Team 68's REAL ROBOT!!!
 

here it is, the real thing. sorry, but i couldn't help posting the pictures of our mockup robot earlier this season. This is the truck town robot. enjoy.

image 2 0f 4
 

arms go up too, (DUH)

pic 3 0f 4
 

and arms go out

image/pic 4 of 4
 

and arms go over, you get the point.

...:ahh: ... Wow... Just wow

Oh my god!
 

I can't belive you actually did it! I could not think of how to get over the sides and block the bar too, but you did it. Wow. It looks almost unstoppable. I applaud you.

One more
 

better view of the second and third stage arms

Fantastic Robot, wonderful job on all of the welding

I have a feeling it is going to take a whippen though this year guarding all of the different access areas.

Truck Town does it again....

Guys, that is a fabulous looking machine...my hats' off to you.

See you at the GLR!

(PS: Hopefully that one won't tip over like the onle last year did...I remember that happening to you guys...)

Cleveland last year
 

This one shouldn't do anything like that. And if you remember correctly the problem of tipping was taken care of shortly after it was discovered to be a possible problem. The problem of tipping didn't take place again at Great Lakes, Western Michigan, or Nationals. Lets hope there isn't a call for reverse engineering this year.

Great job guys, you make myself as an alumnus very proud!!!

Hey Alex, how about some stats? Toss in some Mr. Smith calculations ;)

How do you make sure it is aligned properly before deploying the secondary arms?

The robot looks great! Very creative design. Except one thing that keep bugging me.

I believe the rules states that robots are not allow to interact with the barrier... Just like at 2001 when robots aren't supposed to use the limbo bar to climb over, or at 2000 when robots aren't suppose to touch the goals to score balls.

So, when an opponent robot push against your fork, and the ended up pushing against the barrier, wouldn't that be illegal when you are using the barrier to help block enemy robot?

I suppose a different angle to look at this is if a robot is in front of the barrier, and an opponent robot push against the first robot, and can't go under the bar because the first robot won't fit under... than that would be ok because the robot isn't intentionally using the barrier to block the opponent robot...

I don't mean to be disrespectful... I am just wondering if you thought about this when you design the robot?

yes, we have thought of this. the rule states (please correct me if i am wrong) that you can not interact with more than one "face" of the barrier. well, there is no way that (even if u pushed on both sides) those arms would pinch so that it touched on two sides. This form of agressive pushing is also considered "pinning"

GM31
Reacting is grabbing or using the top of the field borders, the top of the driver stations, the top of the pipes at midfield, and the top of the platform/ramp polycarbonate sides with the intent of supporting a robot or robot part. It is also unacceptable to grab onto or push hard enough against multiple surfaces simultaneously in order to wedge and make immovable a robot. Contact with all of the barriers is acceptable

at the end of the game, however, we have to lift our arms up, in order to get the extra 25 points

Does the bot lift up off the HDPE and put all of its weight on the carpet until the last second? Or is no weight tranfered to the carpet?

Very Cool. It looks neat and strong. However, it seems like it would be easy to eliminate the king of the hill points by pressing the forks against the midfield barrier.

no weight is transfered to the carpet.

after 10 seconds that becomes pinning. and, in the time it would take to back away, we can easily lift our arms up at the last second.

Whats the distance from the HDPE to the underside of your arms?

0 inches

our downrigging system comes out of the end of the first section of arms (not pictured in any of the previuous photos), locks into place, and weight is transferred to pads, adding more stability. however, if you are simply refering to height, its about 9 inches, but, unless you have a super skinny bot, your not going to make it past our downriggers

I was thinking more along the lines of "through" rather than under

I have to say it looks amazing. If you guys are the first ones to the HDPE I am not sure what teams will do to stop you.

One thing I would say, is I sure hope you have a couple extra sets of your outrigers, because I see you have to replace bent ones a lot.

That was my thought too...It looks amazing, and has the potential to truely dominate a match. But if those wings are made of aluminum-which it appears that they are- I hope that you have plenty of spare parts.

that is T6 aluminum tubing. Hard to bend, but yes, its going to happen. Weve got backups.

Thanks Everyone
 

Id just like to take this moment to thank everyone for their incisive input. We here at T3 will take what you all have said into serious consideration for problems. Keep up the good work!

May I ask...
 

Team 222 is attending AZ, I am wondering how your partner is going to score 25 points if you are blocking the whole ramp?

Can you bring back in the forks after you deployed them?

GOOD LUCK


www.tahsroboticsteam.org NEW 2003 pics are up

can you individually control the downriggers on the bar in order to temporarily allow your teammate to go under the bar and to the other side of the field?

Yes, we can independently raise and lower the section that goes over the bar on each side.

Awesome... You guys have obviously thought this through and through..



You must know that your robot will be pushed and plowed repeatedly by very strong teams.. what have you done to make sure your robot is the strongest? any special features?

Also, how fast are you to the top of the ramp? If you're not number one, those extending wings are useless..




still- kudos for that amazing bot..

Re: May I ask...
 

besides being able to lift our arms up to allow people to get next to us, we have staggered our arms, allowing people to sit nect to us, against our arms. And, as for being the first to the ramp, our robot is fast. But, suppose another teem gets there first, we simply lower our first section of arms, move bins around, and then finally, move the other bot out of our way. Not only are we a very fast bot, but a very strong one too.

How long does it take you to get to the HDPE in autonomous?

Speeds
 

Uhh, lol, that really depends on which material we have on our treads. But, A rough time of 10 seconds to be at the top of the ramp is fairly close.

well,its not exactly a great time, but i guess u guys are planning on moving around during the match, or are u gonna sit on the ramp?

Movin around
 

of course. we can either sit, or move around a lot. We dont plan on being a punching bag this year, were going to play each match as we get it. That's up to the strategy section of our team.:D

Thanks!!!
 

Thanks!!

I am sure Denny and I will be more than busy throughout the competitions as well as any down time. Wish Phil was around for this great season!!

All you have to do is just make sure that Big T3 truck is done!!! ;)

T3!!
 

Thanks to all of the teams who have been checking out our robot! We are very proud of our bot this year and hope that we can take it great places. It is comments like yours that help us determine our strategy. Hopefully everyone else this year is as proud of their robot as we are about our own. GOOD LUCK AND CYA SOON!



~Lauren~

Go out there and kick some robutt!

Nice looking robot; hope you have lots of spare arms because the judges won't really be strict against teams trying to push something that covers the field...

Oh yeah, read this too:

Your limbo bar setup is illegal.



By this rule, you are reacting with the barrier. Your limbo mechanism is purposely pushing off the barrier to gain advantage when a robot runs into it. Incidental contact is okay, but reacting on it as you are is illegal.

As posted earlier our robot's arms dont actually touch anypart of the side bars or the plexiglass. The rule states to touch with the intent of supporting your robot and we have all of our support on the HDPE. We have taken into consideration many different aspects of contact and have cleared all of them. It will be okay...

Thanks for your concern.



Lauren
:D

OK not breaking any rules there....
 

For the first one: the contact with the bar will be incidental on the part of our robot. If another team pushes us into it, there is a major difference. We are not intentionally doing anything it will be other teams on the field that make us touch it.

For the second one: we are not wrapping around, the maximum that our robot will ever touch is on one side and that is the result of another team pushing into it.

Hard words coming out.....

Read the bold text.

When a robot hits your "mechanism", it will hit the midfield barrier, thereby reacting against it purposely. It's pretty obvious this mechanism is intentionally designed to react off the barrier to gain advantage.



The question you have to ask yourself is this: If the midfield barrier weren't there, would a team still be able to get by? If the answer to this is yes, then you are relying on the barrier, thereby purposely reacting on it.

I doubt you can answer no to that question because those arms are a very, very long lever. There's virtually no drivetrain that can push against that 12'+ lever.



There's no difference between this, and grabbing a goal in last years game, and having a mechanism that sticks between two field poles and saying, "Oh, we're not touching the field poles, but if someone pushes us, that's their fault."



In the end, it will come down to the referee ruling at the competition. We'll just have to wait and see.

IMHO, it's too cool of a design to be illegal :)

OK...
 

Still we can argue that a downward force is on each of those legs.

This is all I have to say: Toy story's spider has been reborn...

Perhap's the "Tether Rule" may be subjected here. Where as the illegal items become legal because there was a lot of engineering effort put in. Who knows, I agree that it will be a ref's decision.

I hope they stop this problem before it starts, otherwise teams will be adding mechanisms to take advantage of this loophole.


Kinda like filecards and tape measures last year. Everyone had them after they found out they were legal.

Then FIRST tried to crack down at Nationals but by then it was too late, everyone had them.

Wow. Beautiful machine. Consider me jealous.


Also, I have thought about it, and I have decided, that if some robots choose to go under that bar, back up, get some speed going, that arm isn't going to stop them very well.

We are hoping teams go this approuch. Not to damage the arms but to try and figure out the best approuch to get across or under. I believe that almost the entire team would agree that they hope to be damaged every match. The more damage the better. If a team wanted to break the entire arm off I don't believe you would hear objections because of the design of the robot and the way we plan to play ALMOST every match.

Honestly, I think that you have been far to optimistic in your design. I know that we will easily push ur arms into the field barriers and cause u penalties. I also could not imagine how ur arms will stand up to the rigors of a competition with 12ft/sec veteran robots. I just think you guys went to far.

Tethers yes
 

I know that as a team we are having a hard time understanding how someone is having such a problem with the rules after 6 weeks of knowing them... I will be up front with you on this, as one of people who thought this idea up, there are ways to beat this design and out score our team. Your challenge is now to discover how to. Its not all that hard to figure out how to.... and traction power is not needed... see you at competition.

yeah...
 

those bars have to be Al pipes by the look of them, otherwise my guess is they would be overweight. All and all it does look rather heavy...that weight had to come from someplace.

How good is your traction and how does your autonomous program run? Line tracking dead reckoning by voltage or what?

Re: yeah...
 

They are made from Aluminum. We actually had to add weight because we were about 30 pounds under weight.

Great traction!! The autonomous mode has a couple different selections, however the way the program runs... well I guess maybe we use about 5 different methods and then take an average. Sound about right Alex?

i hate to be the devil's advocate, but i will have to agree that your method of reacting with the alley barriers might cause you some penalties.

if it comes to where a robot pushing you begins to damage the field, they will more than likely disable you instead of the bot pushing. it's technically your robot causing the damage.

i don't disagree this is indeed a very amazing robot. i merely wanted to warn you of what i think could seriously hinder your progress in the competitions.

*jeremy

I will have to disagree with the fact that they will disable our robot because what is to gain by doing it... The field althought being damaged by our arm, it is the force exerted by the other robot that will continue to be doing the damage. However if they disable other team the damage will stop, becuse without outside intervention out robot does not damage the field in any way. Therefore I believe that it is the other robot that will be disabled.

A few questions
 

I have a few questions for you guys, but first off, you guys did a great job designing your robot. What you guys have is one heck of a brilliant design. You guys took the rule book and said:"We can't brace ourselves on the stupid plexiglass sides, eh? That's okay, we didn't need 'em in the first place!" Kudos to you guys. Now to my questions:
1. What is the clearence of your arms over the HDPE?
2. What is your guy's estimated top speed?
3. How long does it take to deploy your arms?

If one of T3 guys could answer these it'd be greatly appreciated.

It doesn't mean they have to disable your bot.


Last year much of the time they just waited until the end of a match to disqualify a team.

Pushing and lifting
 

Since the triangular arm that ur outriggers fold out from ("wing sheaths") are a few inches of the ramp (~12in i figure from picture) it would be very easy for bots to combine a push with a upward lifting force on these arms . In this situation very little force will actually opposes the bot pushing you (your wheel base is off ramp). The reactionary force supplied by ur outriggers reacting against the mid-barrier will become a torque (instead of opposing pushing) which will be added to the torque of the bot pushing and lifting ur bot. This could cause ur bot to tip over in an incredibly spectacular fall.

With the number of pushers with wedges and forklift stackers i expect to see in this competition, many bots should have the potential to do this. I wouldn't rely on the refs to DQ a bot for flipping u, since u are pretty much fair game on top of the ramp and ur outriggers technically flipped u as much the other bot. U might want to figure out a design mod (suction cups maybe) to combat this strategy.

As for the notion that another bot will be disabled for pushing against u and ur arms damaging the playing field, that probaly will not happen. If the refs are anything like last year, T3 bot will be DQed for any playing field damage. MOEhawk was DQed for bunching the carpet when other robots pushed on our well anchored bot. No damage would have occurred if the the other bot hadnt pushed on a system that takes over 500lbs of force to overcome static friction. They actually caused more damage to the carpet by spinning wheels while pushing. We had 4 or more DQs last year while our opponents had 0 DQs.

I will have to disagree with you and agree with my brother of course. It will depend on the defination of what caused the field to fail. Since the force came from the opponents robot, I would DQ that team, even though that force was acting through a portion of our teams robot that wasn't ever meant to touch the bar in that manner. Also what if we simple lefted the arms for the robots to go under? We don't intend to stop robots, that wasn't what the design called for. The game isn't to stop robots and this team's plan is to follow what the game was intended for, that is to play with the containers. Think about it.... there is no need to stop robots once you are on top of the ramp from going under the bar. So if we were to get DQ I would have to say the only way that would happen is if we attached ourself to the bar, which isn't what we are doing. If you push into our arms, you only have 10 seconds and then you have to back away or be DQ for pinning.

I doubt they'd DQ a team for shoving another bot, that would be like DQ 2 teams if the both rushed the ramp and crushed half the crates. I'd be more about bots bashing the arms into paperclips or not being perfectly aligned. The only rule violation I see is the wedge rule. The rule states you can't interact with more than 1 surface to form an impassible barrier so if both of your 3rd stages touch the bars then that may be breaking that rule. Other than that its looks very professional.

So, do you care if you score or not?
 

Very nice design. Just one thought...

Are you guarding the ramp the whole time? No prob. We will grab bins, run up the ramp, and fling them to our side, to make sure we have one point more. All graciously professional, of course.

Go Sparky! Team 384
Dave.

I don't know About all that
 

The robot is quite interesting in that it reveals a lot about the way you guys analyze a problem. It is a great plan, HOWEVER... The rule that says that you may not push off of a midfield barrier to gain an advantage definitely comes into play. When a bot tries to get over the ramp and hits you, you redirect the force to the midfield barrier, hence reacting on the barrier. It also means that you are pushing against a midfield barrier to gain an advantage.

Nice Work T3
 

Great robot.

I've been waiting to see what T3 would come up with for this year. I am impressed.

Seems to me that any pushing of the arms will not cause playing field damage, only arm damage by pinning/ramming them into the the midfield bar. And knowing T3, they carry more spares than any other team in FIRST.

It is an interesting interpretation of the rules. Any team that rams the arms WILL be pinning the T3 'bot to the midfield barrier. I'm certain there were many such discussions amongst the team about the legality issues and I KNOW that Mr. Evoy and others would not build a bot they thought to be illegal.

Pinning is, of course, LEGAL for a limited time period. You push a robot into a corner, and the robot is 'reacting' to the side of the playing field. That's simply physics. No robot operation or function is caused by the incidental contact.

I think it is an ultra clever way to stop robots from trying to pin the T3 machine.

It's not unbeatable or unfair, it IS a solid looking robot.

Frankly, because all we see is pictures, who know if they will ever touch the barrier. Outriggers plus solid traction and the limbo-blocking legs may not even come into play.

I can't wait to see it in action.

What blows my mind is that it was underweight. A Truck robot underweight? Never saw that coming.

Adam

Very cool
 

Hey, great design team 68, good luck in the upcoming season!!!!

Team 222

I see some problems, but otherwise good job.

I would challenge ANY team to attempt to revamp their design at a competition to do something like this.

You have an intimidating robot Magnasmific, but that doesn't give you permission to get cocky about it. Your robot isn't perfect, neither is ours, or any other bot out there. Your robot does a spectaular job handling one aspect of the game, but rest assured, there will be more than a few robots that will be able to show you up.

Team's would not be pinning T3 is they ram them on the limbo rails. Pinning is defined as blocking all movement of another bot. If a team pin's their legs to the pole it's not illegal because T3 can still drive their motors or retract the legs. I expect the legs to break at some point with field damage as a result.

I think 68 may have been a little hasty with their mechansim, they have very little clearence when both passing over and locking down their legs from their mechanism to the lexan.

When in semi-perfect position, those arms look like they are less than 4" from the sidewall's top. if they get too far to a side their legs will be useless.

I wasn't trying to be "cocky", and i apologise if it came across this way. I was simply stating that this was a very difficult thing to build, and that it would be hard to imitate during a competition (rebuilding a person's robot), it had nothing to do with showing off. I thank everyone once again for their input and we will defineatelly take everything into consideration

Great Robot
 

As always, team 68 has done an outstanding job! I come from a team where we take a very strict interpretation of the rules, so I have a few questions/comments:

1. Is there a non-metal/hard plastic material on the bottom of the outrigger legs? I am assuming those legs touch the carpet.

2. Are the outriggers inteded to push against the floor as to transfer weight to the outriggers?

3. If your answer to 2 is not yes, then it looks to me as if you are using the midfield barrier to gain an advantage. The rules referenced earlier in this post seem to address that issue.

As far as the pinning goes, I would be VERY suprised if a team got DQ'd for pinning you if your outriggers are reacting with the midfield barrier. Team 217's interpretation of the rule is that the midfield pipes are there to make it harder to cross the field. Any other use of the barrier is probably illegal.

The argument that you're not touching the barrier until someone pushes you is a pretty weak claim, because it is clear to me that you are straddling the midfield bar for a specific purpose.

Of course, please ignore number 3 if your answer to #2 is yes.

For what it's worth, I think you have an amazing design.

-Paul

People Please
 

Understand this. This is a beatable robot. All robots can be defeated with strategy. Look at Beatty, everyone saw them as undefeatable, and , well, they did win nationals, but they were still beaten in some rounds.

I am very proud of my robot, we put a lot of work into is, as im sure that all of you are proud of your robots. I am NOT saying that this robot is undefeatabe. Gadget is right, everyone worked very hard on what they built in these last six weeks.

Also, i'm sure that there are other robots out there like this. A lot of teams would be wantng to their robots a secret. I think that sharing your robot is a great way to help scouts, as well as provide constructive criticism for our designs.

Once again, i thank everyone for their input, and would like to thank the teams out there that have shared theur designs.

Magnasmific....I've got a question, how exaclty are those arms deployed? I mean, I can't see anything "driving" the arms from the pictures? Transfer of wieght maybe? Also, To my knowledge, you can't have a metal surface come in contact with the field...I hope you have some kind of plastic cap on the "feet" of the arm's final stage!

the first stage of the arms are driven by a cable attached to the window motors. the second set is powered by globe motors, with a worm gear. The final stage is unpowered, except for a gas shock which allows for extra clearance of the plexiglass (not pictured in any photos), and gravity.

Also, on the bottom of the arms, its hard to see from the pictures, there are nylon fittings on all of the bottom of the legs. This eliminates the "hard contact with floor" rule.

Re: Great Robot
 

We can create a downward force on the arms. This will allow us additional traction. As far as weight transfer goes... yes there will be "weight transfer".

There is a specially designed traction material that will be attached to the bottom of each of the legs.

People, stop arguing over what rules the robot breaks or w/e. That's for the judges to decide. Saying all this now doesn't help as it's AFTER ship. It's more of an insult. It's a great LOOKING robot but till a regional, none of us except on team 68 will know how well it performs or whether the judges/refs will determine it to be perfectly legal.

I think some of the argument comes from teams that considered a limbo block from the HDPE but decided against it due to rule interpretation.

Just like the mousebots last year, many teams were upset by their use because they didn't build one because they interpreted the rules differently. Only a few teams made "LEGAL" tether's, most had a high chance of entanglement but were still given the OK.

ramming by definition cannot be pinning. Ramming is using the power of the bot for repeated strikes. Pinning is using the bot to hold something against a fixed object

Re: Great Robot
 

I said it in a reply once, and I will say it again... There's a fine line between intentionally using the 14" bar to block robot, and blocking a limbo bot with your robot in front of the bar because your robot won't fit in.

