Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   Robot Showcase (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=58)
-   -   179 Swamp Teasers (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=101676)

Andrew Lawrence 07-02-2012 08:56

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by c.shu (Post 1121581)
I dont see the pictures of this robot everyone is talking about?

It's on the first page.

mott 07-02-2012 09:15

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Not to sound too much like a "glass half empty" guy because I'm a huge fan of the basic concept of this machine but...in terms of it's other reported game-play capabilities, has the Swamp team been following this thread:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hreadid=100696

It's painful and long (unlike this thread which is upbeat and long) but there is meaningful discussion in there about GDC rulings that would seem to make the sprocket components on the underside of the 179 ramp illegal.

I know our team is anxiously awaiting the GDC's response to the open questions posted by 148 and 1619 so hopefully one/both of those replies put us all in the clear!

Great work though and good luck!

c.shu 07-02-2012 09:15

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256 (Post 1121585)
It's on the first page.

I have looked at every page including the first. I dont see any pictures anywhere. Is there a link?

Andrew Lawrence 07-02-2012 09:22

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by c.shu (Post 1121590)
I have looked at every page including the first. I dont see any pictures anywhere. Is there a link?

What browser are you using? They're in Swampdude's post, I think,

c.shu 07-02-2012 09:22

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256 (Post 1121593)
What browser are you using? They're in Swampdude's post, I think,

Internet explorer. I have never had trouble before with pictures.

Andrew Lawrence 07-02-2012 09:25

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by c.shu (Post 1121594)
Internet explorer. I have never had trouble before with pictures.

*Insert "Well there's your problem" reference*
Just kidding

It works fine for me on Safari, Firefox, and Google Chrome, however I haven't tried it on Internet Explorer (and don't plan on it), so I can't say whether or not that's the problem.

D.Allred 07-02-2012 11:12

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by c.shu (Post 1121594)
Internet explorer. I have never had trouble before with pictures.

It might be your network. I have IE8 on my laptop. I can see the pictures on my home network, but not from by business network. My company's firewall blocks several types of media sources like Picasa or Youtube.

EricLeifermann 07-02-2012 11:17

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mott (Post 1121589)
Not to sound too much like a "glass half empty" guy because I'm a huge fan of the basic concept of this machine but...in terms of it's other reported game-play capabilities, has the Swamp team been following this thread:

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...hreadid=100696

It's painful and long (unlike this thread which is upbeat and long) but there is meaningful discussion in there about GDC rulings that would seem to make the sprocket components on the underside of the 179 ramp illegal.

I know our team is anxiously awaiting the GDC's response to the open questions posted by 148 and 1619 so hopefully one/both of those replies put us all in the clear!

Great work though and good luck!

I don't see why the sprockets would be illegal. The 1st part of the ramp that is going to cross the frame perimeter is going to be the very top/part that actually touches the carpet. After that everything that comes after will be part of a "contiguous" appendage. Seems legit to me.

mott 07-02-2012 11:54

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Unfortunately, it's turned out not to be quite as simple as that...

If you review the entire thread and specifically look at post #78 by artdutra04, you'll probably see the concern. In 179's current design, there would appear to be a point in time during deployment where only an edge of the sprockets would be outside their frame perimeter (because the axle connecting it to the rest of the ramp assembly hasn't yet crossed the frame perimeter) making it discontiguous from the ramp.

Swampdude 07-02-2012 11:54

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
The pictures are links from our team Facebook page so your firewall is probably blocking them.

As far as the contiguous perimeter issue, we may need to add a contiguous feature until the ramp edge crosses the plane and becomes the leading edge(split second). It's silly stuff like this that give the poor inspectors an arduous task of pushing all these innocent designs back and hold up inspections endlessly. Wouldn't any time a bot tips a little violate that rule (unless it were completely flat on top)?

EricLeifermann 07-02-2012 12:02

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by mott (Post 1121662)
Unfortunately, it's turned out not to be quite as simple as that...

If you review the entire thread and specifically look at post #78 by artdutra04, you'll probably see the concern. In 179's current design, there would appear to be a point in time during deployment where only an edge of the sprockets would be outside their frame perimeter (because the axle connecting it to the rest of the ramp assembly hasn't yet crossed the frame perimeter) making it discontiguous from the ramp.

