PDA

View Full Version : launching stuff


taranathicus
01-10-2002, 09:07 AM
How do the rules deal with launching a projectile(tethered) to the other end to get points for having your robot in your robot scoring zone while also being able to hodl the goal(s) where you want them?

kevinw
01-10-2002, 10:20 AM
I believe it is explicitly stated that the only thing that may be used as a projectile is a ball. No part of your robot may be used as a projectile, tethered or not.

Jay5780
01-10-2002, 02:38 PM
I pretty sure that the tether would break the entanglement rule as it my cause entanglement.

I'm not sure about the specific rule # but in the past this has been the case

bigqueue
01-10-2002, 03:31 PM
Originally posted by Jay5780
I pretty sure that the tether would break the entanglement rule as it my cause entanglement.

I'm not sure about the specific rule # but in the past this has been the case

But as I recall, the definition of a "projectile" two years ago had something to do with something traveling through an arc.....so in that case, something SHOT so that it rolled along the floor was fine.

Entanglement is a whole other story...but I wonder if during a 2 minute match, "potential entanglement" might not also be "time" dependent?

That is, it is a potential at some moments in a match, and clearly NOT at others.

Anyone else think there might be a moment in the match when entanglement might not be a problem and therefore is NOT an issue?

Do you think we could build a mechanism that operates only during those times? :confused:


http://www.drainsafe.com/images/SafetyAlert/tyfig05.gif

Skanker
01-10-2002, 03:55 PM
Perhaps if you launched at the end of the match? I think that, in some cases it may be a safety risk too... FIRST did post an update about this. They seemed to be intentionally ambiguous about the idea. they said to make sure taht you don't entangle anyone and don't damage the field. It seems that if you are careful in how you design your 'projectile', then it may be OK to have it. maybe, a rolling object instead of flying?

Adrian Wong
01-10-2002, 04:44 PM
We are using a "common sense" definition of what constitutes a projectile. The exact determination will be up to the robot inspectors and referees at the competition events. Below is an attempt to provide a formal definition:

"A projectile is any object, whether attached or not, that is
launched from the robot and continues moving away from the robot by its momentum, typically following a parabolic path as it falls to the surface of the playing field."

Note that something lanched at floor level, such that it never truely falls, but rolls or slids across the floor could still be considered a projectile.The last paragraph seemingly restricts the use of ground-effect (hehe) projectiles.

fs_2002
01-10-2002, 10:36 PM
What about something that rolled on its on power and could come back on its own power?
~bobb
Team 804

Suneet
01-10-2002, 11:20 PM
What about something that rolled on its [own] power and could come back on its own power?
As long as the thing that connected it to the main robot could not entangle another robot, even by accident, it would be fine, I should think.

Our team is doing something like this, but we don't have anything powered on the end. Just extend metal solidly from the 'bot. It's powered, and it's not in any way a projectile.

Matt Ryan
02-07-2002, 07:13 AM
Originally posted by Skanker
Perhaps if you launched at the end of the match? I think that, in some cases it may be a safety risk too... FIRST did post an update about this. They seemed to be intentionally ambiguous about the idea. they said to make sure taht you don't entangle anyone and don't damage the field. It seems that if you are careful in how you design your 'projectile', then it may be OK to have it. maybe, a rolling object instead of flying?

They stated that if it poses an entanglement hazard, it will be disabled/DQed (I should really know which one...but its early).

They never mentioned when, so it seems (to me, at least) clear that they intend to enforce that at any and all times.

Even at 1 second left...thats VERY important...many matches will be won in the last split-second of the match.

Nate Smith
02-07-2002, 11:44 AM
Originally posted by Matt Ryan


They stated that if it poses an entanglement hazard, it will be disabled/DQed (I should really know which one...but its early).

They never mentioned when, so it seems (to me, at least) clear that they intend to enforce that at any and all times.


My impression of the "risk of entanglement" issue is this:
During the inspection process on Thursday, your machine will be examined for anything that a team could get tangled in during operation of the machine. If it is deemed that a mechanism or component on a machine poses a risk of entanglement, you will not be allowed to compete in qualifying matches until it is resolved, just as if you had not met any of the other inspection criteria. If they are not sure, they will warn you, and if it does become intangled during a match, you will be disallowed to compete further until the issue is corrected.

So, the key is not whether or not something does become entangled, but rather whether it could, as the ruling will, in 99% of cases, be made before a machine ever reaches the playing field.

Matt Ryan
02-07-2002, 09:31 PM
Originally posted by Nate Smith


My impression of the "risk of entanglement" issue is this:
During the inspection process on Thursday, your machine will be examined for anything that a team could get tangled in during operation of the machine. If it is deemed that a mechanism or component on a machine poses a risk of entanglement, you will not be allowed to compete in qualifying matches until it is resolved, just as if you had not met any of the other inspection criteria. If they are not sure, they will warn you, and if it does become intangled during a match, you will be disallowed to compete further until the issue is corrected.

So, the key is not whether or not something does become entangled, but rather whether it could, as the ruling will, in 99% of cases, be made before a machine ever reaches the playing field.

That is correct, but refs are human...they don't catch everything.

The one that inspects may say "ho hum", but the one on the field might penalize you for doing something.

CaptainPlaid
02-11-2002, 02:01 PM
It is my impression that if you are planning on extending into the goal area you must have sometime of rigid telescoping device. From reading the rules and the updates I believe everything else will be DQ'ed during inspection.
Also, they will likely need to be mounted on some type of turn table so you do not have to turn your entire robot just to fire your "reacher."

Tom Fairchild
02-12-2002, 07:48 AM
Why would being able to be launched from any angle affect the legality? As long as its not a risk to entanglement, I think its fine.

~Tom Fairchild~, who's roobot's arm last year could move in only one axis. Is that a risk of entanglement?

Matt Ryan
02-14-2002, 07:03 AM
Originally posted by Tom Fairchild
Why would being able to be launched from any angle affect the legality? As long as its not a risk to entanglement, I think its fine.

~Tom Fairchild~, who's roobot's arm last year could move in only one axis. Is that a risk of entanglement?

Anything that even looks like it might have the ability to entangle will earn you a DQ, regardless of how much time is left (1 sec left and you find you're DQed, and the losing alliance now gets three times your score).

Matt Ryan
02-14-2002, 07:04 AM
Originally posted by CaptainPlaid
It is my impression that if you are planning on extending into the goal area you must have sometime of rigid telescoping device. From reading the rules and the updates I believe everything else will be DQ'ed during inspection.
Also, they will likely need to be mounted on some type of turn table so you do not have to turn your entire robot just to fire your "reacher."

If it runs along the ground, then it presents the possibility of entangling another robot by getting caught up in the drive train.