Raising the $3500 limit?

[Steve W]

We don't spend that much in Canadian funds. I guess we could purchase more but we couldn't raise the funds. I would rather raise the weight limit by 10 lbs. With addition funds I would like to purchase a larger weight limit.

[KenWittlief]

I dont think you will see the weight limit or size limit increase - if two average students cant lift the bot without getting hurt, then..... um.... someone will get hurt

and the size restrictions are there so the bot can fit through a normal size door, and fit inside a minivan - FIRST learned this the hard way a few years back - a team build a bot at school and couldnt get it out the shop door.

[Craig]

First off, how many teams COULD spend this much money??? Do you guys really have that much to spend each year? And second, with first being such an incredible competition with so much growth and recognition every year, is there really any need to change it at all? I hope the rules stay just how they are.

[Bcahn836]

I say don't raise the spending limit. Why might you ask, it makes things harder some teams that are just starting. Very little sponsership and experiance. where as some of the veteran teams know some tricks and can creatively spend more than $3500 on a robot. It just wouldn't be fair in my opinion.

[Eric Bareiss]

I guess I should rephrase. I wasn't trying to ask if they should raise the limit, I was just asking what you would do if the limit was gone.

I was just trying to see if anything would really change, most teams don't even get close to the limit so if there was no limit it wouldn't matter. The only team I know of that got close was 45 in 2003 who built two robots.

Rephrase:

For all of the teams who do get close to the limit, would you spend more than $3500 if you could?

For all the teams who don't get close, asumming you had the money, what would you add to your robot? (again, please no stupid answers)

I guess what I am getting at is, not including labor or crazy exotic materials, what could you possibly buy to make your robot cost more than $3500

[Andrew]

I think first should:
1. eliminate machining costs from the $3500 limit
2. eliminate the electronics sub-budget and the per electronic item limit
3. INCLUDE all spare parts costs in the $3500 limit
4. INCLUDE OI parts in the $3500 limit

Why?
1. FIRST ran into difficulties this year on whose machining costs can you waive and whose must you bill. The only way to truly solve the inequities of this problem would be to waive all machining costs.

2. The original electronics budget predates the $3500 limit. It is a relic of an earlier time. The $3500 budget and the $400 per item limits cover electronics as well as mechanics.

3. The problem with practice robots and the inequities of teams carrying bunches of spare parts would be solved if teams had to bill them as well as the main robot.

4. I don't know why this one really. It just seems that the OI is part of your robot and should be billed as well.

[Greg McCoy]

Originally Posted by Andrew

I think first should:
1. eliminate machining costs from the $3500 limit
2. eliminate the electronics sub-budget and the per electronic item limit
3. INCLUDE all spare parts costs in the $3500 limit
4. INCLUDE OI parts in the $3500 limit

1 & 2: Agreed

3: Not sure what I think about spare parts...

4: I don't really agree with this...some teams use laptops and such when they are going for "Leadership in Controls" awards and such and that could take a major chunk out of the $3500. Besides, I don't see how an "expensive" OI would give teams a big advantage...It's an area where I'd like to see more innovation and quality.

On the bright side, I'm glad that the electronics cost limit is going up

[JakeGallagher]

This season I think the most money we spent was on food... o.O We don't have many local companies to give us money, so we have to make due without. Other teams, on the other hand have seemingly unlimited funding, so the cap is what saves smaller teams like ours.
I don't think I would add anything to our bot if they did raise the cap because we ended up with a very competitive robot on a pretty small budget.

Originally Posted by Greg McCoy

1 & 2: Agreed

3: Not sure what I think about spare parts...

4: I don't really agree with this...some teams use laptops and such when they are going for "Leadership in Controls" awards and such and that could take a major chunk out of the $3500. Besides, I don't see how an "expensive" OI would give teams a big advantage...It's an area where I'd like to see more innovation and quality.

