![]() |
pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
I would ask the Q and A for an official ruling, but my understanding is that the bumper perimeter has to be a convex polygon as defined by the definition of frame perimeter:
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
This has come up in past years and was not allowed, but you could always try running it past the Q&A again.
This is kind of on that same track: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=15188 |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
If that "T" had any concave areas, it shouldn't have passed inspection.
This looks illegal. A FRAME PERIMETER cannot be concave (barring the allotted cutouts) |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
You are correct Chris, and in the FIRST Forums thread there they talk about how it should not have passed.
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
i would say yes as long as the bumpers are ok.
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
http://usfirst.org/roboticsprograms/...nt.aspx?id=452 |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
We were the team that had the tee design last year and won an award for it at our first event. At the first event the ref's questioned the design but concluded that they couldn't see that it was positively in violation of any rule. But asked if we would ask the GDC to verify and we did here: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=15188 As you can see they never responded even after many phone calls. We showed up at our second event and they told us we couldn't compete. We could have fixed it in the fix it window if they had responded. But instead were forced to fix it at the event. Redoing the frame and bumpers was not easy.
The whole thing was handled very badly with FIRST. I was very sad to see the rule in the rule book again this year. It is a very confusing rule that really should just say "no inside corners are allowed" After much arguing at the event they finally told us what part we were in violation of. They interpret it as: The outer-most exterior vertices (aka corners) are the perimeter. Thus if you have an inside corner it is not outer-most and thus is not allowed. :ahh: They tell us not to lawyer the rules but then they don't write them like an engineer would and it forces us to lawyer them. Here are this years rules: BUMPER PERIMETER – the polygon defined by the outer-most set of exterior vertices of the BUMPERS when they are attached to the HOSTBOT. (To identify the BUMPER PERIMETER, wrap a string around the BUMPERS at the level of the BUMPER ZONE - the string describes the polygon.) FRAME PERIMETER – the polygon defined by the outer-most set of exterior vertices on the HOSTBOT (without the BUMPERS attached) that are within the BUMPER ZONE. In blue: To determine the FRAME PERIMETER, wrap a piece of string around the HOSTBOT at the level of the BUMPER ZONE - the string describes this polygon. Note: to permit a simplified definition of the FRAME PERIMETER and encourage a tight, robust connection between the BUMPERS and the FRAME PERIMETER, minor protrusions such as bolt heads, fastener ends, rivets, etc are excluded from the determination of the FRAME PERIMETER. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
I'm an engineer, when I read the rules it's easy for me to understand that they mean "no inside corners".
If you're not an engineer, yeah, I can see how it could be confusing. Although it was discussed to death here on CD.... |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Apparently it is better to not have a concave bumper system than to have an aluminum mechanism drop down after start to give the same desired contact design. That will mean other robot will be running into our mechanism through the match and the bumper behind it will be just for looks and rules
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
We had already asked the GDC about this design (yes, we thought of doing it as well). The answer was no.
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=16259 |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
I understand it's by no means your fault, and you obviously didn't mean to, but how could that happen in FIRST? |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
what about a curved bumper?
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
I find it odd that they are taking away creativity when there is an award for it! I personally don't see the harm in having a concave design. Where is the fun in building a box (rectangle) on wheels? Our team is known for doing things in a strange way!! We love that about us. Joe should be on the GDC because of his creative mind. He has inspired dozens of kids being a "wild and crazzzzy guy"!! The kids are bummed but we will go build a nice box on wheels!!
