Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

For those of you who were around in 2002 doesn't this concern about the legality of the deployment remind you of the argument about the legality of a tethered minibot in that year? There were many threads back then discussing whether or not you could have a tethered minibot.
The main argument against them came from the camp of "we were thinking about doing that but decided against it because we felt it violated the GDC's rules". The rest of the teams who DID, in fact, build the tethered bots interpreted the ruled differently (correctly, as it turned out) and went on to do well in the competitions.
I think what is happening again is that teams are upset that they didn't go with an idea that they had and are kicking themselves for it.
May I recommend in the future that teams who have such a great idea but are questioning its legality build two systems which are interchangeable. One is the "hope it's legal and if it is it will be phenominal" version and the other would be the safe version--then you've covered the bases.

Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

You need to understand that the kinetic energy of the minibot is being used to go up the pole whereas the linear deployments the kinetic energy is lost by banging into the pole. Big difference

And Adam, I mentioned that the ramp is a great idea and should be legal. However I mentioned that it needs to be implemented correctly. As R1ffSurf3r mentioned that team 233 implements the ramp in a completely legal manner.

So given his response this should be the yardstick that ramp deployments should be verified for. I would in perfect agreement in that case. However for any minibot that can accelerate to top speed before Deployment I have to see as illegal.

I am not trying to ban ramps altogether, I am just trying to point out the fine line between what I have seen as a legal ramp vs an illegal one

Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

What makes a 233 deployment more legal? Does their minibot come to rest after it crosses the threshold of the deployment circle? Whether the wheels turning takes it across the threshold or some other stored energy mechanism the minibot still has some momentum coming into deployment. :confused: I just don't see the difference.

The blue box for ,<G19>...
...seems to have more tollerance for GUS's deployment where the wheels themselves are being used to cross the threshold than a separate stored energy mechanism. I'd rule GUS legal, and 233 illegal based on what is posted here unless 233 can demonstrate that all of the momentum gained from the mechanism that deploys the minibot is dissipated before the vertical climb is started. There is no provision for incidental kinetic energy outside of the actual motors and wheels.

Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

Yes, I agree if 233's deployment system does not come to a stop before the minibot is launched then I would have say that under the rules it would be illegal. This to me would constitute the deployment system providing kinetic energy to the minibot prior to deployment.

As for GUS's deployment, and why I am having a tough time seeing its legality:
The problem I think everyone is having is that they are equating incidental kinetic energy in the motors/wheel to allow kinetic energy in the minibot. Incidental rotational kinetic energy in the motors is one thing as this energy is not actively contributing to the energy in the system. However with GUS228's they are using the motor/wheel kinetic energy to move a mass (ie the minibot). This in my mind the rules violation as it is clear in the video we can see the minibot accelerating before the vertical cylinder projection.

So my feeling is that for a ramp system to be legal the minibot should be at rest as it starts deployment. And if 233 does it this way (I still haven't seen a good video) then by all means this should be the benchmark for legality.

Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

Wouldn't all ramps then be illegal? The ramp itself, which is part of the HOSTBOT, is contributing to the vertical movement by allowing the MINIBOT to retain the momentum it has going up, whereas a horizontal deployer doesnt contribute since all momentum is stopped before it goes up the pole.

Re: Gus 228's 1.3 second Minibot
 

The ramp is legal in my interpretation of the rules if the minibot propels itself up the ramp. The parts on a ramp that could be considered illegal (depending on implementation) would be if the ramp gives the minibot kinetic energy by being sloped downward, or if the host bot propels the minibot to the edge of the ramp.