On the bright side, I'm glad that the electronics cost limit is going up

This year we got a Leadership in Control award, and the only laptop we used was an old WinBook MIT donated to us. Judges don't care whether you have PowerMacs (as one team did) or flashy stuff like that when they are looking for the Leadership in Control Award--they're looking for the team who put the most effort into making their control system work perfectly. Though, I don't think our programmer would mind much if we had some better hardware...

[kevin.li.rit]

We're using a 75 mhz laptop to program at the speed of light...
If you really wanted to get your robot under the limit, take out some code..........

[IndyStef]

The limit is fine, especially as many teams find ways to hide cost, anyway. Nobody can seriously tell me that the machining cost on many sponsor made parts does not exceed that amount! But that is somewhat beside the point. We are incouraged to find inventive ways to deal with that, and we do. If there was no cap, many rich teams (ones that have more than $50K at hand) would most certainly spiral the cost up, leaving the majority of teams in the dust, and without a chance to win. That could easily lead to a sponsor draught, because many medium sponsors would not want to pump money into a team with the knowledge the team doesn't have a chance to win. Such cenario currently exists in Formula One, and utlimately threatens the survival of that sport.
I like it the way it is. It's more fun, anyway.

IndyStef

Originally Posted by JakeGallagher

This year we got a Leadership in Control award, and the only laptop we used was an old WinBook MIT donated to us. Judges don't care whether you have PowerMacs (as one team did) or flashy stuff like that when they are looking for the Leadership in Control Award--they're looking for the team who put the most effort into making their control system work perfectly. Though, I don't think our programmer would mind much if we had some better hardware...

I think you missed his point. There have been teams that invest quite a bit into their operator interface such as T3 this year with their mini arm to control their real arm. If FIRST were to include the OI into the 3500 dollars, teams might not even have enough money left of that 3500 to even build an OI and then they end up having their OI mounted on a piece of plywood with 4 joysticks. Anyway, there have been some awesome achievements when it comes to OIs, such as T3 and 25 (I think they did too) with their mini arms or 447 with their glove controls, which probably wouldnt' have been possible if FIRST were to put the OI into the $3500...so to the original person who suggested that, I disagree.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by D.J. Fluck

I think you missed his point. There have been teams that invest quite a bit into their operator interface such as T3 this year with their mini arm to control their real arm. If FIRST were to include the OI into the 3500 dollars, teams might not even have enough money left of that 3500 to even build an OI and then they end up having their OI mounted on a piece of plywood with 4 joysticks. Anyway, there have been some awesome achievements when it comes to OIs, such as T3 and 25 (I think they did too) with their mini arms or 447 with their glove controls, which probably wouldnt' have been possible if FIRST were to put the OI into the $3500...so to the original person who suggested that, I disagree.

I also believe that the OI hasn't been included because it simply doesn't matter as much. Do you seriosly believe that if a team that spent 100k on thier OI would be better than someone who spent $25? It all comes down to the robots.

[Adam Y.]

INCLUDE OI parts in the $3500 limit

There goes almost a quater of the budget.

[team222badbrad]

The 3,500 budget is fine. This is a good balance for teams that do not have much money and teams that have too much money.

If anything weight in the robot without the battery. I have seen batteries that have a weight difference of .3 pounds.

[MikeDubreuil]

Originally Posted by team222badbrad

The 3,500 budget is fine. This is a good balance for teams that do not have much money and teams that have too much money.

If anything weight in the robot without the battery. I have seen batteries that have a weight difference of .3 pounds.

I have actually heard a story... not sure if it is true (I'm full of rumors this week )...

There was a team who one year couldn't make the weight. In order to make weight they emptied the contents (lead, acid, whatever) out of the battery. They went to the inspection booth with their faux battery. They were snagged when the inpector asked for them to turn on their robot to verify the team number was set correctly on the robot controller.

"Could you please turn your robot on so I can verify your team number is set properly."
"Uhhh.. Uhh... hold on let us get a fresh battery from our pits."
"I don't need to see it move, I just need to see the RC turn on..."
"Uhh....Uhhh...."