@aidanc Kind of a weird comparison, you can still have paint, you just have to use acrylic, oil based paints are not allowed.
The GDC had wanted to do this in the rev 0.1 editions, but made this one.
@tabor473
There are a ton of different ways they could have done this, but this is the one that they chose. It achieves the goal.
Oh and the people on the discord that are going nuts saying that the GDC is outlawing the color screws are getting that out of a two second sound bite. They are not getting rid of them. Try to not go off the deep end.
I went to bat over this, but this isnât a hill that Iâm willing to die on, I have bigger issues to work on.
It was entirely possible to clarify the rules to fulfill the gdcâs stated intentions without banning widely used and beneficial parts. This has been shown many times here, and though I was never confident in our chances at changing the gdc minds, I am still disappointed that they have chosen to go through with this change, completely disregarding the overwhelmingly negative response of the community
To be fair, they did ask for a show of hands who knew about âScrewgateâ and less than 10 EPâs put their hands up. So the failure point is the âoverwhelmingâ response didnât make it up to your EP and your mentors/coaches. Iâve posted a few times that you need to bubble up to get traction with RECF/GDC/VEX. They will listen, they listened to me, but without the rest of the room having support it doesnât go far.
I wasnât in the Coaches sessions today, I donât know if the screw issue made an appearance.
Remember, only some of you are on discord and others are on the forum. But there is a bigger group out there that you need to try to reach out two. I spoke to a number of EP about âScrewgateâ and when I started with âAre you on the forumsâ a large number said no or said âthatâs for the studentsâ. So youâll need to work on outreach.
It seems like, from the EP summit, that weight savings was meant to be interpreted as added functionality and not what they intended with the allowance of commodity hardware. Their only goal with the rule was âbe able to buy a screw at Home Depot that provides zero benefit over the one you could get from VEXâ
So, while I still disagree with this goal, and I still think this doesnât solve the problem (see smaller or hollow screws), they did have to ban lighter screws to achieve their goals.
(And again, I donât see how this rule can be realistically enforced, I donât think this actually solves the problem, and I donât think the problem actually exists to begin with, but⌠whatever, theyâre the GDC, theyâve clearly made up their minds)
Theyâll be complaining about it when they show up to inspection at worlds and find out the screws their club bought 5 years ago on robosource that were less expensive are aluminum and they donât get to compete at the biggest event of the year.
now i am interested to see that âballâ that comes with a threaded stem.
but really - if it is just to glide, any non-shoulder screwhead would be able to perform the task.
⌠and this sort of thing is why GDC had to clarify what actually counts as a âscrewâ.
I am amazed that a team was trying to argue that a stud-mounted ball transfer unit counted as a screw. I am also surprised they found one with a small enough studâŚ
I agree that if they were getting this sort of question they needed to come up with a âbright-lineâ rule for what is and isnât a screw. I am QUITE certain there was significant thought and discussion given as to WHAT line to use.
To be clear, I donât know specifically what Grant was referring to, but Iâve seen enough extrapolation of the rules over the years that it would not surprise me. As an example, one of my favorites from many years ago.
Yes, but assuming that, erm, âscrewâ is made out of either steel or stainless steel, the latest change would do nothing to ban it. (The existing guidance that it not introduce additional functionality, combined with an inspector with at least two functional brain cells, should have already been more than enough to make it clear that ainât a screw)
Exactly right, the rule change made does absolutely nothing to clarify against the things the gdc says is a problem (with the ball headed screw-like object being a good example), even though it was completely possible to make a change that does clarify these things while preserving a teamâs ability to continue using nylon and aluminum screws as screws.
Also, letâs not forget the educational aspect of nylon and aluminum screws. With these screws, students can learn the importance of using different materials in different applications. In the engineering industry, you are not always going to use steel screws for everything. Instead, you analyze the application and determine how much strength you might need or how light it must be to determine what screw to use.
I recognize that the primary goal of VRC is to educate students and not create industry applications, which is why I think VRC moderated electronics and structural materials (ex. c channels) are necessary. But there is a certain point where these regulations jump from âfairnessâ to âlimitations.â All in all, I deeply respect the GDC for creating such an approachable and fair robotics program for students. But I think these illogical decisions regarding screw legality take the idea of âfairnessâ too far to a point where it is unfair for students who have already invested in these resources and wish to use multi-material screws as a learning opportunity.
Iâll call bologna on this âreasonâ. Vex sells C-channels in both steel and aluminum, providing students the same opportunity to decide between different materials in different applications.
Does it suck that the types of screws allowed are now more constrained than they were in the past? Yes.
Also, you can make (a limited number of) parts from plastic. If you want a materials/strength/design lesson, there are still avenues of doing this that donât involve nylon or aluminum screwsâŚ
These forums are an echo chamber, and itâs really easy to forget that.
The users on this forum represent a very small percentage of the overall community. In addition, the users that tend to be active members here, tend to skew towards higher performing teams.
I think the responses to Grantâs questions are a really good reminder of that.
It doesnât mean the opinions on this forum are irrelevant or less important. However, just because the forum is in a majority agreement on something, it doesnât mean the majority of the community agrees too.
While strictly speaking this may be true, I would suggest that this is because a majority of the community is simply unaware of the controversy, such that they donât have any opinion on it at all, and that if they were to be informed of the issue your argument would evaporate.
Or perhaps the âcontroversyâ simply doesnât affect them. Iâm pretty sure teams that are building the hero robot, or Claw-bot or who only have access to SuperKits donât give a hoot about whether Nylon screws are legal. Sure, maybe you could persuade them to echo your outrage at âthe GDC took this awayâ, but ultimately, I would guess that 10% of teams HERE may be affected by this and 25% of teams HERE will say they are affected by this. The reality is, this probably impacts less than 5% of the community. Arguments can be made these are proportionately high-performing teams, but I suspect theyâll still be high performing teams after this change.
I have used nylon and aluminum screws for 3 years. But do I care they are illegal now? no. Now I will use steel, and its fine , because everyone else is using steel. No big deal.
