Quote:
Originally Posted by EricLeifermann
If the team took off their shooter to put the blocker on because with both the shooter and blocker they are over weight, then they should still pass the new inspection. However they would have to play without their shooter for the rest to the competition including elims. They would not be allowed to put the shooter back on as that would violate the "multiple interchangeable mechanisms must be included in the 120 pound limit" rule.
That is how I have seen it enforced in all my years, and how it was enforced at Northern Lights. As I am not an RI, I can only comment on how I have seen it enforced and how I interpret the rule. Final ruling goes to the LRI at each competition. Though having the rules on hand to cite never hurts, when politely disagreeing with your robot inspectors.
|
How many times do you have to swap mechanisms for it to be considered "multiple interchangeable mechanisms"? Is swapping once enough, or do you have to go back to the original set up at least once? What defines a design change on the robot, versus swapping mechanisms? It's tricky to figure out... IMO, if the old mechanism is still a viable robot mechanism (still intact and could be put back on), then it gets weighed. If the team chooses to disassemble the mechanism, then it could be a different story. If they remove the mechanism from the venue (and thus are not allowed to bring it back in), then it could be a different story. I was fortunate and didn't have to deal with any of this at Lake Superior (we had no full court shooters, and thus no radically changing robots, unlike you guys!), but with North Star coming up in a few days, I may be forced to solidify my interpretation of this rule, and figure out exactly where I draw the line.
At any rate, I would encourage everyone to get their LRI involved early on if you're considering making a significant change that might, in any small way, run afoul of this rule, even if you think it shouldn't.