How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

http://usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Com...0Game_RevK.pdf
Straight of the FIRST website:

<R19> ROBOTS must be designed so that in normal operation BALLS cannot extend more than 3 inches inside:
a) the FRAME PERIMETER below the level of the BUMPER ZONE (see figure 8-5).
b) a MECHANISM or feature designed to deflect balls in a controlled manner that is above the level of the BUMPER ZONE.

Now I haven't actually seen the robot in action but from I have read in forums, part b sounds like it is exactly what 469's robot does. If someone could post a video of these ridiculous matches where they scored 25, 26 points or shed some light on how it doesn't violate this rule that would be great.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

It's very simple.

It does not extend more than 3 inches in said mechanism.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

how could it run along the entire robot and not go more than three inches along the robot...explain

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Their ball return funnel is not more than 3 inches deep. Thus, it is never more than 3 inches into the MECHANISM.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Read the team update that specifically allowed their design. It was one of the last updates. They got called for one active penalty as they were moving their flipper when a ball touched it. Other than that one incident (the drive coach had to do push-ups), the machine is perfectly legal.

I was at Cass Tech, I saw their robot, and I am familiar with the rule. They are perfectly legal according to the rules and updates. You have to see it to believe it.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

It says right there that it can't extend more than 3 inches INTO the MECHANISM not the robot, the ball cannot extend more than 3 inches into the robot under the bumper zone not above it.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

The rule doesn't state that ball cannot go more than 3" inside the robot, rather that the ball cannot extend by more than 3" inside the mechanism. It is very clear to me that 469's design is very legal.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Add me to the list of people who saw it, know the rules, and know it is 100% legal.

Honestly, I figured the GDC would disallow this strategy. When they issued the update early in the season making it legal, I was shocked. Kudos to 469 for building such a GREAT machine.

-John

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Wow.

I just saw a picture of 469's bot, and it's very clear to me that the design is legal.

That being said, It's a very, very good interpretation of the rules, but completely at the moment. It's really no different in concept than a robot with a top with guides to direct balls to the front, but 469 took the concept to the extreme.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

I haven't seen it in person, but it seems from this post that 469 followed the rule exactly. It does put a slight limitation on their amazing capabilities (9 inch ball on 3 inch deep ramp is not as good as large funnel into 10 inch tubes)

Team Update 2 clarified the necessary rules to make their design legal. Oddly enough, the update was released a day after this type of design started to be discussed on Chief Delphi.

As a proponent of this design concept, I am happy to see it is effective and feasible within the other design parameters for this game. Props to 469 for building it and to the GDC for not making it illegal with a later Update (widely considered a possibility by many people I talked to).

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

The ` are spacers, the . are the funnel and the , are the balls
````,,,,,,,,`````````````````````````,,,,,,,
```,,,,,,,,,,,,``````````````````````,,,,,,,,,,,
``,,,,Ball,,,,,,``````` ................``` ,,,Ball,,,,,
```,,,,,,,,,,,,````````.....................|,,,,, ,,,,,,
````,,,,,,,,`````````|....................|...,,,, ,,,
.................```````|.....................|... ............
......................````|<-15 inches-->|....................
|..|........................
|..|............................
|..|................................
|..|...................................
|<>---------1 inch

Why is this not a penetration of more than 3 inches? Or is my diagram innaccurate? I feel like it is in fact penetrating further and further into the feature as it would roll down the rampish thing.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

It is legal because the 'mechanism' above the bumpers is not active, the only active piece is the part that changes which goals the balls will score to, and that only changes when the balls are NOT in contact with the robot.

If I'm understanding your picture correctly, the balls are only going into the mechanism by three inches... the funnels or ramps whatever you call them, only redirect the balls, and the ball enters them three inches in, and leaves three inches in, so there is no fault. The robot is not possesing the ball, only redirecting.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Okay i get it now, but would it be feasible for a team to get into the tower on the platform and block the balls that are coming down their funnel?

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

Only if you want to risk 2 penalties per ball blocked. See <G47>.

Re: How does 469 not violate <R19>?
 

<G47> talks about balls coming down the return, I was asking about balls coming down 469's funnel/ball director.