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
As for it being handled poorly at FIRST's end I have to agree, the inspectors at your FIRST event should not have allowed you to compete at all and it sucks that they lacked the understanding of the bumper rules. I was at that event and I also saw teams competing without batteries secured down and with black bumpers. I admit, my brother got sick of my picking at least one team a match that shouldn't be allowed on the field because they shouldn't have passed inspection. (This was Saturday and is only a SLIGHT exaggeration) Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
I remember at MARC you had a triangle-ish frame, right? You were also the biggest steal of the alliance selections, too.... |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
I remember the T bot. I went to Ann Arbor to watch the game. It was pretty cool!! |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Deleted--double post
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
squirrel, one of the judges at Arizona last year was doing inspections on Thursday. Just for reference... |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
Sounds like a walk in the park to me. The teams you're not so subtly referencing have earned every award they've ever got - and taught their students more about engineering than a thousand lessons on how to use a mill. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
You're right, it's not the judges' job to know the robot rules well enough to inspect. But I wouldn't be terribly surprised to find that quite a few inspectors (or former inspectors, or refs, or mentors) are judges across the country. If we're counting "general idea, but can't cite the exact rule or knowledge a year or two old", then you might get up to about 25%. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
Stop whining about something that can be fixed by working harder. Teams that have the resources to do lots of prototyping, design their entire robots in CAD, send the parts to machine shop sponsors, and assemble completed robots are the way they are because of a lot of hard work. These resources and relationships did not just fall in their laps. These teams provide their students a very engaging and rewarding opportunity to work with engineers and companies, to participate in an advanced engineering design process, thoroughly ideate and test prototype ideas, understand topics like manufacturability and limitations of various fabrication technologies, see how using CAD software significantly improves the final robot, and much, much more. Instead of whining about these teams, recruit engineering mentors. Recruit machine shop sponsors. Fundraiser throughout the year to afford lots of prototyping. Learn and become fluent in CAD software. With enough hard work, any team can become a top tier team. How do I know this is possible? When I first joined 228, we had about eight students and an annual budget of about $12k. Last year, our budget was probably among the top quarter percentile of FRC teams, we had identical practice and competition robots with parts made at our school, at two sponsor machine shops in Connecticut, and at one sponsor machine shop in California. We attended three official events and took home a Regional banner and Regional Engineering Inspiration award. We bucked the traditional advice against never designing a swerve for the first time during the build season, and did just that (and even made it able to drive over the bump), and other than a bearing defect issue (out of our control) got it working within the six weeks build. And we worked our collective buts off for the entire year, both inside and out of the six week build, to fundraise and get the resources in place to make all that possible. Our goal has never been to whine about the top tier teams, but to become one. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
Quote:
Also <R07-A>. Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
Jim |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
The same way teams get rewarded after posting how they design their robot, send the plans to their sponsor, and recieve a kit back with all the parts cut, brackets bent and metal skins laser cut. A simple bolt together and they are hard to compete with. I say more power to them!! Last year we had 2 engineering students on the team ( still do) and we won the Excellence in Engineering Award at both districts we went to. Again it is because we have crazy imaginations that we encourge in the garage. We make our parts ourselves and we don't have ANY fancy machines and our budget is right around $1,200 for the year. ANYTHING is possible. :D |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
OK Ladies and gentlemen,
Time to quote the rules from Section 01 Introduction... FRAME PERIMETER – the polygon defined by the outer-most set of exterior vertices on the HOSTBOT (without the BUMPERS attached) that are within the BUMPER ZONE. To determine the FRAME PERIMETER, wrap a piece of string around the HOSTBOT at the level of the BUMPER ZONE - the string describes this polygon. Note: to permit a simplified definition of the FRAME PERIMETER and encourage a tight, robust connection between the BUMPERS and the FRAME PERIMETER, minor protrusions such as bolt heads, fastener ends, rivets, etc are excluded from the determination of the FRAME PERIMETER. This kind of says it all. Language similar to this was the rule last year as well. Hold a string around the frame and that describes the FRAME PERIMETER. The FRAME PERIMETER must be protected by bumpers and this year the rule under Section 04-The Robot R07-K allows some leeway that was not present last year, i.e.some gaps and some unsupported bumpers. The "T" robot last year and "hourglass" robot shown above fall under the same rule. A string wrapped around the robot at the height of the bumper zone would bridge the opening and therefore require bumpers attached to the robot everywhere the string exists. I failed a "T" design last year for the violation. I explained the rule and assisted the team in becoming compliant. As they were under size and underweight and had time to complete the needed mods, they played. In light of other game rules, (cough herding cough) it is easy to see why the FRAME PERIMETER is so defined. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
It doesn't say the string has to be taught.....You could pull the string around the robot much like a seamstress would use a measuring tape to measure in their job. I took the string as more like a level line.
It is the exterior vertices part that means you can't have inside corners. Not to argue this anymore, but this is just a badly written rule. It would be much better to just say "inside corners are not allowed" Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Kevin,
Not to be hard on this but it doesn't say "wrap the string around your frame and push it in where ever the frame goes in". It simply says "wrap the string around... ". The above rule is specific to 2011 only and does not allow for interior corners. If the GDC changes the interpretation, I will inspect for that new definition. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Definition of wrap
wrap verb a : to cover especially by winding or folding b : to envelop and secure for transportation or storage : bundle c : enfold, embrace d : to coil, fold, draw, or twine (as string or cloth) around something Al, I am just having fun now, but I disagree per the above definition. When "wrapping" an oddly shaped present you would cover each segment as I have stated for placing the string around the robot. Cheers. Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Kevin,
Good thing I am in a good mood today. Good Luck! Al |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
If you want to align yourself consider making an asymmetrical frame and deploying a single bar out. That way half your force is taken by the bumpers. Alternately if you are just worried about another robot ramming it you can place it up in the air and only deploy it when you are going to score. Or you can just build it strong enough to take hit... you know, like we had to do back in the day when we didn't have these fancy bumper things. |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
What makes you think the teams you are referencing just had these sponsors fall into their lap? What makes you think if you're not standing by the mill as it's running you're not trying, or you've somehow done less engineering? |
Re: pic: Legal Frame ????????????????
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 22:08. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi