussed in the context of previous years rules).

As the relevant rules are mostly unchanged, my contention remains that assuming you can bypass part quantity limits to install a spare (this is clearly past and present practice regarding motors, for example), there is uncertainty as to whether air already legally stored in the tanks ceases to comply with R68, and thus R24.

Basically: if you are entitled to bypass the R68 limit of 1 to install a spare compressor, what necessarily prohibits you from bypassing the same limit as a result of the same act to use the air supplied by the first one? It's the same clause of the same rule, and yet to prohibit the air would be to enforce and overlook it simultaneously.

[ATannahill]

Originally Posted by mmaunu

Last year, I specifically asked a Q&A question about this. You can absolutely have more than one air compressor at a competition just like you can have more than 6 CIM motors at a competition. You can only have 6 CIMs on your robot at one time and you can only use one air compressor to put air into your robot...but you can have backups and you can use a different air compressor for different matches.

People always claim that this rule is clearly worded and yet there is always a discussion about interpretation.

Q&A responses from previous years do not have bearing on the current year.

If you want further clarification post a question to the current Q&A.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Tristan Lall

The tangential issue of spare parts under R68 is also a bit complicated (and has been discussed in the context of previous years rules).

As the relevant rules are mostly unchanged, my contention remains that assuming you can bypass part quantity limits to install a spare (this is clearly past and present practice regarding motors, for example), there is uncertainty as to whether air already legally stored in the tanks ceases to comply with R68, and thus R24.

Basically: if you are entitled to bypass the R68 limit of 1 to install a spare compressor, what necessarily prohibits you from bypassing the same limit as a result of the same act to use the air supplied by the first one? It's the same clause of the same rule, and yet to prohibit the air would be to enforce and overlook it simultaneously.

How would you replace a compressor without dumping the air first? Sure, it's possible with an off board compressor, but an on-board one, which covers probably 99% of the compressors I see at competition...