Team Update #1

[Norman J]

I have heard in the past that constraint encourages ingenuity, in a way. As people get more limitations placed on them, they can think more creatively within the bounds of those constraints.

An example is Mad libs. If you tell someone to write a funny story, most people can't come up with something good. If you ask people "Give me a funny adjective, a funny noun and a funny verb." You can get pretty creative answers.

So basically, while I am still slightly disappointed by the lack of launching ability, I am still confident that a strong, innovative team will be able to produce a minibot that can outperform most others and come up with a cool solution despite the limitations.

Good engineering involves working with constraints, not complaining about them.

[Chris Fultz]

I just want to want to make one clarifying point -

If you compete in VEX, you are only allowed to use official VEX parts, with just a few exceptions.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by Chris Fultz

I just want to want to make one clarifying point -

If you compete in VEX, you are only allowed to use official VEX parts, with just a few exceptions.

But if you compete in VEX, they don't make you use VEX in all the other robotics competitions you enter.

FIRST went so far as to change the rules of this other competition midseason to eliminate a viable design that didn't use enough of the Tetrix product.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by Chris is me

But if you compete in VEX, they don't make you use VEX in all the other robotics competitions you enter.

FIRST went so far as to change the rules of this other competition midseason to eliminate a viable design that didn't use enough of the Tetrix product.

I thought they did it for the safety of the volunteers, staff and teams.

On a side note: I don't think your vex response makes any sense. Vex doesn't have any other competitions as far as I know. What's the problem with FIRST limiting you on the parts you use for the minibot? They do it every year in FRC in one way or another.

[Chris is me]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

I thought they did it for the safety of the volunteers, staff and teams.

An easy way to make springbots safe: Make the rule "springbots must be rigidly attached to the pole". There, no safety issue.

A design I was working on would literally be physically incapable of deploying until around a bar.

On a side note: I don't think your vex response makes any sense. Vex doesn't have any other competitions as far as I know. What's the problem with FIRST limiting you on the parts you use for the minibot? They do it every year in FRC in one way or another.

The problem is they're quite transparently pushing their robotics competition on every team in FRC, at the expense of the teams that do VRC now.

[JohnHorton]

Originally Posted by Michael Corsetto

I know everyone is rejoicing about the 84" cylinder, but I personally loved the 60" as an actual engineering challenge. What about this game is different than 2007 again? Minibots? OK, cool.

Agreed. I liked the challenge of making a bot to fit into tight restrictions. I was hoping to see some really interesting workarounds for that.
I think we still have the '07 bot in storage. Hmm....

Originally Posted by BrendanB

...Why put surgical tubing on the list if NO stored energy is allowed...

My thoughts exactly.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

I thought they did it for the safety of the volunteers, staff and teams.

With the amount of energy safely stored in our lift system last year we could put a minibot through the roof of whatever arena we were in (3x 250lbs gas shocks 16" stroke) but we wouldn't for the reason of the light has to be on the tower to indicate we won.

Soccer balls flying would also have similar kinetic energy safety wise.

'08 trackballs flying had significantly more and could easily knock people over, and those exited the field occasionally.

Doing a launched minibot safely was not a large challenge.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by pfreivald

Frankly, I'm surprised that anyone thought that a launch-bot would be allowed under this game -- whether thrown onto the tower or placed and then launched upward.

A. If you paid attention during kickoff, you knew what the intent of the MINIBOT race was.

B. Several pounds of metal and other stuff being launched into the air (either by itself or by the robot 'deploying' it), if it missed the pole due to any variety of easily forseeable circumstances (poor alignment, getting hit -- accidentally of course -- while deploying), hard enough to go ten feet up and still put out .5 lbs of force on impact... Can you say <S01>, kiddies? I knew you could!

The umbrage at this "change" (which is merely a clarification for anyone who read the rules as advised -- in their spirit instead of as a rules lawyer) is pretty funny. Seriously funny. In a funny but serious sort of way.

Not unless you were aiming at as light as possible and completely wrapped around the pole. I had a feeling that projectiles would be illegal; however, I didn't think that if it was attached around the pole and moving really fast it would be illegal.

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill

With the amount of energy safely stored in our lift system last year we could put a minibot through the roof of whatever arena we were in (3x 250lbs gas shocks 16" stroke) but we wouldn't for the reason of the light has to be on the tower to indicate we won.

Soccer balls flying would also have similar kinetic energy safety wise.

'08 trackballs flying had significantly more and could easily knock people over, and those exited the field occasionally.

Doing a launched minibot safely was not a large challenge.

This is a very good point. Our robots are probably more of a safety hazard than a projectile.

I wouldn't have an issue with this rule change, if it wasn't such a key part of the game. I think what annoys me the most is the implications for all the teams who don't have A. and FTC kit, B. a team near them or C. the funds to drop on FTC parts since the minibots will take a few falls. Too bad we now have to pay to remain competitive.

[pfreivald]

You guys seem to be missing my point... What if you missed the pole when deploying your launched MINIBOT?

Aluminum block =/= big squishy trackball (or what-have-you). If you were hit/tipped so that it launched, say, at a 45-degree angle toward the crowd (despite your engineering), this would create an untenable safety hazard that FIRSTs lawyers would be certain to ixnay.

[wilsonmw04]

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill

Doing a launched minibot safely was not a large challenge.

My response was merely an attempt to show that there might have been other reasons for the clarification rather than "forcing" FRC teams to use parts that Vex folks don't like or to "remove innovation and inspiration" from this game that we are about to play.

[SteveGPage]

Folks, I've read both threads, and 'yes' I can sense and in some ways feel your frustration. No, I can't relate to those areas of the country, or to our friends up North, that don't have access to an FTC team, either.

But after reading all the upset and I'm sure hurting comments (I'm not saying you are hurting others - I'm acknowledging that many of you feel betrayed and hurt), I have some thoughts that I think are important.

First, look down at many of your profile signatures. Many of you have very inspirational quotes. If you don't - look up at the spotlight quotes running across the top of the page. There are so many that deal with overcoming adversity. Overcoming barriers. Finding excellance in the midst of mediocrity. Going above and beyond. etc. etc.

Ask yourself some questions.
* If you are upset because you had a great idea about how to launch a minibox (since many of the ideas mentioned couldn't be called a minibot), now you get a real challenge.

* To those of you who have issues with funding, that it isn't in your budget, what about all those teams who post things like - we just lost our only sponsor - the school system just kicked us out of the building and took all our tools and grants - our lead mentor just left and we have no one to help. What do you all say to them? I've read many of your thoughts on what to do to find help, how you encourage them. Unfortunately, you now find yourself in a similar situation that teams find themselves in every year, and yet find a way to overcome that situation.

* To those who think it isn't fair that FIRST is competing with Vex. Why would you even think FIRST cares about what Vex is doing. Do you think McDonalds cares about Wendys when it builds a store right next door? Maybe it isn't politics - but classical business decisions. Capitalism at work. Now we get to teach how supply and demand works, maybe talk about what happens in a monopoly, how some countries place tarifs on others, etc...

So hopefully you have all had a chance to vent, to blow off some steam and tomorrow wake up and do what you all do best, figure out to make the best of a bad decision - and make the best robots you all know how to make!

Steve

[Alexa Stott]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

* To those of you who have issues with funding, that it isn't in your budget, what about all those teams who post things like - we just lost our only sponsor - the school system just kicked us out of the building and took all our tools and grants - our lead mentor just left and we have no one to help. What do you all say to them? I've read many of your thoughts on what to do to find help, how you encourage them. Unfortunately, you now find yourself in a similar situation that teams find themselves in every year, and yet find a way to overcome that situation.

The lack of funding for those teams was brought upon them by others, not by FIRST itself. This is FIRST basically telling the already financially strapped teams that they might have to spend even more money on equipment for this year's competition. This is different.

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by SteveGPage

* To those who think it isn't fair that FIRST is competing with Vex. Why would you even think FIRST cares about what Vex is doing. Do you think McDonalds cares about Wendys when it builds a store right next door? Maybe it isn't politics - but classical business decisions. Capitalism at work. Now we get to teach how supply and demand works, maybe talk about what happens in a monopoly, how some countries place tarifs on others, etc...

Steve -- I think the problem here is that none of these after-school competition engineering programs have "dominant market share and destruction of our competitors" in their mission statements. One way or another, all of these programs (FRC, VRC, BEST, Botball, TSA, Skills, etc.) have a mission statement that comes down to "showing young people that science and technology is fun, and that you can go on to college and a career in the field." Once the mission statement becomes, "Build the cash reserves and dominate the market" they've already lost track of their purpose.

I work for the Robotics Education and Competition Foundation, the folks that run the VEX Robotics Competition, and it bugs me when a school chooses not to be part of our program. At some point, though, you need to suck it up, realize that more than 90% of all middle and high schools don't have ANY engineering/science challenge, and remember that a successful program in a school is a win for all of us.

[gblake]

Originally Posted by wilsonmw04

...
Vex doesn't have any other competitions as far as I know. ...

Similar to the proper clarifying point Chris made. Let me remind everyone that Vex is a product line and is used in some TSA competitions, BEST competitions, some PLTW activities, and in the RECF's VRC and VRCC competition programs (did I forget any?).

"Vex" isn't a competition.

The RECF is the Robotics Education and Competition Foundation.

Blake
PS: I think Justin hit the nail on the head here http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...4&postcount=29

[Hawiian Cadder]

this may be completely stupid, but has anyone considered building a solenoid driver? they have significantly more "initial launch" force and with magnets as well as 24 gauge wire a relatively crude one could be constructed.