Flipping bots

[Tottanka]

I was thinking, is it possible to make a flipping bot, that will start the game up against the driver station, and flip immediately, thus using the 20'' extension constantly. (style team 16 in 2008).
I read the manual, and it's kinda vague for me if that's OK or not... will this require any unique bumper design?

[jsasaki]

G20
ROBOTS must be in compliance with Section 4.6: BUMPER Rules throughout the MATCH.
Violation: DISABLED


R22
BUMPERS must be located entirely within the BUMPER ZONE, which is between two (2) and ten (10) in. from the floor, in reference to the ROBOT standing normally on a flat floor.


You could, but you would be disabled

[wilhitern1]

You could, but you would be disabled

There is something like a 10 sec to right. If you could swing the bumpers into correct allignment in that time, I suppose it might be allowed. Godd question for Q&A?

Neal

[Brandon_L]

There is something like a 10 sec to right. If you could swing the bumpers into correct allignment in that time, I suppose it might be allowed. Godd question for Q&A?

Neal

I'm too lazy to quote the rule, but you can't articulate bumpers. Its a rule every year.

EDIT:
BUMPERS may not be articulated (specifically, R23 is assessed relative to the FRAME PERIMETER).

[EricH]

There is something like a 10 sec to right. If you could swing the bumpers into correct allignment in that time, I suppose it might be allowed. Godd question for Q&A?

Neal

Uhhh... No. There isn't. No grace period to get bumpers in compliance. You gotta start with everything inside the Frame Perimeter, too--which is exactly where the bumpers are attached, and no you can't articulate those.

You're thinking of the case where a robot has gone over, where they have 10 seconds where opponents can't touch them. (G30)

[wilhitern1]

Uhhh... No. There isn't. No grace period to get bumpers in compliance. You gotta start with everything inside the Frame Perimeter, too--which is exactly where the bumpers are attached, and no you can't articulate those.

You're thinking of the case where a robot has gone over, where they have 10 seconds where opponents can't touch them. (G30)

3.2.6.4 G30
Fallen (i.e. tipped over) ROBOTS attempting to right themselves (either by themselves or with assistance from an
ALLIANCE partner) have one (1) ten (10)-second grace period per fallen ROBOT in which the fallen ROBOT may not
be contacted by an opposing ROBOT.
This protection lasts for either ten (10) seconds or until the protected ROBOT has completed the righting operation,
whichever comes first.


So logically if I could swing my frame (including my bumpers) into the right position relative to the rest of the robot, then in theory, I have violated the rules unless there is a rule against intentionally tipping over.

Neal

[Whippet]

So logically if I could swing my frame (including my bumpers) into the right position relative to the rest of the robot, then in theory, I have violated the rules unless there is a rule against intentionally tipping over.

Neal

ROBOTS may not intentionally fall down or tip over to block the FIELD.
Violation: TECHNICAL FOUL
So it really depends on if you are deemed to be blocking the field or not.

[EricH]

3.2.6.4 G30
Fallen (i.e. tipped over) ROBOTS attempting to right themselves (either by themselves or with assistance from an
ALLIANCE partner) have one (1) ten (10)-second grace period per fallen ROBOT in which the fallen ROBOT may not
be contacted by an opposing ROBOT.
This protection lasts for either ten (10) seconds or until the protected ROBOT has completed the righting operation,
whichever comes first.


So logically if I could swing my frame (including my bumpers) into the right position relative to the rest of the robot, then in theory, I have violated the rules unless there is a rule against intentionally tipping over.

Neal

So it really depends on if you are deemed to be blocking the field or not.

Both incorrect. We'll skip blocking the field for now, and focus in on the "flopbot"--also note that blocking the field shouldn't be an issue unless that 6" goal blocker is out to full extent. Noting first that there's a perfectly legal alternative--namely, dropping extensions and not pulling them back up--the crux of what makes the strategy illegal has to do with the bumpers and the Frame Perimeter. And, in fact, the SECOND rule in the Robot section immediately makes the proposed bumper frame idea illegal.

4.1.2 R2
The ROBOT must have a FRAME PERIMETER, contained within the BUMPER ZONE, that is comprised of fixed, non-articulated structural elements of the ROBOT. Minor protrusions no greater than ¼ in. such as bolt heads, fastener ends, and rivets are not considered part of the FRAME PERIMETER.
As we all know, the Bumpers must be within the Bumper Zone at all times. I'll hold off there for a moment while I go through the rules a bit further.

Next up, the Frame Perimeter, which is determined in the Bumper Zone.4.1.4 R4
In the STARTING CONFIGURATION, the ROBOT must constrain itself such that no part of the ROBOT extends outside the vertical projection of the FRAME PERIMETER, with the exception of minor protrusions such as bolt heads, fastener ends, rivets, etc.
If a ROBOT is designed as intended and pushed up against a vertical wall (in STARTING CONFIGURATION and with BUMPERS removed), only the FRAME PERIMETER (or minor protrusions) will be in contact with the wall. In other words, the Frame Perimeter, as determined by the normal configuration of the robot, must be able to be against a wall, or close enough to it.

