179 Swamp Teasers
 

Bringing balance to the Universe one bot (or 3) at a time...
Yes it shoots balls but you can't see that yet, and it blocks the chute nicely :D

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Well done. I was hoping someone would make a good ramp bot but this just blows me away. Good luck

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Why do I have the feeling this is going to win einstein if it can effectively feed balls to the two strong scorers on its alliance? Probably because it will. :cool:

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

My mind...it has officially been blown...

*Goes on Travelocity to buy plane ticket to St. Louis*

Gotta see this thing in action!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Are you sure that this does not violate
I would be inclined to say that your robot does not violate the rule, because you aren't clamping something onto the bridge, but are instead cleverly utilizing friction and balancing.


Also, can the pivoting-platform part catapult balls?:D

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This seems kinda like a 111 from 2001 hybrid utilizing a clever passive gripper to hang. Mind=blown

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

It is fully supported by the top surface of the ramp and doesn't touch any other part

Also it doesn't catapult but it will defiantly be able to shoot balls

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

My only question is how many copycats will we see...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Came in here expecting "Teasers", Things went much better than expected!

That thing is just awesome. 3 more weeks of refining and you guys will be a force, can't wait to talk about it when it makes the FRC Top 25!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Does the bottom of the u-channel that fits over the bridge end touch any part of the bottom side while the bot is suspending or suspended? Or is this just an amazing example of a perfect balancing feat?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I'm curious as to what the 4 sprockets on the ramp do. Guess I'll have to wait a few more weeks.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Take another look. That appears to be the ball handling mechanism on the bottom of their ramp (look at the vertical channels and teh white gears). I'm guessing they are, essentially, a close in dumper. They plan on playing in the offensive zone. Since you're not likely to have 2 bots on defense, their ramp system only makes sense in the offensive zone.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I agree...I wish you wouldnt have shown this so early :(

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

That's not a teaser, thats a robot!

Out of curiosity what angle is your ramp at? I imagine that an angle steeper then the actual ramp (15-16 degrees) may present a problem for some teams trying to climb you.

It really does look awesome though. 40 points anyone?

Good Luck with your bold strategy this season.
Regards, Bryan

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Is this legal?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Good find! Do you think they'll be shooting any higher than the second basket, though?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Does it matter? 10 points in hybrid + 40 points for balancing all 100% by one team. Great job guys! I'm amazed.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Robots may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any Arena structure. Robots may not push or react against the top of the Fender. (Robots may push or react against any element of the Arena that is not protected by another rule.)
Violation: Foul

That's the only rule they might have a problem with.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Thanks for the compliments!
Good luck copying this, there are many, many particulars to make this system work properly. If they successfully do at this point in the season then hats off to them. This posting is meant to inspire creativity, so if that's what it does GREAT! There are a lot of features not shown here like the ball shooter/collector and nuances about the balancing gauge alert system as well :D

It lays flat on the ramp surface when balanced. However I understand a recent Q&A would allow it to touch underneath as long as it comes off easy.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

From the looks of it they aren't reacting off of any surface but the top of the bridge, hence no grabbing or attaching or grappling.

my hunch says legal, can't find anything against it

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

It looks like it would be legal if indeed at no point in time while engaged with the edge of the bridge the top and bottom plates of the channel touch top and bottom at the same instant (which would be considered a "grasp"). If enough weight is placed on the bot's elevated and forward cantilevered ramp it is conceivable that the bottom might not touch the underside of the bridge. Love to see it close up...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

That is a brilliant solution for how to get 3 robots on a bridge. I wouldn't be worried about copycats considering how many robot designs would have to be completely scrapped to attempt anything similar to this.

Good luck this season, this will be a fun robot to watch.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Per FIRST Q & A, Emphasis mine...

Q. Per this rule, would a device that utilizes a passive "appendage" deployed over the center line barrier (bump) to prevent your machine from being moved or twisted when hit (by applying forces to opposing sides of the barrier be considered a violation of this rule? Please elaborate on rule intent.

A. The intent of Rule [G10] is stated in its opening sentence, "Robots may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any Arena structure." While, we cannot comment on the legality of a specific design, holding on to a field element is considered grappling and a violation of Rule [G10].

Q. Is it permissable for a robot on the bridge to extend a device that can also react off the bottom surface of the bridge provided that device does not grasp the bridge firmly?

A. Rule [G10] does not put a qualifier on how a Robot may legally grasp the Bridge. It simply says it cannot do it.


I feel like they might be in trouble...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Dan looking good as usual ,very good execution of the idea, I almost expected to see a robot from you guys like that this year. Also, we will have no problem climbing up if needed hehe. Good job to the 179 crew as usual.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

IF it is illegal, maybe they'll let them compete because it's so awesome!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I don't see how this is illegal. The system does not grasp the bridge. It rests on top of it. The bulk of the robot just happens to be beneath the part doing the "resting."

Amazing job 179! I was hoping we'd see some creative ways to get the 40 point bonus.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Another potentially problematic rule:

It appears to me as if a metal contact on the bridge propels the robot upward? However, if this strategy is legal, then it is absolutely brilliant! Nice work!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Ut oh...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I initially missed the single contact, I assumed they were reacting on bottom as well.

Can't see any problems here; great design. Truly epic.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Could be covered in traction material or something... that's an easy rule to work with.

What concerns me is how do the bumpers work? Unless that ramp is 33 degrees there is no way to put a bumper under it when deployed. (Minimum height for top of bumper is 5")

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Fixable with a small piece of rubber/tread.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I'd like to say it's legal. Looks really cool, and if it is legal, opens the doors to many solutions for 3 robots on a ramp that many teams were too afraid to try.

But does a 'grappling hook' grapple?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

To me, the photo of their robot says a thousand words, and the third photo from the top shows me exactly why they are legal: the CG of their robot is entirely underneath the flat portion of their hanging mechanism. This means that when the robot is elevated off of the ground, 100% of their weight is supported on the flat portion on the top of the bridge (with no other horizontal or vertical forces exerted in a means that pinches the bridge). The rest of their robot is simply overhanging off the side of the bridge.

This condition is no different than if a traditional 6WD robot drive halfway off the bridge, with a sizable chuck of their robot hanging in free air. For the robot to not fall off, the CG must be over the portion supported by the bridge. And while there may be extra robot volume there hanging beyond (or below) the top plane of the bridge, the robot is still entirely supported only by reacting to the top surface of the bridge.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

how do bumpers fit onto this with the ramp down?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Legal or not, I'm worried about the angle of that ramp. I'm hoping teams will be able to climb it without getting stuck.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Looks absolutely awesome!

I can't wait to see this robot in a action and hopefully use the ramp :D

By the way, I was also wondering about the bumpers, how is that going to work?

As for the angle, my guess is that most (if not all) robots that can climb the bump can climb this ramp.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Have you experimented with other robots. Obviously that robot is amazingly light, but I wonder if that amount of weight is enough to unbalance the bridge, because it is all on one side.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

As I read the definition laid out by the FRC GDC, the Court is defined as an area of 27 feet by 54 feet bounded by the alliance walls and side guardrails, which is covered by carpet. Placed in the center of the Court are three Bridges, which are not defined as part of the court, but as objects placed on top of the Court. Thus I do not see [R06] being a problem with interaction between a robot and bridge, because it clearly states "... forces between the Robot and the Court".

YMMV.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This is amazing! Kudos!
Judging by the design of this, the rules have been read and pondered over many times. I think it will be fine, though it will cause refs to take a close look.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Thanks Dave, yah the bumpers fit in there. They're only on the ends 8" long on the rear, plus some other goodies in between. As I said, there are many unseen particulars. Like you said I figure if you can climb the bridge and the bump you should be able to get up this, it's 22 deg, but if one gets stuck we can give them a lift. This can be used after other bots are already balanced to come in as a 3rd bot or a 2nd on the coopertition bridge where they don't have to climb it.

As far as bridge weight distribution, there's a good indication system in the works as to where the weight is on the bridge everyone should be able to see.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Robots like this are a big part of the reason I still love FRC. When a team takes one of the concepts we threw out for not being realistic and not only successfully completes it but does so in a beautifully executed fashion. Excellent design work from 179.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Inspirational robot to get me motivated even more during the final three weeks of build season. I expect this robot will be able to come to championships in competition so I can be in awe of it in person.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I find it a little sad to see such an established team go for something like this. This is obviously a superiorly designed, engineered and machined robot, just look at that sheet metal on the ramp.

That said, I just can't comprehend why a team with this much potential chose to just do the bridge. Being able to gain only 10 points in qualification and no more just doesn't make sense to me, even with playing defense.

I did expect more than a few rookie teams to just concentrate on balancing. But a team of this caliber? I really feel like their engineering expertise would have been better put to use designing even a dumper. A good dumper could virtually guarantee getting 6-12 points per match, plus ten for balancing. That's not including autonomous.

With this design, it is true that 10 points per match can be expected, and that the robot would a boon in eliminations. But why would a robot that can't even play feeder be selected for elims?

179, awesome robot, but I just don't understand why you decided to give up on every aspect of the game but balancing.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

They didn't...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

They can score as well.

What about 111 in 2001 (I think that was the year)? Top caliber team was a bridge ramp robot, and oh yeah, they won championships!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Dont worry, when you see the completed robot you will not be disappointed. it can do way more than balance the bridge (not everything is in the pictures)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Wildstang was a championship finalist in 2001, they've won in 2003, 2009 and 2011. The 2001 champions were 71, 365, 294, 279 and 125

It's still one of my all-time favorite robots though

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

With 179 being Swamp Thing, I find this very fitting in response to DampRobot

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I think you may have skimmed the pictures and posted with out reading the thread.

Absolutely in love with the design.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

What happens when one partner crosses to the farthest endpoint of the bridge and your second partner is possibly just making contact with the bottom of your ramp? What is to keep the bridge from rotating such that the top and bottom of your channel are now in contact with top and bottom of the bridge (ie. grasping)?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

As unfounded as the post you're referring to is, I do feel like the story should be set straight here about 111. First off, Wildstang didn't win championship in 2001. They won in 2003, 2009, and 2011. The alliance of 71, 294, 125, 365, and 279 won in 2001.

But the 2001 game is entirely different from 2012. The game was played 4v0 with several very distinct "tasks" that took place in the game. That led to many teams "specializing" in one task or another (balancing the bridge, moving goals, capping goals, traversing under the bar, etc). Wildstang was a bridge specialist, but that game called for bridge specialists.

And for what it's worth, Wildstang could also cross the bridge quickly and efficiently and could "tip" the bridge back and forth from the ground without deploying their ramp. They were useful for more than just their ramp.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

148 did pretty well in 2008 building just a box on wheels (although a very very special box on wheels) and 469 did pretty well in 2010 with a strategy that wasn't good for seeding well.

Great job 179 for building a different robot and sharing it so early in the season. I just hope we don't see any copy cats.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

It looks like the top and bottom of the channel are sufficiently spaced such that there is no way the bridge can contact both simultaneously within the possible bridge rotation.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

To tag along on this, I believe this was the era before the rules stated that ALL attachments had to cumulatively be under the weight limit. The rules back then stated that any given starting configuration had to be under the weight limit, but the sum total of all the different attachments could be greater than the weight limit. Wildstang often removed their ramp ability to use an attachment which allowed them to control the mobile goals well. You can see them do this in the 710 point match at Midwest (video is on their website).

That being said, the Swampthing robot is also much more than just a ramp. they've cleverly designed a system that can balance on the bridge while taking up almost no space, and significantly reduces the time their partners need to balance. I think it will be a very impressive robot to see in action. Not to mention they can score balls, and will have VERY good drivers by the time competitions roll around. Kudos to you guys for taking the path less traveled, I will be following this robot very closely!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Sorry if I've offended anyone on 179. As I said, that robot is a really cool piece of engineering.

Looking at the pics, I see how a feeder could be integrated into the ramp, possibly using those sprockets in the bottom of the ramp. A feeder/balancer bot makes a lot more sense than a purely balancer. That is what could make this a great robot. Assuming 179 pulls this off (and I have no doubt they can, with this much time left in the season), they would be an extremely competitive robot. I bet many teams would pick them first, even over a great shooter.

Having a feeder and a ramp is what would make 179 truly competitive. I still believe that having just a ramp would not make a lot of sense.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

What they have is far more than a ramp. They have a guaranteed 20 points per match in qualifications, and a very likely 40 in eliminations. They probably won't seed first, but whichever team picks them will win the regional.

Only at the very high levels do you see robots that can guarantee 20 to 40 points per match. This robot is utterly fantastic, and the engineering and thought that went into it looks amazing. I wish I had thought of it, but hats off to 179!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

You'd be surprised, history has shown that the average team is pretty bad at scoring. 20 points may be a decent amount to swing many matches. For example, a hang (2 pts) in 2010 would swing 29% of matches. A suspension and a hang would have changed 72%. (source: http://ewcp.org/blog/2011/12/06/2010-scoring-analysis/)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

My point exactly:

Given the amount that 20 points is this year, I think these guys pretty much have a lock on the regional level, and can really only be competed with by the very high powerhouse level teams in scoring.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Nothing is guaranteed. The average regional match would probably feature teams that have trouble climbing the ramp.

Not to take anything away from 179, but everyone on Chief always freaks out and starts exclaiming "EINSTEIN!!!!" as soon as they see the first out of the box/good robot posted. It's never that simple.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Bunch of us here were impressed with what you guys are offering this year. However, I do agree with what Cory said about the "EINSTEIN" comments. Remember, 469 did have a great plan in 2010 with their ball redirector AS WELL AS a very functional kicker and roller. Right now, 179 is in the best place to be successful.

Congrats guys, we will definitely be seeing you at Champs.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

How does that ramp fit inside the 14" extension rule?



Of course they didn't overlook such an obvious rule.... but that means a very steep ramp, which some robots won't be able to climb (But most will, considering they will be designed for crossing the bump).

Very ingenious design. I bet others will be doing something similar :rolleyes:

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Will you be able to legally use the ramp to aid in the coopertition bonus?

[G27] Deliberate or damaging contact with an opponent Robot on or inside its Frame Perimeter is not allowed.

Even though the robot is designed to be climbed, I don't think there's a way around the "deliberate" wording there. Unless there's a rule change, it seems to me that you would only be able to ramp up allied robots.

Still very useful for your alliance bridge, but maybe not as helpful as I'd originally hoped for getting the coopertition bonus in qualifications.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

It's still really cool though.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This design shattered my brain not only because I didn't think of it, but because when I saw the idea for the first time I thought "naah, getting the bridge balanced with one robot hanging off the side would take such a massive effort..."

Congratulations on pulling that off.

That said - I feel compelled to be preachy (as I do with pretty much every post I make on Chief Delphi...) to those reading from a "low resource team". Do not feel like this is a design one should copy at week 4 of the build season, especially if your robot's "ultimate goal" is to win the World Championship. Among many other reasons, the point values of the ramp balance could be adjusted for the Championship.

As someone who's basically spent his time "mentoring" 2791 observing things and spitting out ideas - taking "continuous improvement" past its logical conclusion with regards to design of a robot is easy to do.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

If you're the robot presented with the opportunity to climb 179, and the choice is between winning with no bonus (2 QP for you/0 QP for opponent), and losing (because of the +9 penalty) with a bonus for two co-operatively balanced robots (2 QP for you/4 QP for opponent), shouldn't you still consider doing the latter, if it skews the rankings in your favour (e.g. by stacking the draft order such that certain alliances are broken up)? Isn't it only really a bad idea if your rank relative to your opponent is an issue, or you determine that you can't risk a card (now or the next time you try it)?

(I'm glossing over several other cases that might be worth considering.)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This hanging method is one of the concepts we seriously considered. In the end we decided not to do it because we didn't think we could make a robot light enough. We reasoned that if we had a 150 lb robot with a CG 1" or so from the edge of the bridge and our partner was 150 lb with a CG 12" from the edge we may not be able to balance. It would require a very light robot because the 2 on top don't have much room to move outward. I'm glad to see someone worked out all the details to make this work. Good job!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Just so we don't get more questions and comments about "this being a bridge balancing only robot" I think your team should just go ahead an reveal your entire robot....

Please? Pretty please?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I don't know if its just me, but the pictures aren't showing up any more.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Assuming those are 8" wheels, just taking some measurements off the pic seems to show >14" from the frame, especially when the ramp is in a horizontal position.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Those are this year's kit wheels which are 6".

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Ok, then the pic is too close to call, so I'll assume you are good to go.... Great job.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I wonder if the plastic piece under the bridge affects how the robot works? I don't recall seeing anything in the rules that "protects" it, so it shouldn't be a rule issue (yet)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Interesting, I had forgotten all about the potential change in bridge points for champs.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Great work 179, your team always finds a unique way to play the game every year. No matter what happens at the regional or championship level, your team should take pride in setting a very difficult goal, and achieving it with flying colors. This is engineering.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I sir and madams tip my hat to you if I had one on at the moment. Simple and elegant design. If it works as well in competition as it does there, then I look forward to seeing you guys go far.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

That's a very interesting design. How much do you expect the final product to weigh (including battery and bumpers)?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

We're working on a somewhat similar design, so I pinged the Q&A with a question about that. The answer was that G27 is in force no matter what, even if you want another robot on you for coopertition purposes.

Also, hats off to 179 for that impressively bold and integrated design. We're planning on a parking platform on our robot and using the bridge as a ramp onto our bot. Our main argument in favor of it was that it'd be valuable in the elims, and it only cost us weight for a parking surface and slightly beefier wedge. We weren't nearly confident enough in the value to build our entire bot around it.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This is totally a Swamp robot. It simply just fits you guys so well.

Kudos on a great design. I still wouldn't have posted it this early on...

-Brando

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Wow I wish I thought of that...

But I have to ask... Is the ramp on the robot in violation of the "no wedges rule"?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Please repost pictures! Sounds great, but would love to see what everybody is raving about.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

What do you mean by the "no wedges rule" ?

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Dan,

Hats off to you and the rest of 179. We have a plywood version of this robot (minus the clever CG management hangin trick) sitting in the closet that we abandoned due to ground clearence worries. I'm looking forward to seeing this compete. Robots like this make me miss the UCF regional.

To prototype the concept, did you just park the 2003 machine in front of the bridge and run robots into it? ;)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

This is the kind of innovation I have come to expect from our friends in West Palm Beach. Inspiring as usual Dan...kudos

Eric

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I love seeing cool out of the box ideas. I'm very interested to see what kind of effect you guys have in qualification matches and how much you jump on people's list because of the 3 robot balance for eliminations. Say you are a middle of the range scorer, how much higher do you go on someones list because of the 3 robot balance ability considering you haven't been able to demonstrate it in the qualification matches? Maybe you guys will try and demonstrate this ability during the practice matches?

I just have 2 concerns about the design that I'm sure you guys have considered but I do feel like I should bring up.
-Is the ramp 14 inches out when it sits on the ground or when it is at it's full extension? We have made a similar mistake in the past and it forced us to do a very big redesign.
-Is the part where your C shaped channel encounters the bridge the same on the practice bridge as on the bridge on the actual competition field? My worry is more about the bottom of the bridge than the top. A subtle difference could change everything.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Definitely. As pointed out, it doesn't apply to the parts touching the Bridge, but they will want to put a rubber coating (or something) on the parts that touch the carpet when the ramp is down. This is because the ramp, touching the carpet, will provide a repulsive force (friction) when robots attempt to climb the ramp.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I love the vice grips visible in the side view - will those make it to the final design? ;)

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

The problem I see as soon as a robot goes on the other side the 179 robot will go off balance and maybe tip.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Take a look-see:

The Bridges video of the FIRST Youtube channel

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

A very interesting design. I'm a little skeptical, but that's just because I can't see a method of ball manipulation (YET).

Now what happens if no one is on the other side of the bridge?

Otherwise, a very unique design that I don't expect to be replicated very much during the season. Though I do expect another innovative team to come up with this somewhere ;)

Also, when the ramp comes up during lifting, does it act as a wall your alliance partners can lean on to make sure they're well aligned? If not, AND I ASSUME IT IS NOT, you may want to make sure you clarify that, since it looks like if someone pushes on that too much, your robot will fall a bit and unbalance the bridge.

Kudos for the robot! Can't wait to see it in action!

-Leeland

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Well I believe he is referring to this:
But this is obviously not the case :rolleyes:





Oh, and this is wayyy of topic but did anyone else know that there was a dead horse emoticon on chief delphi? :deadhorse:

It is a bit graphic

How'd that get there :P

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

How does this react with the ball-stopper that is connected to the edges of the birdge? I believe there is a piece of lexan or polycarbonate beneath the bridge on both ends that connects back to the bottom of the bump. Yes, on the wooden practice bridge built to practice field specs only touches on top but if you p[ut that ball-stopper underneath it looks to be able to touch that piece and would therefore be "grasping" the bridge.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Dan,
this is yet again, another great example of a well-engineered robot at this point.
Despite the questions/concerns from everyone, it was smart of you to post it, to help shed light in other areas, concerning your robot, so that you folks can modify/revise as necessary.

-Glenn

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

That might be a huge issue! When the bridge is balanced, those lexan slants are designed to be at an angle so balls can roll out. It hard to tell based on these pictures but they may be touching those when they are balancing!

Great design, I hope it works out for you in the end!

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

I believe there was a Q&A on that - the lexan slants appear to be considered part of the bridge.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Exactly. Thats not the part in question. The question is if they will be touching that as well when they are touching the top of the bridge; and if they are, then they are no longer just "touching" the bridge, they are "grasping" it and therefore would be illegal.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Why cant you guys just put up the technique on the q&a regarding the legality?

I sorry, but Im confused.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Because Q&A cant answer questions about design....


Also If our robot were to drive on their ramp(opposing alliances), who gets the penalty? The rationale for us getting is would give them the penalty under the wedge rule...

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

The team climbing them would get the penalty. "The wedge rule", [G26] only penalizes strategies aimed at destruction and tipping other robots. The example giving is flipping another robot. It's hard to argue that 179's ramp is designed or being used strategically to intentionally flip another robot, when they're sitting stationary. The key here is the rule does not prohibit wedges, like has sometimes been the case in previous years. The rule only penalizes strategic decisions which result in the tipping of another robot. I feel that any reasonably astute observer would not identify 179 as attempting to tip another robot as their strategy. It's quite clearly the opposite.

[G27], as I mentioned earlier in the thread, assesses a penalty to any robot which deliberately contacts an opponent on or inside the frame perimeter. Since driving up and over 179 is clearly deliberate and definitely inside the frame perimeter, it seems that the penalty would be given to their opponent attempting to climb their ramp.

This is all of course my own opinion on how the rules should be interpreted in this scenario. Refs may call it differently.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Sorry, this is my rookie year. Thats interesting though, I guess you just have to chance it with the refs? To me, that just seems a little weird.

Re: 179 Swamp Teasers
 

Thats actually a fairly new problem this year that has a lot of people upset.