|
#91
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Update #16
As many other people I agree and disagree with the rule. Because lets face, not everyone in FIRST is mature enough to use tools. I have seen kids in my team almost been severly injured from fooling around. I have seen a kid from my team sit at a table for 20 minutes and ust make a huge solderball. Yes, I agree, don't let them in the pits, but the stupid people are only half the problem. It isn't that if you know how to use a tool correctly you will never get hurt. What is your match is in 5 mins and you need to cut comething really quick and you forget to put on saftely goggles. Also FIRST is about learning and engineering. I know none of you design your robots to break intentionally, but maybe FIRST is showing us we need to tihnk about our designs more wisely.
But also, bad things do happen and almost everyone needs to make some kind of repair on there robot. Maybe some robot on the field was breaking to rules and ripped something off your robot? now you need a way to drill a new hole and tap it. I sure would let someone in the machine shop do that to my robot. Especially if it means I have no roboto for 3 hours. Let's not over react here, think about how many teams get by with a hacksaw, cordless drill, and file. And well if FIRST bans cordless drills, I guess it is time to blow the dust off of those good ole' hand crank drills. ![]() |
|
#92
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
Being an outsider looking in maybe I should keep my big mouth shut...
but then, that wouldn't be me. Looking in at First and seeing whats happening I have to admit I'm having second thoughts about getting further into it. Especially from what Paul and others say there seem to be a lot of behind the scenes action going on. Now correct me if I'm wrong or if you only think I'm wrong... Sounds like FIRST Inc. is akin to our government... the powers that be spend all day coming up with ways of helping us and making us safer. Thats why when you call them, they too busy to come to the phone. Leave a message and I'll assigned a staffer, to order an intern, to get a vol. to answer your message with a form letter and a request for a contribution. Someone mentioned a union , while I personal hate unions I'm thinking having a elected by the users representative on the FIRST Inc governing rules making committee might be a good thing. As for all the crying, and complaining about not having this or that.... alright go ahead and get it out of your system... done? Good. A mark of a really good engineer or half good protronie is... making do with what you got. No band saw? Okay learn to use a hacksaw... get a few people to learn the proper way of using it so one persons arm isn't noodles by the end of the day. Instead of crying about things not being fair and this is stupid... Find a work around... find a way to do what you need with what the current powers that be might let you have. Well good luck all... |
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Update #16
Before I begin, let me say the point of this post is not to bash FIRST, it is to provide feedback, because I have a theory that they aren't aware of our views, because we have not voiced them, so here goes.
I bet it took a lot for Paul to come out an reveal his feelings toward this. I bet he thought about it a long while before doing so. What does this tell me? That there are several other mentors out there who have simple become "fed up" that we haven't begun to hear from yet. You've heard from me before, and let me step up to the podeum again. I agree with Paul here. Am I going to leave FIRST because of it? Most likely not. I've tried, but I can't find a better replacement for my time. Would I like to leave FIRST because of all the unexplained and mysteriously illogical rules? You bet. We live in a world of explanation, reason, and logic. FIRST has become a world in which these great assets of our population are diminishing before our eyes, under direction of FIRST HQ. What is engineering about? It is about solving the design challenge, and doing so safely. But it is also about being able to communicate and prove your points. Even more so, I once had an engineering professor give a question on a test, worth only 2/100 points if we got right, buy we were gauranteed to fail the test if we got it wrong. The question was "What is the most important consideration in engineering?" The answer was "meeting the customer requirements." This is important. You can design the fanciest pneumatic rivet gun, suspension bridge, spacecraft, or organization (pause), in the whole world, but if you aren't meeting the customer requirements, it is of no value. I've said this before and I'll say it again. We are the customers here. Without us customers, FIRST doesn't exist. Does the operation of FRC cost a heck of a lot more than every team pays? You bet. But, we shall not overlook the fact that $6000, $10,000, $11,000 is NOT pocket change for the majority of the teams involved. FIRST can say all they want that we get more than we pay for, and we can never argue against this, because it is true. But, they need to realize the loops we have to jump through to get enough money to even enter, and the big risk schools take by spending so much on these programs, the constant ciriticism they find themselves under forspending so much money on these programs and simple fact that we need to make sure we get every bit that we pay for. I want to see a general attitude of "let's explain this better" coming from FIRST, because, right now it the atmosphere from them seems a bit like "we know you love our program, you couldn't leave it if you tried. we know you are here to stay, and we know you will adapt to whatever we give you" On the topic, I believe the pit spaces are too small for many things to happen in the pits. This is not the fault of anyone. It is dictated by venue size. This year, many of the robots easily become much larger than the pit area. It is not uncommon to have up to 10 people even in the pit area at once. It is just plain crowded, which makes it inherently unsafe in some circumstances. BUT, don't ban the tools altogether. Let them be used away from the chaos in a calmer and more spacious enviromnment other than a 10x10 pit square. I see a lot of "solutions" coming from FIRST to problems that simply don't exist. They need better problem identification and analyisis. For my personal story, had we not been able to use a drill press last year, team 696 most likely would not have won the innovation in control award. For the past few years (and even longer really), safety has been one of the key points emphasized in FRC. To me, this ruling says to the students, "you aren't smart enough, you aren't careful enough, you aren't good enough to use powerful and/or sharp things, and plain and simple, we don't trust you not to screw up." I have seen FRC teams where their students are fully capable of running 20 horsepower 700+ inches per minute quarter of a million dollar CNC machines, unsupervised. I have seen teams who's mentors are barely capable of operating a hack saw. But this is exactly my point. It is up to each team to determine their own comfort zone. Putting a blanket rule isn't helping anyone here. And finally, with such a big emphasis on safety, and so many people watching, you can't get away with ANYTHING. This is a good! Should any dangerous condition even begin to arise, someone, student, mentor, or FIRST volunteer will shut it down. Don't ban the safe for fear of the dangerous. Mentors take great pride in instructing their students on proper and safe tool usage. The mentors on each team. It is not FIRST's job to tell a team that their students (and even mentors) are not good enough to perform fabrication safely. This ruling is an insult to everyone who has gone the extra mile to ensure safety. We are skilled people. Let us show you that. And my final point. FIRST Robotics has cost hundreds of teams hundreds more dollars this year, than in any year previously, due to what are in my opinion, poor and illogical decisions on the part of FIRST. In the first week of regionals, FIRST cost teams their matches, and more or less gauranteed that certain teams would have no chance of winning. FIRST has taken away our money, they have taken away our fair and randomly paired matches, they have take away our real time clock, and this week, they take away our machinery, and for many teams, this "last straw" will take away their hopes and dreams. What will they take away next week? FIRST makes a big deal out of how few people are on their payroll. But how many thousands of people actually work for them each and every day. Look in the mirror folks. You are the people that make FIRST great, every minute of every day. I have never before seen a company or organization run by so few, giving membership to so many, that does not listen to it's people. Last edited by sanddrag : 07-03-2007 at 12:58. |
|
#94
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Update #16
Unfortunately, I think we may be seeing the beginning of the end for FIRST. All of these problems are due to the overwhelming success of FIRST. It is just starting to get too big. As the number of teams continues to grow these sorts of issues become compounded. As much as we all want to see FIRST in every school in the World I think that ultimately FIRST is going to be a victim of its own success. The whole concept worked when there were hundreds of teams, not thousands.
For the adult team members (teachers, engineers, mentors, etc.): Is it just me or are any of you at least mildly insulted by this new rule? We teach our students safe shop practices. While they are under our supervision they are “our” kids. We love them, teach them, and would do anything to protect them. We don’t want to see them injured anymore than FIRST does, but, we don’t want to see them injured because we know and love them. FIRST doesn’t know them like we do. FIRST just doesn’t want to see them injured for fear of a lawsuit. They are smart kids. They can design, build, and test a robot with very limited resources after all. Now FIRST tells us that they either don’t have enough faith in us to teach the students properly or the students are too dumb to get it? I find that somewhat insulting. Nobody is perfect. Accidents happen. But shouldn't WE know who can and can't operate particular power tools on our team better than anyone? |
|
#95
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
If something on robot breaks we can't fix it. What I see it coming down to.
FIRST IS NOT THE SAME ANYMORE!!!! Last year I saw the most change with the safety judges. Im ok with them wanting us to be safe but we can't even operate a drill press do they we are stupid. Last edited by JulieB : 07-03-2007 at 13:09. |
|
#96
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
Quote:
I would like to bring some attention to this. This is a good point. What if a bandsaw, grinder or mini-mill IS the proper tool (this is probably very likely). Will teams go stand in line for 45 minutes with their robot out of commission, waiting to get it fixed by an "official" machine shop? No. They will find another method, an IMPROPER tool for the job. This is not only less safe, it is teaching bad safety and engineering practices: "If you don't have the right tool, don't wait or go someplace else to find it, use the WRONG one." Tell me, is this REALLY what we want to be teaching our students? I also can't agree more with the comments stating how this ruling will hurt rookie and struggling teams more than it hurts the successful ones. Which teams are more likely to have poorly designed parts that fail? Which teams are likely not to have made spares? I came from a team that had been in this situation. I can't count how many times we went to other teams' pits to use their band saw or drill press because we had to make a quick-fix part due to a poor design. Last year we had an extremely temperamental transmission that ended up needing some welding. We sat out of 2 matches (on our alliance partners' requests) to get it fixed by the machine shop. If all teams had to go to the machine shop for their little fixes, I think it's no exaggeration that we would have been waiting almost all day. I am upset about this ruling, but I am still waiting for more insight from those higher up. As unlikely as it may be, I have not disregarded the possibility that FIRST does have a good reason for this. I also support the idea of finding out exactly what constitutes a "FIRST Approved Machine Shop", and if we might be able to have 3 or 4 of these approved shops at each competition. |
|
#97
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
Quote:
Let me say that my first and most vivid memory of my first regional was how teams helped and cheered for other teams. What can better express the values we hope to instill in students - and adults, for that matter - than the spirit and determination of one team helping another prepare for competition? That said, we really don't know what FIRST's reasoning is behind banning non-FIRST machine shops. For all we know, it might be coming from some of the venues. I can only imagine what the reaction the manager of a college field house would be when he sees metal chips falling to the covering over his precious basketball court's hardwood. Or maybe some venues prohibit non-union personnel from using machine tools on premises. Possibly it is the same kind of interpretation of "level playing field" that led to the week one match generation algorithm. We can speculate forever, but until we know the reasoning behind the rule there is little use in flaming insurance companies, lawyers and safety professionals. Well, I guess they are always fair game, but that should be in Chit-Chat! I do hope that FIRST does give us the reason soon (and that it turns out to be reversible). |
|
#98
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
I would suggest that (if it hasn't been done already) a team with a mobile machine shop (or the ability to make one on short notice) post in the Q&A about getting their mobile shop approved.
