I remember seeing tons of videos from the robots perspective coming from teams who mounted a go-pro camera on their robot for every round.
What’s the verdict out on this?
Is this allowed? Under what rule? Is it not recommended?
Just wanted to get a low-down so we know what the status of the situation is, as we’re considering doing this.
done it.
as long as it doesn’t transmit it’s fine.
Cameras can be part of the robot provided all other rules apply. Specifically but not limited to the following:
Must be weighed on the robot.
Battery must be fully contained within the camera and be isolated from the frame.
Camera must be securely fastened to the robot so as to not damage other robots, field or produce injury to volunteers or participants.
Camera cannot cause distraction to other drive teams.
Camera cannot transmit wireless without prior written approval of FIRST engineering staff.
As you can guess from the forgoing, the camera must be part of the inspection process.
Thanks guys, that cleared a lot up!
Did rule R14 “No individual item shall have a value that exceeds $400.00. The total cost of Components purchased in bulk may exceed $400.00 USD as long as the cost of an individual Component does not exceed $400.00” apply to cameras this past year or is there some way of getting around it? I think most teams I saw used cameras under $400. I am just curious since the only camera we have is not under $400.
What cams have you guys used?
I’m between strapping on just any member-owned camera and buying an MD80 (like a $13 chinese camera that’s decent).
I would be careful strapping on a camera worth more than $400 onto these robots if it’s the only one you own. While the rules prohibit damaging another’s robot, things do happen sometimes. I’ve seen plenty of broken pieces during my field reset days.
I was more or less curious about the $400 rule applying then actually wanting to put our camera on the robot. The camera we access to is expensive because it is built for extreme industrial conditions. I think with a little common sense it would be fine.
That makes a lot more sense, then. I just wanted to make sure you didn’t duct tape your team’s fragile reward from the last ten bake sales to a machine being put into a violent situation. 
I lost my GoPro in the Atlantic ocean. smashed by robot is not as bad.
and cooler
Yes, it would apply. The camera goes through inspection with the robot, and is therefore to be considered as part of the robot. (Note: Just because the camera is considered as part of the robot does not mean it has to be present on the robot in every match.) As I recall, GoPros are less than $400–but the extreme industrial conditions camera probably would be a little bit more.
I see the cost limit a little differently. Since the camera we are discussing is generally not a permanent part of the robot and is used for recording only (not live video), I see it as a “non-functional” decoration. As a temporary decoration, it is hard to claim it must fit in the budget restrictions for functional parts of the robot. It is included in the weight since it does change that part of the robot when installed.
Al,
Would you have any pull with the rules committee that might allow your view on this to be written into the rules? It would help eliminate any controversy during robot inspections.
I tried to mount a Kodak playsport on our robot two years ago, and was told by the lead inspector at the event that it would require a call to national headquarters to approve a special waiver.
Todd,
I follow the GDC direction and the rules that they make. In this case there is some established guidelines. LRIs are trained to get in touch with me if they have questions. All of them will have my email and phone during the event season. Lacking contact with me, they also have other contacts that they should attempt to get a decision from, including my boss at HQ, and the the Director.
It appears that at least some Kodak Playsport cameras have wifi, which could cause the inspector to invoke [R67]. Additionally, the rules about devices with batteries were loosened last year.
For Gopro cameras the Wifi capability is an addon that can be removed for field usage. Otherwise it allows you to control the camera with a smart phone or even stream video.
Here is pertinent 2012 season Q&A. The add-on camera would have counted as part of the total robot cost.
This is the only direct reference I found.
Can we mount cameras on our robot to record the robot’s point of view for public relations and not count this on our “on robot budget” as long as we do not use the recording during the competition and the data is not sent to the cRIO or driver’s station? Also, do mounts to these parts count as well?](http://javascript<b></b>:ViewAnswer(0)
FRC4084 2012-02-05
The cameras and their mounts would count towards the budget constraint outlined in Rule [R13] as they do not fall into one of the exemptions listed in Rule [R13A-G].
I lost my go-pro skiing, getting it crushed by a robot is WAY cooler n that
The models we use are storage to SD card only. It’s good to know we’ll be able to shoot video this season. We were up against the budget cap last season, so we would not have been able to slip a camera onboard.
From a common sense point of view:
On board cameras during real competitions provide a great public relations aspect to promoting FIRST and FRC. My thoughts: