OCCRA
Go to Post I never use set screws to transfer torque. Something about evil spirits or whatever. - Mark Sheridan [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 03:38 AM
Noah Bamberger Noah Bamberger is offline
Registered User
FRC #5970 (Beavertronics)
Team Role: CAD
 
Join Date: Apr 2018
Rookie Year: 2016
Location: Oregon
Posts: 23
Noah Bamberger is an unknown quantity at this point
2 robots at competition

In the past few years, there has been a few times at competition where something breaks on our robot, but we don’t really have time to fix it due to an upcoming match. I recently came across 148’s Bolt, which weighed 61 pounds with battery and bumpers (wow) and the thought occurred to me: is it legal to build two identical robots, which combined weigh in under the weight limit, to then bring to competition and drive one at a time? So you drive the prime until elims or until something breaks, then drive the copy until it’s repaired. I doubt this would ever be used or if it would be practical but would it be legal?
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 03:45 AM
jaredhk's Avatar
jaredhk jaredhk is online now
No longer old enough to volunteer
AKA: Jared Hasen-Klein
no team (Volunteer, 1836 Alum, and extreme instigator)
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: 🥑Southern California
Posts: 507
jaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond reputejaredhk has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

From the 2018 game manual:

Quote:
Conduct Rules
Compete with only one (1) ROBOT. Each registered FIRST Robotics Competition team may enter only one (1) ROBOT (or ‘Robot’, which to a reasonably astute observer, is a ROBOT built to play FIRST® POWER UP℠) into the 2018 FIRST Robotics Competition Season.

[BLUE BOX] “Entering” a ROBOT (or Robot) into a FIRST Robotics Competition means bringing it to the event such that it’s an aid to your Team (e.g. for spare parts, judging material, or for practice). Spare FABRICATED ITEMS may be brought to the event in a bag or part of a WITHHOLDING ALLOWANCE.

This rule does not prohibit teams from bringing in robots from other FIRST programs for the purposes of awards presentations or pit displays.[/]


Violation: Verbal warning. Repeated violations will be addressed by the Head REFEREE, the Lead ROBOT Inspector and/or Event Management.
__________________
JARED HASEN-KLEIN
w: jaredhk.me // Facebook @jhasenklein // Instagram @rationalskeptic
―――
Dean's List Finalist // The Blue Alliance developer // Los Angeles FLL VOY 2017 // CPP 2022 // *56 FIRST Events and Counting! (16,968 miles) * // Team 1836: The MilkenKnights Class of 2018

―――
FREE ROBOTICS RESOURCES // Admin of: FB's FIRST ROBOTICS NETWORK // How to: FIRST DIVERSITY, EQUITY, & INCLUSION
―――
"I am, as I've said, merely competent. But in an age of incompetence, that makes me extraordinary." -Billy Joel
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 08:55 AM
SenorZ's Avatar
SenorZ SenorZ is offline
Physics Teacher
AKA: Tom Zook
FRC #4276 (Surf City Vikings)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Huntington Beach, California
Posts: 1,412
SenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond reputeSenorZ has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

You would need the robot equivalent of two kids, one on the others shoulders, in a trench coat posing as an adult. The second robot would need to be part of the first for inspection, since you cannot have 60lbs of spare fabricated parts.

And you'd need to not break any of the rules on number of batteries, air compressors, CIMS, etc.

It might be a fun thought experiment, but in the end it would likely be too much trouble to get through the inspection.
__________________
2013-present: FRC Team 4276, Surf City Vikings
2011-2012: FRC Team 3677, The Don Bots
Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 09:44 AM
Taylor's Avatar
Taylor Taylor is offline
Professor of Thinkology, ThD
AKA: @taylorstem
FRC #3487 (Red Pride Robotics)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Plainfield, IN, USA 46168
Posts: 4,934
Taylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond reputeTaylor has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorZ View Post
You would need the robot equivalent of two kids, one on the others shoulders, in a trench coat posing as an adult. The second robot would need to be part of the first for inspection, since you cannot have 60lbs of spare fabricated parts.

And you'd need to not break any of the rules on number of batteries, air compressors, CIMS, etc.

It might be a fun thought experiment, but in the end it would likely be too much trouble to get through the inspection.
Oh, so 1519's 2008 robot(s). Cool.
__________________
Hi!
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 10:01 AM
FrankJ's Avatar
FrankJ FrankJ is offline
Robot Mentor
AKA: The Bearded ONe
FRC #2974 (WALT)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Marietta GA
Posts: 2,548
FrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond reputeFrankJ has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Current rules allows as many fabricated parts that can fit into two bags. no weight limit. So you can bring parts to build as many robots as you want as long as they fit in the bags. There is a rule against building you spares into something that looks like a second robot, but not having the parts to do so. Quoted rule in the post above. The inspected robot can only weigh 120 lbs. Limitations on what can be on the inspected robot would prevent you from having two inspected robots regardless of the weight.

I expect there will be a lot of additional rules in this area to go along with no bag in 2020.
__________________
If you don't know what you should hook up then you should read a data sheet
Reply With Quote
  #6   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 03:58 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
FRC #5052 (RoboLobos)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 331
JeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by SenorZ View Post
You would need the robot equivalent of two kids, one on the others shoulders, in a trench coat posing as an adult. The second robot would need to be part of the first for inspection, since you cannot have 60lbs of spare fabricated parts.

And you'd need to not break any of the rules on number of batteries, air compressors, CIMS, etc.

It might be a fun thought experiment, but in the end it would likely be too much trouble to get through the inspection.
If it was part of the robot for inspection, wouldn't the robot's inspection be no longer valid if you removed the child from the other's shoulder? At that point, you'd need a new inspection and you'd be in violation of the two robots rule.
__________________


Any thoughts I share are meant to be my interpretation of rules/events/intents. They shouldn't be viewed as anything even approaching an official viewpoint.
Reply With Quote
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 08:51 PM
Ben the Builder's Avatar
Ben the Builder Ben the Builder is offline
Registered User
AKA: Ben Mosemann
FRC #3303 (Metallic Thunder)
Team Role: CAD
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Rookie Year: 2016
Location: Fresno, CA
Posts: 8
Ben the Builder is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
If it was part of the robot for inspection, wouldn't the robot's inspection be no longer valid if you removed the child from the other's shoulder? At that point, you'd need a new inspection and you'd be in violation of the two robots rule.
Good point.
Reply With Quote
  #8   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 10:17 PM
marshall's Avatar
marshall marshall is offline
"Who's Marshall?"
FRC #0900 (The Zebracorns)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: North Carolina
Posts: 3,065
marshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond reputemarshall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by jaredhk View Post
From the 2018 game manual:
Interesting... never noticed that before.
__________________
"La mejor salsa del mundo es la hambre" - Miguel de Cervantes
"The future is unwritten" - Joe Strummer
"Simplify, then add lightness" - Colin Chapman
Clarke's Laws
Reply With Quote
  #9   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-28-2018, 10:23 PM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 22,250
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
If it was part of the robot for inspection, wouldn't the robot's inspection be no longer valid if you removed the child from the other's shoulder? At that point, you'd need a new inspection and you'd be in violation of the two robots rule.
As a matter of fact, the robot's inspection would still be valid, for the "supporting" robot alone, OR for the combination of the two. However, should the "supported" robot be the main robot at any point thereafter, then the rule Jared cited would be in play.


As an inspector I've referred a couple teams to the LRI for having an assembled second robot in the pits--or blocked them from bringing it in in the first place. Don't care if the PARTS are there, just don't have them assembled.


For some rules reference (2018 Manual--see 2019 for any changes for that season): I03 says you need to bring it all to inspection, BUT can play with a subset of mechanisms. I04 says you need to get reinspected for changes (all except a list, including I03).
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots; 2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics; 2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk



Reply With Quote
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 11-29-2018, 01:23 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
FRC #5052 (RoboLobos)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 331
JeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
As a matter of fact, the robot's inspection would still be valid, for the "supporting" robot alone, OR for the combination of the two. However, should the "supported" robot be the main robot at any point thereafter, then the rule Jared cited would be in play.


As an inspector I've referred a couple teams to the LRI for having an assembled second robot in the pits--or blocked them from bringing it in in the first place. Don't care if the PARTS are there, just don't have them assembled.


For some rules reference (2018 Manual--see 2019 for any changes for that season): I03 says you need to bring it all to inspection, BUT can play with a subset of mechanisms. I04 says you need to get reinspected for changes (all except a list, including I03).
Read rule I04 again.

Quote:
Exceptions are listed in A through F (unless they result in a significant change to the ROBOT'S size, weight, legality, or safety.)

F. additions, removals, or reconfiguration of ROBOT with a subset of MECHANISMS already inspected per I02.
While F does provide the exception to remove mechanisms, it's nullified if it results in a significant change to size, weight, legality, or safety. While I don't see this modifying safety (at least, not for the worse), it would significantly change the size, weight, and legality.

Size/Weight would be cut in half.
Legality would break now that you're bringing two robots.

As a result, the inspection is no longer valid. Are you reading that differently?
__________________


Any thoughts I share are meant to be my interpretation of rules/events/intents. They shouldn't be viewed as anything even approaching an official viewpoint.
Reply With Quote
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2018, 01:38 AM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 22,250
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
Read rule I04 again.



While F does provide the exception to remove mechanisms, it's nullified if it results in a significant change to size, weight, legality, or safety. While I don't see this modifying safety (at least, not for the worse), it would significantly change the size, weight, and legality.

Size/Weight would be cut in half.
Legality would break now that you're bringing two robots.

As a result, the inspection is no longer valid. Are you reading that differently?
If they inspected in both configurations (base + superstructure, AND base-only), which I should point out that they are required to do, per I03, then they are simply going from one previously-inspected configuration to another previously-inspected configuration. You do not have to re-inspect when changing inspected configurations, unless (for example) you would break a robot rule if both were on the robot at the same time (common example, two superstructures that combined put you over the weight limit, pick one per match, you MUST inspect each time you swap).
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots; 2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics; 2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk



Reply With Quote
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2018, 03:52 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
FRC #5052 (RoboLobos)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 331
JeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH View Post
If they inspected in both configurations (base + superstructure, AND base-only), which I should point out that they are required to do, per I03, then they are simply going from one previously-inspected configuration to another previously-inspected configuration. You do not have to re-inspect when changing inspected configurations, unless (for example) you would break a robot rule if both were on the robot at the same time (common example, two superstructures that combined put you over the weight limit, pick one per match, you MUST inspect each time you swap).
Doesn't that entirely defeat the purpose of said robot on shoulders of other robot "loophole"?

If they inspect in all configurations, that means they're still at the initial problem, they fail the inspection for having two robots. Placing them on top of each other to make a single SUPER robot would momentarily get around this problem, as posed prior.

If they then split the robots, the inspection is no longer valid unless this configuration, the one they're trying to avoid getting inspected, is also inspected.

As the entire point was to NOT get all configurations inspected, then how exactly is my reading of this incorrect? Or, do you agree that the change is significant enough such that it would pull the inspection if the only tested configuration was robot on robot?
__________________


Any thoughts I share are meant to be my interpretation of rules/events/intents. They shouldn't be viewed as anything even approaching an official viewpoint.
Reply With Quote
  #13   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2018, 04:09 PM
maxxman maxxman is offline
Registered User
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Canada
Posts: 54
maxxman is a jewel in the roughmaxxman is a jewel in the roughmaxxman is a jewel in the rough
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
Doesn't that entirely defeat the purpose of said robot on shoulders of other robot "loophole"?

If they inspect in all configurations, that means they're still at the initial problem, they fail the inspection for having two robots. Placing them on top of each other to make a single SUPER robot would momentarily get around this problem, as posed prior.

If they then split the robots, the inspection is no longer valid unless this configuration, the one they're trying to avoid getting inspected, is also inspected.

As the entire point was to NOT get all configurations inspected, then how exactly is my reading of this incorrect? Or, do you agree that the change is significant enough such that it would pull the inspection if the only tested configuration was robot on robot?
Talk to 1285 from 2015, they built 2 robots for their first 2 events and went back and rebuilt 1 bot for their last.

Even if the rules allow for it, more than likely it will be more advantageous to build a single robot.
Reply With Quote
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2018, 05:23 PM
JeffB JeffB is offline
Registered User
FRC #5052 (RoboLobos)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Austin
Posts: 331
JeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond reputeJeffB has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by maxxman View Post
Talk to 1285 from 2015, they built 2 robots for their first 2 events and went back and rebuilt 1 bot for their last.

Even if the rules allow for it, more than likely it will be more advantageous to build a single robot.
Are you saying they brought 2 robots to the same event? Or, they built one for each?

The topic here relates to bringing 2 robots to the same event. The question was whether or not a smaller robot would allow for the duplicate robots to come in under weight. As someone pointed out, rules were added recently to only allow teams to bring a single robot to competition. 2015 would be prior to that point if they were bringing 2 to the same event.
__________________


Any thoughts I share are meant to be my interpretation of rules/events/intents. They shouldn't be viewed as anything even approaching an official viewpoint.
Reply With Quote
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-03-2018, 10:23 PM
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 22,250
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 2 robots at competition

Quote:
Originally Posted by JeffB View Post
Doesn't that entirely defeat the purpose of said robot on shoulders of other robot "loophole"?

If they inspect in all configurations, that means they're still at the initial problem, they fail the inspection for having two robots. Placing them on top of each other to make a single SUPER robot would momentarily get around this problem, as posed prior.

If they then split the robots, the inspection is no longer valid unless this configuration, the one they're trying to avoid getting inspected, is also inspected.

As the entire point was to NOT get all configurations inspected, then how exactly is my reading of this incorrect? Or, do you agree that the change is significant enough such that it would pull the inspection if the only tested configuration was robot on robot?

Let me put it this way, so as not to go too far down the rabbit hole. Let's take a 2018 robot, which has a lift AND an Everybot dumper. Both systems are present on the robot at inspection, both systems are OK to go through, everything is legal. (I know of a robot that was like that at one time.) But, the lift fails somehow, and the team wants extra time with a match coming up. So they remove the lift, lock stock and shooter, and play the match with just the Everybot.

Per your interpretation, they must get fully reinspected, because they removed the lift (losing significant weight in the process). Most inspectors I've worked with would start that conversation with "Go to the field, good luck, come back when you're done repairing"--and then somebody would saunter over to the pit to see what was up a few minutes later. The REPAIR would need to be reinspected, likely as a courtesy ("we changed this piece out for a spare" or something like that), on reinstallation. But not the removal. (If the inspection sticker was on the lift, there could be issues. But that's able to be worked around.)



Also, please note that I very specifically did NOT include "superstructure only" in the initial inspection list of configurations (thus, not all configurations were inspected, per rule). I DID include both base alone and base with superstructure. That means that the superstructure has been inspected but only as part of a "superrobot". Show up at the field with just the superstructure, and there will likely be some interesting looks at best--99% chance the Lead Robot Inspector and Head Referee pull you off the field for a non-inspected robot.



@maxxman: 2015 rules were... weird. 148 had 2 (or more) robots as well. BUT that was allowed as long as they were connected by a tether on the field, and both together fit in a certain size constraint when not on the field. Quite a few robots had tethers to one outlying piece or another. Some happened to have that outlying piece be a second robot.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots; 2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics; 2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk



Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:04 AM.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi