Encouraging International Competition / Harmonizing Rules

Read the mention of the international competition this August, and started thinking of bringing over a bot or two from here in the colonies.

After reading the UK rules there are a couple of things that could be done to make it easier for US robots to compete, that might be worthy of discussion.

US rules can be found at http://www.botleague.com/http://www.botleague.com/

1) Featherweight weight class differences. Here in the US FW is 30lbs, not 12 kilos. Not much that can be done about that, I fear, and thats why God created hole saws.

2) Radio problems. Having to buy a whole new tx/rx for one comp is onerous. Some sort of way to borrow radio kit would be great. Needless to say this could work both ways.

3) Indicator lights & Failsafes. There are some differences between UK and RFL rules here. We both need a visible main power light, but the rules about receiver lights and failsafe lights are different. Basically, in the US, only a main power light is required, but you must demonstrate that the bot fails safe if either the radio signal is lost or the receiver dies.

4) Removable links. This is the biggie. Most US robots do not use removable links because they are too unreliable and are also considered more dangerous. The preferred method is a switch such as the Team Whyachi switches (http://www.teamwhyachi.com/http://www.teamwhyachi.com/), which activate using several turns with a hex wrench. They simply cannot pop out, and you can construct a tool that mounts the hex wrench on as long a handle as you desire, so they permit you to disable the robot from a very safe distance.

Just some food for thought.

Robert,

Im sure others will reply about about your points 1-3, so I will concentrate on the point that you make about the differences between US and UK rules on removable links. I think that we, in Britain, have got hung up about needing to show the link removed. Would it not be as good if the power light did not come on with the transmitter and receiver both on? Of course you can think of ways to fool the scrutineers, but that could be done now, and never is. As far as I know everyone does their best to obey the rules as written.

I do know that on Robot Wars 7 almost every week one robot was immobilised because the link came out or became loose.

Perhaps it is time for the FRA to have another think about this rule.

Jeremy

Some good points Richard.

have no idea about the rules in the US...will read that URL link when I can.The removable link though ...the one you describe sounds better re the way it cant come out but at least with a totally removable link you have a visable sign that the bot is dead. It is handed in to transmitter control so there is NO WAY you can make your bot active in the pits without permission...plus if it does pop out in a fight it at least fails to safety...annoying re losing the fight I know, but at least the bot is definately dead.

The frequency thing...not sure what it is in the states (72? 75? Mhz) but there are some radio sets like the Futaba FF7 (like we use) and much more modern sets than this that use interchangeable RF modules ...I have a 40mhz one in the transmitter for robot stuff and a 35mhz one for model aircraft stuff. I agree though you would still have to buy a different receiver.

Hope you can make it over here.

Tom

1. how many feathers are there in the US? also how many would make the trip across? im assuming only those with heavyweights will. Obviously reducing your weights by 1.6kg is alot of work for you, and the only thing most of us could do is add extra armour without rebuilding the robot and considering most of us have spent alot of time/money getting them to 12kg, im sure people wont be too pleased.

2. most roboteers have spare radio sets, im sure agreements could be made before the event to borrow peoples.

3. Only a power light is needed, the failsafe and Rx supply are advisory only.

4. Tricky subject, by allowing you key switches should we allow UK robots to use them? But why should we then allow your robots to use them when we have been banned? I suppose its a matter of opinion, i dont mind, providing the switch is safe and reliable. I cant understand why so many peoples links fall out, our link, you have to use both hands to get it out!

This is a good argument in favour of allowing 802.11 remote control - so far as Im aware the same equipment is legal to use on both sides of the pond and in other countries.

Personally I like the idea of removable links; I know when Ive got the link in my back pocket that my robot is safe(r) to work on. I can see advantages to something that can be deactivated by a tool on a long pole - a hook on a stick could work as well on removable links, but as Alan says the 175A connectors often require quite a bit of force to remove.

http://www.robotcombat.com/marketplace_switches.htmlhttp://www.robotcombat.com/marketplace_switches.html

These seem to be the main types available to the US. Personally i have seen 2 of them being used (the team whyachi and the Hella Master Power Switch) The both seem very safe to me and were allowed in robot wars (well the hella master power switch anyway) as centurian used to use one.

Just my opinion

Regards
Ian

Hella key switches were banned over here due to the posibility of the key being snapped off during a fight, and ending with no way to shut down the robot. I much prefer the links as they are so simple, and if the right ones are used, then they wont come out.

