Chief Delphi
Page 3 of 3 < 12 3
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro! (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=142356)

vigneshv 23-01-2016 01:26
Re: WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro!
 
How did you power the telescoping part of your arm (I wasn't sure from the CAD)?

Justin Montois 23-01-2016 01:59
Re: WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DesignComp (Post 1528790)
All this misinformation is actually making me post (well, my friend who runs this account is posting for me, but still) - climb is legal within 1/4". It's really pushing it, but it fits, so y'all should stop saying it doesn't. We suggest teams develop a better way to make it clearer that it's legal with their own methods.

-Andrew Lawrence
It's also worth mentioning that most of the "extending outside the 15" perimeter" Issues will be dealt with during inspection. The only time I've ever seen it called on the field in prior years is when a robot is "flailing" something obviously outside the frame. These +/- a few inches calls during scaling won't be made by the referee crew because it's not realistic for them to see when a robot is 16" outside of it's frame for a split second during a fast climb.

This is why I expected a change to G18 during scaling. Every one said it's supposed to be hard and things like that but for me it came down to can it be called easily be the referee and/or checked during inspection. The answer to both of these questions is no. And rules you cannot enforce should not be rules.

MrBasse 23-01-2016 10:08
Re: WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Montois (Post 1528791)
It's also worth mentioning that most of the "extending outside the 15" perimeter" Issues will be dealt with during inspection. The only time I've ever seen it called on the field in prior years is when a robot is "flailing" something obviously outside the frame. These +/- a few inches calls during scaling won't be made by the referee crew because it's not realistic for them to see when a robot is 16" outside of it's frame for a split second during a fast climb.

This is why I expected a change to G18 during scaling. Every one said it's supposed to be hard and things like that but for me it came down to can it be called easily be the referee and/or checked during inspection. The answer to both of these questions is no. And rules you cannot enforce should not be rules.
That doesn't mean you should knowingly break the rule and hide it in inspection. I've seen teams do this in the past and got a hint of that from your post. Teams should never look at this as a viable solution to play the game.

PayneTrain 23-01-2016 11:41
Re: WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrBasse (Post 1528827)
That doesn't mean you should knowingly break the rule and hide it in inspection. I've seen teams do this in the past and got a hint of that from your post. Teams should never look at this as a viable solution to play the game.
How do you get that? It should be on the team and the inspector to clearly cover the way robot mechanisms perform before it even gets to the field. Referees don't test for steroids in Major League Baseball.

Just feels needlessly accusatory.

MrBasse 23-01-2016 12:23
Re: WCP MCC Robot 2016 powered by VEXpro!
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PayneTrain (Post 1528865)
How do you get that? It should be on the team and the inspector to clearly cover the way robot mechanisms perform before it even gets to the field. Referees don't test for steroids in Major League Baseball.

Just feels needlessly accusatory.
Nothing accusatory, unless there are some concerns from the one doing the reading. I'm sure that you have seen others skirt the rules in the past, as Im sure Justin probably has. Whether it be here or in any other part of life, having something that follows the rules when inspected closely and then abandons them when there us no clear way to catch a violation is wrong. Volkswagen comes to mind, as does recent Mini Cooper crash testing issues.

When I said that I didn't mean to imply that he had cheated in the past or was saying it was okay to do so. But if rookie teams or veteran teams with a lot of fresh membership read something written as it was, they might assume that as long as you pass inspection you can do whatever you want since there is no way to enforce it. I have seen it in the past with rookies and even some well respected veteran teams.

I just want to be sure that everyone stays on the right side of the rules to keep things the way they should be.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:40.
Page 3 of 3 < 12 3
Show 100 post(s) from this thread on one page

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