Consider these 3 scenario that involve the bar to block opponent robot:

1. Putting bins in front of the bar, so opponent robot can't go under because the bin is in the way,
2. Putting your 14"< robot in front of the bar, and even though the opponent robot could out push your robot, your robot will never fit under, thus blocking your opponent
3. extending an arm in front of the barrier and block the enemy robot because the bar is supporting it from behind.

Now, obviously the first scenario is legal, because they intentionally design the bar so bins won't fit under, and FIRST should've taken into account that robots will be blocked because of that. For the 2nd scenario, it should be legal also, because the opponent robot will be pinning your robot against a wall if they keep pushing.

As for the 3rd scenario, I agree with Paul that you may not use the 14" bar to make a part of your robot functional. If the bar isn't there, I doubt the arm will stop robot from going across. Sure, it is legal to use it when the arm isn't touching the barrier, which will happen when opponent robot sees that they can't go under when the arm is there. But as soon as the opponent robot touch the arm, and the arm use the 14" bar to react, then it will be illegal, at least that's the way I see it.

So, unless FIRST change the rule regarding robots reacting against field barriers, I honestly believe it is illegal to deploy such a device to block enemy robot, imho. Otherwise, it is unfair for teams who strictly follow the rules. If it was legal, a lot of robots would've use the bar to flip themselves over, or use the side barrier to lock themselves in place.

Please don’t take this the wrong way, because I believe this is one of the most creative idea I’ve ever seen this year…

Please ask FIRST about this, and show them the picture.

I agree. Last year we had a nice design where a big piece of plastic that would be hard to run over and get entangled on would fall out, and more would flip out from the inside of that and so on untill we are in the scoring zone. But then we go to VCU and we find people who have wire shooting from their bot and then a robot PURPOSFULLY push a goal on our teather, now that ticks me off.

It's a fine line interpretation of the rule. This isn't really much different from a tall and long robot parking itself in front of the bar. You couldn't push it out of the way, in fact, you would be guilty of pinning the bot against the bar. I am gonna side with T3 in this case. The rule isn't really clear, and I don't think T3's design is impenetrable. As someone pointed out, I can see them being tipped by a wedge or getting tangled up in the deployment process. Nonetheless, they look like a formidable opponent.

That's a very poor analogy. The tall robot has no option of where to go, therefore it's pinning. T3 can simply lift its arms up. They are in that position by choice, not by chance.


The question isn't whether they can be beat. Of course they can be beat. Nobody is unbeatable. That has been illustrated last year. The question at hand is whether or not they are in direct violation of the rules. I am sure many other teams have thought of this type of design, but went against it.

No Need ...
 

O.K., there is no need to get nasty. I know a few of the engineers on team 68 and believe me, they have a conscience.

The fact of the matter is that rule GM31's first sentance states:

"The outer field barriers are safety features of the playing field and robots should not be designed to react against them"

It goes on to clarify that the midfield pipes are considered field barriers. We can argue over the wording, but the intent is clear - do not rely on the field borders to hold position.

That said, see the previous posts about the outriggers and their ability to transfer weight. My guess is that they transfer their weight to the outriggers and don't rely on the midfield barrier at all.

-Paul

Re: No Need ...
 

Paul, for what it's worth, I agree with your interpretation and analysis exactly. I'm eager to see if FIRST clarifies this potential controversy.

68 - Great bot again!
As a member of another ramp-domination team I'm impressed with they way you guys accomplished it. To tell you the truth, we thought this was illegal during our brainstorming. I hope it works out for you guys...
See you in Houston.

It's still very gray to me. Let's take a look at five examples.

Robot 1: Is 25 inches high due to it's design and function, the team couldn't make it any lower. They decided going under the bar wasn't a big deal to them. The contact with the bar is not by design and it is incidental.

Robot 2: Is 25 inches high, with arms that extend out making a barrier. Their design has nothing that grabs onto the bar, but due to their height, you can't push them under it. The contact with the bar is intentional but incidental.

Robot 3: Is 13 inches high, but has a cylinder that extends to increase it's height. The cylinder has no other purpose but to prevent another robot from pushing it under the bar. The contact with the bar is by design AND intentional.

Robot 4: Is 13 inches high and has an arm used to pick up boxes. When the arm is extended it increases the height of the robot and prevents it from being pushed under the bar. If the arm is lowered, the robot is free to move under the bar. The contact with the bar is not by design and is incidental.

Robot 5: Is 13 inches high and has nothing to contact the bar at any time.


Robot 1 is a legal design. FIRST can't DQ a team because they chose not to go under the bar. Robot 1, isn't necessarily designed to block another robot, but in a match, it may have to.

Robot 2 is also legal. The robot was designed to block other robots. Because of it's height, the robot can not be pushed under the bar. It is not illegal to make a robot that can not clear the bar.

Robot 3 is illegal. The cylinder was designed to interact with the bar.

Robot 4 is not illegal, but if the arm is up, it can not be pushed under the bar. Does a team HAVE to let another robot push it around? My guess is this team will not be DQ if it used it's box picking arm to prevent it from being pushed under the bar. That is unless the arm itself had some kind of lip or hook to help it hold on. Then that would be illegal.

Robot 5 is of course legal.

I think T3's robot falls into the gray area between Robot 2 and Robot 3. If the bar didn't exist, then T3's design would be perfectly legal, but not quite as effective. This is definitely one for the judges. I understand those teams that see this as a violation. But even though T3 knows another robot will push them into the bar. Their contact is intended by design, but incidental. If nobody pushes them, then they are not interacting with the field. I think the rule is put in place to prevent damage to the field. I don't see T3's design as posing any particular kind of damage threat. T3's strategy is no different than building a robot 13 inches high and then welding a 5 inch bar on top just so another robot can't push it under. The only difference is T3 blocks the entire play field.

Your Examples
 

Your examples do not highlight the biggest part of the intent of the rule. Getting pushed around on the playing field and designing a robot to be immovable on the ramp (one big key this year) are 2 entirely different things. If a King of the Hill Bot uses the field borders to gain its immovability, then it is in violation of GM31. This is NOT incidental. It is intentional. 25 points and complete positional domination is gained by a method prohibited by rule GM31. I am inspector at 2 regionals this year and if I run across a robot designed like this, I will notify the head referee and get his or her opinion on the issue citing GM31.

However, I say again that I am willing to bet team 68 is pushing hard enough against the floor to make this a non-issue for them.

Time will tell...

Can we just let it go and say "nice robot?" The rules are there for the Judges/Refs to interpret, not us!

Nice robot from team 5!!!!

:D

Re: Your Examples
 

I agree with Paul, while I think your design is interesting and will probably be effective, I also feel it violates the rules about field interaction. If your legs only had 1 pole one 1 side of the bar, I could say "While interaction with the field is likely, it doesn't look like it is central to their design". As it is now, it sure looks like all your strength will come from the bar...

Only time will tell :) and I do admire the design.

Greg

This is a quote from an earlier part of the thread where they say they have all their weight on the HDPE. As for their imobility as King of the Hill. I see your point. But, I don't think that is the intent of their design. The design is intended to prevent other robots from going under the bar, or did I miss something? I wouldn't blame you for bringing this up at an inspection. I think the judges will let it slide though.

I just saw the thread where they say they can transfer weight to the arms. I don't know. Like I said, it's one for the judges. I hope they let it go. I want to see if our robot can beat it somehow. :D

I think the refs probably will let it go... Just because its a really creative idea, and also because a lot of the referees aren't that familiar with rules because they don't build robots like us (well, I can't say all refs because I happens to know quite a few who used to be on teams). I remember some incidents where the robot react against the field to make part of their robot functional, and it wasn't called on.

So, that's why I suggest Team 68 ask FIRST staff about this, because they know the rules the best. Why risk having the change out the device when you can think about it if you ask them now? I am not saying you will be asked to take it off, but its just much better to get a clarification as soon as possible.