I personally think everyone is looking into this on a microscopic scale when it comes to what is contiguous. If you go to the hardest and strictest enforcement of a definition of a word you will get what everyone is talking about with things being contiguous. I see it as the sprocket is attached to the axle which is attached to the ramp as one assembly which has already crossed the frame perimeter. Yes the sprocket has its individual teeth that make the chain move but its part of 1 part. I get that those teeth will cross the perimeter at a different miniscule time. The GDC's response to the Q&A's seem straight forward to me, i don't get why people are so worried about it.

artdutra04 07-02-2012 12:25

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by EricLeifermann (Post 1121665)
I personally think everyone is looking into this on a microscopic scale when it comes to what is contiguous. If you go to the hardest and strictest enforcement of a definition of a word you will get what everyone is talking about with things being contiguous. I see it as the sprocket is attached to the axle which is attached to the ramp as one assembly which has already crossed the frame perimeter. Yes the sprocket has its individual teeth that make the chain move but its part of 1 part. I get that those teeth will cross the perimeter at a different miniscule time. The GDC's response to the Q&A's seem straight forward to me, i don't get why people are so worried about it.

Common sense and what the rules actually say/how the GDC interprets those things are two entirely different beasts.

Common sense says a wheel or sprocket rigidly attached to an appendage that crosses the frame perimeter is obviously contiguous. If you strictly and exactly follow what the GDC has ruled on G21 in the Q&A forum, these are illegal. Until now, the basic gist of all GDC rulings on G21 has been: "if it is outside the frame perimeter, it must be a single contiguous piece (with the test of contiguous-ness only being the on the parts outside the frame perimeter) at all times. If it is not contiguous, it's considered multiple appendages and illegal".

If this seems inane, it's because it is. You can't build robots based upon what your gut says is common sense or what seems to be the intent of the GDC. You have to build your robots based upon exactly what's written in the rules. You also can't decide to arbitrarily enforce GDC rulings on some things (like whips on an intake roller) and not on others (ordinary wheels on an appendage) even though they both violate the contiguous/one appendage/frame perimeter ruling in exactly the same manner.

I'm really hoping the GDC realizes the untenability of the "must be contiguous at all times outside the frame perimeter" position on G21 in today's team update and comes up with a better solution.

EricLeifermann 07-02-2012 12:47

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by artdutra04 (Post 1121675)
Common sense and what the rules actually say/how the GDC interprets those things are two entirely different beasts.

Common sense says a wheel or sprocket rigidly attached to an appendage that crosses the frame perimeter is obviously contiguous. If you strictly and exactly follow what the GDC has ruled on G21 in the Q&A forum, these are illegal. Until now, the basic gist of all GDC rulings on G21 has been: "if it is outside the frame perimeter, it must be a single contiguous piece (with the test of contiguous-ness only being the on the parts outside the frame perimeter) at all times. If it is not contiguous, it's considered multiple appendages and illegal".

If this seems inane, it's because it is. You can't build robots based upon what your gut says is common sense or what seems to be the intent of the GDC. You have to build your robots based upon exactly what's written in the rules. You also can't decide to arbitrarily enforce GDC rulings on some things (like whips on an intake roller) and not on others (ordinary wheels on an appendage) even though they both violate the contiguous/one appendage/frame perimeter ruling in exactly the same manner.

I'm really hoping the GDC realizes the untenability of the "must be contiguous at all times outside the frame perimeter" position on G21 in today's team update and comes up with a better solution.

I agree with what you are saying but the point i was trying to make in this thread was that they will have already broken the perimeter when the sprockets will cross the perimeter so I (yes im not on the GDC so it doesn't really matter or count) see their appendage as legal.

As for my comment on the microscopic scale people are looking at appendages, I feel that I understand the intent and "description" that the GDC has given of the rule, that I don't see what everyone is so worried about. I understand the logic of their arguments and worries but I don't understand why they have them.

TerryS 08-02-2012 13:27

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
I have to join the chorus that this is a very innovative and well executed design. What blows me away the most, if I'm reading the date stamp correctly, is that this thread started at the end of January...just over three weeks from kickoff! Your team must have some very talented CAD engineers, machinists and welders to put that together so quickly. Either that or you worked 24/7 till that point.

Bravo! Can't wait to see your shooter!

Robert Cawthon 08-02-2012 14:14

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by BrendanB (Post 1118136)
The biggest issue is not what the dictionary says, but what the GDC believes grasping/grappling/reacting is.

And the robot inspectors at the regionals.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:00.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi