Arm vs Basket
 

Posted by Andrew Trax, Coach on team #180, S.P.A.M., from Southfork,Martin Co. High and UTC.

Posted on 5/1/99 6:04 AM MST


In Reply to: Re: Check this out posted by Jacob Etter on 4/30/99 10:03 PM MST:



In defense of baskets with lifts....
We had a 4 to 5 second lift to 8'+ for our basket. You have to admit there were
just about as many flimsy arms snapping off as there were baskets swaying
and breaking. I saw a few arms holding floppies and another robot would
bump into them and the floppies would fall off. With the basket, the
floppies stayed where they were put.

Mrs. Trax

How 'bout both?
 

Posted by Daniel, Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M Gunn Senior High School and NASA Ames.

Posted on 5/1/99 9:17 AM MST


In Reply to: Arm vs Basket posted by Andrew Trax on 5/1/99 6:04 AM MST:



G-Force has an arm that picks up and lifts a basket. Best of both worlds? =)

Besides, a well built arm can do more than a well built basket. The ones that were breaking off were just not built all too well.


-Daniel

Re: How 'bout both?
 

Posted by Andrew Trax, Coach on team #180, S.P.A.M., from Southfork,Martin Co. High and UTC.

Posted on 5/1/99 9:44 AM MST


In Reply to: How 'bout both? posted by Daniel on 5/1/99 9:17 AM MST:



I saw yours and it was a great idea. And you got my vote for creative
approach to the game.

Mrs. T


: G-Force has an arm that picks up and lifts a basket. Best of both worlds? =)

: Besides, a well built arm can do more than a well built basket. The ones that were breaking off were just not built all too well.

:
: -Daniel

Thanks!
 

Posted by Daniel, Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M Gunn Senior High School and NASA Ames.

Posted on 5/1/99 7:16 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: How 'bout both? posted by Andrew Trax on 5/1/99 9:44 AM MST:



Thanks! We tried to think of a way to have an arm AND a basket without having an elevator. We knew it would be wasting motors and other materials to do two separate systems for that. Anyway, we were really happy about how it ended up.

By the way, you make me really happy. My main goal for the team this year was to get noticed. So that GRT wouldn't be just another team, but the team that made G-Force. It's my last year and I wanted to go out with a bang. It's great to hear stuff like that =)


-Daniel

You're Welcome!
 

Posted by Andrew Trax, Coach on team #180, S.P.A.M., from Southfork,Martin Co. High and UTC.

Posted on 5/2/99 7:30 AM MST


In Reply to: Thanks! posted by Daniel on 5/1/99 7:16 PM MST:



Hey! It was pretty much the same type of decision for our crew. We had
a great chassis, lift & basket and opted to not ship the arm for the same reasons.

When you get to college, be sure to hook up with or start another team.
We should all have a passion for something constructive. The high schools
that get all you guys as mentors will be very lucky.

Mrs. Trax

I plan too
 

Posted by Daniel, Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M Gunn Senior High School and NASA Ames.

Posted on 5/2/99 12:00 PM MST


In Reply to: You're Welcome! posted by Andrew Trax on 5/2/99 7:30 AM MST:



Expect a competitive team from UC Berkeley next year. If we get Stanford in there too we'll have some nice rivalry =)

See you next year. In Florida =)

-Daniel

I took an english class once....
 

Posted by Daniel, Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M Gunn Senior High School and NASA Ames.

Posted on 5/2/99 12:10 PM MST


In Reply to: I plan too posted by Daniel on 5/2/99 12:00 PM MST:



Hey look! I'm going into the third most prestigious mechanical engineering program in the nation and I can't even spell 'to'!

I've got me some mad skills... ;-)

-Daniel

Us too
 

Posted by Chris, Coach on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW Automotive Electronics.

Posted on 5/1/99 2:18 PM MST


In Reply to: How 'bout both? posted by Daniel on 5/1/99 9:17 AM MST:



We had both an arm and a basket. I'll be posting pictures soon so everyone can see.

-Chris


: G-Force has an arm that picks up and lifts a basket. Best of both worlds? =)

: Besides, a well built arm can do more than a well built basket. The ones that were breaking off were just not built all too well.

:
: -Daniel

Nice bot
 

Posted by Daniel, Student on team #192, Gunn Robotics Team, from Henry M Gunn Senior High School and NASA Ames.

Posted on 5/1/99 3:03 PM MST


In Reply to: Us too posted by Chris on 5/1/99 2:18 PM MST:



Chris,

There's a pic of your bot at the Woburn Robotics website. The link's below.

It looks like a nice layout. I'm not sure how much some of that PVC would withstand though. Seems like that stuff will crack in even the slightest pushing matches. Did you have any problems with that?


