2019 Field Element Cut List and Layout

We generally struggle to come up with an easy to follow cut list when making our practice field. This year, I invested in some plywood layout software which handles all of the nesting guesswork for us.

We’re opting to build the half field version of the team elements, so if you’d like that nesting layout then enjoy.

(Disclaimer: I took the dimensions from a spreadsheet that we created to import into the software. I haven’t validated that there weren’t typos in that spreadsheet. If you find errors, let me know and I’ll re-run the layouts.)

EDIT: Updated length of TE-19112-01.
Field Layout.pdf (344.6 KB)


Really appreciate this. FIRST already provided DXF’s of the field components ready for a router that were already nested but they are certainly not ideal.

1 Like

I just verified this against FIRST’s half-field team drawings. The new revision (with updated length of TE-19112-01) should be all correct.

Fun fact: this uses 4 fewer sheets of 1/2" plywood than FIRST’s “shopping lists”.

1 Like

Also a good idea to invest in figuring out what is really necessary in the build. There is some 3/4 ply that can be 1/2". Also more 2x4 then needed in the level 3 platform and you dont need to cover every side. And, Possibly better to break the level 1 into 3 pieces (not 2). We have to move, setup/tear down, our elements each session so weight, size, cost, necessity are all factors.

Check the number of field elements you have against the what a full half field is.

1lv 3
2 lv 2
Full lv 1
2 full rockets
2 human pl
1 full cargo

Is a full half field

More correctly worded, this is the “half” of the field we’re building in order to test all functions. We don’t have space for a “Full” half field, but want full pieces of each structure (not the one-port version). It’s somewhere between “full half” and “reduced” fields, leaning more toward half than reduced.

(If there’s strong demand for a nesting run with more quantities of some parts, I can do it. But likely not tonight.)

I agree. That’s kind of what I was getting at in my last post. We spent some time today determining which elements we needed (and which version of them since there were several options for many). In my experience from past fields, the things they call out as 3/4 ply is typically weight bearing. While possible to skimp there, I’d rather not have that be the cause of “surprises” later on (flex, clearance, etc.). Plus you’d realistically have to put the space back in somewhere (maybe the 2x4s) in order to have correct angles.