Chief Delphi - Team UPDATE

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=124428)

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Repeat in your best Boris and Natasha voice:

"Head referee strong like moose."

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

if the alliance's ball gets stuck on the truss, is there a penalty?:confused:

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Quote:

Originally Posted by AllenGregoryIV (Post 1325424)

I have learned not to count a lot of things out in FRC. I didn't think a sub 10 sec climb was possible last year but the Poofs proved that to be incorrect. I can conceive of a strong enough vacuum system that could do this.

This is a totally different scenario. Basic math could be done to show that a system using even just a few CIM motors would be able to lift quickly enough for a ten second climb. This is something you essentially can objectively prove *is* possible. The question mark was whether or not a team could tune a system to transition between layers smoothly and quickly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis (Post 1325458)

I saw a video the other day of a team holding a ball with a shop vac. It seemed pretty stable to me, and wouldn't violate the 6" diameter cylinder rule. Also, a 6" diameter cylinder isn't 36 square inches in cross section. That would be the area for a square cross section 6" per side, and as the diagonal of such a square would be longer than 6", it would be illegal per R3. The largest cross section available is about 28 inches, per the area formulae for a circle, pi*r^2.

Okay, so 27*pi square inches. I've seen vacuum setups work okay, but I haven't seen any using a 6" diameter circle that are strong enough to deflect a ball being shot into it. And honestly, if someone gets a ball up there onto their scoring mechanism *and* wastes the alliance's "dead ball" card on their blocker, I think they've earned the right to attempt to block a shot. I'd be more inclined to believe a 12" diameter suction cup with a well designed, high powered impeller could do it, but I don't see it here.

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Quote:

Originally Posted by MooreteP (Post 1325461)

I feel sorry for the refs.
This is a tough task and will require much interpretation.

Rather than shaking the truss, I'll bet that we see 12' PVC poles on each side of each field. They will become the nets of 2014.

It does shake off, the GDC tested it before making that the official way to remove a stuck ball.

Personally I was expecting them to send a piece of pipe to knock it off.

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Does anyone know if the GDC reads CD? (fun with acronyms)
I have an idea for signaling a dead ball, which is apparently still being discussed. Basically, the alliance currently possesing the ball can give the signal as soon as they believe it is dead. Alternatively, if the team is holding on to it strategically (to tank rankings), both alliance partners can give the signal and overrule the team holding the ball. Possibly something different for Elims, to give alliance captain more power. You would hope this would never be the case in Elims, but you never know.

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zaque (Post 1326236)

Does anyone know if the GDC reads CD? (fun with acronyms)

They read CD all right. They just don't necessarily say anything about it, and rarely if ever post anything here. (I'm not even sure they have logins, in most cases--though I'm pretty sure some of them have older ones if they really need to use them.)

Re: Team UPDATE - 2014-01-10

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB987 (Post 1325394)

So...sounds like we would all be better off designing our robots so they CAN'T catch. Too big a risk for infrequent 10 pt gain verses risk of 100 pt penalty or worse? I can just see big basket fold outs waiting innocently for their partner to lob their ball over the truss and their opponents misfire bounces right in. I think the penalty is too extreme for an incidental event like an unintentional catch of your opponents ball...it would seem more fair to allow a no harm clause if the catching robot immediately returns the ball to the opposing alliance.

By definition of a CATCH, I believe if you stop moving your robot (as in on the x/y plane that is the field, which is considered HOLDING) and quickly get it out of your robot (therefore not shielding it inside your machine, or TRAPPING it) and as long as they don't consider your attempt to get the ball out of your machine as LAUNCHING, it would be legal, right?

I perused the Q&A and didn't see a question about it. I might submit it myself tomorrow if no one does by then.