My predictions:

1) The field will still be rectangular or at least use the same border structure that FIRST invested so much money in last year.

2) The robots will drive on carpet. There may be some other structure that require climbing other materials, but let's face it, other floor materials are either too expensive or too difficult for rookie teams to deal with.

3) They will limit what type of material can contact the carpet! No explanation needed - right?

4) The game scoring will not be too complex. They want an average spectator to easily be able to figure out who is winning.

5) If the game strategy requires complex actions to get a good score, it will also include a very simple task to at least get some score. FIRST does not want teams to feel worthless and let the alliance down if their robot is not working well. Just like last year, a simple task like just driving to your home zone (or just staying there) made a significant difference in the score for your team.

6) Scoring items will be a simple shape. Or, they will provide some form of "handle" if it is not a simple shape.

However, the soccer balls were being thrown by the human players, not the robots. If there are projectiles this year being thrown by the bots, they can be thrown much much faster and can become dangerous if launched into the crowd. If we get projectiles, I see us getting a BattleBots type closed in field.

It depends on the projectiles though. If its a foam ball then I'd doubt that anyone would get hurt by getting hit by one but if its a soccer ball then I'd be ducking. :(

Wrong. The soccer balls COULD be thrown by the robots. At the kickoff last year, they showed exactly that, a robot that would shoot the balls into the goals. I think they wanted more teams to do that, that's why they showed it at kickoff. I only saw one or two teams actually do it, but it was done.

And you assume the soccer balls didn't go out of the field last year. They did. So, I really so no problem with projectiles, because FIRST will of course put safety rules in. Just because a robot could throw a soccer ball 90 mph doesn't mean they will be allowed to (and it may not even be helpful to the game!).

But, again, this is all wild speculation ... I'll wait till kickoff (or at least the BOM) to worry about the game.

Stephen

Well they could be thrown, but as you said, they weren't really. And they probably weren't being thrown very quickly correct? I'm thinking projectiles like playing dodge-ball with the robots (that would be fun!) so that's where the closed field comes in in my thinking.

I doubt FIRST would have robots play dodge ball (but I could be eating those words in a few weeks!). If the projectile motion means throwing balls into goals, then there is absolutely no need to throw them in very quickly. In fact, that would be detrimental to scoring (just think ... do basketball players beam the ball into the hoop, or do they gently toss it in?). So, assuming some sort of goal that the balls must be thrown in, there is no need for a closed field.

Stephen

True true, I just tend to think of speeds that are very fast, cause it's fun that way :D

Much like some of the ball shooters last year.

33 Comes to mind, they could shoot the balls up to about 6 feet with a pretty decent arch to it or they could shoot it about 3 feet with a high arc. depending on their alignment to the goal.

I don't think I saw any team that would shoot the ball horizontally in effort to split the PVC, would be too inefficiant and impossible from a range over 6 feet or so.

Gerbils? Jello?
 

Aha! That means we're supposed to make herding robots which will herd a flock of gerbils into a pen containing a thousand pounds of Jello of which the shape is modeled by ax^2 + bx +c, and the first team to get their flock of gerbils to eat all the Jello wins!

I want to who was spreading the rumors????????

If anybody has anything to say about this years game they had better get their ideas posted... exactly 14 days left till kickoff

Dodgeball with robots would be fun :) But I don't see them doing that. I think they want to steer away from Battlebot-type competition. I think there will be bumping and competing with force, but I doubt there will be projectiles that the robots are supposed to throw at eachother, or an objective to make your opponents robot a heaping pile of srcap in the middle of the floor.

Also, the floor is probably carpet, but hopefully a carpet that won't snag as easily.

I think that Dodgeball style is out of the question. To hazordous. FIRST has never been about smashing something people have spent a lot of work on. On the hazordous part, the field would have to be made to have no holes the size of the ball so as to prevent injury from the balls. (There is currently not because any launching of balls has not been a fast, horizontal launch that could injure. The launcher that shot about 30 ft at Kickoff last year had a high arch thus being slower and more noticeable by the crowd.)

Last year's inspection I assume had checked for fast, powerful, horizontal launching mechanisms for safety reasons.

