2013 Build Rules and Competition Regulations

[PJ-27]

I think the new Li-Po securing wording is good. Blu-Tac is out?

I suggested a Li-Po charging table for the FW Uk Champs. At the moment there is just a rat's nest of cables, in amongst are several Li-Pos charging.

Plus means we can keep an eye on people daisy chaining extension leads together. Last year I unplugged my extension lead to a mass chorus of groans and no power alarms as several chargers switched off.....

[Bodge Job]

a communal table would be a good idea, but i would have thought it would be illogical for every one to watch them, surely it would be better to have each lipo and charge clearly marked, so if someone does see something suspicious then they can quickly find the owner. and the fact that charges do like beeping when something goes wrong, people would be aware of it pretty quick?


AND regarding the walker rule, i would like to find out what people think, as i plan to attempt one eventually as im bored of driving a lifeless box :P but would have thought that cam operated leg, type things could have some alowence, but maybe not the full 200% as i don't think that would be needed. or the rule could just be left open, and any one building a walker just keeps the forum/community informed so people know whats going on and can post there views if they think its unfair.
As seeing walkers would be awesome, but if someone then goes and makes basically light-weight Little spinner with legs, and trys to fight it as a feather, then that would be taking advantage of the rules.

[blazerbotics]

Our point as an EO regarding Lipos

Obviously there are concerns over running Lipos at events, however if used and treated carefully and kept within there limits there shouldn't be any issues. Would thing I would encourage is for teams (especially heavyweights) to learn and understand about the technology before jumping in with them.

It had been spoken about having a list of approved manufacturers etc, however we are going to allow any, but we would strongly suggest you buy the best equipment you can afford. Don't go out and buy the cheapest cells/chargers you can find. If this starts to become an issue then we would have to look at an approved list.

As John has mentioned, something that I have spoke to the Big Nipper guys about, who ran the trial, is to have a specific Lipo charging table, as somebody must to watchhing Lipos when on charge. We know at events you are used to plugging in your charger and then going off for a natter, but with Lipos this cant be done, therefore by having all the chargers on one table, then it only needs one person to monitor them. This will be up to the roboteers to organise who's watching and when.

Please remember the EOs are putting up alot of risk by allowing LiPos, and we're the one's not receiving any of the benefits. The situation will be constantly monitored, and if there becomes to many problems/issues, they will just get banned. I have no issue with banning individual teams from running them if they do not follow the rules or are in anyway mis-using the batteries. It's our insurance and contracts with venues on the line, and we cannot allow anything to put these at risk.

It's up to you guys to make sure you are competent in using them, and are following the procedures. One person running the wrong type of batteries, charging them incorrectly etc could ruin it for everybody, we cannot police everybody all of the time.

Sorry for the harsh line on this, but I hope you can see where we're coming from.

[psychostorm]

Would it be possible for a shuffle bot to claim a weight advantage if:
It weighed in as an exposed wheel robot at the regular weight,

then could attatch a shuffling mechanism pod (that was separately weighed) to the side with the wheel axle (wheels removed) linked to the shuffle mechanism.

That way you could never use the walker weight for a weapon. The weapon would have to fit in the roller weight limit.

[typhoon_driver]

and we're the one's not receiving any of the benefits

Not that it matters much but I disagree with this statement. Featherweight fights have gotten far more interesting since lipos came along due to the energy density. May not be the same for heavyweights but I disagree with this view.

Regarding a charging table again I disagree. If you don't have the discipline to stand or sit beside your bench for 15 minutes whilst they charge (and the charging times are far less) then you shouldn't be running them. EOs shouldn't be afraid to throw someone out of a competition if they don't follow the rules in the pits regarding lipo.

[teamstorm]

Ok.. bear with me this is going to be quite a long one

1) Charging Table = Epic Fail

Come on guys, think about this stuff - you're suggesting that one person should have the responsibility of supervising a table full of LiPo's charging ? If the risk is big enough for us to take these steps, then we are suggesting there is likelyhood of an issue.

What happens when something goes wrong, what if there is damage to a building or a fire, what happens if that person gets badly burned trying to rescue your LiPo's from the building as they were 'responsible' for them ?

If (god forbid) any damage hapenned to the building the insurance company would immediatley ask who was responsible for supervising where the fire took place, and I don't believe that any individual should have responsibility for someone else's LiPos over which they have no knowledge of condition or past treatment, and due to not having a low voltage discharge, don't even know if a danger is present.

I am happy to supervise my own batteries charging, but to ask someone to be responsible for others is naieve and inappropriate.

Sometimes I think this stuff is just thrown together without any thought for impact or legal sides.

If you charge, YOU are responsible for supervising YOUR charging.

2 - Low Voltage Cut Off

Just because there isn't a low-voltage cut off that will work in our environment (and I have not done research on if there is) doesn't mean we should just say 'oh well then we won't use them' - there is a REASON that they are used elsewhere ! The effort involved in getting such a device is small, even smaller given that we have such a close relationship with those who manufacture our speed controllers and this could EASILY be written into the PIC code. I am sure that Ian would be willing to up-version his software for those running LiPo's and that should just be considered part of the investment required in doing it safely.

