The Official Forums state:

The underlying purpose of the bar is clearly stated here. They are not intended to be used as braces. You are using a loophole. My original comments stand.

he also stated that the purpose of the arms were not to block robots. perhaps if the true purpose was explained, it would kill all these negative attitudes running around.

Re: Robots
 

Mark,

Let me see if I get it. A little guesswork combined with some visualization aided by a very tired mind yields the following explanation: the arms are not used for blocking robots at all - but they are used to block containers. The arms on the robot appear to be very cleverly designed to prevent any containers on one side of the field from moving to the opposite side of the field. Try to pass or throw one across the ramp, and the first stage can stop them. Try to pass or throw one over the side-field bars, and stage three is there to stop them (or at least slow them down a lot!).

Control the containers, and you control the game. At that point, there is no need to worry about where the robots are, and no need to impede their progress. In fact, given the formula for calculating QPs, it is to your advantage to let the opposing alliance robots go where ever they want (including on top of the ramp for the KOH points). So, not only does your robot not block the other robots, you probably actively move them out of the way to allow passage of their machines.

Thus, no conflict with the rules. No violation of M-7 or anything else.

Am I close? Actually, don't tell me. I want to wait and see this thing in action at one of the competitions! In the mean time, I am going to sit back and chill for a while. If you guys have done your jobs as efficiently and effectively as I suspect, then all this moaning and groaning about rules violations will be moot. If not, then we should all just let the folks at FIRST will do their jobs with regard to the rules determinations. All the kvetching on this forum (including all the predictions that FIRST will make the "wrong" call on the rules - whatever that means - before FIRST has even said one thing on this particular topic) will not, and SHOULD NOT, influence that process.

-dave

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

Y = AX^2 + B.... ehhh, whatever

Well.. if stage 3 is not intended to impede robots or aide in king of the hill, why have it go all the way to the ground? If it's objective is to just block bins, then having it end just above the midfield barrier would prevent bins from passing. Remember, bins can't fit under the bar, robots can.

Oh? but if you are so far out even a decent push on a bin could start to spin you.. hmm well put something in to prevent that. If something hits it, be against teh midfield barrier.


Sorry, this is a sarcastic response to the answers given. 3am and I'm tired. I've already said my piece that it is a great looking, well made bot. I just think some rules are either going to be bent or stage 3 will need removed

Well I like to see the robot in action. I think it is a well designed robot. Though, it looks to me like at least SOME thought was put into blocking robots under the bar. Why else do the posts come down where they do? If they left an area wide enough for a standard sized robot to go under, then it would be a different story.

Except for a few poorly chosen comments by some. I don't see why we can't discuss this here. Team 68 posted the pic looking for input. Something we say may help them in their match. There's nothing wrong with a civil discussion, even when there is a dissagreement.

Well when i saw what 68 does i was amazed. It's a well thought out bot that's more than a step ahead of everyone else in their planning, construction, and strategy. Personally i have no problem with going up against a robot as such. but i have a feeling that when a robot (130lbs) travelling at 9 - 15 fps makes a bump against this robot strategy goes out the window.

I'd be sure you guys have backup wings for this thing.

If you didn't see a robot like this coming then don't whine about how it throws off your strategy. For Innovation and Rec.....

Good job 68!

Thank You
 

this was our exact purpose. Thank you for keeping it at heart.

Hey, I just want to make sure everyone knows that the purpose of showing you our robot was not to make people mad at us for "weasling" through the rules. We only wanted to show you because we are very proud of our robot, as everyone else is proud of their own. As stated several times before, we as an entire team- both students and engineers- discussed the rules and our design to exhaustion, making sure it was legal. For clarification, because there are still many people who do not fully understand why it does not break any rules or use any loopholes:

1. It does not come into contact with the midfield bar UNLESS another robot pushes against us. We are planning on this happening, and will be prepared to fix any damage resulting from it.
2. It does not touch the plexiglass.
3. There is nylon on the bottom of all the legs, so no hard surfaces touch the carpet- we won't cause field damage and will not be DQ'd for it.
4. It is NOT DESIGNED TO STOP BOTS! It is designed to limit the flow of bins from one side to the other, yes, we will use it to slow traffic from one side to another of bots, but our arms work independently.
5. It is NOT DESIGNED to keep us from spinning on the HDPE.
6. It is beatable, and we will be prepared to fix all damage- we will have enough extra parts to get through each competition.

Once again, we thank everyone for their input- it does help us in checking our work. However, blatant stabs at our team's character and behavior- classifying us into "non-gracious professionals" as well as "weasels" is not appreciated and NOT in the spirit of FIRST. FIRST is about helping each other GRACIOUSLY, and competing GRACIOUSLY, not putting others down for a design you disagree with. So in the future, it would be appreciated if those who do not wish to help us with your comments specifically on the robot and only wish to insult would keep those comments to yourselves. Thanks again to all of you who have contributed thoughtful discussion of our design.

Alexis

I have nothing against your team--only your general strategy. A strategy I am sure multiple teams will have. My comments were directed at this strategy, not your team. I am still convinced you are using a loophole, but realize there is nothing you can do to change your robot. All I am saying is that for FIRST to achieve success, this strategy must be abandoned. Maybe next year....

