View Single Post
  #15   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-04-2005, 08:31
petek's Avatar
petek petek is offline
What would Dave do?
AKA: Peter Kieselbach
FRC #3654 (Tech Tigers)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2002
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Middletown, CT
Posts: 923
petek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond reputepetek has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to petek
Re: Should FIRST address "ramp bots"?

Maybe I'm looking at this too simplistically, but rather than limit engineering designs, I would prefer that FIRST instruct referees to penalize a team which, while in the process of pushing on another robot, causes it to fall over. This would apply to any shape of robot and would not penalize the "ramp bot" unless it was driving into the tippee. It would make it a penalty to push a robot up the side of a wedge (e.g. this year's goals) until it tipped over. This would not penalize a robot if the two got tangled up and, while trying to get un-tangled, one of them tipped over, unless the tipper was pushing against the tippee. Also, it would not penalize a robot if the tippee was doing the pushing or ran into the side of the tipper accidentally.

Am I missing something?
__________________
Pete Kieselbach
#4