Quote:
Originally Posted by Gregor
Cylinders are not fun to design for or inspect. A nice rectangular size constraint would be much easier on everyone involved.
The inconsistency between inspections at regionals (this is always something), but particularly shooter guards this year. This shouldn't be up to the LRI. It should have at least been adressed (one way or the other) after week 1 at the latest.
|
Yes, agreed, inconsistent and confusing. Game rules vs robot rules. It's not just the cylinder or shooters, it's bumpers also. Everyone has different experiences and areas of expertise. RIs have to know every design solution a team may come up with and if it complies at all possible times of a match. Thus, please help us to help your teams.
For bumpers, I like to feel the bumpers and push on them to make sure of their construction and ensure they are secured to the frame. However, not every RI does the hands-on-the-robot approach when it comes to bumpers. Why do I have to feel the bumpers and push on them? Why can't I just look at them?
We want every team out on the field competing in their matches. It is our job to help the teams get out there on time and be successful; however, there is also a limit to what we can do in a few hours vs what the robot rules stated 6 or more weeks prior. Thus, I'm going to have to ask you all to meet us half way.
I am going to suggest that each team have a seasoned student compliance lead that goes through the rules and checklist criteria comparing them to the actual build of the robot to ensure compliance to the rules prior to bagging the robot. I say this because we have seen several cases where the team assumed the rules had not changed from the previous year and went to town on their build resulting in a very noncompliant robot showing up at a regional. Knowing this happens frequently, we have offered as well as other super experienced teams have offered to inspect the robots for compliance prior to bag and tag. Unfortunately, we do not get many takers of this valuable service.