Rule <R06>

[Raul]

We (111) did have a different set of wings that we rarely used. So, those would not be considered spares and would not be eligible per this year's rules.

[Chris Fultz]

I agree with Rauls intpretation. If it is an optional configuration, it has to be weighed in. Spare parts would not if they were identical.

This probably avoids the issue of a team having an "optional configuration" that might end up as "all inclusive".

This new rule will force a team to select a configuration and go. It would be really tough to have two configurations that could stay under 130#.

[KenWittlief]

Im looking at the rules from last year, and it says:

M5 at the time of robot inspection,you must present ALL mechanisms that you will use on the robot during the entire competition event... Only mechanisms that were present during the inspection may be added, removed or reconfigured...

I took that to mean all mechanisms must be presented "on the robot" - in previous years they spelled it out more explicity - last year this could be taken two ways

From what Raul said a few posts up, it sounds like they had their robot inspected with different attachments added OR removed - was it clear to the judges that this is what you were doing?

On our bot last year we had 4 wheel drive and we also had castors for the front if we wanted to take the front wheels off - we had it inspected with the 4 wheels AND the castors on at the same time, but when we played each match we were free to attach the front wheels OR the castors - this sounds like what is required this year

maybe I was mistaken about last years rules? either way, its clear for this year - everything you use must be on the robot at the same time for the whole inspection process - then if you choose, you can leave things off or put them back on.

[Dave Flowerday]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Im looking at the rules from last year, and it says:

M5 at the time of robot inspection,you must present ALL mechanisms that you will use on the robot during the entire competition event... Only mechanisms that were present during the inspection may be added, removed or reconfigured...

I don't want to spend too much time rehashing last year's rules, but if you look at the inspection checklist, it states that when weighing the robot, it must be < 130 lbs in the "heaviest configuration."

As for this year, I'm a little curious as to why they changed this rule. Did they suspect that people weren't being honest, and were actually competing overweight? Hopefully not, as a good percentage of the rules rely on teams being honest. It's been mentioned before, but if someone's really interested in cheating at this competition, it wouldn't be too hard.

[RoboCoder]

I think its another way to put a challenge into the game. This year there are so many things that the robot could possibly do, that it would be pretty easy (remember: everything's relative) to make your robot perform any given function as its primary function and do it well (one module for manipulating the multiplier balls, one for the pull-up bar, one etc etc etc), and swap them out to complement the capabilities of your alliance partner. By changin the rule, a limit is placed on teams who choose a modular interchangable design, and thus teams are encouraged to build one robot that can do multiple goals in a single match, which CAN DEFINATELY be a tougher task. Just another challenge FIRST wants to give us

[KenWittlief]

ah AH! so the Klingon verison of the manual WAS correct!

"Seven ways to score all day
one bot to rule them all
one bot to find them..." :c)

[Joe Johnson]

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday

Did they suspect that people weren't being honest, and were actually competing overweight?

I don't think cheating had anything do to with this rule. I think it has more to do with the whole issue of "what is the robot and what is the module" type discussions we all got into last year.

I think it is cleaner this way.

But... ...then again, it isn't my ox getting gored. We've never used the module rule so we didn't really loose anything.

Joe J.

[KevinB]

Originally Posted by Dave Flowerday

As for this year, I'm a little curious as to why they changed this rule. Did they suspect that people weren't being honest, and were actually competing overweight? Hopefully not, as a good percentage of the rules rely on teams being honest. It's been mentioned before, but if someone's really interested in cheating at this competition, it wouldn't be too hard.

Although this rule change doesn't bother me at all, I don't think it will do anything to prevent cheating. The teams that want to cheat (hopefully there are none!) can still simply weigh in with certain modules missing and then add them back in the next day.

[Raul]

At first I did not particularly like the rule, but now I do not care that much.
It just forces us to implement additive instead of substituitive (did I just make up a word?) modularity.

[KenWittlief]

From Raul: I am not offended by your questioning the legality of our robot last year - you have the right to do that if you are not familiar with the rules...

I am sorry if my post sounded like I was accusing your team of cheating last year, or of using an illegal robot.

that was not my intention or question. I read the rule from last year and took it the other way - what Im trying to ask (or understand) is how did you clarify the rule, or did you think you needed to?

1. did you think the rule was clear enough as you understood it, and no clarification was needed?

2. did you ask FIRST about it? was there a team update that made it clear?

3. did you wait and ask the judges about it? or did you assume your multiple attachments were ok and simple have your bot weighed more than once?

we only have a few mentors on our team, and we dont have time to pour over every rule - so we probabally miss several things - which could be missed opportunities.

I know some teams delibrately WONT ask FIRST during the build season, cause they dont want to give their idea away. Some teams have been burned by this when the issue came up later, and part of their bot was not acceptable.

Personally I like the modular idea - in the playoffs the game will probabally become more aggressive - it might come down to one or two critial functions (like hanging or dislodging the 2x ball) - and it is worth considering what you can leave off you bot for those matches when you have an excellent alliance that augments your functions with others.

Another thing I have learned over the years - teams often modify their bots a little here and there during the events, after they have been inspected. Is this bending the rules? I think if you have your bot re-inspected after the mods were made, its ok (or if you only make a minor change)

but if you add a new function that wasnt there when the bot was inspected on thursday, you are using a new subsystem that you didnt have before - I think this is okay too (as long as the bot changes are inspected) - most of the magic and excitment at an event happens in the pits, not on the field

Sorry if Im rambling here - I think its important that teams understand what they are allowed to do, and whats prohibited. It sounds like our team missed out last year on the opportunity for switchable subsystems.

[Meredith Rice]

I agree with what others have said that the main purpose of this rule is not to prevent teams from competing with an over weight robot exactly but from having optional components to choose to use during the competition season.

What I don't understand is if this rule would prohibit our team from doing what we did last year. We built and shipped two versions of one component of the robot not sure which one we would be able to use due to the weight limit. The component was a tower with a rotating and telescoping arm used to knock over stacks from the start possition. One version had a rigid tower and the other a telescoping tower. We preferred the telescoping tower because it could be lowered to improve driving, but we could not use it at our first regional as it would put us over the weight limit.

For nationals however we were able to lower our weight with some creative drilling and made the weight limit using the telescoping version of the tower. We never changed the tower during the competition or used the other version and therefore never needed it to be reinspected.

Therefore, can anyone give me their imput as to whether in this year's competition the two towers would need to be weighed together with the robot, the point being that they weren't interchanged ever during one competition. It appears clear to me though, that if we wanted the option of switching towers during a match we would need them weighed together.

Thanks.

[Jeremy]

Yes you can change the parts but all the parts together must weigh 130 or under not just each attached part

[Raul]

Originally Posted by KenWittlief

Im looking at the rules from last year, and it says:

M5 at the time of robot inspection,you must present ALL mechanisms that you will use on the robot during the entire competition event... Only mechanisms that were present during the inspection may be added, removed or reconfigured...

I took that to mean all mechanisms must be presented "on the robot" - in previous years they spelled it out more explicity - last year this could be taken two ways

From what Raul said a few posts up, it sounds like they had their robot inspected with different attachments added OR removed - was it clear to the judges that this is what you were doing?

On our bot last year we had 4 wheel drive and we also had castors for the front if we wanted to take the front wheels off - we had it inspected with the 4 wheels AND the castors on at the same time, but when we played each match we were free to attach the front wheels OR the castors - this sounds like what is required this year

maybe I was mistaken about last years rules? either way, its clear for this year - everything you use must be on the robot at the same time for the whole inspection process - then if you choose, you can leave things off or put them back on.

Ken,

I am not offended by your questioning the legality of our robot last year - you have the right to do that if you are not familiar with the rules.
So, let me make it perfectly clear for you - the rule is different this year. Last year we were allowed to interchange different modules as long as each different configuration weighed less than 130 lbs.

[generalbrando]

Not that what I think matters, but...

I think the change has to do with making things a little more fair. In the past, teams that could manage to build their robot in moduals and what not could escape the 130 limit. They couldn't use them all at once, but these extra functions they could choose now and then were more weight than was allowed to a team that could not (for lack of resources or engineering support) create a modular design.

On the flip side, this might discourage complex modular designs - but hey - we're supposed to be challenged, right?

Good luck to all, as always.