View Single Post
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-02-2012, 12:25
artdutra04's Avatar
artdutra04 artdutra04 is offline
VEX Robotics Engineer
AKA: Arthur Dutra IV; NERD #18
FRC #0148 (Robowranglers)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Greenville, TX
Posts: 3,078
artdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond reputeartdutra04 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: 179 Swamp Teasers

Quote:
Originally Posted by EricLeifermann View Post
I personally think everyone is looking into this on a microscopic scale when it comes to what is contiguous. If you go to the hardest and strictest enforcement of a definition of a word you will get what everyone is talking about with things being contiguous. I see it as the sprocket is attached to the axle which is attached to the ramp as one assembly which has already crossed the frame perimeter. Yes the sprocket has its individual teeth that make the chain move but its part of 1 part. I get that those teeth will cross the perimeter at a different miniscule time. The GDC's response to the Q&A's seem straight forward to me, i don't get why people are so worried about it.
Common sense and what the rules actually say/how the GDC interprets those things are two entirely different beasts.

Common sense says a wheel or sprocket rigidly attached to an appendage that crosses the frame perimeter is obviously contiguous. If you strictly and exactly follow what the GDC has ruled on G21 in the Q&A forum, these are illegal. Until now, the basic gist of all GDC rulings on G21 has been: "if it is outside the frame perimeter, it must be a single contiguous piece (with the test of contiguous-ness only being the on the parts outside the frame perimeter) at all times. If it is not contiguous, it's considered multiple appendages and illegal".

If this seems inane, it's because it is. You can't build robots based upon what your gut says is common sense or what seems to be the intent of the GDC. You have to build your robots based upon exactly what's written in the rules. You also can't decide to arbitrarily enforce GDC rulings on some things (like whips on an intake roller) and not on others (ordinary wheels on an appendage) even though they both violate the contiguous/one appendage/frame perimeter ruling in exactly the same manner.

I'm really hoping the GDC realizes the untenability of the "must be contiguous at all times outside the frame perimeter" position on G21 in today's team update and comes up with a better solution.
__________________
Art Dutra IV
Robotics Engineer, VEX Robotics, Inc., a subsidiary of Innovation First International (IFI)
Robowranglers Team 148 | GUS Robotics Team 228 (Alumni) | Rho Beta Epsilon (Alumni) | @arthurdutra

世上无难事,只怕有心人.