Quite a few roboteers used this kind off switch but the key keeps on braking that is why they where not alowed in robot wars i had to change mine to enter S6

I prefer removable links to fixed switches. We all know what kind of weird damage a robot can get during a fight and in my opinion a fixed switch can be damaged far more easily than a removable link. With the removable link the ultimate tool is a crowbar (ask Derek Foxwell) but what do we do with a snapped switch ?

The other points: frequency, lights, weight of featherweights... that is exactly why the Dutch and other European roboteers abide by the rules established by the FRA. We want as little confusion as possible. But we all know that the USA have more differences in respect to -say- tools and industrial standards than you would think and that there will always be problems. What you need then is an international agreement regarding each others rules when international battles take place. That is the only option.

(The worst example would be like asking USA soldiers to swith to Kalishnikows because all guerilla and terror soldiers use them... stupid no ? Exactly my point.)

At featherweights.org we had a small debate about the 12kg/30lb limit, trying to decide if we shoudl move to 30lb. It wasnt met with too much excitment, the main arguement being that people arnt particularly likely to hop over the pond to battle featherweights. However, I think with the sport becoming more international (although with the robotic olympiad claiming it was truly international yet having no UK fighting robots competing to my knowledge) I think it is justifyable to re-opne the debate. Perhaps a large MSN meeting one saturday night of featherweight builders? It would be good to get some US builders involved in such a debate aswell, as us getting to know them and vice versa can only be a good thing. Thoughts?

Tricky subject there Eddy. Like Alan said above, alot of people have spent alot of time and money getting their robots down to 12kg. Also it is widly known a Feather Weight is 12kg, and has been since RW UK first started. I know which side of the fence i will be on if that disscussion takes place.

Ian those switches WERE allowd in RW, un till about Series 5 i think it was - they banned them as there were many times in the area where a switch broke and could not turn the robot off to be taken to the pits safely. Removable Links all the way. Dont like it, build a link which does not fail or fall out - many teams have done this, see no reason why not everyone else can.

Mr Stu
FeatherWeights.org Crew

I have received several emails on the subject, and there seems to be a fialrly common concensus.

Re: radio swapping- this seems to have gone down quite well- quite a neat solution. It could also work two ways should we cross the pond. Im going to look into getting a radio with a frequency module so that I can be US-proof.

Links- a no budge zone it would seem- The piece of mind and safety advantage offered by a link is far superior to a switch. I dont think theres much room for manouver on this one.

Weight Limit- it is a lot easier to make a 12kg robot 13.36kg (30lb), than a 13.36kg robot 12kg. In the immediate future, should we have feather events with a substantial no. of US feathers, I think we should have a 30lb weight limit- I think geoff put it best: It would mean adding 1.36Kg to a 12Kg machine (not hard to do)!

In the long term, if events start becoming more international, then I would propose we increase the weight limit, or at least meat somewhere in the middle. The arguements Im beginning to hear for keeping the 12kg weight limit are identical to the ones wheeled out when the heavy weight limit went up to 100kg from 80kg- and that has been a definate success, despite everyone saying it would bring about the end of the sport. Of course Im thinking far off here- were no way near this stage yet, but increasing ties with other countries is no doubt a good thing in my opinion- Belgium and Holland are testiment to this- the standard of the dutch robots is terrifying! A standard set of rules for the world would be a good thing I think. That leaves the option open of traveling to events all over the world- imagine if you were going on holiday to america, and you found out that there was a motorama or nerc or bot bash by the sea or what have you only 20 minutes away to be held whilst youre there- I know I certainly wouldnt
be able to resist the temptation to pack the featherweight!

My appolgies...Clearly my maths is slipping..30lb = 13.60Kg
So I have just found you all another 240g!! :)

LOL!!!!
Well the post about the FRA Word Championship states the FRA rules will be in use. After talkng to a few people, the rules will not be changed. Power lights are needed (not hard) a removable link is needed, there safer, and weight classes stay the same.

Mr Stu

Sure sure- FRA rules for this event. Im thinking more long-term here- certainly there are issues with changing FRA rules to do with the insurance that covers the rules. Out of interest, how often will the rules be up for review?

It may have slipped peoples notice, but the FRA rules are actually far closer to the American RFL rules than anything produced prior to them.
This was done very deliberately in order to make cross Atlantic competition easier.

Nearly all of the rules that have been modified for the FRA were modified either because of the difference in laws over here, or because the solution they are using has already been proved unsafe via issues with past events.

