Flag Solutions...

[Otaku]

Do something similar to this year...

White status lights with red and blue interchangeable plastic covers. Team color indication, Robot status indication, one package.


...Problem solved. Now somebody design it.

[RyanN]

Originally Posted by Otaku

Do something similar to this year...

White status lights with red and blue interchangeable plastic covers. Team color indication, Robot status indication, one package.


...Problem solved. Now somebody design it.

What about instead of the Orange Diagnostic light, make it have a clear dome, add those super bright LEDs and then you basically have a Diagnostic light that is set to the team color... and for the people saying "Oh, well if the robot loses the connection to IFI, it doesn't know what color it is" then instead of letting the RC control the light color, have a SPDT switch to set the color of the light. I personally do not like the flags as it does not say "Hey I'm on the Red alliance!!!! Woo!!!" but it says "I'm red..." LEDs stand out much more than a flag, and if FIRST gets the high powered LEDs, then we should definitely use them.

[Mr. Freeman]

If we go back to the rotating lights or start to use super bright LEDs that can be seen from a mile away (assuming we don't blind someone in the process) then won't they affect the vision systems?

I don't have too much experience working with the CMUcam and my team hasn't been able to get the thing to work for the past 3 years, so someone correct me if I'm wrong. If one of these lights shines into a camera won't it basically wash everything else out and therefore cause the camera to loose a lock on a target?

[Athleticgirl389]

Why not use A FIRST Robotics favorite... ducktape and zip ties I'm sure we can come up with something incorperating both of those haha

[RyanN]

Originally Posted by Mr. Freeman

If we go back to the rotating lights or start to use super bright LEDs that can be seen from a mile away (assuming we don't blind someone in the process) then won't they affect the vision systems?

I don't have too much experience working with the CMUcam and my team hasn't been able to get the thing to work for the past 3 years, so someone correct me if I'm wrong. If one of these lights shines into a camera won't it basically wash everything else out and therefore cause the camera to loose a lock on a target?

This brings up an interesting point as well. Instead of messing up the vision system, next year it may open up a whole new can of worms and the robots have to work together in autonomous to complete a certain task and the robots find their partners by the lights and then communicate using IR or something.

[Tt321b]

What if FIRST included 8 more cold cathodes (4 red and 4 blue). And teams had to put one of each under the corners of their robots. That would look really cool to see each robot have either red or blue underglow. I would then be really easy to tell which alliance the robot is on.

I have seen teams put the green cathodes under their carts and they look cool, they are bright and since they are shining at the ground they don't blind anyone.

Just thinking outside the box.

[ALIBI]

Originally Posted by InfernoX14

Have teams ship two robots: One painted red and one painted blue.

The only problem I see with the flags is the fact that they fall out. The previous suggestion of using a rubber stopper or something of that sort would work except for the fact that we have yellow flags now. Both have to be able to fit.

Maybe, instead of something like that, the standard flag holder could be changed to include short peices of surgical tubing attached (with screws or zipties?) in such a manner where both flags will fit, and they will be somewhat secured.

Hey, we did that in '06. We drilled two holes opposite eachother near the top of the tube and pulled surgical tubing between the holes(I know, not per spec, but the inspectors that noticed it liked it). The flag ended up between the surgical tubing and the tube. There is also two sides so the second yellow flag could also be added without problems. I do not think we ever lost a flag, and we were top heavy so we did have a tendancy to tip over, flag intact. The flags make it very easy to identify the alliance partners, they do not take power, there is no light to interfere with the camera, and they could easily be held in place. Go with the flags but find a way to hold on to them.

[John Gutmann]

Originally Posted by Tt321b

What if FIRST included 8 more cold cathodes (4 red and 4 blue). And teams had to put one of each under the corners of their robots. That would look really cool to see each robot have either red or blue underglow. I would then be really easy to tell which alliance the robot is on.

I have seen teams put the green cathodes under their carts and they look cool, they are bright and since they are shining at the ground they don't blind anyone.

Just thinking outside the box.

Cold cathodes Are way too fragile to have them on robots that are hitting each other with hunders of pounds of force. I dropped one once and the tube broke.

[dlavery]

I really hate to burst anyone's bubble. But before anyone puts a lot of effort into coming up with snazzy alternatives to the flags, we need to admit something right up front: it ain't gonna happen. Why? It is due to a simple, basic fact that everyone has skipped over so far:
$$$

Let's check some fiscal realities. A typical rotating bubble light (single bulb, 12v, single rotating element, including two single-color gels and mounting hardware), purchased in bulk, goes for about $58.50. There will be an estimated 1500 teams next year. Each team needs one, plus 10% more for spares, so 1650. That comes to a total of $96,525.*

The bright LED clusters (including 4- to 6-LED element, programmable color display, protective diffusing cover, mounting housing, and connecting hardware) came in at about $43.50 each. Each of the 1500 teams will need two (or maybe four, but let's go with the lower limit for a minute), plus 10% for spares, so 3300 units needed. That comes to a total of $143,550.*

Now consider the flags. A typical red or blue bicycle flag (impregnated fabric or urethane plastic, 10-inch size, mounted to a 1/4 inch diameter, 36-inch fiberglass whip pole) can be purchased for $6.50 (unit one). Each team does not need a flag (they just provide their own flag holders), so they don't have to be included in the kits. Each regional competition just has to have an adequate supply of the flags. Let's say they need 24 flags (six on the field, 12 more for the teams in the queue, and six more for spares). There will be an estimated 42 regional competitions next year, but only 10 running at any one time (the flags get recycled from event to event). That means you need a total of 240 flags, for a total cost of $1560.*

So, put yourself in FIRST's place. You have a choice between three options. They price out at $96.5K, $143.5K, and $1.5K. Everything that goes in the kit of parts has to be cost-justified. If you go over the set budget, every additional dollar will get passed directly to the teams. That could result in a cost increase to participate in the program. And the last time the cost of participation went up, the teams screamed bloody murder about it.

Anyone want to guess what we will have in the kit of parts for next year?

-dave

p.s. again, I am not saying any of this to put down any of the cool ideas that folks might come up with. But I am trying to remind everyone that when they start thinking about cool solutions to perceived problems, you have to make sure that the solutions address the ENTIRE problem and not just part of it. "Cost" is ALWAYS a part of the problem statement.

p.p.s. * all these prices have been normalized to reflect unit one purchases from easily identified sources. They can be reduced through bulk purchases. But the relative costs between the options will remain the same. Yes, it is probably possible to get the prices of the lights/LEDs reduced. It is also possible to get the prices of the flags reduced. So please don't nit-pick the numbers and say "but I can get the lights for $1.16 less than that from XYZ company" - that is irrelevent to the central point.

[joshsmithers]

I am a fan of using the diagnostic light as an alliance identification system. I'm talking interchangeable, colored covers as others have mentioned. My reasons for this are that it's easy to see, it would serve for multiple purposes, and there aren't many problems with it. (That I know of) I didn't see any go flying 15' on regular basis, nor did I see tubes get stuck on any. We had no difficulty at all with it. Just wire it, mount it, and there you go. I also believe that the diagnostic light is easy to see, and it gave me the joy of easily knowing whether our robot was disabled.(I wasn't on the field too much)

I believe this would be an inexpensive, simple way to solve the flag "problem". (This doesn't seem to be too big of a problem, but it has been upsetting for some.)

[ALIBI]

From dlavery "I really hate to burst anyone's bubble. But before anyone puts a lot of effort into coming up with snazzy alternatives to the flags, we need to admit something right up front: it ain't gonna happen. Why? It is due to a simple, basic fact that everyone has skipped over so far: $$$"

Take a look at post #22, two holes = free, 1" of surgical tubing = free. I do not think we need an alternative to flags and they can be held in place in the current flag holder for a little effort. I do agree, most of the alternatives could be very expensive. If FIRST or sponcer donated items could come close to the cost numbers you propose, I would rather see something new to play with than something as mundain as a flag replacement.

[John Gutmann]

I don't Know if there a rule reguarding this or not. But why not just have a rule that makes it legal for teams to have thier own Identification System. That the GDC can decide whether the team has to or doesn't have to use the flag. Same idea as the bumpers, you can use this thing and have this advenge by using it but you need to make it to this exact specification. That way FIRST doesn't have to pay for it and it is a standardized way of doing something.

-John

[Herodotus]

Originally Posted by sparksandtabs

I don't Know if there a rule reguarding this or not. But why not just have a rule that makes it legal for teams to have thier own Identification System. That the GDC can decide whether the team has to or doesn't have to use the flag. Same idea as the bumpers, you can use this thing and have this advenge by using it but you need to make it to this exact specification. That way FIRST doesn't have to pay for it and it is a standardized way of doing something.

-John

I was actually thinking of the same thing. Allow individual teams to come up with their own identification system and then include it as part of their inspection. If their system isn't what the judges consider noticeable enough then they have to use the flag.

The only problem I can think of this is for the judges themselves. They've already have their work cut out for them, and having multiple different identification systems would probably multiply their workload a good bit. I wasn't around when lights were used as the primary method of identification but based on what I read on here flags seem to be the simplest and most effective mode of identification.

[Ryan Albright]

Originally Posted by dlavery

The bright LED clusters (including 4- to 6-LED element, programmable color display, protective diffusing cover, mounting housing, and connecting hardware) came in at about $43.50 each. Each of the 1500 teams will need two (or maybe four, but let's go with the lower limit for a minute), plus 10% for spares, so 3300 units needed. That comes to a total of $143,550.*

Simple solution

Whelen FIRST sponsorship

[Dan Petrovic]

Originally Posted by Richard

Actually this has been done -- by collaborating teams. See 968 and 254.

What if they are on the same alliance?