Safety Issue: Robots Moving in Pits

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by robochick1319

Yes, so put it on the floor of the practice field.

BrendanB already posted why this isn't an acceptable solution.

[bkahl]

Just out of curiosity, would you then consider this illegal too?


https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...type=2&theater

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by Knufire

BrendanB already posted why this isn't an acceptable solution.

Yes, but I still don't see why. I think people are sacrificing basic safeguards that are very important because of something that is more convenient.

Lift the wheels off the ground or perhaps just disconnect drive motors as someone suggested earlier. Lifting the wheels even half an inch above the ground resolves the issue and should still allow you to test your pick up mechanism. (i.e if you suck the tote up, then lay something underneath the tote so that it lays at the right height for the now slightly raised robot).

Are we all seriously saying there is no workaround? Convenience really trumps safety?

[zinthorne]

Originally Posted by JamesCH95

I would be quite upset if we were prohibited from driving the robot on the ground in our pit because it is very easy to do it safely.

When we test our robot on the floor (which is about the only way to evaluate certain performance changes) we establish what we call the 'kill radius.' This terms stems from my experience using axes/mauls/chain-saws - the radius around an operation where a bystander could be hurt. We spread team members around this 'kill radius' to keep people away from our robot when it's being run. This is a practice that has earned us compliments from various safety officials.

In addition to establishing a kill radius around the robot we put one person on the controls whose sole job is to mash the disable button if anything goes wrong. To avoid confusion only one person is ever allowed to issue verbal commands to the drivers, with the exception of "STOP" which everyone is allowed to say.

Now, if teams are at a loss for how to operate their robot with the drive disabled... pull the drive motor breakers. This is what we do when we operate the robot on workbench or other place where we want the wheels on the ground but cannot afford to have it drive. It requires no nuances or expertise and takes just a few seconds.

We do the same thing with the "kill zone." We also have rules that only the driver or operator control the robot in the pit. We also have a person on the disable button. As another precaution we have a button on our drive controller that must be pressed before any movement from the drivetrain can occur. This has proved very useful when practicing when programmers use a remote so nothing goes crazy. It also allows if by some chance somebody picks up the remote or drops it the robot will not just start moving.

We also place our robot on blocks when it is on the cart in the pit. (It stays on the cart 95% of the time in the pit.

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by bkahl

Just out of curiosity, would you then consider this illegal too?


https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...type=2&theater

Not unless it is turned on and enabled. Just like picking up a robot that is turned off doesn't violate the general "don't touch a live robot" rule.

Although I wouldn't recommend pushing something with your head. But hey, maybe their robot is very light and the team member is hard headed?

[bkahl]

So this is probably a bad idea...?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oa1lz-9cCRQ&t=98

[Tom Line]

Originally Posted by robochick1319

Yes, but I still don't see why. I think people are sacrificing basic safeguards that are very important because of something that is more convenient.

And therein lies the rub. Many of us don't believe that to be the case. Many of us believe in the concept of acceptable risk.

You continue to return to the argument of 'but safety!'. A number of very experienced individuals have pointed out that there are any number of situations where a robot needs to be on the ground to test particular functions.

The 'but safety!' argument doesn't hold water with me. All too often it's applied in lieu of common sense.

It would be... entertaining... to try to tell the 600 teams attending worlds that they are not allowed to operate their robots any place accept the couple of practice fields provided.

[Zflash]

First the OP said that robots should be tested on blocks she never said there needs to be a rule about it. So for everyone who is saying no more safety rules calm down that is not the intention of the thread.

The intention was to bring a serious safety concern to the community and discuss ways to mitigate and perhaps even eliminate the hazard. If your team choses to accept the risk of running the robot on the floor then don't assume that others around you are accepting of that same risk. Respect others around you and stay within the confines of your pit.

And for those constantly countering safety with the term common sense as is often done on these forums.

Remember that although teams at each event have the ability to think and behave in a reasonable way and make good decisions (Common Sense). They are also often pressed with time constraints and unexpected problems. When this occurs shortcuts are often taken. All the OP is asking for is when testing the robot consider placing it on blocks when possible/disabling the drive in the manner of your choice. IF you must drive in the pit you are taking the shortcut of waiting for practice field time and your team may see that as an acceptable risk. Keep the robot in your pit by placing your own members in harms way not those around you who were not asked about accepting that risk.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by bkahl

Just out of curiosity, would you then consider this illegal too?


https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v...type=2&theater

Well I wouldn't encourage that either.

Originally Posted by robochick1319

Are we all seriously saying there is no workaround? Convenience really trumps safety?

I wouldn't say that accurately describes how people feel in this thread and outside of this thread but I can't speak for everyone.

Believe me safety has its place in FRC. My overall underlying question is does safety always trump risk? Does every safety risk require more action compared to just acknowledging it exists, making everyone around you aware, asking yourself if you believe your team has done everything it can to do so safely, and exercising caution while carrying it out? Even just enabling your robot (on blocks drive enabled) poses as safety risk so that would become the next in line safety issue so to speak so how much longer before that gets taken away?

