Chief Delphi - Interesting Q/A's

Chief Delphi (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/index.php)

- Rules/Strategy (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=6)

- - Interesting Q/A's (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showthread.php?t=42625)

Re: Interesting Q/A's

I agree, hopefully it is included in the next update. It will affect alot of people.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricky Q.

I personally am not agreeing with this decision

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=508

that counts roller reversing mechanisms designed to empty into the corner goals as "shooters."

To me, it makes no sense. Shooters should be defined as something designed to get something into the center hoop, not the corner goals.

Here is where things get fuzzy for me. S03 states in part, "Any mechanism used to throw balls must be contained within the original 28" x 38" x 60" starting envelope of the ROBOT and must be shielded such that the mechanism cannot make contact with other ROBOTs.

From dictionary.com: Throw defintion #2. To discharge into the air by any means.

Throw does not equal roll...but until FIRST agrees with Webster, looks like its back to the drawing board... :(

Kev

Re: Interesting Q/A's

A problem with a lot of the Q/A answers is that they give a simplistic or general answer that is often not related to the question and never explained with reasoning or logic.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kevin Kolodziej

wait, are they saying that even a small pneumatic at ground level used to softly push balls out so that they don't get clogged when dumping them NEEDS to be sheilded?

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricky Q.

Wouldnet this also effect dumping hoppers or hoppers that have a door to dump?

if the hopper goes outside the size, then its illegal because its considered a shooter since by changing position its imparting force via gravity and potential energy.

If a door opens on the base of the hopper to put balls into the lower goals, then the hopper is a shooting mechanism beacause of the same argument. Right?

oooh this might be the first real intresting rule issue this year!

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rombus

I agree. By the strict following of the rules, any device used to push, throw, manipulate or other means used to score the balls AND anything that comes in contact after the start of shooting, must remain in the confines of the starting 28 x 38.

This means that a hopper without a device to push the balls into the goal and anything attached to the hopper as a guidance system (door or flap) must also remain inside the confines and must be shielded.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

I must put down the question and answer that I asked about sponsors, logos, school names and numbers. This is a rule that has not been enforced in the past but with the strict enforcement of rules this year, according to the Q&A, will be. It has even been referenced in other Q&A's as a definitive answer. I guess we will see at the regionals.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

ahaha, FIRST wants everyone to build to same robots?

Some weird rulings.

But so it goes, I guess.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rombus

Yes. Look at the animation. The robot that goes to the corner goal during autonomous and dumps the balls in would be deemed illegal by this definition of "shooter."

Kev, who now realizes that being behind isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Could somebody post that question (do doors have to stay inside starting footprint) on Q/A? An official ruling will hurt a lot of people.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rombus

I don't think that is true. Per update 6 and the corresponding update to to section 4 of the manual, a shooting mechanism "delivers the final dynamic impulse that ejects the ball from the robot, and any parts of the robot that contact the ball while and/or after this impulse is delivered."

In the case of reversing rollers or using a pneumatic piston to push balls, the rollers or the piston do deliver and impulse and would be considered a shooting mechanism. However, opening a door does not apply an impulse to the balls and should not be considered a shooting mechanism.

Edit: just found this thread: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...threadid=43369 and it appears that other people support my interpretation. Any more discussion on this issue should happen in the other thread.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ricky Q.

I personally am not agreeing with this decision

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=508

that counts roller reversing mechanisms designed to empty into the corner goals as "shooters."

The problem with this rule is that enforcement will be difficult. Especially since most harvesters will look the same with only a few legally allowed to push balls. Robot inspectors could determine if a robot has the possibility of violating <S03>. The referees enforcement would need to be done on a case by case basis on the field. The referees would need to know that if robot x pushes balls out of its harvester than it is breaking <S03> but robot y is legally capable of doing so.

It's a similar problem to the muzzle velocity rule. FIRST might check muzzle velocity during robot inspection, after that it's on your honor.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

I don't want to curb any good discussion, as this definitely is, but this thread was meant mainly for posting interesting Q/As that people need to see, rather than in-depth discussion on them.
Please post in Q/A if there is debate on something and post the official answer here. If you want to debate it further, please start a thread for it so it'll be easily found instead of buried here. Thanks!