I think FIRST better have a solid clarification about this, or it might develope into this year's "tether/mouse bot" issue. I would hate to see teams getting answers saying "no you are not allowed to..." and at National everyone put on a new arm (which I think will be unlikely) and block the ramp with it.

And even if they managed to lift up the whole robot onto those arms, they are still bounded to be pushed against the 14" bar when the opponent robot are stronger than they are...

I think people are worry about this not because they thing the 68 will be undefeatable... Its just because everyone put so many times chewing on the rules, figuring what's the best thing they can do while following the fules. Remember last year when FIRST change the rules regarding tethers? Its not something that can be easily forgetten.

I remember that all too well. My team, Team 267, thought long and hard on how to make a tail within the rules, but then we get to the competition and everybody has mouse tethers, and tape measures. Hell, we could have done the same thing and saved us a headache.

Now, I know not to let this kind of stuff get on my nerves. 68 has a nice design, but it's not going to be too effective against our design. That is, we hope.

maybe its just me, but it seems like there's just enough space under those arms to let a robot with a low profile slip under them. Will the arms be useless against under-bar bots?

I second both things Matt said.

No, as mentioned earlier there are friction pads at the ends of the first stage arm. This pad not only makes the robot harder to move but it also cuts the width, both from the robot to the pad and from the pad to the side down to less than 30in. Also, even if the pads were not there a robot would have to be less than 9in to pass under the arm.

Robots
 

I must again state it was never the intent to stop robots.... The arms will be raised 90% of the time to allow other robots to run freely around the field. The other 10% of the time we will be unable to left our arms because of robots pushing against them and binding the hinge points, but we will be trying to left the arms if robots are trying to go under. At least that is our estimates on on percentages.

The robot itself should be next to imposible to move on the HDPE surface based on the "creative" traction material used on the drive train. If robots can move the drive train, they still have to deal with the out riggers on the HDPE and then if they break traction there, the outer arms pushing onto the carpet. There are a series of tractions that a robot will have to break through in order to pass over the ramp. The best bet is going under the bar, which our robot wasn't designed to stop. Everyone is looking at the arms in the wrong regard. However I will not be telling the purpose of the arms until the first regional, where you will see that they are not to trap or pin robots, nor act against the bar to be king of the hill... There is another advantage which hasn't been pointed out yet. Only time will tell!!

Gearboxes?
 

Alex,

You have any pictures to post of the gearbox? I don't want you to post stats... however I would like some one to example how these interesting gearboxes run at the same speed, while having motors run opposite to each other... thank you Mr. Smith for showing us some real engineering and some real friction equations. It is amazing that they run at the same speed with out programming to help. Who doesn't like friction and gear ratios!!

Can't wait to see how the first 15 seconds go!!! I will be in there driving one of the spare robots over spring break. Watch out bro and alex, I might be taking over the drive team like in high school again :-)

DanG Bot!
 

It is somewhat obvious that the other advantage these arms have is that they can reach over the wall and knock over bins without moving out of the starting blocks. Nice design; very courageous design. I look forward to seeing it at GL and MW.

I call robots with this capability - DanG bots. This is because Dan Green from our team insisted that this was the best design to knock the bins over quickly and that we should have this type of design. I may lose my bet to him because of your unique design.

Raul

Re: DanG Bot!
 

Well you are spilling the beans without Joe or Bill telling you their designs... :D For some reason I can see and another tank and swerve drive train coming out of Wildstang this year... See you GL!!

with those arms it looks like you could knock down opposing stacks without ever really leaving the ramp.....

I wanna see this robot go up against 179's bot...

This is not about specific rules, it is about the death of FIRST. I cannot explain the meaning of FIRST in words, but I know it is not about exploiting loopholes in the rules to win.

I am not jealous or angry: only saddened by this blatant act of weaseling.

I am sorry that you feel that way. However when we came up with this idea it was not seen as a loophole in the rules. Yes we did realize that there were rules reguarding the midfield barrier, however every student and advisor unanamiously agreeded before we started building our robot, that our design did not violate any of these rules or the underlying purposes of these rules. Therefore I and the rest of the team would appreciate it if you did not look at us as "weasels" simply because we have a different way of thinking than you do.