I'm fine with not being allowed to tether in the pits on the floor but like I said the current practice field standards are unacceptable and teams will always have a moment when the robot needs to be tested on the floor and potentially with the drive wheels operational. Until the practice field changes teams will still do what they need to so they can always put a robot on the field that will perform as it needs to which does requires troubleshooting in the pits.

[robochick1319]

Originally Posted by Tom Line

And therein lies the rub. Many of us don't believe that to be the case. Many of us believe in the concept of acceptable risk.

You continue to return to the argument of 'but safety!'. A number of very experienced individuals have pointed out that there are any number of situations where a robot needs to be on the ground to test particular functions.

The 'but safety!' argument doesn't hold water with me. All too often it's applied in lieu of common sense.

It would be... entertaining... to try to tell the 600 teams attending worlds that they are not allowed to operate their robots any place accept the couple of practice fields provided.

LOL I didn't think my argument was "but safety!" I thought it was more let's mitigate the risk by putting in a basic safeguard. Test it, sure. We test ours in the pits. But test it in such a way that it doesn't pose a serious risk to other teams in the pits.

I don't think having a robot hit men, women, and children in the pits is an acceptable risk. The severity is high and the likelihood is high and that seems unacceptable.

And as cliche as it is, common sense isn't so common. If it were, I wouldn't have had to start this thread based on previous incidents.

[JesseK]

As a team who puts the robot on the floor in the pits a lot this year, here's our advice: have an itchy trigger finger ready on the space bar.

Putting a robot on the floor is a necessity when tuning/tweaking/fixing the mechanism that interacts with the game piece. It does not matter the year, if the mechanism must pick up a game piece off of the floor then the robot must be on the floor for a proper test.

Personally I don't see a reason to change. If the robot acts erratically then space bar, reset and move on.

[GreyingJay]

Originally Posted by JesseK

As a team who puts the robot on the floor in the pits a lot this year, here's our advice: have an itchy trigger finger ready on the space bar.

Putting a robot on the floor is a necessity when tuning/tweaking/fixing the mechanism that interacts with the game piece. It does not matter the year, if the mechanism must pick up a game piece off of the floor then the robot must be on the floor for a proper test.

I don't think the issue is with testing a mechanism, but with the risk of the robot taking off and driving out of the pit area.

[JesseK]

Originally Posted by GreyingJay

I don't think the issue is with testing a mechanism, but with the risk of the robot taking off and driving out of the pit area.

There's no risk if your hand is on e-stop. That was the point.

This entire argument is based on one's arbitrary definition of safety. If I see something as safe, then none of this applies to me. Likewise if I see something as unsafe, it all applies. The people arguing for stricter safety rules see every potential danger as unsafe, and that's their definition of the word, that's perfectly alright. The people who say such a change isn't needed see the same small potential dangers as acceptable, yet unlikely risks, and therefore view the whole thing as safe - that's their definition of the word, and likewise, that is perfectly alright.

There are clear safety hazards (such as launching frisbees into the air in the pits) that everyone can agree on as being unsafe. Anything we all agree on also happens to already be a rule (funny how that happens). The gray areas of ambiguity vary from team to team, and as such, I would suggest actions taken on these issues should be based on each individual team. As the age old saying goes, "You run your team, and I'll run mine, and we'll all be okay as long as nobody is hurting the other".

[Qbot2640]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

Without putting the robot on the ground, it is not possible to fully test a robot mechanism that is designed for picking objects off the ground. Without putting the robot on the ground, it is extremely difficult to test closed-loop wheel speed or position software.

Putting robot wheels in contact with pit floors has legitimate uses. I believe a rule against it would go too far.

If a team has an autonomous program that could involve the robot moving fast or great distances, then they should not run this with wheels on the floor - but otherwise Alan points out there are legitimate reasons to put wheels on the floor to test.

Originally Posted by robochick1319

Yes, but I still don't see why. I think people are sacrificing basic safeguards that are very important because of something that is more convenient.

Are we all seriously saying there is no workaround? Convenience really trumps safety?

The sacrificing of safety is not committed when a robot is run carefully with wheels on the floor - it is committed by carelessness and/or insufficient expectation of adverse possibilities.

And from my perspective, only a few respondents see this as a convenience VERSUS safety issue...the majority see that the current practice is not threatened by an unsafe condition.

Originally Posted by JesseK

As a team who puts the robot on the floor in the pits a lot this year, here's our advice: have an itchy trigger finger ready on the space bar.

Putting a robot on the floor is a necessity when tuning/tweaking/fixing the mechanism that interacts with the game piece. It does not matter the year, if the mechanism must pick up a game piece off of the floor then the robot must be on the floor for a proper test.

Personally I don't see a reason to change. If the robot acts erratically then space bar, reset and move on.

As a team who has often needed to test something minor (like the effect of having gaffers tape from the field wrap around our drive pulleys) and unable to schedule the practice field - a rule prohibiting us from executing a quick safe drive test on the floor of the pit could be extremely detrimental. The focus should be on innovative ways to be safe - not hamstringing teams by onerous rules...don't let the problems dictate the solutions...let the solutions stand on their own.