This is like saying 'because I can't find a welding mask that fits my head today, I just won't bother with one'

We have identified a risk that we can't currently mitigate, so rather than hiding from it and saying it get's all a bit complex to deal with so we'll just make it reccomended, let's come up with a way of mitigating it. To not do so would be remiss ! Any person doing an investigation into an incident would Google LiPo's and Robots... find this thread on the FRA's own forum and realise we knew about the risk but didn't do anything about dealing with it ?... We need to think this stuff through in terms of the impact of something going wrong, not just some guidelines for the sake of guidelines.

3 - Fire Extinguishers

Just the very fact that people are saying 'we should have CO2 fire extinguishers around in case of a fire' scares the living daylights out of me that people simpley DO NOT understand the technology we are talking about here. A CO2 fire extinguisher will be next to useless for a LiPo fire - the ONLY extinguisher that would be of any use is the new Type D (yellow) ones - for details see here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fire_extinguisher#Class_D. The other option is water which will ensure that any material around the LiPo fire (which will get VERY hot for a VERY short space of time) will not catch fire except that then reacts with the Lithium in nasty ways. Bottom line, where is this guidance for event organisers ? Do you guys understand what you would need to provide to do this in safety ?

A Consultation is a great thing to have, and I think those reacting with the 'how dare you approach' should view this as what it is, an opportunity to discuss. I am sure that those writing this stuff will take on board all the feedback and requests for clarification.

Happy to speak to anyone who has any questions, FRA or otherwise - at the moment 10/10 for the FRA starting a consultation, now we need to ensure that we all work together to drive the right plan, and don't shy away from dealing with difficult/awkward issues along the way.

[kane]

Firstly we do apologise if our previous post comes across as hostile. It certainly was not meant to be so or perceived as being so from our end.

We are quite confused. I do not doubt that these rules are up for consultation, but the AGM is after the consultation ends, which would be the ideal situation in which to resolve the issue fairly. We are also confused as to where the immobilisation change has originated from. The pit rule was obviously an issue that needed addressing but why has the immobilisation rule been changed with it?

No problem, it's easy to misread the tone of some text.

The reason we don't wait until an AGM to vote on matters is because discussing rules can be time consuming and doesn't always represent the community's view as best as it could. They are a great opportunity for open debate on matters or when a simple Agree/ Disagree is required.

The previous rules were fairly ambiguous around immobilisation and especially the pit. 10 seconds is a much more realistic time for a countdown. This has all been rewritten to be clear and offer no room for mis-interpretation (hopefully). The new rules make the rules of engagement clear to both the roboteers and the audience.

The consultation period provides time for the community to provide their input; agree, disagree or have a completely different view. Of course we hope everyone is happy and the new rules can be brought into effect at the end of the consultation period. But should anything require further discussion, that can be done so at the AGM and if neccessary a vote may be called.

[kane]

Just because there isn't a low-voltage cut off that will work in our environment (and I have not done research on if there is) doesn't mean we should just say 'oh well then we won't use them'

Over discharge is not a safety risk. Yes, it will severly damage the cells. Chargers will generally detect the over discharge and refuse to charge the pack, or charge the pack with severly limited capacity. In the worst case that the charger causes a battery fire the fire will be contained in a LiPo bag.

Just the very fact that people are saying 'we should have CO2 fire extinguishers around in case of a fire' scares the living daylights out of me that people simpley DO NOT understand the technology we are talking about here

Fire extinguishers are an interesting subject. As you point out there is a risk of fire to surrounding objects. Only class D extinguishers are suitable for putting out a LiPo fire. However the pack sizes we are using and LiPo bags means that the fire will have a limited burn time and containment. CO2 would be most suitable on any equipment in the vacinity without leaving a big mess or creating a risk of electrocution. Water extinguishers must not be used on live electrics.

The greatest risk of fire is through puncturing a cell. This is unlikely to occur outside of the arena.

[kane]

Would it be possible for a shuffle bot to claim a weight advantage if:
It weighed in as an exposed wheel robot at the regular weight,

then could attatch a shuffling mechanism pod (that was separately weighed) to the side with the wheel axle (wheels removed) linked to the shuffle mechanism.

That way you could never use the walker weight for a weapon. The weapon would have to fit in the roller weight limit.

2.5 Interchangeable Panels
If interchangeable panels or weapons are used, the weight is measured with the heaviest set-up in place.

[craig_colliass]

After looking at advice from a wide range of experienced users, also the history and application of this battery type.
I think the rules and the Eo's conditions do control the risk posed by the LiPo battery safety questions.
However some sort of low voltage cut off device developed in this community would be a good addition to safety.
Perhaps electronic inventors would like to put their not inconsiderable intellects and talents to address this problem and come up with a device that will cut off power at the given voltages so as to eliminate this risk.