Commercial Hardware

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Brandis at 2/1/2001 7:26 PM EST


Coach on team #5030, FATE, from Novi High School and Magna Corporation.



Can we use locally purchased hardware - nuts, bolts etc or do we have to purchase through small parts?

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Ross at 2/1/2001 7:42 PM EST


Engineer on team #330, Beach Bot, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA/JPL , J&F Machine, and Raytheon.


In Reply to: Commercial Hardware
Posted by Joe Brandis on 2/1/2001 7:26 PM EST:



: Can we use locally purchased hardware - nuts, bolts etc or do we have to purchase through small parts?

You can buy anything that is on the additional hardware list from any source that you want. Nuts and bolts are considered fastners (for most purposes) and fastners are on the additional hardware list in unlimited quantity.

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Leung at 2/1/2001 7:51 PM EST


Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M. Gunn Senior High School.


In Reply to: Re: Commercial Hardware
Posted by Joe Ross on 2/1/2001 7:42 PM EST:



I still never got this part:

If we can buy parts from local store that appear on the Small Parts catalog, are we allow to use those instead of ordering directly from Small Parts, and just report the price with the Small Parts standard?

[archiver]

Posted by Matt Leese at 2/1/2001 7:59 PM EST


Other on team #73, Tigerbolt, from Edison Technical HS and Alstom & Rochester Institute of Technology.


In Reply to: small parts stuff
Posted by Ken Leung on 2/1/2001 7:51 PM EST:



Technically no, all products must come from Small Parts. Or at least, that's my reading of the rules. I know this is much less of an issue with the additions we've had to the additional hardware list in recent years however.

Matt

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson at 2/1/2001 8:09 PM EST


Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: small parts stuff
Posted by Ken Leung on 2/1/2001 7:51 PM EST:



I will tell you where I draw the line:

If the stuff is IDENTICAL, then I don't sweat the details. If it is just similar or NEARLY identical, then only SPI stuff will do.

By the way, even if it is IDENTICAL, I still buy enough from SPI to make our robot. I am not too fussy about making sure that the spares get the EXACT ones from SPI. Also, I must confess that I don't keep two piles of stuff that is identical in every respect but that one pile came in boxes with SPI on their labels.

On a scale ranging from too legalistic to too cavalier, how do others think this interpretation fits?

Do tell.

Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Ross at 2/2/2001 12:41 AM EST


Engineer on team #330, Beach Bot, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA/JPL , J&F Machine, and Raytheon.


In Reply to: Too Legalistic Vs. Too Cavalier
Posted by Joe Johnson on 2/1/2001 8:09 PM EST:



: By the way, even if it is IDENTICAL, I still buy enough from SPI to make our robot. I am not too fussy about making sure that the spares get the EXACT ones from SPI. Also, I must confess that I don't keep two piles of stuff that is identical in every respect but that one pile came in boxes with SPI on their labels.

This is just about what we do. Seeing as how we often don't know what we need until we need it, we buy a lot of stuff locally and then order the part from SPI. If the two parts are identical than we use the local stuff and keep the SPI stuff in the corner. If they aren't identical, we start using the stuff we purchased locally and replace it with the SPI stuff when we get a chance.

We started doing this one year when FIRST had a ruling that said something similar, and haven't looked back.

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Baker at 2/2/2001 7:52 AM EST


Engineer on team #45, TechnoKats, from Kokomo High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: Re: Too Legalistic Vs. Too Cavalier
Posted by Joe Ross on 2/2/2001 12:41 AM EST:



There are many SPI parts (or materials) that we don't buy them from SPI.

For instance, these things are VERY available to us:
Shoulder bolts
Delrin
Nylon washers
Oil Lite bearings/bushings

For making a FIRST robot, these parts are only available through SPI (except possibly the shoulder bolts, which I'm not sure about their fastener status).

Any of these parts that we get by "other means" are verified to be dimensionally and functionally the same as the SPI parts.

For instance: I just grabbed a bar of 1"x1" Delrin off our stock shelf yesterday to make some parts for a mechanism. Looking on page 140 of SPI, I see that we can buy 2" diameter Black Delrin from SPI. I'd be suprised if we have to use over 36", but worse case, our team's SPI cost will be accounted with $85.50 for the use of a few blocks of Delrin. We do this without buying any Delrin from SPI.

Once we use these parts, we still account for all of them on our SPI spreadsheet... just like we bought them.

We spend much $$ at SPI (well over $1,000), and I see it being silly for some of duality of buying things from them that we have readily available to us. We are confident that these parts and/or materials are the same that we would get from SPI.

If we're out of line here, please let me know.

Andy B.

[archiver]

Posted by Michael Betts at 2/2/2001 12:35 PM EST


Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.


In Reply to: Too Legalistic in some cases
Posted by Andy Baker on 2/2/2001 7:52 AM EST:



Andy, Joe, et al,

Team 177 executes exactly as Team 47 (per Joe's post).

During development we use whatever is at hand. We do not order from SPI unless we KNOW it will go on the bot (or that SPI is the easiest source). It's simply too expensive to prototype with SPI much of the time.

Prior to shipping, we make sure that we have ordered all material, on the bot, from SPI. If it's identical to what we used, we don't replace it. If it is different in any way (or if we are not sure) then the SPI material goes on the bot before shipping.

Mike

[archiver]

Posted by Gary Bonner at 2/2/2001 12:36 PM EST


Other on team #433, Firebirds, from Mount Saint Joseph Academy and SCT Corp., FMC Corp..


In Reply to: Too Legalistic in some cases
Posted by Andy Baker on 2/2/2001 7:52 AM EST:



It seems reasonable to me that if you’ve bought identical parts from Small Parts, it shouldn’t matter if they are the actual ones on your robot. However, I don’t think FIRST would agree. From Team Update 5:

Q74. Are we allowed to buy parts which are in the Small Parts catalog from another store and write them in at the Small Parts price toward the $1200 spending limit? Is it required that they be genuine Small Parts parts?

A74. We expect teams to purchase parts listed in the Small Parts catalog from Small Parts. The reason for using the catalog is to provide all teams with equal access to certain parts in terms of both selection and lead time.

With the recent ruling on fasteners, this is even more cumbersome.

[archiver]

Posted by Joe Johnson at 2/2/2001 3:55 PM EST


Engineer on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: Re: Too Legalistic in some cases
Posted by Gary Bonner on 2/2/2001 12:36 PM EST:



In regard to Q&A74, honestly, I don't know what to make of this rule.

If absolute "equal access to certain parts in terms of selection and lead time" is the standard, what am I to do with left over Small Parts Inc. stock from last year?

For example, must I throw out chain that I purchased from SPI last year but went unused because it would give me a theoretical advantage "in terms of both selections and lead time"?

I am a reasonable person with a reasonably well formed conscience, but I can't see the reasonableness of a strict enforcement of this rule.

Again I ask, Too Legalistic or Too Cavalier?

What is a person to do?

Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by Raul at 2/2/2001 10:02 PM EST


Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.


In Reply to: Consider the following...
Posted by Joe Johnson on 2/2/2001 3:55 PM EST:



Wow, this is getting out of hand. No wonder we have too many lawyers and not enough engineers.

Seriously, I agree that it is impossible to set a ruling so vaguely based on "selection and lead times". After all, did FIRST set a date for when we are allowed to start buying from Small Parts?

I never even considered it a legality issue in using Small Parts from previous years. I think that type of interpretation based on the "making it fair for rookies" issue is absurd.

We always look at the latest catalog to determine the price to account for in our list. But we certainly are not going to throw out the materials that we bought before this year.

I refuse to say anything else until I first contact my lawyer :-).

I think I will ask Eric about it next time I call him.

Raul

: In regard to Q&A74, honestly, I don't know what to make of this rule.

: If absolute "equal access to certain parts in terms of selection and lead time" is the standard, what am I to do with left over Small Parts Inc. stock from last year?

: For example, must I throw out chain that I purchased from SPI last year but went unused because it would give me a theoretical advantage "in terms of both selections and lead time"?

: I am a reasonable person with a reasonably well formed conscience, but I can't see the reasonableness of a strict enforcement of this rule.

: Again I ask, Too Legalistic or Too Cavalier?

: What is a person to do?

: Joe J.

[archiver]

Posted by Bill Beatty at 2/3/2001 12:26 PM EST


Other on team #71, Team Hammond, from Team Hammond.