Per R22, BUMPERS must be located entirely within the BUMPER ZONE, which is between two (2) and ten (10) in. from the floor, in reference to the ROBOT standing normally on a flat floor.
There is no explicit requirement that BUMPERS be perfectly parallel to the floor, however the requirement that BUMPERS be constructed per Figure 4-8, the vertical cross-section, does implicitly mean that a BUMPER should not overtly deviate from this orientation.

So far, the bumpers must remain in the bumper zone, which is parallel to the floor, and they must be mounted on fixed, non-articulated structural elements of the robot--and, to start out, the robot needs to have nothing outside the frame perimeter. I'd add in R23, but that one specifically calls out that it's with reference to the Frame Perimeter--which I've already established as having to be non-articulated.

I think that's enough to show that flopping down to start the match is impossible to do legally. 16 was able to do it in 2008 because of somewhat relaxed (and still in flux, to some extent) bumper rules--but unless those relax, 16 is the very last team to compete with a flopbot.

About that blocking the field--I'd consider that to be the least of my concerns, unless I actually had a goalie pole that was out when I flopped over. 50 points can be overcome, if assessed--but not with a disabled robot (G20, for violation of bumper rules) or down a robot (T6 and T7 require you to not show up if you haven't passed inspection, under pain of alliance red card and you not being allowed to compete until you've passed).

[Meredith Novak]

16 was able to do it in 2008 because of somewhat relaxed (and still in flux, to some extent) bumper rules--but unless those relax, 16 is the very last team to compete with a flopbot.

...and some pretty animated discussions with robot inspectors. (We love you, Al.) Having the last flopbot is a sad distinction.

[dodar]

...and some pretty animated discussions with robot inspectors. (We love you, Al.) Having the last flopbot is a sad distinction.

Atleast the rule isnt called Rule 16 in the rulebook. lol

[Canon reeves]

Sorry for being in the dark here, but what is the advantage of a flip bot? I tried looking for some matches on the blue alliance with team 16 and I saw the Curie finals and saw them against the wall then come down but I don't understand why this helps except for not being outside the bumper limit? Now I understand, is it so that you can extend out and since you are in the goalie zone it can be as far out as you want?

[Meredith Novak]

Sorry for being in the dark here, but what is the advantage of a flip bot? I tried looking for some matches on the blue alliance with team 16 and I saw the Curie finals and saw them against the wall then come down but I don't understand why this helps except for not being outside the bumper limit? Now I understand, is it so that you can extend out and since you are in the goalie zone it can be as far out as you want?

The 2008 balls were about 40" in diameter - much larger than this year's. We wanted a robot with a footprint that was larger than the starting size allowed in order to carry the ball. With the rules that year (sort of) we were able to stay in the correct size box in our "starting configuration" and flop to our desired size for game play.

[Canon reeves]

Ahhh ok, I understand now, can't say I'm to surprised Your team came up with this, can't wait to see what yall do this year at AR regional!

[Meredith Novak]

Atleast the rule isnt called Rule 16 in the rulebook. lol

I think we generated several rules that year...sigh.

[dodar]

Ahhh ok, I understand now, can't say I'm to surprised Your team came up with this, can't wait to see what yall do this year at AR regional!

16 wasnt the first to build a "flip bot."

[cbale2000]

EDIT: Never mind, one should remember to refresh when posting responses to questions in case they've already been answered... >_>

[AndreaV]

The bumper rules killed all the 'fall over to become bigger' robots, limiting all robots to the max config of 38x28 up til 2013

The perimeter rule made robots even smaller still, but allowed for some more creativity. If you scale the the old max config into the the current perimeter, it ends up being something like 26x30"

Last year we needed some extra space to fit all the 'stuff'. Like this year, we needed a wide pickup, it was out thinking that if we could pick up 2 frisbees wide auto would be a piece of cake.

By chamfering the corners by 3.5"x4" we were able to save 8.75" of perimeter, directly translating into an extra 4" of length making our robot 32"x28". 3 of those inches made it possible for our pickup to deliver disks from our pickup to our hopper.

Only downside was bumpers were a pain to make, but isn't that always the case? ;)

[gpetilli]

Instead of articulating, you could have two sets of hard mounted bumpers, one for each orientation. The ones for not in the starting configuration would "not be bumpers" and would count in your weight allowance. Thats my interpretation of the rules, but i would certainly post an official Q&A before adopting that strategy.

[Nemo]

Instead of articulating, you could have two sets of hard mounted bumpers, one for each orientation. The ones for not in the starting configuration would "not be bumpers" and would count in your weight allowance. Thats my interpretation of the rules, but i would certainly post an official Q&A before adopting that strategy.

Your bumpers wouldn't be in the bumper zone while you're in the act of falling.