So the rookie team I mentor is buying hardware and we are looking on some clarification on how we need to be reporting things on our BOM.
Rule R11 a. says “individual items that are less than $5 USD each, as purchasable from a VENDOR” are exceptions that don’t need to be recorded in the BOM.
If we bought some screws from McMaster in a pack of 100 for $6 how would we report this expense? What would happen if I bought 100 and then only used 20 on the robot? Would I report that cost of the pack of 100 since that was the smallest quantity I could buy in? I’m confused by the part of the rule that says “as purchasable from a vendor”. If I could find an equivalent screw for under $5 would I then be able to write it off?
As a BOM purist I say you should put these items on the BOM regardless of rule 11, as it is a critical step of documentation in identifying how a machine is manufactured. I feel like the only time to start thinking about excluding items is when you are getting near the costing cap.
However to directly answer your question, per R11a which you posted above:
Each is the key indicator here. Each individual fastener in that pack is $.06 and thus would not need to be reported even if you used all 100 of the fasteners on your robot.
However as always Chief Delphi is not an official source to interpret the rules, and you should ask the question on the Q&A if you want an official interpretation of the rule.
If you can find another source to buy it individually for under $5, then you can leave it off the BOM. But if it’s something that you can only purchase in lots, and the lot costs more than $5, you must report it on the BOM.
If my understanding is wrong, someone please let me know.
A. individual items that are less than $5 USD each, as purchasable from a VENDOR,
I think the “as purchasable from a VENDOR” means that if you cannot purchase it individually from a VENDOR at unit price, then you can’t exclude it.
I’m not trained as a lawyer, though, I’m trained as an engineer. And I also know that when I’m looking for a strange piece of hardware, sometimes I have to purchase 100 of the stupid things to get the one I need. Example…putting flooring in the bathroom last month, needed one more strip, had to buy a box of a bunch of them for $65, was not happy.
I agree with you on this. But as an RI I am not going to get that deep in the weeds for normal fasteners unless my LRI tells me different. (not likely).
As a engineer I think the current BOM is useless as a training tool. But its point is a cost containment tool. Others can argue it usefulness for this. As a mentor I think it is a pain in the butt. The way I buy material mostly in bulk means I am generating the per piece cost on the BOM from the internet.
Rule R12 (no individual parts over $500) has a clarifying piece of text
The total cost of COMPONENTS purchased in bulk may exceed $500 USD as long as the cost of an individual COMPONENT does not exceed $500 USD.
and also a clarifying example:
Example 3: VENDOR C sells a set of wheels or wheel modules that are often used in groups of four. The wheels or modules can be used in other quantities or configurations. A team purchases four and uses them in the most common configuration. Each part is treated separately for the purpose of BOM costing, since the purchased pieces can be used in various configurations.
Applying the same logic to exception A of rule R11, your screws are each worth $0.06, because buying a box of 100 screws does not mandate that you use 100 screws on your robot. Instead, it is a bulk collection of parts, which “can be used in other quantities or configurations”.
Even if you bought a $1000 box of 50000 screws and used only 1 on your 2020 robot, you would still be fine. You paid Fair Market Value for those screws, each screw can be used individually or in any quantity or configuration of other screws, and that one screw has an FMV of $0.02.
Anecdotally, in 2019 one of our new members put individual nuts and bolts on the BOM, each costing less than $1 in quantity. At our first event, the inspector pointed those items out, and told us that we didn’t need to put them on the BOM.
Interesting. They are treating COTS differently than Raw material. For example in the same R13 blue box a 3D printed part has to be costed at the cost of the smallest spool you can buy to print that part. (Although you can lump all the parts together that was printed from that spool.)
Not to say anything bad about anyone in this thread, but this is proof that RIs can and do make mistakes.
Everyone please read the rules, then read them again, and then assume you know nothing about the rules and read them again in the event someone questions your knowledge.
I am sure @FrankJ is a very diligent RI, and the fact that he made this mistake shows that other RIs will probably make this mistake and many less diligent RIs will make even worse mistakes. Always escalate to an LRI if you disagree with an RIs interpretation of the rules. Make sure to be respectful when doing so, and come armed with a manual, some screenshots/pictures, and a calm demeanor. (EDIT: LRIs also make mistakes, just arguably less frequently, and most of them are near impossible to get around because of the “LRIs have the final say at your event” stance of FIRST HQ)
I am pretty firm in saying that my interpretation from upthread has been correct for at least as long as I have been in FRC (since steamworks), and IIRC the R13 Blue Box change came out of a similar CD debate that lead to a Q&A answer and (eventually) this Blue Box.
I believe that the reason for this discrepancy arises from the fact that it would be absurd to have a RI accurately determine the area of complex custom parts made from stock in order to determine their actual price, whereas it is fairly trivial to prove that a $100 box of 100 bolts would cost $1 per bolt.
I go along with what the RI wants…and I don’t claim to know the last word about it, and I would not be surprised if there are different, valid ways to read the rules. I’m just telling how I read it, and what we do. And by doing so, hoping that someone will point out if I’m doing it wrong! so I can learn.
1st part: I am always happy to review the written rules and to be corrected when appropriate. The goal is to have a rules compliant robot. Inspection should not be an adversarial process. Much bigger rules changes around weights, allowed spares,when re-inspection is required, and cheesecaking. This is going to take patience and a willingness to revisit the rule book on every bodies part.
2nd part: I no longer try to interpret the reasoning behind anything the GDC does.
