Why do we bother bagging?

[Michael Hill]

I'm glad we went from shipping to bringing our own robot to competitions, but why do we even bag anymore? Many teams build nearly identical twin robots so that work can continue after build season and into the competition. Yes, generally there is less stress for students and mentors after the robot is bagged, but many teams will still meet to work on the "practice bot". Many teams, however, can't afford to buy/make two of everything, so they're really stuck with the robot in the bag. Why not make it fair for everyone to just leave it out so teams don't need to waste money building a second robot to continue work? Let teams manage their own schedules so mentor and student burnout doesn't happen.

Just my opinion.

[Ty Tremblay]

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...t=entire+robot

[Jeffy]

This has been debated before. I'm sure you can find a thread using the search function if you would like to see more opinions on it.

The majority of replies to such threads can be summarized to: It is fair. Teams with practice bots worked to obtain the resources and skill it takes them to make two robots. The only thing stopping your team from being like them is more hard work.

[Michael Hill]

Originally Posted by Jeffy

This has been debated before. I'm sure you can find a thread using the search function if you would like to see more opinions on it.

The majority of replies to such threads can be summarized to: It is fair. Teams with practice bots worked to obtain the resources and skill it takes them to make two robots. The only thing stopping your team from being like them is more hard work.

Clearly our definitions of "fair" differ. Surely you can't think that a rookie team building out of a parent's garage is expected to be able to afford and build two identical robots in the same manner as teams with access to CNC waterjet, milling, lathe, etc. All that stuff doesn't appear over their first year just by "working hard". There's a clear analogy to socioeconomics we have today, but I'll refrain from going there.

[BigJ]

Originally Posted by Michael Hill

Clearly our definitions of "fair" differ. Surely you can't think that a rookie team building out of a parent's garage is expected to be able to afford and build two identical robots in the same manner as teams with access to CNC waterjet, milling, lathe, etc. All that stuff doesn't appear over their first year just by "working hard". There's a clear analogy to socioeconomics we have today, but I'll refrain from going there.

On the other hand, you can't think that every team should have to build out of a parent's garage. I have seen more than one rookie team that looks like a FIRST veteran even without a mentor with prior FIRST experience. I suspect it was because they did their research before jumping in, reached out to other veteran teams, and used the resources available to them to succeed.

There are multitudes of resources for all teams, not just rookies, to help them obtain more sponsors, help, and other types of resources.

[PayneTrain]

Really the question we need to start asking is "Why do we bother bagging at all anymore?"

When the competition landscape shifts to a majority district system, will we see the robot lock-ups disappear? Before? After?

Don't say FRC will be keeping these kinds of restrictions forever. Some members of the community who have been doing this for far longer than I have (6 going on 7 years) think that bagging/locking up the machine is an archaic a practice as regionals in dense areas.

[fox46]

Surely you can't think that a rookie team building out of a parent's garage is expected to be able to afford and build two identical robots in the same manner as teams with access to CNC waterjet, milling, lathe, etc. All that stuff doesn't appear over their first year just by "working hard".

Powerhouse teams don't pop into existence overnight. It can take years to reach the level where building two robots is within a team's grasp. This year said rookie team may be building out of a garage but that is precisely where many big teams started. The year after though they can collect more sponsors and grow their team... and the next year even more- and although it won't happen overnight if there is a strong enough passion and drive to improve and succeed, that former rookie team will be waterjetting practice robots in no time.

I know how tough it can be to feel "left behind" when you see these huge teams with massive resources but they were rookies too at one point and likely not that different than yourselves.

[sanddrag]

As a team that builds two identical robots (to very high standards of quality), I'd like to offer my perspective which you may find interesting.

Last night at 12:30 AM when trying to move this darn thing all bagged up, I found myself asking this same question. It's entirely an honor system anyway. Not that anyone would, but you could just put it in the bag the night before the regional and no one would ever know. I could sign a form saying I didn't touch it, and that's the same as signing a form saying I bagged it, just, without the bag. It's just a pain to move while in the bag, and I'd be happy if it went away.

We continue work every day starting this afternoon on our second robot anyhow. There is no real end of the build, especially not with a 45 pound withholding allowance. (and I know we've discussed this in other threads, so I don't want to repeat it all).

To us, all that the current bagging rule does is cause us to spend thousands of more dollars and hundreds of more hours that wouldn't be necessary if we didn't have to bag. Imagine how far all that time and money would go in other efforts if it wasn't spent on building a twin robot, because the real one is off limits by a millimeter of plastic.

