Thread: Discs Bounce Out of Goals
View Single Post
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-02-2013, 13:17
Andrew Schreiber Andrew Schreiber is offline
Joining the 900 Meme Team
FRC #0079
  
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Misplaced Michigander
Posts: 4,062
Andrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond reputeAndrew Schreiber has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Discs Bounce Out of Goals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alpha Beta View Post
Several teams have noted that goals with a back and chains behave quite a bit differently than the open holes suggested in the low cost field diagrams.

http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...6&postcount=13
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...11&postcount=6
http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...77&postcount=2

We can confirm those concerns. We have observed that a direct hit on a chain will drop a disc into the goal, but as the chains start to swing on successive shots (or if a shot hits between two strands of chain) it is quite easy to get them to bounce back out. By suggesting in the low cost field diagrams that teams build goals without chains and a hard backstop to test with many teams have been set-up for an unpleasant surprise when nearly 50% of their shots are rejected.

Is this just part of the design challenge or will FIRST modify the field set-up to help discs be retained in the goals? It reminds me of the surprise last year (2012) that led FIRST to flipping the polycarbonate over under the bridges. It also reminds me of 2010 when FIRST modified the penalties associated with a design constraint after it proved detrimental to game play. Looking forward to our week one event in Lubbock to see how the real goals behave.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
In 2010 FIRST removed the penalties for having a soccer ball go under the robot after week 1 events when penalties dominated many mid-level teams' performances. Appears to be a case where the design challenge was clearly given but enforcing it proved detrimental to the overall event.
(http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...ad.php?t=84091)

2012 is the first time I remember FIRST changing the field design after a week 1 event to help out the teams who couldn't work with the polycarbonate under the Bridge. Part of the problem was the polycarbonate was not part of the low cost field suggested by FIRST and while some teams designed a mechanism to reach under the bridge to get the balls, having the majority of the balls stuck out of play and disabling the bridges was a big deal for teams who didn't plan for it.

In 2006 this was also an issue. FIRST did not modify anything and instead said that it was just part of the game challenge.
__________________




.