Chief Delphi

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)
-   General Forum (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Team Update 2 (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=153578)

Bkeeneykid 13-01-2017 13:34

Team Update 2
 
Find the newest one here: https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.n...amUpdate02.pdf

bobbysq 13-01-2017 13:38

Re: Team Update 2
 
TL;DR Velcro isn't banned yet, but "superfusion" is, whatever that means.

(Q&A is also down, so no definitive answer :/)

engunneer 13-01-2017 13:40

Re: Team Update 2
 
key points
  • 40kPA = RP (not 41)
  • Rope length measured from DAVIT (DAVIT tails don't count)
  • No tape on end of rope
  • Rope rules diageam with dimensions

Bob Steele 13-01-2017 13:44

Re: Team Update 2
 
I would guess that superfusion might be something like melting the end of a nylon rope into a feature that is used in climbing. For instance... melting the end of the rope into a solid hook shape or something....

Just my guess...

nardavin 13-01-2017 13:46

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by bobbysq (Post 1630578)
TL;DR Velcro isn't banned yet, but "superfusion" is, whatever that means.

(Q&A is also down, so no definitive answer :/)

I read this as yes, velcro is banned. From the example box: "FIRST Robotics Community members are innovative and may discover a way to fuse the end of the ROPE in a way that can be leveraged for competitive advantage. This 'superfusion' extends the fusing’s purpose beyond only preventing fraying."

You could, in theory, still use a rope that acts like the loop-side of velcro that you could grip with hook-side on your robot.

PayneTrain 13-01-2017 13:47

Re: Team Update 2
 
Nothing stopping the velcro brigade from fashioning a rope that coincidentally manages to mesh with the hook side of hook-and-loop fastening...

(at least until someone does it and hurts the GDC's feelings because someone found a way that made their challenge easier than they wanted it to be)

Kevin Sevcik 13-01-2017 13:48

Re: Team Update 2
 
Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

Chris is me 13-01-2017 13:48

Re: Team Update 2
 
They are really going to need to address this Velcro thing one way or another at some point. I'm a bit worried that the Velcro questions in the Q&A are going to be dismissed as "can't rule on legality of specific designs" or something like that, and we'll carry this ambiguity past the first week of build season.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik (Post 1630592)
Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

This is what any smart team is doing, I think, but the second that Velcro is confirmed legal is the second we can redirect those efforts elsewhere.

GreyingJay 13-01-2017 13:49

Re: Team Update 2
 
Yeah, I read that as saying "you can't use a strip of Velcro and claim it is the mechanism by which you are preventing the end of your rope from fraying", as it then has more purpose than simply fusing the end of the rope.

engunneer 13-01-2017 13:50

Re: Team Update 2
 
I actually don't see any prevention of velcro in the current rules, Team updates, and Q&A AS LONG AS you pay attention to how the material is constructed, and how you attach it to your rope.

efoote868 13-01-2017 13:55

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik (Post 1630592)
Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

From the Q&A and this update, it looks like if you weave the loops portion into the rope it'll be legal. And if the loops portion of specifically Velcro is banned, it should not be very difficult to find another natural fiber with similar properties. I don't think the GDC will come out and say "Velcro as a rope is legal," because you'll have some team that tries to use the hooks portion only of Velcro with adhesives when that doesn't meet the definition of rope.

Kevin Sevcik 13-01-2017 13:56

Re: Team Update 2
 
Assuming the GDC wants to ban Velcro, their easiest option is to just ban the use of hook and loop fastener to attach to the field.

tig567899 13-01-2017 13:57

Re: Team Update 2
 
From what I interpret, you're still allowed to stitch non-tape velcro to the end of your rope, just not fuse your rope with velcro.

FrankJ 13-01-2017 13:59

Re: Team Update 2
 
If the Q&A is fixed long enough I think the Velcro question will be answered. But with I am thinking the way the update 2 is written, it will not be legal.

On the other hand you should be weave fibers in the rope to simulate the hoop part of the velcro. That would be enough to thread the rope on the lift drum. Think 'Superfrayed" the polar opposite of superfusion.

Kevin Sevcik 13-01-2017 14:01

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Logan Byers (Post 1630602)

This is highly relevant. I forgot the strand part of the definition. I don't think braiding strips of Velcro will work, since a strip of Velcro is hardly a strand. I think the Velcro brigade is down to hoping that a strip of Velcro counts as a rope.

Steven Smith 13-01-2017 14:07

Re: Team Update 2
 
I think if you read for intent and not just wording at this point.... the GDC could have very easily have just said the rope is a standard field element. They probably would have liked to, but know that many climbers are going to damage the rope over time, which will lead to a lot of backlash, so they put the onus on teams to bring their own rope.

If the wording is ambiguous, they will continue to qualify the wording to meet the intent, or teams will just run the risk of designing around something that gets banned post bag/tag.

Yes, there are ways to solve the problem via rope design, but the intent is to solve it via robot design (acquire/climb). I really don't see an about-face on this direction, and I think the very few updates we've gotten so far have been consistent with my reading of the original intent. If they are going to argue that the 4" whipped end cannot be modified to make acquisition easier, ONLY to prevent fraying, I cannot see why they would say the rest of the rope can be modified to make acquisition easier (short of the approved knotting).

engunneer 13-01-2017 14:10

Re: Team Update 2
 
it's important to remember that the 4" end that has fraying prevention applied and the point that the rope length is measures to don't have to be the same thing. the rope anatomy diagram shows this clearly.

you can keep the end of your rope from fraying (using legal methods), and then tie that end of the rope into a knot or a loop, and that is NOT superfusion.

lukekaiser 13-01-2017 14:13

Re: Team Update 2
 
My question is couldn't someone just braid, mesh or tie a rope of less than 1 inch out of yarn that would be strong enough to support a robot, and still use the "hook Portion" of the Velcro on the robots spooling mechanism? I feel like that would be really easy to create, and still have the "Velcro" properties that everyone is trying to achieve.

efoote868 13-01-2017 14:14

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

consist entirely of flexible, non-metallic fibers twisted, tied, woven, or braided together except for the last 4 in. (~10 cm) of any cut end (E) which may be whipped, (with material that is flexible and non-metallic) or fused only to prevent fraying.
So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

ASD20 13-01-2017 14:26

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1630623)
So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

See figure 9-1

FrankJ 13-01-2017 14:27

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1630623)
So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

The tow strap would have to be less than 1" wide with the metal hooks removed.

BrianAtlanta 13-01-2017 14:50

Re: Team Update 2
 
Here's my $.02.

I "think" they don't want Velcro used, but the clarification seems to only apply to the modification to the rope to prevent fraying.

Quote:

Community members are innovative and
may discover a way to fuse the end of the ROPE in a way that can be
leveraged for competitive advantage. This “superfusion” extends the
fusing’s purpose beyond only preventing fraying.
So as it stands currently, if you have a strap of Velcro that satisfied the definition for rope, I think that would still be legal since you didn't modify it. I just expect that they'll address that in the next update. So be careful about betting on Velcro as rope.

SenorZ 13-01-2017 15:15

Re: Team Update 2
 
Once robotics becomes an exercise in linguistics and semantics, we've lost our way.

Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

Teams are saying, "Hmmm, attaching to and climbing up Material X is easier than rope, and provides less of a challenge. Let's see if we can use Material X."

While there's nothing wrong with this, technically, it is not in the "spirit" of the challenge. As a teacher, I give game/challenge projects to my students. Every year I need to field a variety of "why can't I..." questions because they want to bend the challenge to meet their design preference. I know this is NOT the same thing as the "velcro controversy", but it has the same flavor.

Go to the rope section at Home Depot. If there is a spool of Velcro there, you have an argument.

efoote868 13-01-2017 15:21

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankJ (Post 1630637)
The tow strap would have to be less than 1" wide with the metal hooks removed.

Then my question becomes, why would tow strap material be legal and the hoops portion of velcro not? The velcro loop is made up of fibers that are flexible, non metallic, and woven, same as the tow strap. In my opinion, neither would be categorized as rope in English, but both meet FIRST's definition in the rulebook.

engunneer 13-01-2017 15:31

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by efoote868 (Post 1630674)
Then my question becomes, why would tow strap material be legal and the hoops portion of velcro not? The velcro loop is made up of fibers that are flexible, non metallic, and woven, same as the tow strap. In my opinion, neither would be categorized as rope in English, but both meet FIRST's definition in the rulebook.

you just described the pro-velcro argument. Find a piece of velcro that meets these specs (no adhesives, completely made of fibers, woven, braided or twisted, size, etc.) and you have a legal component for your rope.

there are MANY examples of velcro that are not legal, but not because they are velcro.

nuclearnerd 13-01-2017 15:33

Re: Team Update 2
 
I'm going to stake a claim that hoop-side velcro strips will remain legal when all is said and done. We can keep lawyering the rules until you have a very fuzzy rope, and it would still work. It's just a *very* good solution to the problem. (Although the Ri3D 1.0 version still requires the drum to move. Lets see if we can improve that).

And I don't buy that lawyering the rules is outside the spirit of the game. This is a design challenge, with a very specific spec. If the "client" wanted something different, they'd put it in the spec.

And along those lines, if they wanted us to solve a specific rope climbing problem, they would have made the ropes a standardized game pieces and made us all use the same thing.

(sorry, this should probably go in the velcro thread)

wesbass23 13-01-2017 15:38

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorZ (Post 1630670)
Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

Teams are saying, "Hmmm, attaching to and climbing up Material X is easier than rope, and provides less of a challenge. Let's see if we can use Material X."

Why work harder when you can work smarter, right?

Jon Stratis 13-01-2017 15:44

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorZ (Post 1630670)
Once robotics becomes an exercise in linguistics and semantics, we've lost our way.

Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

Teams are saying, "Hmmm, attaching to and climbing up Material X is easier than rope, and provides less of a challenge. Let's see if we can use Material X."

While there's nothing wrong with this, technically, it is not in the "spirit" of the challenge. As a teacher, I give game/challenge projects to my students. Every year I need to field a variety of "why can't I..." questions because they want to bend the challenge to meet their design preference. I know this is NOT the same thing as the "velcro controversy", but it has the same flavor.

Go to the rope section at Home Depot. If there is a spool of Velcro there, you have an argument.

I would go the other way with it. As a professional engineer, requirements are everything. You design to requirements... and sometimes the requirements are ambiguous, or your understanding of those requirements doesn't match the understanding of the product owner. I always look for the easiest way to implement a set of requirements - it'll be quicker and more reliable than a complex way. Heck, just today at work I was having a discussion with a product owner that disagreed with my design, because my design included text that wrapped from one line to the next. There was nothing in the requirements that prevented that, and in the design I felt it gave the best presentation. So, now we're looking at alternative solutions as we work together to modify the requirements.

GreyingJay 13-01-2017 15:46

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SenorZ (Post 1630670)
Once robotics becomes an exercise in linguistics and semantics, we've lost our way.

Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

While there's nothing wrong with this, technically, it is not in the "spirit" of the challenge.

While I would agree that there is a point of bending the rules too far, I think that encouraging students to think outside the box is very much in the spirit of an engineering challenge. A lot of good engineering comes from saying "but what if?" and challenging a conventional assumption.

I would never have thought of using Velcro if you had left me to my own devices.

KevinG 13-01-2017 16:09

Re: Team Update 2
 
Speaking only for myself, unless we get clarification I would rule as a RI that Velcro hook or loop tape meets the definition of a rope. I do not believe that my interpretation is the only one, and frankly that worries me.

falconmaster 13-01-2017 16:46

Re: Team Update 2
 
Ok , I guess I am missing something here. In the team update 2 why are there two knots in the Rope Anatomy diagram in Fig 9-2?

