38" as the front of the robot? [Archive]

View Full Version : 38" as the front of the robot?

Tomasz Bania

09-01-2008, 16:15

I will post this for our team soon on Q and A, but it seems like there are a few bugs right now (all questions posted were erased).

Are we allowed to have the 38" demension of our robot be the "Front" and have the 28" demension be our "side". This would really help in our design this year.

Thanks in Advance!
Tomasz Bania

EricH

09-01-2008, 16:16

JackN

09-01-2008, 16:32

Many teams have had success with this kind of design, teams like 1 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/23364)1 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/17273)1 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/12297), 71 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/23650) and 461 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/23817).

Tomasz Bania

09-01-2008, 16:34

Thank You for your help! I knew there were wide robots in previous years we just wanted a confirmation on that.

Tomasz Bania

Jon Stratis

09-01-2008, 16:40

The only rule that would concern you at all is:
<G15> ROBOT Starting Positions – Prior to the MATCH, the three alliance ROBOTS must be
placed entirely inside their HOME STRETCH, touching their Alliance Station Wall or the
angled fence in front of their local ROBOCOACH STATION, and not contacting any other
ROBOTS.

So having a wide robot isn't a problem, you just have to ensure that your robots aren't touching (the starting area is 13.5' wide, but some of that is at 45 degrees, and 3 wide robots would be 9.5' wide, so you should be fine)

dlavery

09-01-2008, 17:09

Thank You for your help! I knew there were wide robots in previous years we just wanted a confirmation on that.

Tomasz Bania

Just to be clear, NOTHING anyone says here is a confirmation. The only source for official answers to questions like this is the FIRST Q&A system. Any answers provided here (or anywhere else), no matter how well intentioned or how well meaning the providers may be, are unofficial at best - and flat out wrong at worst. Please do not make any critical design or strategic decisions based on unofficial information you may receive in these forums. If there is a problem when you get to the competitions, "because I heard it on Chief Delphi" will not be a valid justification for violating an important rule or design constraint.

-dave

ChuckDickerson

09-01-2008, 17:14

Just to be clear, NOTHING anyone says here is a confirmation. The only source for official answers to questions like this is the FIRST Q&A system. Any answers provided here (or anywhere else), no matter how well intentioned or how well meaning the providers may be, are unofficial at best - and flat out wrong at worst. Please do not make any critical design or strategic decisions based on unofficial information you may receive in these forums. If there is a problem when you get to the competitions, "because I heard it on Chief Delphi" will not be a valid justification for violating an important rule or design constraint.

-dave

Brandon, can this be put in big bold letters on the top of the main Chief Delphi page?

Tomasz Bania

09-01-2008, 23:30

Just to be clear, NOTHING anyone says here is a confirmation. The only source for official answers to questions like this is the FIRST Q&A system. Any answers provided here (or anywhere else), no matter how well intentioned or how well meaning the providers may be, are unofficial at best - and flat out wrong at worst. Please do not make any critical design or strategic decisions based on unofficial information you may receive in these forums. If there is a problem when you get to the competitions, "because I heard it on Chief Delphi" will not be a valid justification for violating an important rule or design constraint.

-dave

I have also now submitted it to the q&a and obviously be basing our decision off of the GDC ruling, sorry for the confusion made by my statement. I will post an edit to my previous post ASAP.

Thanks Again,
Tomasz Bania