Posted by Michael Martus. [PICTURE: SAME | NEW | HELP]
Coach on team #47, Chief Delphi, from Pontiac Central H.S. and Delphi Automotives Systems.
Posted on 1/15/2000 3:05 PM MST
The rule regarding 'FABRICATING ’ parts only at the event will result in teams bringing full sets of plans and ‘Fabricating massive amounts of parts just in case’ or minor changes they had no time to complete. Yes this will happen, and at Who’s expense…this saves money for many teams. Any time you can get others to do your work it is great. When else will they be able to fabricate and be ‘Legal’?
I predict that if the rule stands regarding the fabricating of parts only at the event that the shop will be overwhelmed, and not be able to keep up with demand.
The line will be long, very long.
This means small repairs will NOT get done. There may be a lot of robots waiting for repairs and will not run in matches.
On Site resources cannot handle this event.
What do you think about this possibility? Opinion?
Posted by Ed Sparks.
Coach on team #34, Bob Jones High School / DaimlerChrysler, from Bob Jones High School.
Posted on 1/15/2000 8:48 PM MST
In Reply to: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Michael Martus on 1/15/2000 3:05 PM MST:
Looks to me like the teams with ‘Super Funding’ (HOT comes to mind) will have the definate advantage with those portable machine shops. I’ll be one of those standing in line while my ‘Humanoid’ is tossing balls.
Ed Team34
Posted by Dodd Stacy.
Engineer on team #95, Lebanon Robotics Team, from Lebanon High School and CRREL/CREARE.
Posted on 1/15/2000 10:56 PM MST
In Reply to: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Michael Martus on 1/15/2000 3:05 PM MST:
I think this rule is counter productive and contrary to a host of other constructive changes FIRST has made in the game this year. Specifically, for example, I believe that changes such as lifting the quantity limits on many items of the Additional Materials list will allow us finally to design and build robust mechanisms that will arrive on the court ready to rock, unlike some of the contraptions we’ve had to cobble in the past from 10’ of this and 10’ of that.
But no matter how much better our first effort is this year than last, we are likely to find some weaknesses and suffer some breakage when we actually go ‘up against’ other bots at our first event and discover some of the play modes we may not have anticipated. Under this rule, we WILL show up in Orlando less able to play competantly, and I think the play will suffer needlessly.
As I understand this rule, we are limited to fabricating (improved? Is THAT allowed?) replacement parts on site at the competition(s) from raw stock. The on-site machine shops and the staff have been wonderful - they saved us at Hartford last year when we broke an axle. But they are going to be overwhelmed by the effect of this rule. We’re going to have lots of no-shows, and the whole experience is going to be stressed and degraded for a lot of the kids, needlessly in my mind.
I would agree with the rule between shipping day and the first tournament. We should all be required to complete our project in 6 weeks and then play with it. I would suggest however that we be allowed between tournaments to fabricate improved repair parts for mechanisms that break at the first event, with the restriction that changes in functional capability may not be implemented in this time period. (Those could presumably be done on-site, working from raw stock, under the present rule.) This would allow teams to re-engineer marginal parts using their home base resources, while preventing anybody from carrying on fab and development of secret weapons to spring in Orlando, based on what they saw and learned from the Regional play strategies.
I’m sorry to be so blunt about it, but I think this rule has a very negative impact potential and that FIRST should reconsider it.
Dodd
Posted by Jon.
Engineer on team #190, Gompei, from Mass Academy of Math and Science and Worcester Polytechnic Institute.
Posted on 1/15/2000 11:58 PM MST
In Reply to: I’m Confused posted by Dodd Stacy on 1/15/2000 10:56 PM MST:
i have to agree. I can see that FIRST wants to try to contain building to the 6 weeks, but i think this is seriously gonna screw teams now that we have to ship from competition to competition…
i’m sorry but you need to be able to make spare parts at some point and it seriously suck if you made these spares BEFORE week 6, put them in the crate and then learned at your regional that a small redesign would save you butt… but now, you’re stuck with useless spares.
my $.02
jon
Posted by Erin.
Student on team #1, The Juggernauts, from OTC-NE, Oxford High School and 3-D Services.
Posted on 1/16/2000 10:59 AM MST
In Reply to: imho: weird rule posted by Jon on 1/15/2000 11:58 PM MST:
this just means that this year we are going to have to stick together when another team needs help. it will teach alot of people more about good sportsmanship, deadlines, and most of all, gracious professionalism.
there is a method behind the FIRST madness.
think positive.
-erin
Posted by Scott Strickland.
Engineer on team #21, ComBBAT, from Astronaut & Titusville High School and Boeing/NASA.
Posted on 1/16/2000 8:35 PM MST
In Reply to: I’m Confused posted by Dodd Stacy on 1/15/2000 10:56 PM MST:
I agree with you.
We should be allowed to bring ‘spare’ mechanisms or structural components to the competition. Drive shafts and fragile ball grabbers come to mind.
I think improved or different replacement mechanisms should not be allowed.
What if FIRST required us to ‘declare our spares’ at the competition, to see if they were equal? Or allow us to ship as many spares as we want in the same box as the robot?
Scott
Posted by Dodd Stacy.
Engineer on team #95, Lebanon Robotics Team, from Lebanon High School and CRREL/CREARE.
Posted on 1/16/2000 9:43 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: I’m Confused posted by Scott Strickland on 1/16/2000 8:35 PM MST:
Or allow us to ship as many spares as we want in the same box as the robot?
: Scott
Scott,
As I understand the rule, it is permissable to send spares in the box, since that would require that they had been fabbed during the 6 week build period. It’s just fabbing spares between tournaments that is disallowed, whether they are identical to the originals or improved/strengthened to prevent continued breakage.
Dodd
Posted by Raul.
Engineer on team #111, Wildstang, from Rolling Meadows & Wheeling HS and Motorola.
Posted on 1/16/2000 9:59 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: I’m Confused posted by Dodd Stacy on 1/16/2000 9:43 PM MST:
My interpretation of the rule also allows us to ship (in the same box as the robot) many different spare configurations to be tried during practice rounds and then choose which one to use. Then you can get inspected with the one you choose.
Does this sound right?
Raul
Posted by Dodd Stacy.
Engineer on team #95, Lebanon Robotics Team, from Lebanon High School and CRREL/CREARE.
Posted on 1/17/2000 6:02 AM MST
In Reply to: Shipping Un-identical Spares OK also?? posted by Raul on 1/16/2000 9:59 PM MST:
I interpret the rule to allow this, too. Anything that is built in the six weeks, or in the pits at an event, is legal after passing inspection.
Dodd
Posted by Tony K.
Student on team #292, PantherTech, from Western High School and DaimlerChrysler.
Posted on 1/16/2000 7:40 PM MST
In Reply to: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Michael Martus on 1/15/2000 3:05 PM MST:
I don’t know how they expect every team (what are there now, 300 or so?) to obey with this rule. I know something like that is not in the spirit of FIRST, but I think it’s impossible for them to check. And like you said, the line will be VERY long at the machine shop. I think it would be easier to throw out this rule — it would eliminate a lot of problems.
Any opinions?
Tony
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 1/16/2000 7:56 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Tony K on 1/16/2000 7:40 PM MST:
I’m with you all the way. The machine shop is going to be mobbed, and this will not help ANY team…veteran or rookie. I think this rule was put in place wit h good intentions, but poor planning and logistics. Any other views?
Lora
Posted by Tony K.
Student on team #292, PantherTech, from Western High School and DaimlerChrysler.
Posted on 1/17/2000 5:39 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Lora Knepper on 1/16/2000 7:56 PM MST:
The solution: machine shop in a briefcase. I know some these engineers can figure out how to do it!
Posted by Lora Knepper.
Student on team #69, HYPER (Helping Youth Pursue Engineering & Robotics), from Quincy Public Schools and The Gillette Company.
Posted on 1/17/2000 6:34 PM MST
In Reply to: Re: Fabricating on site & Machine shop posted by Tony K on 1/17/2000 5:39 PM MST:
I like your style…I think I’ll propose it to Gillette tomorrow! 
Lora