Quote:
Originally Posted by artdutra04
Basically, at any given point in time, your robot must be able to be dropped into a giant virtual bucket that's Ø54" x 60"/84". As long as it can fit inside this bucket in some orientation, it's a legal configuration.
Much simpler for people to comprehend, and it does not negatively affect teams who based their designs on the pre 2013-01-15 update rulings.
|
That's what I'm hoping they do as well. (Apart from the thing that could be mistaken for a division slash in your example—but I think FIRST can figure out appropriate wording that fits the rulebook.)
It allows officials to use the least-restrictive interpretation of what it means to be robot-oriented, and lets much of the existing design work stand.
On the other hand, it
may go against the GDC's intent, but that's the price FIRST needs to pay for not adequately capturing the intent in the first two versions.
More practically, it's hard to judge the size of a 3-D cylinder superimposed over a moving robot climbing an obstacle. But since it was hard enough to judge the size of that cylinder when it was oriented with respect to an obvious reference, presumably FIRST has thought about this sort of thing and can devise some way of enforcing it when the orientation is completely arbitrary. (Hopefully "ignore it" doesn't figure into the final cut.)