Frustrations with Minor Technicalities

[joeweber]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

We have a slight problem with losing pressure over time in our pneumatics and we NEED pressure to kick in auton.

We did have a small leak like this and decided to find it. We took soapy water and searched it down, it took awhile but we found many leaks. After finding all of the leaks we found it held pressure overnight. We were in line at kettering for an hour and did not loose any air pressure.

[Ed Sparks]

Originally Posted by JohnBoucher

A hard lesson learned a long time ago is to build 1" under-size to prevent problems like this. Do you ever really need 100% of the allowed dimensions?

Ya know, I've been around a long time and this general issue of fitting into a sizing box just keeps comming back and giving us inspector types heartburn. I suggest that starting next year, after ship date, the GDC issue an update that increases the max sizes by 1" in all directions.

[Mike Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Ed Sparks

Ya know, I've been around a long time and this general issue of fitting into a sizing box just keeps comming back and giving us inspector types heartburn. I suggest that starting next year, after ship date, the GDC issue an update that increases the max sizes by 1" in all directions.

Robots are made to this size so that with bumpers they fit through a door... an extra inch will not go through a standard door.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

Robots are made to this size so that with bumpers they fit through a door... an extra inch will not go through a standard door.

If this is true...how come these dimensions were the same pre-bumper requirements?

[Ed Sparks]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

Robots are made to this size so that with bumpers they fit through a door... an extra inch will not go through a standard door.

Ummm, I was trying to be humorus........ Besides you could start off at 20" x 26" x 30" and then change it to "Door fitt'n", "Box fitt'n" dimensions in Team Update #XX.

(More stupid inspector humor)

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by joeweber

The best solution is have more than one person read and know the rules.

This suggestion would be even better if you had someone who knew last year's rules thoroughly read this year's rules and look for differences.

Have everybody go over the robot looking for violations way before ship date. The best policy is have the students go over the robot with the inspector to be sure that they know the rules and that they will be expected to know the rules. Nothing like pop quizes to help them learn. Going through the inspection check off list with a fine toothed comb does not hurt (assuming it is released sooner than it was this year).

That's another great idea - do an inspection within your own team. Or maybe get an "inspector" from a nearby team to go over the list with your students, while your "inspector" does the same with the other team.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

While it is unfortunate that some of you have seen robots that have illegal parts, it is something I (we) strive to prevent every year. Some events simply cannot find enough experienced inspectors. Those inspectors who have not worked on a robot receive training via web and working with experienced inspectors at their first event of the season to try and come up to speed. Those people do catch most every part of the robot but still sometimes miss something. You do have the right to approach your LRI and question something on another robot. A Globe motor is a great example. You could be helping that team by getting a LRI to suggest ways to replace the motor, get the team compliant for their next event and prevent less stress for the team in the future.
The FRAME PERIMETER has been an issue all season and has been discussed at length. Most of us don't really understand it but we have attempted to make the info available to all through Team Updates, the Q&A and here on Chief Delphi.
Outside of the obvious (i.e. Globe motor this year) items you think are non-compliant may in fact be perfectly within the rules. Protrusions of the FRAME PERIMETER cannot be determined from the stands or from the sidelines with the bumpers on. You would be surprised how many legal solutions there are to this rule.
If you are going to Championship, know that the maximum number of experienced inspectors will be present on site. Your chances of having something overlooked are small. Be aware that we will be inspecting using the latest versions of the manual, the inspection checklist and any team updates that happen to affect your robot that are issued between now and then.

For all teams: Many of the rules are not written as a response to competitive advantage. They are included as a means of getting you to think about real world problems and solutions. The FRAME PERIMETER rule is one of these. It is similar to the allowed motor list, weight, height, battery and pneumatics restrictions.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

You are aware that we're up to Update 19, I hope.

He can count to 19, you know....

[pathew100]

Originally Posted by ICanCountTo19

I sight the example of yellow card going on our partner in the quarter finals who drove over the ball and E-stopped once they realized they couldn't get the ball out. We argued that they did not continue playing with the ball and were told they did not E-stop quick enough.

Actually this is an <S03> violation and your partner, per the rule, could have received a RED CARD for using the E-stop for a non-safety reason. So they got off easy. This is in Team Update 5, btw.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by pathew100

Actually this is an <S03> violation and your partner, per the rule, could have received a RED CARD for using the E-stop for a non-safety reason. So they got off easy. This is in Team Update 5, btw.

Safety can involve various things. In this case it was a combination of not causing damage to their robot and the field. When a 150lb machine is balanced on top of a soccer ball bad things can happen. I have seen teams try to get off balls and fall and damage themselves. It is also possible that they could have destroyed the ball in their efforts to get off. In the past there have also been teams that have, in their attempts to get off field elements, fallen and had appendages break the field boundary. The team decided it was unsafe to continue playing.

[45Auto]

We were informed Friday (along with half a dozen other teams) that we are not allowed to use an off-board compressor when we have an on-board one ...... It isn't that we're an irresponsible team who isn't paying attention. 397 has been around for 10 years. Why is something like this just now being pointed out to us.

Because that's the first time you've had inspectors that noticed it and were aware of the rule. Why complain when someone points out to you that you're breaking a rule? The inspectors are volunteers and only human, they're under lots of pressure to get a bunch of robots through inspection as fast as possible. A lot of them are not intimately familiar with FIRST, robots, or all of the rules.

As was noted earlier, R75 has been around for a long time. Just because you and others got away with something for several years doesn't make it legal.

I expect our team to be thoroughly aware of all the rules. We have 6 weeks to make sure our robot is legal, the inspectors only have a few minutes.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

Because that's the first time you've had inspectors that noticed it and were aware of the rule. Why complain when someone points out to you that you're breaking a rule? The inspectors are volunteers and only human, they're under lots of pressure to get a bunch of robots through inspection as fast as possible. A lot of them are not intimately familiar with FIRST, robots, or all of the rules.

As was noted earlier, R75 has been around for a long time. Just because you and others got away with something for several years doesn't make it legal.

I expect our team to be thoroughly aware of all the rules. We have 6 weeks to make sure our robot is legal, the inspectors only have a few minutes.

Teams WILL overlook some rules, most of them minor technicalities, as the OP said. Teams who do not read the rules are at fault, but there is no point attacking posters when they clearly were responsible and generally were knowledgeable of the rules, their original intent, and their updates. I'm amazed when people are still surprised that robots can possess balls 5 weeks into the build season (half my team was unsure whether our ball roller was legal a couple weeks before the Boston Regional, a testament to the fact that few care about rules as much as they should), but this I can understand.

Maybe we shouldn't spend our time criticizing teams for not knowing minute details, but instead make a point that things do change, and that teams should always have a fallback plan when they do. Teams that push the limits of rules without fallbacks are playing with fire (I admire 469 for that. They would have had a very effective robot, even if the original intent of their robot was disallowed in competition). Being able to evolve as the season wears on, I think, is a skill many times more useful than being able to read the rules.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by maltz1881

Mike is probably one of the best if not the best inspector out there. Having worked with him for a couple years now in the pits, he is such a fair and hard working man.

Quoted for truth. Our complaints are not with Mr Martus or the rules. They are merely things we have found irritating and would like to seek community support on how to minimize these sort of issues in the future.

Now, the complete rudeness to my parents, one of whom is over 75 years old and does not get around very well is something I was unaware of and to whatever team this was SHAME on you. They weren't wearing any team shirts so for all you know they were just people who had heard of the competition... or potential sponsors. What the heck is wrong with you? (No, I don't know the number, no I don't WANT to know the number)

Originally Posted by 45Auto

Because that's the first time you've had inspectors that noticed it and were aware of the rule. Why complain when someone points out to you that you're breaking a rule? The inspectors are volunteers and only human, they're under lots of pressure to get a bunch of robots through inspection as fast as possible. A lot of them are not intimately familiar with FIRST, robots, or all of the rules.

As was noted earlier, R75 has been around for a long time. Just because you and others got away with something for several years doesn't make it legal.

I expect our team to be thoroughly aware of all the rules. We have 6 weeks to make sure our robot is legal, the inspectors only have a few minutes.

Did you read what he said? He is saying that he is not blaming anyone. He is merely remarking on some issues he had. Now, if you are one of those people that refuse to admit that FIRST can do any wrong and claims that it is perfect I can accept that but otherwise I would appreciate if provide constructive posts that consist of more than, "I don't care because you broke a rule now shut up." You have insulted my team with your comments but more importantly you have insulted my brother. You have disregarded what we have posted and merely made cheap cracks at our expense with your comments about how "teams worth worrying about never have problems".

We admitted we missed it. We admitted it was our fault. I will personally admit that I dropped the ball by missing those rules. Not my team, not the inspectors, ME. Now that assigning blame is done (as it was 2 days ago) can we accept that and move on to help us find solutions to these problems?

Ours was NOT a localized situation. Many teams in Michigan had major problems. Many inspectors also were unclear on rules and interpretations varied from inspector to inspector. There IS a problem. People are confused on the rules. Bumpers seem to be particularly confusing for everyone. (No, I don't want to hear about how your team got it right and then another attack on my team questioning how stupid we are to not get them right) There is a problem. I don't know if it is localized to Michigan but it exists. Is it lack of training? Lack of inspectors? Unclear wording? Too many updates? We are not complaining, we are not criticizing inspectors (if I were to do that it would be in person) We showing that there is something wrong somewhere along the line. We are holding our own team up as an example because bringing up another team as an example would be RUDE to them. I have a list of teams who had major violations (significantly more major than 1/4" bolt protruding outside the frame perimeter) giving them a competitive advantage. I have one example of a team that was given and award for it. How can we make sure inspections are consistent and complete across the world?

[45Auto]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Did you read what he said? He is saying that he is not blaming anyone. He is merely remarking on some issues he had.

Sorry, I read exactly what he said. Looked like to me he was asking a question. The last sentence in his paragraph 1), Post#14:

Originally Posted by Icancountto19

Why is something like this just now being pointed out to us.

My point was that it WAS pointed out to him as soon as anyone noticed it. Just because the volunteer inspectors didn't notice it earlier is no reason to get upset when it's found. Anything you can do to make the inspections more complete and uniform would be great. Unfortunately, you're dealing with volunteers who may be inexperienced and have limited time to devote to studying and analyzing the rules. In the real world, some things ARE going to get by the inspectors no matter what you do. The inspections are NOT going to be perfectly consistent from one inspector to the next around the world.

If you feel it's necessary and it bothers you, then you have the option of bringing any discrepancies to the offending team or the inspectors attention. My team would thank you for pointing out anywhere we've inadvertently broken a rule. However, my experience has been that anything that gets by the inspectors is not worth worrying about. The competition itself is not the point of FIRST.

Your best bet is to know the rules yourself and be able to document anything on your robot to the lead inspector if necessary.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

Now, if you are one of those people that refuse to admit that FIRST can do any wrong and claims that it is perfect

LMAO! You obviously don't know me!

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

I will personally admit that I dropped the ball by missing those rules. Not my team, not the inspectors, ME. Now that assigning blame is done (as it was 2 days ago) can we accept that and move on to help us find solutions to these problems?

What other solution can you imagine other than "read the rules", as has been pointed out many times on this thread? There is NEVER going to be perfect inspections for every team. Have more than one person read them and check the robot against them as often as possible. It's much easier to change something to comply while you're at home in your shop, rather than the day of inspection at the competition.

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

You have insulted my team with your comments but more importantly you have insulted my brother.

Sorry if you took anything as an insult. It wasn't meant to be.

[AmoryG]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

My point was that it WAS pointed out to him as soon as anyone noticed it. Just because the volunteer inspectors didn't notice it earlier is no reason to get upset when it's found.

I'm not naming any particular team when I say this, but I'm sure some do have a reason for getting upset. If something was overlooked Thursday, and on Friday right before a match we're told something needs to be fixed, that might upset me. Fixing things takes time, time we could have had Thursday without much consequence, not the day of competition. It's not the inspectors fault, but it definitely is something worth getting upset about.