The bagging does not stop anyone from continuing to build their robot. It only makes it more expensive to keep doing so. When you build a practice robot, you're literally buying time. We do this, and I don't like it. It becomes a competition of who has more dollars and who has more adults with more hours to spend away from their families and responsibilities. This is one area that there is really a disparity in FIRST, and I say this coming from the upper end of this spectrum. It's easy to tell the others to work harder if they want your results, but not always practical for them to do so. It all boils down to who is involved with your program, and to what extents they're willing to go to make it awesome.

The only real issue with not bagging is, nobody would attend the first two weeks of events if the build season extended right up to the events, and for that problem, I have no solution.

Either let everyone keep working, or (preferably) go back to the real, hard limit 6 weeks, so we don't have this 3 month build season.

Let's not continue this whole build two robots thing. I'm out of space to put them, and out of money to fund them.

[Nemo]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

The only real issue with not bagging is, nobody would attend the first two weeks of events if the build season extended right up to the events, and for that problem, I have no solution.

There would be a bigger difference between weeks 1-2 and weeks 6-7, but teams would still go to early events. Several reasons:

1) Teams sign up for events that have open slots and that fit their schedules and geographical reach. Space in events is scarce.

2) You can still qualify for the Championship at early events, and you can do it with a less amazing robot than you'd need at a later event. If you're a team that is capable of building a reasonably polished robot in 6 weeks, maybe you'd be able to dominate at an early event.

3) Logistically, qualifying early in the year is nicer than qualifying really late. You get more time to plan your trip. Also, if your team wants to make significant upgrades for the Championship, you get a longer time to plan that out and execute it without having to focus completely on shorter term, less ambitious goals required to qualify at the regional level.

4) Having a big gap between regional or district events is pretty nice for giving upgrade time after the first competition experience. So I'd much rather attend week 1 and 5 than weeks 5 and 6.

That doesn't mean every team would LIKE that system better, but I don't think it would be a big problem to get teams to attend early events.

[Rynocorn]

Originally Posted by sanddrag

The only real issue with not bagging is, nobody would attend the first two weeks of events if the build season extended right up to the events, and for that problem, I have no solution.

See I actually think the opposite for my team. We typically come up with really good strategy while not building as great of a robot and use it to our advantage. We have won two regionals 2005 and 2010 (week 1) and did not have the best robot at either event but executed a strategy well. Also, our team cannot support a longer build season as we are all exhausted. Just another take from a different team

[Rynocorn]

Nemo beat me to it- I echo his points with less eloquence

[techtiger1]

My team tries to push the envelope with robot design as much as we can. The team is lucky enough to have some nice resources available and a handful of extremely dedicated mentors that come back year after year. I have searched over the past few years for the answer to this question as well and have decided the rules are the rules. The only true answer I have come up with is to design a simple, effective robot using the wide variety of COTS items now available and push during the early parts of the build season to get things done. This theory leads to both the practice bot and competition bot getting done earlier in turn minimizing the stress associated with the ceremonial " bag and tag". Right now it is just a theory because my team has never executed it .

[Andy A.]

An interesting aspect of the switch to the district model is that of the 'robot access' period. We're allowed a six hour window between bag day and our competition in which to unbag and work on the robot, in an effort to make up for the lack of a day in the pits a normal regional would get us. We get another access period between district events.

It's sort of strange bagging and tagging the robot knowing that we'll just be breaking the tag again in a couple days to resume the build. I understand the reasoning behind it and, frankly, it works well in our favor (six hours in our shop broken up as we see fit vs. sort of 6 hours in a pit broken up by practice matches). Still, it seems sort of silly and does make you wonder why we bother with the bag at this point in the season at all.

[MrForbes]

I like the end of the build season...today I get to spend relaxing in my garage, working on my car. No robot stuff. Except working on the BOM.

Incidently, if we built the robot in my garage, it could be far more sophisticated...I do have a mill and lathe here, there are none at school. Although we still have the nagging little issue of getting students intersted in designing stuff that needs such fancy equipment to make.

[fox46]

"...[W]hy build one when you can have two at twice the price?"

Ahh- but this is not the case! If you do your design work properly and make drawings of major components etc. it doesn't matter if you are working on a $100000 waterjet or a table saw. Setup time is typically more than half the battle. If you have the material in the machine and the machine is set up to run it usually doesn't cost much more to make two of a part rather than only one. This is especially true with CNC equipment so the cost of building a second robot is typically just a little longer run time on your machines and a bunch of old components stolen from last year's robot.

Last week I had made this "meme" for my team's facebook page inspired by some funny photos. Having a practice robot means that the long hours and restless nights don't end till your last competition. It doesn't make these things any easier, it actually equates to much more work.