Besides that, if you got an intentionally busted peice of your machine, you'd be angry. Something that you worked your butt off on getting creamed because some driver is ticking sucks. (It happened to 247 last year)

- I know which team did it, but I won't say.. At Great Lakes Regional, they was attempting to push our telescoping tether out of scoring position, after they did they rammed full speed bending it to become unfixable material. Luckily, our engineers had made replacement pieces for it and brought it with them to the pits. About 5 or 6 of us had to disassemble and rebuild the arm before our next competition (which was in roughly an hour). We got it done and were exhausted because it was a 2 hour process crammed into about 45 minutes. For the rest of that competition, and later in the Canadian Regional we hated the team that did it to us, because it was an obviously malicious act.

-- back to subject --

If FIRST were to become a malicious-based competition I think a lot of kids would not get the benefits they do now. Sure, hands-on engineering skills, but not that good ol "Co-opertition" that hides it's real value.

You must not have been around for the competition in 1997 and prior years. Anyone else remember the famous "Rule T-5" which not only allowed, but encouraged, flipping over opposing robots during matches? For several years, tossing robots was an expected part of the game. Dean's and Woodie's speeches during the kick-off each year included the warning "build 'em robust, because there will be 'vigorous interactions' with other robots" (their polite way of saying "your robot may get thrown on it's head"). During a discussion with Dean, he said "if a robot gets damaged when it is turned over, then someone didn't do their homework and make a rugged enough machine."

Eventually, this rule was changed as the robots became larger and more energy was involved in throwing the machines around, and thus the risk of accidents became greater.

FIRST has evolved and changed a lot over the years. Folks should be careful when making absolute statements like "FIRST has always done..." or "they have never done..." About the only thing that has been constant is the amount of change from one year to the next, the unpredictability of the game and rules, and the deviousness of Dean's imagination when it is time to create the game!

-dave

-------------------------------

Y = AX^2 + BX + C

????
 

Has anybody suggested that maybe he was merely the ongoing work of a mechanical genius who said something allowede by accident, as he contemplated the world???:rolleyes:

Errr how can dodgeball be dangerous???? I mean we play it as humans and don't really get hurt. Unless I'm playing then I usually end up breaking my glasses. The only way the robots could break playing dodgeball is if we play with medicine balls.:D First can always use foam balls which someone also spread a rumor about being used next year(I can't keep track of all these rumor topics) which can't hurt anyone even if they are flying hard. I personally want to send those balls flying. I tried to get my team to try that last year but my idea was poorly designed. If I can build it correctly this year then we will have balls flying all over the place.

Yah, but what's a human's limit on throwing a dodgeball? 25-30mph (and that's probably being nice) We could easily build robots that can throw them in excess of 100mph

mmmmm speeed. im already thinkin up a killer pneumatic rail gun with dual stage pistons and bosch tracks. aaaauuaaguhauaguahag :drools upon self: 100 mph? set up your pneumatics right, these babys can go faster then bullets. (but will they be to spec? meh....)

I won't say it can't be done, because I know there's got to be someone else out there like me who'll do it just to prove it possible. . .

but, I'd be impressed. Very, very impressed. Scared, too.

Now - in the history of FIRST, has anyone successfully guessed what the game is?

I'd definately go with M. Krass on this one ... I can't see how we can easily build a robot that can throw a soccor ball in excess of 100mph!! Not with the kit of parts from FIRST anyway. Now, I won't say it can't be done either, but I sure don't see it being done easily.

But if (and I do doubt it) we play dodge ball, there will certainly be safety rules. For instance, if beaming a ball in excess of 100 mph will damage the playing field, or possibly cause an injury, it won't be allowed. Just because something could be done doesn't mean it will be, or that it will be allowed. Dodgeball doesn't have to be dangerous. I personally don't see a graciously-professional FIRST team building a robot that is a hazardous to others.

Stephen

Something to be worried about regarding fast moving soccer balls is their effect on computers and scorekeepers at the judges table. It was a problem this past year.

What would be fun however is a field with nerf ball cannons along the sides where randomly chosen observers from the crowd get to shoot nerf balls at the robots and either help or hinder them. It would certainly make the game more interesting for the viewers since they would be a part of it and never know if they were going to be picked until the last minute.