When it comes to interpretation of rules, sometimes first does not make enough clarification on things, last year we felt the full brunt of " mis interpretation of the rules "

We had a solid aluminum tether ( or mini bot we called it ) that spanned 28 feet at any time someone could try to run over it for days and not get tangled in it.. and it was strong enough so when we ran over it with a pick up truck it didn't break, but something like that took up about 45 lbs on our bot in which we coulda used something better in a drivetrain , but some of these other teams use basically wires running with a motor and a wheel and ways like 4 lbs for the whole thing but could get entangled easily. We felt a general injustice about the whole ordeal because people started adding these little mouse bots and tape measures and getting same points for something really cheezy that we felt was against the rules.. but it comes to general mininterpretation of the rules, It even happens within the groups of judges and refs, some refs will enforce a rule more than another ( Ie damaging last years carpet ) it got trashed yet not many teams in my division ever got disqualified for it, just issued " warnings after the match "

Its almost like someone forget to send out the memo, clarification of rules has been a big problem in first for a little while now, Every team has the chance to be jipped because they designed for something exactly the way the rule is written and another team is gonna be better off because they bent the rules a little, its all up to refs interpretation

Now concerning team 68 , I don't feel that they violate any rules, also, if they get rammed and they touch the barrier, they will not get disqualified because they did not put themselves into that position the refs will realize that, neither will the refs disqualify the other bot for ramming them, because they said this will be a violent game prepare your robot for such, I think team 68 did an amazing job this year as always, and will be a tough competitor

I think they have a few weakeness that can be exploited by a few bots with certain types of arms and lifting devieces, what I havn't read yet is anybody mentioning holding their arm down, if you can't push their bot out of the way and get 25 points, why not hold the arm down to the floor and make it so they can't get it either just a thought, you have a great bot looks very powerful hopefully we'll see you at nationals

Stupid marketing
 

to team 68: another year, another great bot from Truck Town. This is a design that many teams would love to have as a partner for their robot.

As for blocking a robot from "limboing" with an arm or with a robot body, I don't see the difference. I don't see the illegality of this... but then again, it is not up to me or any of us... it will be up to the referees.

Now... on another note... some people are being prett silly and possibly stupid in this thread and in others. Many teams have posted pictures of their robots on-line, and there are a number of people who quickly criticize something about the robot... or they say "we can beat that design".

My bet is that these same people will be saying "why didn't we get picked?" after a regional or at the Championships. They will say "we dominated our matches, but none of the top seeds picked us... why?" These teams need to remember that other teams have many choices of partners, and if all esle is equal, a picking team would rather not choose a team who has been publicly critical of their design. This is pretty simple logic, people.

Keep in mind that words can be harsh and people do not forget what is said against them. Please, for your teammates sake, keep your egos in check and try to use some tact and consideration.

Now, most of the replies are very tactful when they are questioning a teams' design... but some are simply stupid. Keep your heads.

Andy B.

Re: Re: Robots
 

Dave I am not able to say this earlier before a competition. You may or may not be on the right track, but only time will tell. I want to point this out that this strategy was figured out only minutes after the broadcast. There are many ways to bet it... I wonder if that is why the arms were built to be taken off during some matches and use some other interesting device that was put in that shipping crate... just more food for thought!!

Re: Re: Re: Robots
 

now mark, don't be giving away all of our secrets now. :D

Re: Stupid marketing
 

Andy, I must ask if you were getting at the team members of team 68 in your lastest reply; I am sorry if our team has upset you or others that have read this forum regarding our attitudes. It was never the intened purpose of any of our team members. We would like to thank you for your words of kindness about our over all design. It looks like we won't be seeing each other on the field until the Midwest Regional, however no promises that scouts(including myself) won't see you before that. :D

Re: Re: Re: Re: Robots
 

Come on... you know they are going to like that other "attachment" :D

I talked to my brother last night and I have got to see how great it works!!! See you in T minus 6 days. And maybe I will even have some eggs :-)

Naaa..
 

Naaa... it wasn't you guys, Mark.

I see three types of criticism when a team posts pictures of their robot:

1. A post where someone gives constructive criticism, or something said that will actually help the team go through inspection or may help them clarify the legality of their design (for example, Paul's posts in this thread... he has his opinions, and he is sincerely trying to clarify the rules) These are good posts... and they should always be welcome (I'm reminded of the pneumatic cylinder discussion that happened 2 weeks ago... we were able to fix it before we shipped our 'bot)

2. A post where a person outright says that a deisgn or a method of play is not gracious... where they are passing judgement on another team just from a picture. This is pretty shallow and creates discord and strife between teams. This is not smart.

3. A post where someone simply says "we can beat that"... or "I definitely see problems with this design" and that's all that they say. This is simply stupid. Maybe their robot can beat the one which is pictured... they are really not gaining anything by posting these opinions... and if their robot is not as good, then they have egg on their face. I assume that the rest of their team regrets this person representing them on these forums.

I hope this clears up what I posted previously.

Andy B.

Re: Naaa..
 