Quote:

Question:
If we are feeding balls under power into the corner goal, and the balls bounces off of a part of our collection system that is outside of our starting envelope to help guide them into the goal. Will this be considered a shooting mechanism, and not be allowed?

Answer:
Any part of the robot that makes contact with the ball while and/or after it receives the final dynamic impulse that ejects the ball will be considered part of the shooting mechanism. As such, these parts must satisfy all applicable rules regarding shooter mechanisms

Quote:

Question:
If a ball delivery system (hopper) is attached to the top of the shooter is the hopper considered to be part of the shooting mechanism and subject to the limitations of rule S03?

Answer:
A shooter includes the mechanism that delivers the final dynamic impulse that ejects the ball from the robot, and any parts of the robot that contact the ball while and/or after this impluse is delivered. Depending on their exact design and construction, a subsystem that delivers balls into the final energy transfer mechanism may or may not be considered part of the shooter.

Ball delivery mechanisms that are not part of the shooter are not automatically limited to the operating volumes indicated in Rule <S03>. However, they still must satisfy all relevent 2006 FRC rules.

Quote:

Question:
Rule is question: <G09> ROBOTs on ALLIANCE PLATFORMs - ROBOTs score points if they are entirely on an ALLIANCE PLATFORM at the end of the match.

Now it would stand to reason that "at the end of the match" means the moment the match ends BUT in years past rules such as:

2003: "An additional 25pts will be awarded to each robot that is touching only the top of the platform at the end of the match."

2004: "A robot that is hanging from the bar at the end of the match will receive 50pts".

the phrase "end of the match has been interpreted as AFTER the end of the match. So the question is, this year does "at the end of the match" mean the moment the match ends or some time after? (if after please norm the refereeing and tell us how many seconds)

Answer:
Robot position will be determined after all robots and game pieces come to rest. Note that referees may take 5-10 seconds to determine if all game elements are at rest.

Quote:

Question:
Rule S03 states that "Any mechanism used to throw balls must be contained within the original 28” x 38” x 60”starting envelope of the ROBOT and must be shielded such that the mechanism cannot make contact with other ROBOTs. A ROBOT that violates this rule will be considered unsafe per <S01>."

Since it's not reasonable to shield from a robot sticking something down the muzzle of a shooter, to what lengths must we go to comply with S03? Was the intent that a robot should not be able to come in contact with the shooter assuming that no portion of it extends beyond the bumper area? In this example, what constitutes the muzzle? Would the whole front of a rotating wheel shooter be considered the muzzle, for example?

How about the sides of a rotating wheel shooter? Must we shield a gap on the sides of the robot where another robot with something sticking outside of its bumper area could penetrate to the shooter even though the shooter is inside our starting envelope? Is so is a screen okay or must it be solid?

Answer:
Under Rule <S03>, all shooting mechanisms must be shielded. The intrinsic purpose of the shielding is to prevent injury and/or damage to humans or robots (either by preventing inadvertant contact with the shooting mechanism, or containing parts of the shooter if it comes apart while operating). The shielding must act to prevent either humans or robots from coming in contact with the shooting mechanism, and should be designed accordingly. We cannot anticipate every possible configuration of shooting mechanism and appropriate shielding, and must rely on the best judgement and common sense of the teams to determine how this shielding is constructed.

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Here's an interesting one...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Question:

Imagine that Redabot has a hatch that opens in front of a corner goal to deposit balls, which has been ruled legal (assuming everything else about it is legal). In a match, the balls inside Redabot get jammed, and Redabot's drivers give it a love tap against the wall to jostle the balls, causing all of the balls to stream into the goal.

In that situation, has the whole robot become the shooting mechanism, in that it was the robot tapping the wall that caused a final dynamic impulse to eject the balls be delivered? And if so, how does one effectively shield the whole robot?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Answer:

If this is the normal method of ball release then it would be determined that the robot is not the shooting mechansim, but the entire field is. In this case, you will have to provide shielding for the entire field.

However, as described, this would be considered incidental contact and this contact would not be an issue.

I wonder how one provides shielding for the entire field...

Re: Interesting Q/A's

Quote:

Originally Posted by Billfred

I wonder how one provides shielding for the entire field...

Darn it! I knew we shouldn't have given up on that force field generator!