Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Well any useful polarizing film/glass is going to look something like a 50% to 65% neutral gray tint. If they're actually doing anything useful, then they have to filter something like 50% of all incoming light, after all. If we can work with the GDC to get around that, however, there's plenty of places that sell adhesive backed polarizing film, so you shouldn't have any difficulty making your own custom, precisely properly polarized glasses. Perhaps the GDC would permit drivers to wear custom tinted safety glasses during the 2:15 of the matches only.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

did the blind spot happen at all the regionals?

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Dave,

The rookie drivers will always be affected by certain rules every year. This one is no exception. The only advice I can give new / inexperienced drivers with skid (or tank) steering: get very clear from the line or turn before your robot completely clears the line.


O.K. How about from a coach that was behind the glass for every match this weekend? The glare is definitely a factor, but coaches can move anywhere in the box and I suggest you do. This game really allows the drivers to do their thing without a coach for every second of the game. The coaches can move around and make sure the glare is accounted for. The biggest part of the glare is the ball looks like it may be on your side when it is in a completely different quadrant ... pretty freaky. The line crossing takes patience. If you have patience, then the line crossing is not be a factor. Do most of your maneuvers while on the line (not just crossing it) and you get plenty of leeway.


No way. We would have to see almost 3 times as many penalties due to the 30 pointer in 2005. I agree that the quantity of penalties was higher, but not the total penalty points.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

WOW, jgannon's pictures put a total different light on the subject. What would happen if they changed the top two sections of the dividing wall to chain link fencing the same as the robo coaches station or if they where to cheese hole the top two sections of polycarb? Personally I think fencing would be the way to go. And maybe dull up the alliance station wall or paint it a contrasting color. Perhaps, after seeing several wicked hits, the alliance station wall should be protected with a SAFER Barrier. (Non-NASCAR fans will not have a clue what I am talking about)

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Then the majority of arm bots would have a ridiculous disadvantage, as there would be many more chances to get a fairly important part of their robot stuck in a fence.

I think that drivers will just have to be more careful. When our driver couldn't see because of glare and robots in his way, he knew where the robot was, so he didn't move until enough of the congestion had dissipated.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Not possible at this point. The change would need to be made the Wednesday before the event, which would mean sending out the chain link NOW to get there on time, to EACH event. Cheese-holing wouldn't work either...now you've got some opaque sections at the top.

How about we just consider this part of the game challenge and leave it at that?

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Hear, hear!

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Rule changes are regularly debated, in fact I'm thinking about making it an annual thread on the website.

I'm impressed by the casual and first hand experiences and opinions that help bring the entire issue to light and in better focus. From the stands and especially from a webcast, nuances behind the penalties are missed. The sightlines, the position of the drivers, the reflections (or lack of) - add to the challenge the drivers face.

It appears that great caution will be needed while driving - limiting "driving with reckless abandon", should reduce the number of penalties. Some of the penalties look like they could have been avoided with a bit more forethought, planning, and a conscience effort. Some of the penalties look like the teams were victims of circumstance - bad decisions, poor planning, and silly mistakes. But, again it could have been because my vantage point was simple via webcast camera. I'm sure it must have looked alot different in person.

I do hope FIRST considers making field improvements to eliminate the blindspot demonstrated in those photos attached by Joe G. - very enlightening.


Mike

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

I believe that the game would be improved if Dave's elegant revision to G22 were implemented. I enjoyed watching the robots compete at MWR, but competitions whose outcomes are often determined by accidental rule violations are sort of, well, uninspiring. If I was particularly interested in the outcome of a match in qualifying I often ended up watching the refs as much as I watched the bots.

Let me outline a specific scenario I saw at MWR: two robots racing to the turn at the end--a slower (call it rookie) bot takes the inside line on the corner, a faster bot on the outside line overtakes the slow bot on the turn and clips the slow bot's corner, spinning the rookie bot. The collisions appeared accidental/incidental but in each instance the rookie bot crossed back over the line while they were getting pointed counter clockwise again and in each instance they were penalized. I'm not sure the turning radii of the offending robots would've permitted them to resume play otherwise. Possibly the refs should've changed the calls on appeal on the basis of G23, if the passing bot initiated the contact (BTW: this might be an effective strategy under the MWR rules interpretation), but possibly the slow team was trying to block the pass, in which case the penalty should stand. The referee's calls seem correct to me according to the rules, but perhaps slightly contrary to the spirit of the competition.


In each instance Dave's revision would have let the rookie bots get pointed back counterclockwise without incurring a penalty.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Like some other folks, i also disagree with you on this point. Because of the glare basically blocking everything CCW of the line, you don't know that you have crossed the line until you have crossed it. If the "line" were "moved back" then teams would be able to see that they were about to cross the "line" and avoid a penalty (and by "line" i mean the new theoretical plane that the robot could not touch because that would mean it has fully reverse-crossed the original line). It is not about reckless driving it is about human limitations. Unfortunately i think that this would not be the best fix



This is what i think is the best solution. A quick 1 or two seconds so the drive can go "oh my, i see that i have broken the plane, let me go forward or reorient myself quickly so i can avoid a penalty" because, once again, the driver might not be able to see that he has broken the plane until he has broken the plane.

Yes, i do like the combination too, but i also want to keep the time at a minimum. Robots should not be given enough time to perform any productive function while stradeling the line other than a quick reorientation so they can merge back into the CCW traffic flow.

just my 2 cents. Does anyone know what kind of input the GDC gets before making decisions? Is this message getting to them, are they reading these threads looking to see how the FIRST community thinks the game could be improoved, or do you need to contact them more directly with formal complaints for them to want to take action?

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

If you want to get a message through to the GDC, post it as an official question on the FIRST Q&A system. They will see that. None of the GDC members ever read any of the CD forums, so posting things here would be an inefficient way to communicate with them.*

-dave


* it is part of the blood oath that they take when they sign on as GDC members. The "I will never, ever, ever, read Chief Delphi" clause is right after the "if I divulge anything about how we are going to use tropical fruit in the 2010 game, I will give up my first born" terms, and just before the part about doing the Chicken Dance in exchange for donuts.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

I think the big concern is whether or not there will be any tropical fruit other than bananas....

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

This glare situation (which I'll have to admit is pretty freaky, but makes sense under standard laws of optics) could be gotten around by positioning your robocoach at the far end and having them take over the controls at the end of the field as you do your drive by in any mode (tele-operated or human control period).

Oh wait.. Did I just stumble upon another issue the GDC thought of, and a reason for intentionally allowing the robocoach to be at that opposite end of the field??

On can only amuse himself by thinking so... ;)

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

Hey, I saw a robocoach signaling a team using arm motions from the far end in one of the webcasts. Enough said.

Re: Rule G22 needs to be changed
 

After seeing a few teams with their team number or team logo on a vertical panel attached to their OI control board that could be seen through the clear front of the player station, and looking at the above linked source, it occurred to me that a polarized panel could be rigged to the OI board. This type of solution would keep the drivers' safety glasses in compliance with the rules, and still cut the glare. It would have the downside of creating an awkward OI board - what with a ~3'x4' plastic panel attached to it.

In a related solution, what about using suction cups to stick a small-ish polarized panel to the player station window? Anyone know off the top of their head whether this would be legal?