I think there are two separate, but related items for discussion.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
3743: Completely, 100% supported by the bridge. Eligible for CP.
|
This one is kind of a fine distinction, but FIRST has been consistent in the Q&A that the whole weight of the robot must have a load path through the bridge to be supported (though not necessarily directly).
But the system is statically indeterminate, so the exact load path is unclear. If all of 3743's weight is borne by its own direct contact with the bridge, then it's supported. But given that it's in contact with 488's (flexible, elastic) bumpers, and there are numerous small protrusions that appear to be making contact, there's basically no plausible way for the load path
not to pass through 488 at some point, and without at least some of the force at the contact point being due to 3743's weight. (Let's leave aside the question of whether 488 is supported by the bridge for a moment; we'll deal with that too.)
There's no escape hatch in the rule for this case. Given that it's not possible to formally determine the load path, the safe assumption to make is that contact implies support—because at a basic physical level, that's a substantially true statement. It also fits the rules just fine, because contact is irrelevant if both robots are clearly supported through the bridge.
Contrast that with the alternative—that load paths be assessed in every situation, and some judgment be made as to what degree of force to ignore. (1 N? 1 nN?) It's essentially unfathomable that referees are prepared to make
that call consistently.
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
488 is the tricky one. They are definitely on 3743 (completely supported by the bridge via 3743), and definitely on the bridge. From the angle of this picture, it's unclear whether they're even touching 2952; it almost looks like their bumper is going into a gap in 2952's bumper.
|
I'm definitely unable to make the call with the same level of evidence as the referees on the field—so if indeed 488 and 2952 are not in contact, I've got no problem with that outcome.
If I'm correct on this second question, the first question is moot: 0 CP. If I'm not correct on this point, then there's a chance for 1 CP,
if I'm also incorrect on the first point. (Of course, given the state of the rules, I don't think there's any way—other than an arbitrary interpretation not specifically addressed in the rules—that the first point is not valid. If that's the determination that the referee made, it's a stretch, but plausibly within their discretion.)
Of course, none of this negates the problems with the rule construction or the FMS feeds.