Then of course the math formula everyone is assuming is about projectile motion might be the formaula for the curvature of a field surface.....

might be the shape of half a football...

or a half pipe shaped field.....

or a pedestal with curved sides ......

or a conical pit or goal where the ball at the bottom gets the highest points....

Woodie said " 'y = ax(2) + bx + c,' he said solemnly, before adding with a chuckle, 'Just don't ask me about the rumors about the gerbils and the thousand pounds of Jello.' " My theory is this: we need to launch a gerbil, on a parabolic trajectory over a wall, into a tub of jello.

....with little or no splash, a-la olympic diving.

No, can't do that...dont wanna upset PETA :p

y = ax(2) + bx + c
 

If Woodie's comment (which I think everyone is obsessing about just a little too much) is sooo cryptic, then may he's referring to the Quad in Quadratic. Just imagine the insanity of a square field (mind you, a square is a rectangle, so this isn't going to happen according to some). It's split into 4 quads. How would the game be set up then? Would everyone have to stick to their own quad? Does everyone has a goal? Would there be alliances?

I'm ready to hear the real game. There are a lot of promises that it will be shockingly new. Can't wait!

could this formula be hinting toward more alliances or maybe even knowing who you will be teaming up with. Don't the revolving lights have a parabolic mirror inside. Maybe we are going to be teamed up ahead of time and each team build a robot to do half the challange.

Upsetting PETA would be more fun than launching the gerbils. :D

Last year, our robot picked up the soccer balls and shot them. It had a maximum range (with little accuracy) of about 30 feet. Our main limit is the height of the ceiling. Our limit on fire rate was the ball pick up speed.

The two safety issues on firing balls are: firing into the crowd and firing into a player station.

We considered firing into the opposing player station to disrupt them. We chose not to because of the safety issues and because of gracious professionalism.

We chose not to fire into the crowd because it would make no competitive sense. Further, by the time a ball might get to the crowd, it would have spent most of its energy and would be fairly easy to catch.

From a practical stand-point, as you increase range, you have to invest more resources in your shooter. Most designers are going to pick the maximum sensible range figure (probably 30-40 feet) and design around that. Any further range would be a waste of resources.

Given variability in ball characteristics (size, pressurization, surface texture), accuracy becomes extremely problematic beyond about 15 feet. Improving accuracy means investing more design resources.

In the past three years, there have been "shootable" balls available. However, very few teams have invested in developing a ball shooter. Most teams that handle balls have gone with the basket bot strategy.

I anticipate that there will be objects on the playing field that can be handled and delivered by robots. In part, this is because of the human player aspect. (Maybe that is one of the groans that Woodie was talking about...no more human player.) As long as there are small,movable playing field objects, then shooting/hurling them will be a viable option. Whether it is the best option will depend on the other game elements.

I, for one, hope that the playing field will be more interesting this year than last year. I also hope that soccer balls or basket balls make an appearance. I really hope that the game goes away from a tug of war game and towards a more skill game. It would also be nice if offense and defense were equally valuable in the qualifying rounds. Maybe this will be the second groan...no more 3x loser's score.

Andrew
Team 356

what about this
 

I can't remember who said it but i think that people need to look further then the parabola........think in real life what are parabola's used for, well light and sound for the common applications. What if the FIRST crew this year wanted things to be completely different? What if the robots had to go and manipulate sound or focus light beams using lenses. I think that that would be fun don't you??

Also I have an instinct to tell me that the football will be the ball of choice this year......don’t ask it just makes sense to me.

As far as the kit I have some ideas.....
1) The only guaranteed motor in it this year will be the seat motors
2) The kit may include a frame
3) Don’t expect the same limitations on parts (maybe just a cost limit)

Well we shall see soon.........

Has anyone other than myself noticed that the full size robot controller default program has still not been released yet. Perhaps this years game has some sort of new programming element to it.

just a thought

Well, you can bet that there will probably be lifting involved. Our team got an email with a hint saying that we should bring a large roller cart. Probably two crates full of stuff. But then again, we are rookies this year.