Also is the end with the loop, showing an option that you could use a loop or a straight piece with fraying prevention?

engunneer 13-01-2017 16:55

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by falconmaster (Post 1630744)
Ok , I guess I am missing something here. In the team update 2 why are there two knots in the Rope Anatomy diagram in Fig 9-2?

Also is the end with the loop, showing an option that you could use a loop or a straight piece with fraying prevention?

one knot is required (to hang from the DAVIT). the other knot is optional, and can be no closer than shown in the diagram to the davit knot. the number of optional knots is from 0 to N where N is unknown, but large.

the loop on the end is made using a segment of the rope, as a result, the end with fraying prevention is not part of the loop. since the loop is longer than the fray-prevented part, the loop constitutes the end of the rope for the purpose of length measurement.

jspatz1 13-01-2017 18:15

Re: Team Update 2
 
"...whipped or fused ONLY to prevent fraying." I interpret that to mean 'for no other purpose.' Q&A does not like to address specific design issues. They are trying to let us know Velcro will not be legal without saying it out loud.

Hobbes Novakoff 13-01-2017 19:15

Re: Team Update 2
 
From the blog it looks like they are allowing Velcro (or a velcro-like material) to be used.

Eric Scheuing 13-01-2017 19:41

Re: Team Update 2
 
Question on the whole velcro thing. It looked like the loop holding the rope up for most of the match was made of velcro. Should teams be concerned that their rope won't deploy properly and they won't be able to climb?

Cothron Theiss 13-01-2017 19:49

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Eric Scheuing (Post 1630840)
Question on the whole velcro thing. It looked like the loop holding the rope up for most of the match was made of velcro. Should teams be concerned that their rope won't deploy properly and they won't be able to climb?

That is an excellent point if that's the case. Thankfully, the rope is released by the human players, so the human player should be able to remove the retaining strap from the rope even if it does present issues.

Blizzard3197 14-01-2017 11:57

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by engunneer (Post 1630580)
key points
  • 40kPA = RP (not 41)
  • Rope length measured from DAVIT (DAVIT tails don't count)
  • No tape on end of rope
  • Rope rules diageam with dimensions

So you can't get more than 40kPA in points (so no possibility of 2 RP), or do you mean that you ONLY get the RP if you have EXACTLY 40kPA?

jtrv 14-01-2017 12:28

Re: Team Update 2
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blizzard3197 (Post 1631077)
So you can't get more than 40kPA in points (so no possibility of 2 RP), or do you mean that you ONLY get the RP if you have EXACTLY 40kPA?

Previously, the manual said if your kPa "exceeds 40kPa" then you get the RP. However, they changed it so if your kPa "meets or exceeds 40kPa" you get the RP.

By the first definition, it was interpreted as you need 40kPa + 1 fuel in goal minimum to get the RP. Now you only need at least the 40kPa.

Tuba4 14-01-2017 12:45

Re: Team Update 2
 
This should settle the question. From the blog:

Q6: Velcro usage on a rope. Can a team use Velcro on a rope that they bring to the field? Can they place Velcro above the 4 inches that secures the rope end? Can it be place on the 4 inches that secures the rope?

Answer: Please see Team Update 02. Non-adhesive-backed hook and loop fastener may be part of, or the entirety of, a legal ROPE, provided that the ROPE is entirely made of "flexible, non-metallic fibers twisted, tied, woven, or braided together" per I04 (e.g. something stuck to or wrapped around the outside of the ROPE does not satisfy this requirement unless it's whipping as permitted per I04 part D).

Tungrus 14-01-2017 13:33

Re: Team Update 2
 
Yes, Velcro on rope is allowed per Q&A. However Velcro (only, to climb) is not allowed as it does not meet rope definition.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:36.

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