Check it out...
-Daniel

Re: Nice bot
 

Posted by Dave, Student on team #308, Walled Lake Monster, from Walled Lake Schools and TRW.

Posted on 5/1/99 4:08 PM MST


In Reply to: Nice bot posted by Daniel on 5/1/99 3:03 PM MST:



Hey,
Actually, we never had a problem with the pvc, but we did have problems with the plexiglass pieces in the arm. After fighting off a couple of robots with it, it started to crack.

Dave


: Chris,

: There's a pic of your bot at the Woburn Robotics website. The link's below.

: It looks like a nice layout. I'm not sure how much some of that PVC would withstand though. Seems like that stuff will crack in even the slightest pushing matches. Did you have any problems with that?

:
: Check it out...
: -Daniel

Re: Arm vs Basket
 

Posted by Jacob Etter, Student on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells and ONSI Corp.

Posted on 5/1/99 11:58 AM MST


In Reply to: Arm vs Basket posted by Andrew Trax on 5/1/99 6:04 AM MST:



I'm sorry if peeps misunderstood what i was saying, i don't think that basketw are a bad design, the national champ used a basket, what i was trying to say is that there is notrhing wrong with building anyhting robustly, arm or basket, mr wibble seemed to indicate that building a robust arm was not within the spirit of first and i didn't agree with that, sorry to those i offended

Who needs a basket?
 

Posted by P.J. Baker, Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.

Posted on 5/1/99 7:51 PM MST


In Reply to: Re: Arm vs Basket posted by Jacob Etter on 5/1/99 11:58 AM MST:



Here is a link to a picture of the Bobcat, perhaps the only robot in the competition that could hold all 10 floppies without a basket

Trust yourself with technology, don't hide from it
 

Posted by P.J. Baker, Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.

Posted on 5/1/99 7:48 AM MST


In Reply to: Check this out posted by Tom Wible on 4/30/99 5:56 PM MST:



Tom,

I believe that all 10 floppies weigh about as much as one of the balls from last year. The weight of the floppies did actually give us a problem with our wrist that kept a couple of our team members up all night before we shipped the Bobcat to the Hartford regional.

You wrote 'If you design a robust arm which can tip and destroy other people's baskets, then you are not in alignment with the spirit of FIRST.' Once again, I must say that I disagree. To me, no matter what your robot can do, gracious professionalism should guide us to not use it maliciously. I don't feel that to run away and hide from good technology is inspirational at all, nor do I feel that it is in the spirit of FIRST. I am extremely proud of the tremendous robot that Bobcat Robotics delivered to the competition this year (BTW -C.H.A.O.S. is also tremendous). I am equally proud of the way that our coaches and drivers used the robot in their matches. There were several robots that needed repairs after tangling with the Bobcat this year, but it was not because we tried to break them, it was because we built a very robust robot that could initiate and withstand a lot of contact fighting for the puck. I really feel that our design was in the spirit of FIRST for that reason. I am sorry if you feel differently.

One further note. There is one robot that stands out in my mind as having the ability to tip robots. It is the great machine built by team #68. FIRST recognized this great robot with the Motorola Quality Award at Nationals. Once again, I think FIRST has sent a clear message about the type of robot they preferred to see at the competition.

I must admit
 

Posted by Tom Wible, Coach on team #131, chaos, from central high school manchester and osram-sylvania.

Posted on 5/2/99 7:56 AM MST


In Reply to: Trust yourself with technology, don't hide from it posted by P.J. Baker on 5/1/99 7:48 AM MST:



I have got to admit it, your team is one that we look up to. You have a great team, with a good robot this year. When I saw your robot in Hartford this year I thought that you simply adapted last year's design to this year's game. You had a killer machine last year, and applying that basic desgn to this year's game I thought was a unique approach. I could see how you played your game and you did not seem to go after other robots to tip them. You seemed to play an offensive game, with some occaisional basket blocking. In the spirit of FIRST IMHO.
I will say it again though, if you had crossed over into the dark side, and made it a plan to tip over teams that were on the puck with their baskets raised, I would say that you would not be acting in the true spirit of FIRST. Face it, no robot with a basket can withstand a robot with an arm pulling it down. Most teams designed thier robot to have a basket which would elevate to eight feet, with a standard wheel base. It would very difficult to design a robot which could do all that this year's contest demanded, and add to that the ability to withstand tipping from an attacking team, AND withstand a fall with your basket raised.
My interpretation after two years in FIRST, is that FIRST wants sportsmanlike interaction, without the destructive interaction that tipping brings. I think FIRST needs to better clarify tipping so we can all know what is allowed, and what is not. As I recall from the BENGI-BOT, if two robots became entangled when battling for the puck, and one or both fell as a result, that was OK. It was not OK for one robot to reach out and pull another over by its' lifted basket, even to gain access to the puck. To tell you the truth, I didn't even think about any of this until I got home and some teammates and coworkers mentioned it to me after watching some of the video tape. Then it started to sink in. People who are looking in from the 'outside', thought that FIRST was not like robot wars, with tipping and the damage that comes with it.
I am not against robots with arms. I am against intentionally pulling over robots who have their baskets raised, anywhere on the field.

Sincerely,

Tom Wible

Re: I must admit
 

Posted by P.J. Baker, Engineer on team #177, Bobcat Robotics, from South Windsor High School and International Fuel Cells.

Posted on 5/3/99 5:50 AM MST


In Reply to: I must admit posted by Tom Wible on 5/2/99 7:56 AM MST:



: I have got to admit it, your team is one that we look up to. You have a great team, with a good robot this year. When I saw your robot in Hartford this year I thought that you simply adapted last year's design to this year's game. You had a killer machine last year, and applying that basic desgn to this year's game I thought was a unique approach. I could see how you played your game and you did not seem to go after other robots to tip them. You seemed to play an offensive game, with some occaisional basket blocking. In the spirit of FIRST IMHO.

Thanks for your kind words. This was actually the third straight year that arm design has appeared on our robot.


: I will say it again though, if you had crossed over into the dark side, and made it a plan to tip over teams that were on the puck with their baskets raised, I would say that you would not be acting in the true spirit of FIRST.

I agree 100%, but this is not what I was upset about. Your initial post implied (to me) that robot DESIGNS, like TKO and, by extension, ours. Were not in the spirit of FIRST. This no longer appears to be what you are saying.


: Face it, no robot with a basket can withstand a robot with an arm pulling it down. Most teams designed thier robot to have a basket which would elevate to eight feet, with a standard wheel base. It would very difficult to design a robot which could do all that this year's contest demanded, and add to that the ability to withstand tipping from an attacking team, AND withstand a fall with your basket raised.

I believe that FIRST wanted teams to account for this with both design strategy and game play strategy. We were all unstable when fully extended. A good design strategy was to build a machine that was as stable as possible and had a quick, retractable lift. A quick, retractable lift alowed teams to wait until the final seconds to deploy their lift, and also return their robot to a more stable postion if it needed to fend off an attack.


: My interpretation after two years in FIRST, is that FIRST wants sportsmanlike interaction, without the destructive interaction that tipping brings. I think FIRST needs to better clarify tipping so we can all know what is allowed, and what is not. As I recall from the BENGI-BOT, if two robots became entangled when battling for the puck, and one or both fell as a result, that was OK. It was not OK for one robot to reach out and pull another over by its' lifted basket, even to gain access to the puck. To tell you the truth, I didn't even think about any of this until I got home and some teammates and coworkers mentioned it to me after watching some of the video tape. Then it started to sink in. People who are looking in from the 'outside', thought that FIRST was not like robot wars, with tipping and the damage that comes with it.
: I am not against robots with arms. I am against intentionally pulling over robots who have their baskets raised, anywhere on the field.

This was only my first year doing this, and I did not see the infamous 'BENGI-BOT' demo. My interpretation of the rules (and the spirit of FIRST) goes something like this:
1) Intentional attepmts to break or tip a robot are illegal - even
if they fail
2) Strategies of holding down or pushing down baskets or
pushing/pulling robots off of the puck are legal (I will admit
that grabbing an extended lift up high and pulling is, at best,
on the borderline of legality) - even if they result in damage
to a robot or tipping of a robot

I think FIRST asked us to build a robust robot that could withstand a lot of contact. I do not think they meant for the puck to be a safe haven for a robot that loaded itself up with 10 floppies, climbed onto the puck and lifted its basket within the first 45 seconds of the match. I think that FIRST wants (and know that I want) exciting matches. In this year's game, most of the excitement came while teams were fighting for the puck. I think that to disallow rough contact once a robot has raised its floppies would have made the game much less exciting to watch. As far as the inconsistency in the officiating between regionals. I would say that you have to expect that. Not only do the officials change between regionals, but no one, not even FIRST really knows what the game will look like before the first regional is played. I think that there were a less DQ's as we got further into the regional season because FIRST saw how the game was being played. You may think that it's unfair to change the interpretation of the rules as the season progresses. Personally, I do not have a problem with it as long as it is consistant within an event. Part of our job at acompetition is to see what is and is not being allowed, and to adjust our strategy accordingly.

That pretty much sums up my feelings on this issue. I am willing to 'agree to disagree' on interpretations of the rules, as long as we can both agree that the DESIGNS of the Bobcat, TKO, G-Force and others are well within the spirit of FIRST. I have enjoyed sparring with you over this issue, and hope that you'll be at the Rumble in July. If Andy doesn't beat me to it, I'll buy you a coke :-).

Best Regards,

P.J. Baker