Ill answer the main points raised at the start of the thread:

1. Weight classes do need to be standardised over time, but Id suggest the 12kg limit is the far easier one to stick to.

2. The radio frequencies is none negotiable Im afraid, the ones we are using are the only ones legally available in this country.

3. The power light indicator section of the rules is due an update in version 1.2, the failsafe indicator is being moved to advisory status and only the main power light will be mandatory.

4. Removable links are again none negotiable; there have been far to many situations where the keys have snapped. Popping of links is not an issue from a safety point of view, its just irritating for the builder.. the onus is on the builder to make sure it doesnt happen.

Hope that helps

Sam
FRA safety executive

Sam,
Whats the problem with a temporary weight change on the feathers to help out our friends across the pond? Seems a little mean to me. as you know I fully support the light/link/radio policy as these are directly related to safety, but whats 1.6Kg between friends? Hardly a safety concern, could we not call it a guesture of goodwill?

why not go half way and call it 800g?

I agree with Geoff, bring it on, overweight or not, well still take em. Grrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr

Joe Townsend

PS. Can I still add extra armour? Please.......

Well the only thing with the 1.6kg is for pushers it would give more traction so for all the english pushers i would surgest get 1.6kg of led and strap it in there.

Regards
Ian

Or alternatively we could actually think about what were doing and put on 1.6kg of extra armour for the same effect but plus better protection :-p

but it would slow us down, alphas drive was designed for a 12kg robot. Storm 2 was taking of panels during series 7 to keep as light as possible. If the featherweight limit is changed it should be to 12.5 kg to keep in with the trend of the others (ie half the weight of the next one up).

Also in response to the 12kg limit being the far easier one to stick to- I dont see how- surely it is easier to go to one group of builders and say You can have an extra 1.6kg than it is to go to another and say You have to loose 1.6kg. I certainly know which group Id rather be in.

but the american ones are designed to have the extra weight. Im sure most feathers over here would be different if given the extra weight from the start.

Remember guys, we are talking about a temporary change for one event only. A Eddy says its far easier to temporally add than to temporally loose.

Remember guys, we are talking about a temporary change for one event only. A Eddy says its far easier to temporally add than to temporally loose.

While the frequencies commonly used for ground vehicle remote control in the US are illegal in the UK, the current bands in use in the UK are not the only ones available. So far as Im aware 40Mhz and 459Mhz are legitimate remote control bands explicitly for ground vehicles, and 27Mhz can be used for ground and air vehicles. This does not stop you using remote control equipment not explicitly designed for ground vehicles, such as 802.11 wireless networking and modems running on cellphones. Even IR could be used, so long as it is done safely.

Failsafe should be implemented above the physical networking layer - and it is, at the moment. All the failsafes Ive seen or built are independent of the RF equipment used. There is nothing inherently safe about the 40MHz band; it is just a set of numbers.

Jim:

No 459 mhz is not explicitly designed for ground vehicles ..it is still totally ok to use this frequency in model aircaft.

At the mo I have 2 reftec UHF transmitters that work...1 receiver and 1 (much better quality) multiplex Tx and Rx that works great ..all on UHF 259 Mhz and allowable in model aircraft and bots.

One day I will get round to using it in a bot but at the mo we are having no probs with 40 mhz.

Tom

My apologies, Tom. I know better now.

Im actually thinking of going to 40MHz for Cayennes refit due to the latency problems Ive had at 459MHz... but this is way off topic now.

What probs have you had jim?

The main attraction to me with UHF seems to be the very short RX ariel...basically 4 inch or so wire, so very easy to mount in a bot.

From range checks I have done it seems fine and I remember flying a friends model circa 1977 when the British Reftec 1st came out and range was not a problem...the short stubby Tx ariel is also a bonus.

But like I say at the mo 40 mhz with a Quick Uk Rx antenna is working great for us...we read alot of bad reviews about this antenna but we have had no probs whatsoever radio wise since using it.

From asking around fellow modellers Becker UHF gear is supposed to be the dogs bol**cks and I also remember another British maker called Cotswold doing UHF gear.

Of course Roger Plant does a UHF conversion to your existing radio gear which is useful if you want to use your existing gear coz it may be a full computer set but it adds another box to the Rx and a clunky looking box on your Tx and is VERY expensive but evidently works ok.

Decisions Decisions.

Tom

Boy, lots of stuff to reply to.