Andy,
I've been feeling the same way you have, and trying to find the words to express it. Thank you.

I hope everyone takes a good look at what Andy posted, and remembers it the next time they decide to comment on someone else's robot.

I have read and re-read all the rules and the answers from the official forums. After careful consideration I come to the conclusion that it all comes down to one question: Was using the mid-field bar as a brace intentional? You say no. I have no way to verify this, but also have no way to disprove it--so I will trust you. Therefore, I congratulate you on a truly innovative robot, but recommend that next time you ask FIRST's permission before you step into a grey area.

Re: Stupid marketing
 

Thank you Andy I just hope that everyone reads that and takes it into consideration when they post their replies.

As I've said, it's a great looking bot. It's design is great and it's innovation is also. I would love to be paired with it, and hate to be against it.

I'm not doubting the skill or innovative capabilities of team 68. They've never, to my knowledge, tried to skirt the rules. They probably didn't try to here either. Problem is, they might have.

If the rule is interpretted to allow their bot to do this, so be it. They took a risk in making it because it's an interpretable rule. They may be asked to remove it.

I won't have hard feelings either way, it's out of everyone's hands and I think the 100+ posts on the subject, most saying the same thing, is pointless.

My fully personal feeling is the intent of the rule was to not have robots intentionally using the barrier for any purpose. Their's is that it is you may touch it but not break it.

Everyone is at a fork in the road. One path is legal, one is illegal, neither are labeled. They chose a path, we'll find out what one they took.

We'll see eventually, good luck 68.

Yup, I want to say Good luck to 68 too. Hopefully FIRST will give its answer before competition start, and I really want to see FIRST allowing this robot to compete in the game.

If you don't have the patience to read all the posts in this thread, just take a look at Paul and Andy's posts. I believe all of us agree that we should wait and see what happens, and this discussion end here for now.

Some one please record a short video footage of this robot at regionals, and post a link in here to show us what its like when they dominate the ramp! Don't make me fly out to their regional!

I apollogize for attacking your team. You guys have a very nice robot, and I am sure you have very good reasons for doing what you did.

You had a very, very good robot last year. I hope you do just as well this year.


Good luck! (Don't break down too much!)

arms
 

I may be wrong, but i think you're not allowed to have any metal contact with the carpet. You may want to put something on the end of the tubing that blocks the alleys cause that would be metal contact.

Re: arms
 

We already have plastic ends on the 3rd stage of the arm, thanks for your concern though.

I just gotta say...awsome bot;) I just wish we were gonna be at a regional with you guys so i could see it in action

Re: One more
 

Let me guess... Rory is the hand in this picture, Denny is the guy with his hands on his hips and Alex is the guy standing on the ramp? Man at first glance I missed Nick sitting on the side rail

O no!! who is driving that thing? O thats right the drivers aren't needed at all... :eek:

All I have to say is, this design must have Denny worried.

I've already posted this in this thread, but as your team doesn't want to stop (no offense, maybe you didn't read it the first time), read it again:

It's also been posted to "Let the Moderators, do the Moderating."

Nah
 

nah, i dont think denny is worried. this picture was taken while we were discussing strategy, and of course, he is always thinking.

That is a nice looking robot you have there. It should be fun to compete against you. It would also be very interesting. The question I have for you is, what is it made of? cause it looks like you'd have trouble making weight.

Awsome bot!! You guys worked really hard!!
I can't wait to face you guys in nationals, we have a little something that will keep the bar open for us. We just put this fork underneath your arms and lift, bam instant room.
Its a dual use device!

t6 aluminum tubing. and thats the funny part. we were way underweight this year, it didn't seem to make sense, a t3 bot, actually underweight??
lol

O_O!
 

What an outstanding Robot. I don't think I even need to wish you guys luck. But good luck anyway. *bows*

Great work... 'nuff said.

The part that I find funny is what do thoughs arms weigh? about 45 pounds for the set is all. Amazing what a little engineering can pull off. My only fear is that concept number 2 is also 45 pounds or less. Can't wait to see!!

I won't waste time bickering over rules, whatever happens with DQs and such happens. This robot is definately a thoughtful design, I give you credit. I just spent over an hour reading all of the posts here and in the picture gallery. The general concensus I have found is that other teams feel threatened by this robot's potential. People keep talking about how they hope they are not paired against it. As a member of a competitive team, I for one can't wait to be paired against Truck Town and see how The Bobcat 2003 (Team 177) matches up.
Good luck in your competitions.

PS- Check out The Bobcat in the picture gallery

I agree with what David said about the rules. If it happens, it happens. Then they learn to not do it the next time. It's a matter of trusting guts or thoughts.

Oh, my mouth is already watering with possible matches against them... I love strategy :D

Speaking of which, last year I had several strategies to beat 60 but I never got to use them because we always paired with them! Hehe, not that I regret it, I just love good competition :rolleyes:

See you in AZ Truck Town Terr.... errrr, Thunder! It is always fun with you guys ;)

hmmmm.... I see the beauty and style of this bot however- how could is the driver to position the robot correctly on the hill? What happens if a robot is powerful enough to ram you? then wouldnt your arms break?