View Single Post
  #52   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-12-2004, 22:58
Marc P. Marc P. is offline
I fix stuff.
AKA: βetamarc
no team
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Watertown, CT
Posts: 997
Marc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond reputeMarc P. has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Marc P.
Re: YMTC: Redabot weighs 129.8?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall
Remember what I said about parts of parts?

Not so fast. It's also a spare part, which doesn't count against the limit.

That's a symptom of the real problem--a badly conceived rule. There's no universal way of determining whether their extra drill is a spare part, mounted on the mechanism for convenience (where it is legal) or a part of the mechanism (where it is illegal, due to weight). You could take the naïve approach, and say, "well, it's attached to the mechanism, so it mustn't be legal", but that comes down to a silly semantic argument as to when something is part of something else, and when it's a separate entity. Note that they (properly) pass the weigh-in, because they know that a mechanism or part need not be attached to the robot to be part of its official weight (e.g. the two function modules--which probably can't be attached at the same time).
I don't think it's a badly conceived rule though. In my experience, there IS a way to tell whether a drill motor is a spare part. My team keeps our spare motors in their boxes until needed. These are kept aside in the event one of the pre-mounted motors burns out. Our intentions for this motor are clear- it's kept as a spare/replacement (the two words are interchangeable here) for a mechanism on the robot who's function is consistent upon changing the motor.

"There's no universal way of determining whether their extra drill is a spare part, mounted on the mechanism for convenience (where it is legal) or a part of the mechanism (where it is illegal, due to weight)."

This is more a matter of perception than anything else. As a referee/inspector, if a team claimed to have a "spare" drill motor already mounted on a mechanism for convenience, and it was clearly a different mechanism from one already mounted on the robot, I'd have to tell them to lose some weight if the total was over 130.0 (ideal solution, where everyone ends up happy and legal), or they can't use the extra arm (the apparent intention of the rule in question- to limit possible modular configurations).

The example of Redabot probably isn't the best way to illustrate the intention of the rule, where the weight is close enough where something can probably be chopped to make it legal. Rather, say the weight of Redabot by itself is 118.0, while Jumpy is 10.0. Grabby weighs 12.0 pounds. Clearly under the 2004 rules* only one mechanism would be legal, period. The total sum of all possible configurations would be 140. Under the 2003 rules, this would have been perfectly fine- the heaviest configuration would be with Grabby, and weigh in at 130.0.

Both mechanisms have parts in common. Both are made of aluminum, both have belts, and motors, and bolts, and rivets. Should we consider the aluminum itself a spare part, because it's common between the two? Would it then be fair to consider the drill motor a spare part because it's shared between the two? How about the bolts holding them both together?

I know the extremist argument doesn't usually work, but it's getting late and my brain is shutting down for the night, and I'm running out of fuel to debate. Hopefully you can see what I'm saying though.


*Jonathan correctly pointed out the purpose of this thread to be "YOU make the call" rather than going to the original source of the rules, but my intention was to highlight the "Based on the 2004 rules" part, and since an original source of the rules is conveniently handy around these parts, ultimately, the official FIRST ruling comes from his general direction, regardless of what the group decides here.
Reply With Quote