In Reply to: Re: Consider the following...
Posted by Raul on 2/2/2001 10:02 PM EST:




I don't see any rule that states when you have to buy material from SPI. Joe, I think you are reading more into the Q74 than it says. It only states that all teams have to live with SPI lead times. It does not prohibit using various methods of reducing lead times from SPI, including FedEx Priority or ordering early.
FYI, in past years, when additional raw material was more limited, we ordered raw material from SPI before kickoff.(don't use a FIRST order blank) We ordered many things even if there is only a small possibility of use. We usually spend about $3000 each year and have built up a large inventory of SPI material. Sometimes for prototyping we use local stuff but change it out with SPI stuff before shipping. We have done this to help support SPI and to stay legal, and we have no intention of throwing out this inventory.

Bill B

[archiver]

Posted by Ken Patton at 2/4/2001 12:26 PM EST


Engineer on team #65, The Huskie Brigade, from Pontiac Northern High School and GM Powertrain.


In Reply to: Purchase date
Posted by Bill Beatty on 2/3/2001 12:26 PM EST:



We do pretty much the same thing as Bill's team. We keep SPI raw materials and off the shelf items (chain, bearings, collars) from previous years stock, because we are too cheap and sensible to not use it. We dont re-use anything that has been modified by us, though.

I have drawings sitting on my office floor (my really big "out box&quot right now waiting for SPI material, even though I have identical stock in our machine shop 100 feet away.

Ken

[archiver]

Posted by ChrisH at 2/5/2001 1:30 AM EST


Engineer on team #330, Beach 'Bots, from Hope Chapel Academy and NASA JPL, J & F Machine, Raytheon, et al.


In Reply to: Consider the following...
Posted by Joe Johnson on 2/2/2001 3:55 PM EST:



I caught the thing about lead times too. It brought to mind an ealier post from team 368 which is in Hawaii. As I recall they have to wait an additional 1 or 2 days for stuff from SPI due to the extra shipping.

If they want to even up the lead times does that mean we all have to leave the stuff in the box for 2 days when we get it so it's not a disadvantage to the Hawaii teams?

I think we have to try and use some common sense. Which as I realize has nothing to do with legality. Why else do you think juries were invented? but that's another subject and way off topic.

While we don't order stuff before hand (we don't have that much $$) We do routinely use material that was purchased in previous years. I don't see any problem with this especially since, as someone pointed out, the rules don't say when the material had to have been purchased from SPI

Chris Husmann, PE
Team 330 the Beach'Bots

[archiver]

Posted by Andy Baker at 2/4/2001 1:08 AM EST


Engineer on team #45, TechnoKats, from Kokomo High School and Delphi Automotive Systems.


In Reply to: Too Legalistic in some cases
Posted by Andy Baker on 2/2/2001 7:52 AM EST:



Looks like that team 45 is in the minority with regard to the subject of buying "commodity parts and materials" from non-SPI sources, like my Delrin example.

For us, the easy fix to this problem is to place an order to SPI that includes their parts and materials that we are using on this year's 'bot. I'll do this and make sure that we are in within the rules.

But, to argue the point some more...

The point of this rule is to "even the playing field" for rookie teams, and teams who do not have the resources some other teams are privvy to.

I really don't see how this rules helps rookie teams or low-resource teams. I'll try to explain my point by expanding on my previous example of using Delrin (which is only legally available through SPI):

A rookie or low-budget team needs Delrin, so they can get it by these means:
1. Use raw stock from their sponsor.
2. Call a local plastics supplier and ask for some scrap Delrin.
3. Get some raw material from another team with more resources.
4. Buy the material from SPI.
5. Buy the material from a local plastics supplier.

Options 1-3 are much cheaper than 4 or 5. This rule is supposed to help teams with low resources or rookies... but all it does is handcuff all teams. If all teams have to buy the stuff from SPI, then all teams are put into the worst case scenario with regard to purchasing these types of items. In a 6 week project we should be able to use creative resources to get stuff that is functionally legal.

By all means, I do not aim to bash SPI. I am just trying to save some teams from spending money that they do not have to spend.

I'll stop for now... but this issue does need to be debated. I'll probably send FIRST a note about this, and try to get a clarification.

Obviously, I'm missing something here... I'm in the minority on this. Someone set me straight.

Andy B.