I agree the radio issue is something that has to be dealt with by people helping each other out. Does anyone know if the TX-module radios like the Futaba 9CAP work in both US and UK bands (75 vs. 40 mhz)? Same thing with crystals in the receiver.

Regarding popularity of Featherweights in US, they are becoming one of the most popular classes, as are the 12lb robots, because they are a bit cheaper to build and yet you can still do some serious damage with them. The original version of my bot Anorexia got bounced off the roof of the BotBash arena by VDD, a disc spinner, last summer. It was going over 20mph when it hit the ceiling, we estimate the impact force at over 200Gs, and it chopped a big chunk out of the mild-steel C-channel frame, bending it about 25 degrees! Let me tell you, I was impressed.

There are several really nasty featherweight drumbots, lots of tough wedges and bricks, even some ICE bots.

To clear up some confusion, almost nobody uses keyswitches here, certainly not keyswitches with non-removable keys. The Whyachi switches and the modified Hella switches use a hex key as a key (so nothing to break off), and you would have to physically destroy the switch to get it to change state. Bright main power lights wired to the switch are required, so no light, no power (assuming the light doesnt break, of course)

Realistically, the chance of a bot failing to a dangerous state with both the main power light and the radio light giving misleading results is very slim. A nice feature of the whyachi switch is that when you tighten it down, its off, no ifs, ands or buts. Youd have to put a bullet into it to short it, and a fairly big one at that.

One thing a lot of bots (including mine) do have is a charging plug, a double removable-link that isolates the batteries from the rest of the bot. The difference is that during combat it is stuffed behind a locked panel so that it cannot pop loose, and main power is controlled by the switch.

Requiring a removable link for pit safety but permitting it to be secured if a proper switch is installed might be a way to address the safety concerns and deal with the lucky hit, popped link, dead bot problem. It really sucks to lose that way.

802.11 : bad idea when you get into a noisy environment. Same problem with the otherwise cool IFI robotics kit. They are way too sensitive to interference (eg: internal combustion engines!).

At Robot Assault last summer, an IFI-run bot ran into serious problems because every time his ICE-powered opponent hit the gas, he lost his link.

R/C stuff works because its simple and stupid. Also, the 802.11 stuff weighs more!

26 vs 30. One of my feathers can make it, one (the new one with the magmotor powered blade) almost certainly cant. I just raised it to note the point of difference. Be nice if there was a way for the new bot to compete as thats the one my diabolical sons are going to drive.

I personally would love to have an excuse to come over, since I was born in Tumbridge Wells and I could visit my dear old Nana (98 years young) at the same time. You wouldnt deprive a sweet old lady the chance to see some of her great-grandkids, would you? Surely not! ;^)

On a side note, my website, http://www.madoverlord.com/http://www.madoverlord.com/ has a lot of edited videos of events over here. I run an Anime company (allegedly) and so have sort of drifted into the job of videoing events. Hope to have them coming out on DVD soon.

Enjoy.

Robert has a point- would it be acceptable to remove the charging links whilst in the pit? This would rule out the possibility of Pit activation, however It still does not allow a particularly easy de-activation should the bot loose control.

Ive been researching RF modules and have come out more confused than I went in. Which radios will accept RF modules. Are RF modules specific to their radios (eg 6 ch./7ch./8ch) and can 40Mhz modules be purchased for these? Can suynthseised modules be purchased in the 40Mhz frequency? A general explanation of modules would be much appreciated as I really dont have a clue with modules :-)

As I see it eddy,
The FRA require an easily accessable removable link with power light. This is not open to negotiation. If you want a power switch, that is up to you, but a removable link (and light) MUST also be fitted up stream from your switch towards the batteries.
As far as Robert and any of our other US friends are concerned, Im sorry, but this is one rule that you guys are just going to have to live with if you want to compeat in the UK. Im still holding out a little hope that we can agree somthing on the weight thing, and Im sure we can work out something like a radio loan system to keep you UK legal.
So at the end of the day, two out of three aint bad!

I agree with Geoff about the link and light.
Like you pointed out Eddy -its mainly down to activating and de activating the robots at the door. If we think about it in more detail - with all these US bots with Ti all over, there not going to get Hurt that much and may not even need a link. But it gives peace of mind to the person who has to turn these things on and off, or surpervise it all. And just imagen if a speedo or something wouldnt turn off - links all the way, not hard to fit, and not hard to make sure they dont pop out.

I dont know what to do about the weight limit for feathers. In the long run, i say stick to 12kg. But for this one off event -, if we have to stick to the FRA rules 100%, then 12kg it may have to be, but if something else can be done - then go for it.