|
|
#99
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
FIRST, please improve your two-way communication skills so that decisions can be made that people embrace rather than criticize (drill presses, et al).
Companies too often dictate change without comprehending the law of unintended consequences. For instance, a change made to restrict pit drill presses will have the unintended consequence of creating other safety problems; will impede teams’ abilities to make repairs, which in turn will create other unintended consequences. (For those of you schooled in the law of unintended consequences, you will recall that World War II was the unintended consequence of the Treaty of Versailles.) There appears to be a communication problem at FIRST. FIRST does not seem to be adequately collecting the input from stakeholders before deciding on tactical change. Nor are they adequately communicating the reason for change. The lifeblood of dynamic, growing, thriving enterprises is communication. Effective communication can limit the number of unintended consequences that result from change. One potential solution is for FIRST to implement a reverse Q&A process. Ask designated team representatives for input on problems or pending changes, prior to changes becoming law. People will feel engaged. Unintended consequences will be fewer. A better decision will result. The Q&A system already works pretty well one way. FIRST just needs to use it in reverse too. |
|
#100
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
Quote:
|
|
#101
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Update #16
Quote:
I understand your position here but FIRST is slowly teaching us that the only way things like this get handled are if we make a big fuss about it. I know that's probably not the truth, but since these changes keep coming with no explanation until a big stink is made people are starting to believe they have to make the big stink to get issues looked at. Case in point: the scheduling algorithm. Who knows what the real story is behind the scenes, but the problems with the scheduling were clearly reported after the pre-ship scrimmages. Nothing was said or done about it before the week 1 regionals (where it obviously upset a lot of people) at which point everyone made a big fuss and now it's being dealt with. To many of us, it looks like FIRST knew about the problem but chose to ignore it until a whole bunch of people got mad and got vocal. Now, if instead there had been an announcement that said "Yeah, the scheduling sucks but we just can't fix it in time for week 1, bear with us and it will be ready for week 2" (assuming that's why they didn't fix it for week 1 in the first place) then people still would have been mad but the big fuss probably would have been avoided. Similar examples to this are abundant (AVA is another). |
|
#102
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Update #16
While I in no way advocate (and have been vocal in my dissatisfaction earlier in this thread) this rule, instead of bashing FIRST, why not work towards a solution? While FIRST typically lacks the transparency and accountability we want any organization to have, I doubt that they do not hear our reactions. This is quite obvious, by the reaction of FIRST and Autodesk to reinstate the regional AVA, and FIRST attempting (albeit too late for many teams) to correct the scheduling algorithm.
Perhaps we should start an ORGANIZED and OFFICIAL reaction (say a petition?) similar to the one created after the announcement that there wasn't a regional AVA. Regardless of the next course of action, getting steamed and angry will benefit nobody. And coming from me, that has to mean something. |
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Update #16
Ask yourself this, do you want to be the mentor who makes the phone call to a parent to explain that their son or daughter has just been injured? What would you say to a ten year old who is on a school tour of the pit area when a piece of non secured aluminum flies off a drill press and punctures his head, accidents happen. Thirty-three years of teaching Industrial Arts with no serious student injuries. Yes, I teach proper tool use and safety. In a few cases it was blind luck that no one was injured. After all, they are called accidents!
I don't think FIRST is trying to chase away veteran mentors. I don't think FIRST is trying to take the fun out this great experience. I think FIRST wants to develope a safe place for everyone to enjoy the event. This is the 16th update. FIRST has made 16 changes thus far. I would almost bet the ranch that changes will be made to this for the benifit of all. Ken |
|
#104
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Update #16
Quote:
Quote:
Spoiler for Billfred's Editorializing:
|
|
#105
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Update #16
Nobody will EVER dispute that safety should be priority 1 at the event. But I am starting feel that the safety issue has gone from proactive to obsessive. Just getting out of bed can be a safety hazard (6:00 AM, dark outside and my foot just found my 4 year old's lost Lego piece by the bed corner).
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Update #9 Up | Beth Sweet | Rules/Strategy | 1 | 06-02-2007 17:56 |
| Update 13 | Tomasz Bania | General Forum | 6 | 27-02-2006 23:12 |
| Update 7 | EricH | General Forum | 2 | 08-02-2006 20:26 |
| Update 6 | Beth Sweet | General Forum | 0 | 04-02-2006 09:05 |
| Update 5 | Imajie | General Forum | 14 | 01-02-2006 13:03 |