Safety in Game Design

[Josh Fox]

There are a couple difference I can think of off the top of my head between drive team members and MCs running and jumping around the field.

First, when MCs are running around the field, there are generally no other people on it carrying very heavy robots at risk for collision, which can't be said for when drive team members are setting things up. It's a relatively more controlled environment.

Second, and I'd argue this is probably the "real" reason, is that there are much greater concerns about students injuring themselves as opposed to adult volunteers, and people feel more comfortable letting adults assume risk for themselves.

While I agree it kind of sucks that a very momentary lapse in judgement (stepping over the field border/defenses) that probably isn't leading to that much of an increased risk can be of grave consequence to your team, there's also a great deal of emphasis from all announcers and field crew that those actions aren't acceptable.

[Michael Corsetto]

One easy way to avoid unsafe robot design is to eliminate critical resource scarcity.

Scarce resources can lead to crazy R&D into potentially unsafe mechanisms (see: 2015 Can Races, 2011 Minibot Races, etc.)

-Mike

[waialua359]

Ironically, I saw someone trip pretty badly over the secret passage tubing when walking onto the field with their team to accept an award this past weekend. I guess because of the long line, they couldnt see it with their teammate directly in front of them.

[KJaget]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Ironically, I saw someone trip pretty badly over the secret passage tubing when walking onto the field with their team to accept an award this past weekend. I guess because of the long line, they couldnt see it with their teammate directly in front of them.

I saw a 5 student pile-up during awards at the NC Campbell University event, and they didn't even use the field for the awards (just walked in front of it). The first person stopped to grab a medal from a judge and the rest ran into the back of the student in front.

The moral? I have no idea. I guess life can be dangerous if you don't pay attention no matter what the venue?

[CalTran]

I will admit, I see no reason why they couldn't have brought back the middle gates for this particular field.

[Karibou]

Originally Posted by CalTran

I will admit, I see no reason why they couldn't have brought back the middle gates for this particular field.

I'm not positive (maybe someone else knows for sure), but do all districts own their own field borders? If so, implementing a 1-time change to the field border setup like this would be costly to them. The configuration of the alliance station wall is easy enough to change year to year (and it's an expected change), but the sides are a little more difficult.

I think it would also complicate field reset/robot flow - if you were to limit robot entry to one gate (since the FTAs, refs, etc would be really mad if robots had to enter directly in front of the scoring table), you'd have six teams trying to go through one opening at once, potentially creating a backup in the lane where teams from the previous match have to travel to exit.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by Karibou

I'm not positive (maybe someone else knows for sure), but do all districts own their own field borders? If so, implementing a 1-time change to the field border setup like this would be costly to them. The configuration of the alliance station wall is easy enough to change year to year (and it's an expected change), but the sides are a little more difficult.

That's fair. Something that I definitely didn't consider. I'm just recalling the field from back in 2010, which was basically a time before districts (MI not withstanding.)

I think it would also complicate field reset/robot flow - if you were to limit robot entry to one gate (since the FTAs, refs, etc would be really mad if robots had to enter directly in front of the scoring table), you'd have six teams trying to go through one opening at once, potentially creating a backup in the lane where teams from the previous match have to travel to exit.

It's certainly possible to still do the 3 team entry per side, though admittedly locals like Greater KC that have very little space between the scoring table and a side of the field complicates the midfield entry.

[plnyyanks]

Originally Posted by Karibou

I'm not positive (maybe someone else knows for sure), but do all districts own their own field borders?

The answer is yes, districts do own their own field perimeters.

[ChristianSpring]

Originally Posted by plnyyanks

The answer is yes, districts do own their own field perimeters.

I agree.

[scottgoering]

Originally Posted by CalTran

That's fair. Something that I definitely didn't consider. I'm just recalling the field from back in 2010, which was basically a time before districts (MI not withstanding.)


It's certainly possible to still do the 3 team entry per side, though admittedly locals like Greater KC that have very little space between the scoring table and a side of the field complicates the midfield entry.

Originally Posted by Karibou

I'm not positive (maybe someone else knows for sure), but do all districts own their own field borders? If so, implementing a 1-time change to the field border setup like this would be costly to them. The configuration of the alliance station wall is easy enough to change year to year (and it's an expected change), but the sides are a little more difficult.

I think it would also complicate field reset/robot flow - if you were to limit robot entry to one gate (since the FTAs, refs, etc would be really mad if robots had to enter directly in front of the scoring table), you'd have six teams trying to go through one opening at once, potentially creating a backup in the lane where teams from the previous match have to travel to exit.

As far a flow goes - no reason you couldn't have added the middle gate and left the 4 in as well - just use the middle gate to get robots from the previous match off if they finish in the Neutral Zone. This was the critical path/worst case scenario, because you had teams crossing in the secret passage, which had a berm and was narrow.

[Hitchhiker 42]

Originally Posted by scottgoering

As far a flow goes - no reason you couldn't have added the middle gate and left the 4 in as well - just use the middle gate to get robots from the previous match off if they finish in the Neutral Zone. This was the critical path/worst case scenario, because you had teams crossing in the secret passage, which had a berm and was narrow.

To be fair, that was rare, as most people wanted to get the points for the scale/challenge at the end of the match.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by KJaget

I saw a 5 student pile-up during awards at the NC Campbell University event, and they didn't even use the field for the awards (just walked in front of it). The first person stopped to grab a medal from a judge and the rest ran into the back of the student in front.

The moral? I have no idea. I guess life can be dangerous if you don't pay attention no matter what the venue?

At all of the events I have been to/watched awards they removed the secret passage tubing before awards.

[gblake]

This thread seems a bit quixotic, and reminds me of the one not so long ago that chastised some or all of the Dean/Dave/Woody trio for not wearing safety glasses during a game demo.

If anyone wants to actually change things, use your noggin, and figure out the proper channels to use to contribute your help.

If anyone wants to winge/vent, this is a great place to do it.


Know-what-I-mean?

[Michael Corsetto]

Originally Posted by gblake

This thread seems a bit quixotic, and reminds me of the one not so long ago that chastised some or all of the Dean/Dave/Woody trio for not wearing safety glasses during a game demo.

If anyone wants to actually change things, use your noggin, and figure out the proper channels to use to contribute your help.

If anyone wants to winge/vent, this is a great place to do it.


Know-what-I-mean?

Ah yes, the age-old (and very helpful, I might add) "your-posts-on-this-forum-amount-to-nothing-in-this-bleak-world" post.

Thanks gblake!

-Mike

Just FYI, Frank Merrick ( fmerrick [the "at" symbol] firstinspires [the period symbol] org ) is a great place to email questions/concerns about FRC game design safety.

[headlight]

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto

One easy way to avoid unsafe robot design is to eliminate critical resource scarcity.

Scarce resources can lead to crazy R&D into potentially unsafe mechanisms (see: 2015 Can Races, 2011 Minibot Races, etc.)

-Mike

Agreed. There are also some standard practices in FRC robot design that are somewhat questionable. I'm quite surprised by the general acceptance of spinning wheel shooters without guarding or consideration for the RPM rating of the wheels. Of course, writing rules and inspecting for safely designed spinning wheel shooters would probably be largely ineffective.