Re: "Heading" balls?
 

POSSESSION: Controlling the position and movement of a BALL. A BALL shall be considered in POSSESSION if, as the ROBOT moves or changes orientation (e.g. backs up or spins in place), the BALL remains in approximately the same position relative to the ROBOT.


This is same thing I was confused about when I read this rule.
Whoever made this rule had a different interpretation of "controlling" from the general public. What they think is that having the robot moving around, but whatever that is inside of it is not moving at all, is called controlling..

So I assume that if the ball inside of the robot moves around in any direction AS the robot moves around, then it is not called controlling, even though many teams might design the internal system in such way that so they can control it, but the judges won't call it controlling..


So to be called Carry, there are two factors, controlling and no contact with the ground....
If the ball is in the robot(no contact with the ground), however as the robot moves around, the ball moves around as well(not controlling), therefore this scenario would not be called carry. This is how I personally understand that rule

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

Team 115 saw it as you can essentially let the ball "bounce" of of you but not so that you can immediately control it..

We were thinking of using the same foam they use for the goals in a dome shape to essentially let the ball fall close to the robot so we could get to it relatively easy.

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

ya i agree with with you, it is on the verge of being illegal, that's why i brought it up here, so someone could tell me exactly if it was illegal or not, cause i already know most of the rules, but if we could it would be an interesting an effective stratagy

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

yeah so why can you have it "bounce" down a channel and put the ball in front of your robot

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

Unfortunately, CD is not an official source for information. We can figure out some things, based on the manual, but other things need clarification. I'm interested in the answer too, for other reasons [insert evil laugh]. That's where the FRC Q&A comes in. They typically open it up about halfway through Week 1, after Update #1 comes out and fixes all the obvious stuff.

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

Q&A of course is for official clarifications. Note however, posession is defined as controlling the position AND direction of the ball. Not the position OR direction.

The example given in the rules, is essentially that if you move your robot and the ball moves with you, then you are in possession.

So a soccer player, continuously heading the ball, is not likely in posession of the ball given FRC rules. She is not, at any point, controlling the position AND direction... although she may temporarily control the direction.

If you can build a robot that actively heads one of these soccer balls repeatedly, however, I can almost guarantee that not only will you not receive a penalty, but you will also receive a very nice award.... perhaps several.

Likewise, if the top of your robot is sloped to your advantage, or you have an impact absorbent material so that balls don't bouce off you... so long as they don't stick to you... then you're okay.

But if you build an active mechanism... something that you control... that reaches above the bumper zone and affects the ball (whether or not the motor or servo reaches above the bumper zone is irrelevant, it is the mechanism that matters) then you're probably going to have some explaining to do.

Jason

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

Well from what I read is that you can have a mechanism that reaches above your bumper zone and contacts the balls just so long that when the ball touches the mechanism it is stationary/passive

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

that is worth a second Q&A topic apart from the 'channel'


I would personally want an angled surface on top that slopes down from back to front instead of a dome. It seems like it should be legal, but i'll wait for the Q/A answer.

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

What would really help to clarify this rule, is to demonstrate a scenario of carrying and a scenario of not carrying.

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

EDIT: Don't read here... move along to the next post.... :P

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

Also, if such a ramp/dome can be deployed and undeployed (say, to allow you to get through the tunnel), does the fact that it can be moved and controlled then make it an active mechanism? Thus, not allowed to interact with the balls above the top bumper plane?

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

<G45> States that a robot cant control the ball with an active mechanism. If the mechanism deploys upwards and stays stationary when it comes in contact with a ball, considered an active mechanism? or does the mechanism have to be in motion at the time of contact to be considered active?

Thank you,
Team 20

Re: "Heading" balls?
 

That's the same as dodar's question above, I think. It needs to be asked to Q&A once that forum is open. I'm interested in the answer myself.

Also, I think if the answer is no, then how about one that is not actuated, but is simply sprung into the up position but is also flexible?