View Single Post
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 19-01-2012, 22:11
Tyler Olds Tyler Olds is offline
FUN Show Host
no team (First Updates Now)
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Oshkosh, WI
Posts: 1,159
Tyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond reputeTyler Olds has a reputation beyond repute
Re: FIRST Q&A Cop Out?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy Grady View Post
I read this on the Q&A today

Q. Would a passive device applying force to multiple sides of the 2x2 angle on the bridge to partially/fully support robot weight violate [G10] if it didn’t actively clamp/grasp/attach to the angle, so that at match end the robot can be lifted off the bridge w/out actuating/releasing any mechanism(s)?
A. The purpose of this forum is to answer questions about rules, not to perform design reviews for legality.

This is an extremely valid question that needs an answer. What is FIRST's definition of grasp, attach, or grapple? I thought the question was asked perfectly, and it could have major implications on a number of overall robot designs. FIRST should not constantly use the "We do not do design reviews" answer. While in some cases the answer may be warranted, in many cases, the best way to clearly express a question is in a form which explains a design of a particular element. This is a design competition, if you can't answer a question of legality of a design element, then you should not be able to tell a team that uses a design that falls within a grey area of a certain rule that they cannot use a robot. If you leave a rule open to interpretation because you don't want to do a "design review" then you must be prepared to allow a team's interpretation of the rule, flat out.

Am I wrong here? This is not the first time I have seen an answer in this year's Q&A that made me completely frustrated.

Completely agree Andy.

Perhaps if we paid $599 we could get a five month extended Q&A support plan. If for any reason they do not answer four of the same type of question, we could get our money back. Think about it, that is only 12% of the original $5,000 registration cost and will pay for itself over and over. Don't worry, if there is not a FRC location near you, you can get service anywhere in the US and the support plan is fully transferable.

On a more serious note:

I wonder if the post would have stated "Would a passive device applying force to multiple sides of the 2x2 angle on the bridge to partially/fully support robot weight violate [G10] if it didn’t actively clamp/grasp/attach to the angle." Leaving out the last part if the question would be answered since it does no talk as much about "design".
__________________
First Updates Now Show Host.
Watch and Listen to FUN on Youtube, iTunes, and www.firstupdatesnow.com
FRC Emcee 2009-2016: Team 2826 Wave Robotics Lead Mentor 2001-2004 Team 93 NEW Apple Corps Alumni
CD Moderator
Reply With Quote