pic: Legal Frame ????????????????

Thats actually really clever (and also illegal) considering how many of those penalties that got called in week 1. Are there any pictures of it?

I remember at MARC you had a triangle-ish frame, right? You were also the biggest steal of the alliance selections, too…

This judge always did :smiley:

You start down a slippery slope if you allow “pointed” bumpers. Ramming another bot with a point wouldn’t do now, would it?

Easy to break? So not true. I can build my V but not have it part of the frame or in start up. I can run all over the place with it sticking out, mind you that would be dumb of me but I can still do it. When the match starts up I could have it come out as long as I am within there specs.

I remember the T bot. I went to Ann Arbor to watch the game. It was pretty cool!!

The same way teams get rewarded after posting how they design their robot, send the plans to their sponsor, and recieve a kit back with all the parts cut, brackets bent and metal skins laser cut. A simple bolt together and they are hard to compete with.

Deleted–double post

There is NO RULE saying that that is illegal. If that is how the team chooses to conduct their design and build, that is their business. I don’t know of a single team that does that, BTW. The bumper rules are clear-cut (or mostly so, with some recurring “is this legal” Q&A questions that are typically answered quickly and clearly).

squirrel, one of the judges at Arizona last year was doing inspections on Thursday. Just for reference…

You mean the robot that they put in hundreds of hours prototyping, designing, and entering into CAD in meticulous detail? Some teams emphasize the physical shop work of putting a robot together, but it is by no means a requirement of the competition. The process these teams go through is likely far closer to an actual real life engineering process than what your team does or what mine has done in past years.

All that design must be so easy, huh. All they have to do is make a perfect CAD model of their entire robot exactly as it will work, then they have to assemble, test, and try again if something isn’t perfect.

Sounds like a walk in the park to me.

The teams you’re not so subtly referencing have earned every award they’ve ever got - and taught their students more about engineering than a thousand lessons on how to use a mill.

One is against the rules, the other is completely legal. Do me a favor and delete this post, we can have a little chat about this topic on Monday and if you still feel this way I will fully support you in posting this in a new thread that it is more relevant to.

I’d like to point out-- I didn’t say that a “T” bot (or any other robot that breaks the current rules for bumpers) is “easy” to break, I simply pointed out that it would have a greater potential to be damaged, or to damage other parts. I’m not saying that’s the reason, but there are reasons for these rules. We may not be privy to all the information, and we probably don’t like it, but that doesn’t change the fact that it’s most likely there for a perfectly logical reason.

One judge out of how many, about 20? I’d say it’s very unlikely that more than 10% of the judges at any regional know the rules well enough to perform robot inspection. It’s not their job. It’s the robot inspectors’ job.

I didn’t have time to count the number of judges. Being short-handed and then behind schedule does that to ya…

You’re right, it’s not the judges’ job to know the robot rules well enough to inspect. But I wouldn’t be terribly surprised to find that quite a few inspectors (or former inspectors, or refs, or mentors) are judges across the country. If we’re counting “general idea, but can’t cite the exact rule or knowledge a year or two old”, then you might get up to about 25%.

We probably have pictures around… At our first event we had all the refs and inspectors come look at the bot… That was our first order of business… They found nothing wrong at that point… Like Mr. G said we were not given any advantage, just trying to avoid penalties… But hey we made the change when asked too…

My standard advice:

Stop whining about something that can be fixed by working harder.

Teams that have the resources to do lots of prototyping, design their entire robots in CAD, send the parts to machine shop sponsors, and assemble completed robots are the way they are because of a lot of hard work. These resources and relationships did not just fall in their laps. These teams provide their students a very engaging and rewarding opportunity to work with engineers and companies, to participate in an advanced engineering design process, thoroughly ideate and test prototype ideas, understand topics like manufacturability and limitations of various fabrication technologies, see how using CAD software significantly improves the final robot, and much, much more.

Instead of whining about these teams, recruit engineering mentors. Recruit machine shop sponsors. Fundraiser throughout the year to afford lots of prototyping. Learn and become fluent in CAD software. With enough hard work, any team can become a top tier team.

How do I know this is possible? When I first joined 228, we had about eight students and an annual budget of about $12k. Last year, our budget was probably among the top quarter percentile of FRC teams, we had identical practice and competition robots with parts made at our school, at two sponsor machine shops in Connecticut, and at one sponsor machine shop in California. We attended three official events and took home a Regional banner and Regional Engineering Inspiration award. We bucked the traditional advice against never designing a swerve for the first time during the build season, and did just that (and even made it able to drive over the bump), and other than a bearing defect issue (out of our control) got it working within the six weeks build. And we worked our collective buts off for the entire year, both inside and out of the six week build, to fundraise and get the resources in place to make all that possible. Our goal has never been to whine about the top tier teams, but to become one.

The rules clearly define the FRAME PERIMETER, but stop short of saying that the bumpers cannot go inside of this perimeter. Ask on the FIRST site and hope for a clear answer.

Actually <R07-K> says that.

K. BUMPERS must attach to the FRAME PERIMETER of the ROBOT with a rigid fastening system to form a tight, robust connection to the main structure/frame (e.g. not attached with Velcro). The attachment system must be designed to withstand vigorous game play. All removable fasteners (e.g. bolts, locking pins, pip-pins, etc.) will be considered part of the BUMPERS.

Emphasis mine.

Also <R07-A>.

A. BUMPERS must provide complete protection of the entire FRAME PERIMETER of the ROBOT (i.e. BUMPERS must wrap entirely around the ROBOT). As part of the 100% coverage, BUMPERS must protect all exterior corners of the FRAME PERIMETER. For adequate protection, a full segment of BUMPER must be placed on each side of the corner (see Figure 3-2).

I think it would be the logical conclusion that the bumpers must be on the outside of the FRAME PERIMETER in order to protect it.

I have been an engineer for over 30 years, and in Section 4, I see the definition of a perimeter. It would have been much clearer just to add that the bumpers must continuously touch this perimeter. Hopefully we will see this in an update, as I suspect many teams would like to use the “V” design in the original post to help center the robot on the tower base. The people at FIRST have a tough job in writing rules, but not giving any hints or design directions.
Jim

They turned us down. We figured it was a 50/50 chance. I have to give the people of FIRST a lot of credit for giving us the answer on a Sunday. That was the point of the “V” to line up at the pole. One of the kids already have something up their sleeve to solve it!! :smiley:

The same way teams get rewarded after posting how they design their robot, send the plans to their sponsor, and recieve a kit back with all the parts cut, brackets bent and metal skins laser cut. A simple bolt together and they are hard to compete with.

I say more power to them!! Last year we had 2 engineering students on the team ( still do) and we won the Excellence in Engineering Award at both districts we went to. Again it is because we have crazy imaginations that we encourge in the garage. We make our parts ourselves and we don’t have ANY fancy machines and our budget is right around $1,200 for the year. ANYTHING is possible. :smiley:

But this isn’t true - there are allotments for bumpers going over various sized gaps in the perimeter.