Practice Robots

[matthewdenny]

I was thinking about practice robots the other day, and had a few thoughts:

-It seems that building a second robot is of an obvious benefit to teams that can afford to do it in that it gives them the opportunity to work on driving, coding, and even making mechanisms that can be transitioned to the competition robot using withholding allowance weight.

-Unfortunately this is a financial hurdle many teams have a hard time realizing. Even teams that can afford to make a 2nd robot probably have other things that could benefit from the funding spent to do so.

-The practice robot is beneficial to student learning in that it gives a platform to work on and learn from.

-There is are some feelings of unfairness from teams that are unable to build a second robot, and this is understandable, but those teams that have the resources to build a practice bot shouldn't be handicapped because of their effective fundraising either.

MY PROPOSAL: What it every team had a practice robot. How? Use he competition robot. After 6 weeks no modifications may be made to your robot. You can still use it to practice driving and coding. There would still be a stop build day, but without the bagging. Parts that are damaged or worn out could be replaced with identical replacement parts only during this period. Basically you act as if your robot at the end of build is off limits just as if it were in a bag, but the robot as it is at that point can still be programmed and practice driven.

What do you think? Would this be a fair modification to future rules?

[Chief Hedgehog]

Dead horse...

[AllenGregoryIV]

For those of you new to CD that may not have been aware of prior discussions on this topic. Here is the main thread that discussed this.
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...d.php?t=116658

[matthewdenny]

I'm familiar with the arguments for and against limiting the build season to 6 weeks and personally I like the 6 week limitation. However using that robot for drive practice and eliminating the need for practice robots... I can't remember seeing that discussion. (I have only been here a few years though)

[z_beeblebrox]

We also use our practice robot to iterate hardware.

For example, last year, we developed our catcher and made substantial improvements to our drivetrain after stop build day on our practice robot.

[thatprogrammer]

Having a sheetmetal sponsor is also quite an advantage. Having many experienced mentors can be said to be a bigger advantage than having a practice robot or a sheetmetal sponsor. Working to gain these "advantages" is something all teams should do, as hard admit might betk gain them. Limiting what teams can do with resources they've worked to earn is lowering the floor, rather than raising the ceiling.

[matthewdenny]

Having good sponsors, and mentors is a huge advantage, but I don't see any easy way to provide teams with that. However they have a perfectly good robot that can be used for coding and driving sitting in a bag in the corner of the shop.

I'm not proposing that you not be allowed to build a practice robot (lowering the ceiling) I am thinking that this is an easy way for lower resource teams to learn more and be more competitive, with out affecting the more well off teams.

[Knufire]

Originally Posted by matthewdenny

After 6 weeks no modifications may be made to your robot. You can still use it to practice driving and coding. There would still be a stop build day, but without the bagging. Parts that are damaged or worn out could be replaced with identical replacement parts only during this period.

This GREATLY affects some of the better off teams. We plan to design, build, and add one or two entirely new subsystems after stop build day. This is only possible because we have the practice bot to test and iterate so we know that all 30lbs of additions we bring to the event work.

Originally Posted by matthewdenny

Having good sponsors, and mentors is a huge advantage, but I don't see any easy way to provide teams with that.

I think you're missing the point, buddy. It isn't something you can provide to teams. You can provide resources showing them how to do it, and information regarding the best methods of achieving these things, but in the end it's something every team has to work hard for. You can't just give good sponsors and experienced mentors to teams, the teams have to actively work towards those goals themselves. In a program like FIRST, getting good sponsors and experienced mentors isn't all that hard if you work hard towards these goals. And I mean really work towards them.

[matthewdenny]

Originally Posted by Knufire

This GREATLY affects some of the better off teams. We plan to design, build, and add one or two entirely new subsystems after stop build day. This is only possible because we have the practice bot to test and iterate so we know that all 30lbs of additions we bring to the event work.

I meant no modifications to your competition robot. If you want to build a practice robot this wouldn't prevent it. That was in regards to the competition bot.

[jds2001]

Of course, there's always the problem of how to actually enforce these rules. With the current rules. there's a lockup form that you sign, with attestation from an adult mentor/teacher/whatever that you've complied with the rules (which is fairly easy to verify - is the serial number of the tag the same as what the mentor said it was?). Mentors can't attend to the robot 24/7, so this is a good way to make sure that rules have been complied with. In these proposed changes, how do you ensure that compliance?

Admittedly, there could be some less honest teams that completely ignore the current rules and bag the day before competition and falsify records. However that goes against Gracious Professionalism and the entire ethos of FIRST (and should be fairly obvious that they had an additional 1-6 weeks of time with their robots)

[thatprogrammer]

Some "problems", similar to the current "problem" of practice bots, could be created as a result of doing this (if it were done).

1. Teams that are near week 1 regionals (like my team), would get much less time to practice than teams near later regionals. Teams that build current practice bots can use them to improve their robots before a regional, even a week 1 regional, so this is less of a problem for them (they can continue improving hardware over a week).

2. Teams that are better off would still be able to make practice bots. While other teams wouldn't be able to improve their robots after build season, the more powerful teams would be able to. While teams would get the same amount of drive practice, the better teams would still get the ability to build for a longer period of time.

[Cory]

Originally Posted by matthewdenny

After 6 weeks no modifications may be made to your robot. You can still use it to practice driving and coding. There would still be a stop build day, but without the bagging.

Teams building practice robots would continue to build practice robots under this scenario. A huge benefit to having one is being able to implement new/improved systems with your witholding allowance at your next regional.

[pandamonium]

I can assure you that it is not as simple as just practicing and programming without modifying and working on your robot. Even if you try not too things will brake and you would inevitably work on your robot.

[Nemo]

It would be kind of weird to have the robot out and driving around, yet be forbidden from making any mechanical tweaks to anything.

Of course, it's also nonsensical that we have "stop build" on February 17 and then continue building stuff. Overall, the stop build deadline leads to much more nonsense than sense.