<sarcasm>
We could always revolt… 
</sarcasm>
No, I agree with FIRST if they decided against IFI breaker panels because the sponsors complained. FIRST only exists because of sponsors, and it would be horrible for FIRST to lose sponsors.
IFI’s site says out of stock for the entire year.
Yep, no awesome panels this year. Major crapfest, but I guess it’s not that big of a deal. Just another curveball. Seems like we’re getting alot of those this year…
Those breakers were nice, but just think now FIRST is forcing us to be simpler.
Agreed. I’ll miss that IFI panel … made teaching students the electrical system so much easier.
But that new AB terminal block is kind of cool … I will admit that.
what i’m saying is that companies like Rockwell Automation have been complaining that FIRST teams haven’t been using the terminal blocks and other components that Rockwell has donated.
My feeling is that if somebody wants to donate something, that’s terrific, but if it really isn’t that good and people would rather use other parts available on the market they should be able to - rather than being force-fed all of the donated parts. I’m bummed.
I think FIRST wants us to use the parts that the sponsors give to kind of give those companies importance. If no one used those new panels this year than the company would feel as if it was a waste on their part of donating it. I think at the same time I think that the product has to be good. In this case the “klunky” panel is heavy and is less “capable” in my opinion comared the the smartpanel.
FIRST made a BIGGG mistake in my opinion and I hope they retract that rule at least this year and tell the company that supplied them that although the contribution is appreciated, it is not too practical
Pavan.
I’ll venture another explanation: maybe FIRST wants to expose a future generation of engineers to more standard methods of interconnecting and protecting power circuits when the wiring is field accessible. While I agree with those who say the 2005 IFI breaker panel is very convenient and compact*, I wonder if it meets the same safety standards as the components that are required for 2007?
*and, BTW, easier to inspect.
Has anyone considered the possibility that this decision came from IFI? Perhaps they were not selling enough of these panels or for some other reason were no longer interested in producing them and told FIRST that they didn’t intend to sell them this year. If this was the case, then FIRST may have chosen to disallow them simply because it wouldn’t be fair to the new teams who would not be able to purchase this from IFI.
I have no information to suggest that this is what happened or anything, but I’m just pointing out that FIRST’s hand could have been forced on this one.
That is what I thought at the beginning too and so I e-mailed IFI and am waiting until Monday to get a response.
Pavan.
I, too, am bummed about the Panels. We are a rookie team this year, though I have been involved with FIRST for several now, and I must say, these Panels were VERY convenient, in in my opinion, safer.
I do hope that FIRST allows us to use the Panels.
Jacob Komar
FIRST electronics rules have always emphasized safety and simplicity of inspection over what some consider ideal. Whatever your opinion, that’s the way it is, just like the rules limiting any other aspect of the game.
I don’t beleive that the smart panels are available anymore, so it’s not fair for teams who have them from previous years to use them when others can’t. I think they were donated by Innovation FIRST, custom made for us, like many of their products. IFI continues to donate lots of parts to us some of them much more exotic than the compact, intelligent panel. Given the choice, I’ll take the newer stuff from IFI and be happy rather than complain that they can’t do the same thing they did two years ago.
The new distribution terminal strip seems like a huge improvement to the heavy blocks we were given in some previous years. The parts are also reliable, standard components that the Rockwell Automation (Allen Bradley is part of Rockwell) can supply in the huge numbers required as the program grows.
For what it’s worth, I talked with a representative of RA (one of the most dedicated FIRST volunteers I know) about this issue last spring. I also asked on these forums and other teams about what they would like to see RA donate to the kit of parts. As I understand it, this looks like a win-win: FIRST needed a reliable, safe, and available electrical distribution system, Rockwell wanted to support the program by donating useful items directly to teams.
I have to agree with some of the post here. The IFI Panel was team and robot friendly. I would prefer to use if it is allowed. The distro devices we are supplied this year are standard interconnect items and you will find them in virtually all large scale electrical installations. So we are being provided with real world parts that make education on real world systems practical. I just wish that there was a an adequate substitute that would allow distro safely and fully insulated while providing a lighter and smaller alternative for the big chunk of brass. Please be advised the the Maxi breaker panel is designed to accept wire up to #2. To insure the a #6 is fully in contact with the shell and the locking screw, we will strip the #6 back about 1-1/2" and fold over the strands twice to approximate the right diameter to insert into the Maxi block.
I am afraid that the supplied distro provides several single point failure points for robots. A single point failure is a single component or connection that if it should fail, will cause the failure of the entire system. I am expecting a change in the electrical system design such that the negative wiring to each fuse block is identical to the positive wiring. Watch the team updates.
What exactly does the circuit breaker in the KOP look like? Is it the ATC fuse panel? Sorry for the question, we are are a Rookie team and somewhat lacking in the electronics area.
The 120 A main breaker is shown in KOP checklist, page 11 of the Blue Tote (Pg 16 in the .pdf file. Directly below that is a picture of the MAXI Style Fuse Block which we will have to use this year for the 40 amp breakers as discussed in this thread. The smaller circuit breakers are shown on page 1 of the E-kit pages (page 18 of the pdf file).
I agree that the Maxi fuse blocks are heavy and I too would like to have something lighter. However, I can find lots of other rules I am more disappointed by and overall I think we can be happy there’s not a lot more restrictions.
I also agree with Al that the wiring drawing does not account for 40 A ground distribution. I hope that we’re allowed to do these connections without another heavy chunk of metal.
Thanks.
Regardless of the rules for electrical systems you cannot use the IFI breaker Pannel. Due to the fact that the pannel is listed on IFI’s website at discontinued it turns the breaker pannel into a non COT. Since they arne’t selling them any more it makes it impossible for every team to use it, thus illegal.
I think the 2 rules that sum it up are <R46> (about different fuse pannels) and <R47>(COTS)
Can we use 2 maxi blocks?
We have 5 CIM motors total (4 small and 1 large) on our robot, but the MAXI block only has 4 40 amp breakers. The Panel allowed for use of 6; does this mean I need a WHOLE OTHER chunk-o-brass to power just one motor?:yikes:
Jacob
You could run the larger CIM off a 30A breaker from the ATC panel … the stall draw on the large CIM is 40A lower than the smaller CIM, and peak power is 70w less. Not too sure the risk of tripping the breaker, it’ll depend on how hard that motor is being ran.
I recall seeing teams from previous years using smaller (1 and 2 port versions) of the MAXI block. The terminal supply co PDF catalog isn’t cooperating with me this morning, so I couldn’t see if it still existed.
But you are allowed to run another heavy MAXI block if you want.