Mr Stu

I have to say that, even in this day and age, removable links still seem to be falling out of robots (see Dantomkia in the All Stars - although admittedly there was previous damage involved in that particular case). Vast numbers of fights have been cut short because of links being knocked out, and making them hard to remove seems contrary to the idea of keeping things safe. For all the assertions in this thread that its easy to ensure links stay in, this still seems to be a problem for some quite high profile robots. Im not saying that switches are any better, and certainly links would seem to be *safer*, but theyre not perfect.

Ive had this rant before, so I wont go into detail, but my personal preference would be for some means to indicate that the link has come out, and to call a time out so that it can be reinserted. Itd still be better to ensure that the link stayed in, but it would mean that we wouldnt have so many unfair fights, and we might not need a crowbar to get the link out of a live robot which has been designed to avoid link failure. Some means of signalling that the link had been removed (as opposed to other power failure) would make a currently simple system a lot more complex, although it might be a convenient safety measure, but perhaps when roboteers deactivate their machines at the end of a fight they could take the opportunity to say hang on! and restart.

Just a thought, with all kinds of practical problems, but I just thought Id bring it up again while the link/switch issue gets another mention.

--
Fluppet

Sam Smith has a wonderfull solution.

Velcro.

That works? On a heavy? Over the flame pit?

Ill bear it in mind, though. I tend to think in terms of some kind of bayonet fitting (counter-sprung so force is required to extract it), but maybe Im over-thinking it, never having tried to build one. Anything twisty would be harder to remove at poles length, too.

Are all the failures seen with links really down to inadequate retention mechanisms? Well, obviously, they are, but what I mean is: are there really lots of teams out there with inferior link retention, or have those teams who have had failures with this just been unlucky? If not, should we have some more guidelines from the FRA on how to stop a link falling out?

Sorry to go off-topic; just curious, and sharing the concern of the US roboteers.

--
Fluppet

Enough is enough about links popping out : Pussycats link has NEVER EVER CAME OUT.
With all the slamming around, flipping around, hits from Mr Psychos hammer, flying by the arena flipper, bashed by Fluffy, flipped by Chaos 2, M2, Dantomkia, the link has NEVER came out!

The link has never came out on any of our feathers, not being whacked by Vortex, flipped by a heavy weight, or bring hit by Thors Hammer on Kitty - we have NEVER had a link problem.

Ok it may happen now i have said all the above - but point being - we havnt had a problem, i personaly havnt had a problem with the bots ive built, and Pussycat has never had a problem that Alan has built. so personaly - get out there and do something about it.

Sorry for being rude - but if its never came out of Pussycat, and never came out of my robots with my poor building skills after going in and it being trashed and polycarb flying everywhere coz of Vortex and co, im sure everyone else can do it.

Mr Stu

Mike does not use the same link in Dantomkia as most of us, that is for a technical reason to do with the battery charging method. Mike use a bungee to retain the link in but has been known to forget to put the bungee on and link falls out. The link on M2 is exposed and after over one hundred fights has never come out, came close when Pussycat tried to cut through it in S7!

I have sold over 300 heavyweight ready made links and never had a complaint. Thats not to say one has not come out but I would like to think its very rare.

Personally, I feel that this is one of the best rule changes that Mentorn came up with - the primary battery current has to flow through the removeable key. Returning to an on/off switch would be madness IMHO.

Im not disagreeing (I certainly prefer the idea of a link, probably being more safety paranoid than the average roboteer). Im not accusing those roboteers whove not had link problems of having a weak point - I was just wondering whether those who *have* had problems were doing something different. Sorry if I sounded accusatory, Mr Stu!

Thanks for the explanation about Dantomkia - although I was aware that there had been a repair problem anyway. The link removals that tend to stick in the mind are actively caused by another robot (Behemoth and Shunt, Bulldog Breed and Hypnodisc) but there have been a good number of others that I recall as a spectator. Paul and Stu, are your links solely held in by friction(shield flap aside) or do you have some mechanism to hold them in place? Im speaking as a proto-builder here - clearly your designs are sufficient to stop link failure, so if were promoting link usage as an alternative to switches (see, Im on topic) it would be nice to know what you do. May I ask how the bungee on Dantomkia works? (Is it just a loop holding the link together? Doesnt that make it a bit slow to remove?)

I learn a little more with each digression. :-)

--
Fluppet