Thread: G28, Q&A 83, and Noodling a Can Without Touching it
View Single Post
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2015, 11:32
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
  
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,358
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: G28, Q&A 83, and Noodling a Can Without Touching it
I feel like our team is in purgatory. If a narrow interpretation of G27 stands, we will be forced into engineering hell designing an active mechanism to load totes from the player station. We have studied the tote fall and can meet Narrow G27 but, It requires a nasty complex mechanism. On top of that the ref is going to hell with us. The ref would have to be standing right at the station wall watching very intensely as we drop the totes. Can not take their eyes off of our robot for a second or possibly miss a G27. Our robot will block the view of the tote at the most critical point in the trajectory of the tote. We had to use camera freeze frame to confirm G27 compliance in all tote fall geometries. This would be a totally subjective call by the ref to nail us with a G27. There is always the possibility That in bad driver and human player actions we could incur a visible G27. So what does the ref do to enforce narrow G27 interpretation? If the q+a answer is reversed we may be back on track to tote loading heaven. (not really, It is still complex)