Engineering Notebook Online/Paper

Are Online Engineering noteboosk allowed for this year? I remember last year it was encouraged but I’m hearing rumors that they aren’t.

Check each event as to what they expect and notebook review.

Notebook may be in-person or remote. If remote those with paper notebooks will need to scan each page. Links to notebooks must be provided to EP for judging.

Regardless of online or hardcopy notebooks, they need to have consistent timestamp practice acceptable to event.

there is NO “bound” bonus, so notebooks do not need to be bound, but rather adhere to timestamp bonus that demonstrate chronological order of each entry of notebook.

Regardless of notebook submission, if in-person interview at event, teams are expect to bring hard copy of notebook - for online notebooks, print each page and collect them in chronological order. For bound notebook - just bring notebook.

Lots to consider here - but from my personal EP and Judge experience - I think the most important facet of judging is allowing Judges to review notebooks prior to event and allow judging in-person to focus on interviews with teams rather than speed read all notebooks day of event. Big win for all!


Thanks, 1 more question

Where do y’all get your engineering notebooks from?

We’ve used RECF notebook, we have used $1 notebooks, loose leaf binders and these too:

but the real advice is to be consistent through out the season - follow the notebook rubric, apply a design process … use competitions as a means of testing ideas and using that information to improve your robot design all season long.


You should also get an engineering notebook when you register your team, along with the liscence plate pack and a couple of rings.

1 Like

Last piece of wisdom to offer - when I judge, I am looking at three perspectives:

  • What does the team tell me about their robot and design process
  • What does the engineering notebook record as their design process
  • What does the robot itself tell me about its ability on the competition field

A solid team excels on all three points by being consistent message.

Things that does not work well are code dumps without ever mentioning what problems it solves, or any comment. Interviews where only one person speaks and the other members are completely unaware of team goals, robot design and implementation plans, and only one person contributing to the notebook (all members should be developing their engineering skills, and documentation is a critical element…)

And definitely the team mentor / coach should step away from team during interviews, can be in periphery, but not interjecting.

As an EP I am awe of judge teams at events - they work so work so very hard to hear, see teams a whole day, and read carefully engineering notebooks. Their good will and positivity at events is remarkable.