Re: G04
 

A belay system that involves a significant mechanical advantage (think pulleys) could be used without much training or other equipment - someone holding it in their hands can reasonably be expected to apply 25-50 lbs of force on the rope to stop a robot.

Re: G04
 

I do find it interesting and slightly disturbing that the rules/GDC is effectively being biased against teams that are vertically challenged, literally limiting their performance capabilities. By which, I mean a team with 1 or 2 tall individuals would have no such problem where a team that doesn't will.

My team is not personally effected by this (we've got tall, strong people), but it still seems unfair nonetheless to teams that don't.

Re: G04
 

I agree with this discussion. I think the G04 problem will be a significant issue for some teams.

I also wonder. By Who and When will the belay system be attached to the robot? If by the field personal then they must have a ladder to reach the attach points right? The rule does not state that the belay must be attached by someone from the ground?

Re: G04
 

Part A of the rule

"A. by the TEAM while standing on the floor without special equipment,"

seems very clear to me that the team members do everything from the ground only.

Re: G04
 

This is not unprecedented. 2009 featured a game that was biased against people that were colorblind.

Re: G04
 

Regardless of whether or not there is a precedent for discrimination, complaining here is not the best way to encourage change. Somehow, we need to express displeasure directly to FIRST if we truly want to be heard.

That being said, there is nothing in the rules that prohibits the use of robot parts to remove robots from the pyramid. Any tool that you might need to reach the release could be attached to a length of wire rope bolted to the frame and stowed on the bottom of the robot.

Similarly, fold-down, locking handles to allow shorter people to lift a robot that is otherwise above their reach could be bolted on and then only one person tall enough to release the handles is needed.

After the match the size constraints no longer apply, which gives more freedom in designing the retrieval assisting mechanisms. There is still a penalty in the form of weight and volume occupied by these elements, but any robot that can climb that high will already be devoting a lot of weight and volume to that mechanism. I hope this helps.

Re: G04
 

The robot could have a folding ladder! Rules against climbing the pyramid exist, but not against climbing the robot...

Re: G04
 

On a similar note, what if your drive team is able to form a human pyramid to allow the top member to release whatever needs to be done? Technically legal but I think would fall under the Head Ref's jurisdiction to penalize unsafe procedures.

Re: G04
 

Keep in mind that while the zone three horizontal bar is 90" off the ground, it is possible* for the robot to have made a valid 30-point climb and not violate any height/volume restrictions, and yet the bottom of the robot is still only 6" off the ground at retrieval time.

*I said "possible"... More likely, you can just barely leave the 60" bar and still be a 30-pointer. A robot 5' off the ground should be manageable by the vast majority of teams.

Re: G04
 

Why don't they just allow teams to have an extra two people just for robot removal. Some teams won't even need them and this way some teams could have smaller people on drive team. These specialists stay out of the way until match is over.

I agree that this wouldn't be a bad idea: allowing extras to remove the bot. I tower over all of my students

Re: G04
 

One team that has a mentor that can handle this is 2122...
See Mark... another reason for you to be around...
Mark is pretty tall....

Re: G04
 

Don't give then a reason to make one, please. :D

Re: G04
 

G04-A, standing on your human player is not the same as standing on the ground. A fold down handle that adds 4" of reach and a 6" pawl poker on 8-12" of wire rope are not outrageous. The fold down handle is just an evolution of the built in handles some teams already use. As long as one uses common sense, there should be nothing unsafe about them. (I do recommend a sturdy lock or latch on any handles so that they don't collapse)

Re: G04
 

How does one reach said handles to fold them down if the purpose of the handles are to allow you to reach the robot?

A proper solution to this mess would be a simple work access platform about 3'x6' and 3 feet tall with a railing around it which can rolled out throught the field access gates beside the pyramid, casters retracted and stood-upon by team members to reach and lower their robot. It would be a simple item to add to any field setup (have it double as a shipping container for field components). Similar platforms are used in industry for fall arrest mitigation all the time with minimal risk and an excellent safety record. They are far preferred to ladders for tasks such as trying to manipulate a 150lb machine at arm's reach above one's head.



The purpose of the pyramid challenge should be to design a robot for the purpose of climbing it, not designing a robot to be removed from the uppermost level without the use of tools/equipment. If the removal process was not intended to be part of the challenge than the pyramid should not have been made 90" tall in this case. It should have been limited to 60", and the robot's height and size restrictions adjusted accordingly to ensure a similar degree of difficulty for the challenge

The GDC has to get it together and think their games through before releasing them. Team Update 3 is a perfect example of this kind of "chasing the bus" situation. Be sure to let them know your opinions when you are emailed the FIRST survey at the end of the year. They do listen- I've been complaining about Motors the past two years and they've responded with a whole family of CIM-variant motors this year!