Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

They don't contradict each other... you simply have to follow the more restrictive one.

Unless, of course, a team update changes things.

Which I hope it will... pivoting a 60" tall robot about it's tallest point would be illegal under this set of rules and I really want to see some pivoting robots!


Jason

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

But they do. If you are using a fully extended robot(83" tall and is perfectly legal) to climb the pyramid and you tilt over, you violate the 54" cylinder rule; but the 84" tall rule still says that you are legal because it is robot-centric.

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

84 inches is your vertical height limit, the 54 inches is your horizontal width limit. They do not contradict eachother. You can be 85 inches tall and still be in the 54 inch cylinder. However you can't be 84 inches tall, rotate your robot, and stay in the 54 in cylinder.

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

This situation is REALLY going to limit the ascending climb from level 0 to 3 if there are no exceptions while climbing.:eek:

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

You must conform to both at all times. It simply means you cannot tip your robot if you are 84" tall, or you will be in violation of one of the two constraints. Nothing in the rules says you MUST be 84" tall, so you can still legally conform to both parts at all times.

What IS strange is that because one rule is robot-relative and the other rule is field-relative, you can tip your robot while climbing the tower so that your bumpers are in a vertical plane, and now there is no restriction in that direction. I could extend something out of my robot parallel to the BUMPER ZONE planes, and because my robot is tilted 90 degrees, the 84" rule no longer applies to that appendage since it is extending "horizontal" to my robot, but vertical relative to the field. Nothing limits it's height.

This of course, assumes that when they say the 84" height is relative to the robot, they are indeed considering "height" to be the distance measurement normal to the BUMPER ZONE planes. An alternative interpretation is that the "height" measurement is always measured normal to the floor, but that it's always measured from the lowest point on the robot. It's still "robot-relative" in that sense, but not how we're used to defining it. This would, in effect, limit your robot to an 84" tall x 54" diameter right cylinder normal to the floor, but who is always measured from the lowest point on the robot.

They can't say the 84" is always measured from the floor, since that would prevent anyone from being able to grip the 90" tall 3rd rung bar, but they can still make the measurement be taking in the direction normal to the floor, but be relative to the lowest point of the robot...

Experience/history would suggest that "robot-relative" means in relation to a robot resting on a flat floor, hopefully this is the case.

Gosh this is confusing. It would be a lot easier if it was all robot-relative (for inspectors and refs too I would imagine).

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

Exactly.

Re: Smaller Robot Perimeter
 

Exactly.

I remember at least one robot in the pre-bumper days that deliberately fell over and then drove around that way.

Both rules have to be satisfied at all times. I just hope teams get penalties for violating these rules as is appropriate, else a lot of other teams will have done a lot of hard design work for nothing! ;)