String Theory: <G22> at the Championships

[Ashburn]

This is a suggestion for those attending championships who are concerned with violating rule <G22>, also known as “breaking the plane.” Though I cannot be sure that this suggestion will work in practice, it is very easily implemented and I thought I ought to submit my string theory for those who might want to try it.

The idea:
Attach a length of brightly colored string (EDIT: or nylon rope) to the bottom of your robot, near the back end (if your robot has a rear). The string should be coiled and laid under the robot within the appropriate dimensions prior to each match. The length of the string will vary from team to team because the robot, with the string fully extended, will need to adhere to the 80” rule. I imagine that a 1-to-2-foot length of string will probably be sufficient to achieve the goal.

The result:
At the beginning of the match, as soon as the robot moves forward from the starting position, the coiled string will uncoil and trail behind the robot. The length of the string and where it is attached to the bottom of the robot will determine how far behind the robot the end of the string lags behind while the robot travels forward. When the robot stops moving forward, so will the string. Most importantly, however, when the robot backs up, the tail end of the string will remain in place. The string thusly provides a buffer zone for backing up and turning when the robot is in the vicinity of a lane marker or finish line and, ideally, prevents many of the <G22> violations that are most likely to occur during the heat of competition.

The positives:
+ Once completely over a line, the string itself will not break the plane of a lane marker or finish line because it is not rigid, but slack.
+ The main structure of the robot will have a buffer zone in which to maneuver even after crossing a line, because the string (which counts as part of the robot) will not yet have fully crossed over the line.

The negatives:
- A robot will have to travel farther in order for the trailing string to completely cross a line and for the robot to receive points for doing so.

Attached is a series of slides roughly illustrating the concept. If you have any comments, suggestions, or additions to the positives or negatives, feel free. I simply wanted to put this out there. Good luck to all teams!

[Vikesrock]

Seems to me like it could be a huge entanglement hazard with both mechanisms and wheels of other robots

[Josh Goodman]

Quite true....but I think he may be on to something.

[Uberbots]

Well, considering our robot extends to 79.5" in the worst case... i dont think we will be doing this )=

its a good idea though, but i don't like the entanglement issues.

[Corey Oostveen]

I like the concept of this! Very good idea. Like others have mentioned entanglement could be an issue.

Great idea keep on thinking!

[IKE]

This reminds me of the extending tape measures of zone zeal a few years back. Overall I like it. It will be tough to make sure people don't step on your tale, but I really think you are on to something. Very clever...

[Daniel_LaFleur]

I like the idea, although you'd have to make sure you don't get 'hooked' on to the center divider while going around the end lines.

[wingnut1705]

I had thought about this during the Detroit Regional, but our team didn't have the extra space so I didn't bring it up. Entanglement would be a problem, but out of the box ideas can be a great way to solve a problem. This idea should be tried at Atlanta.

[David Brinza]

Somehow this seems inconsistent with my pet peeve of seeing students walk around with their shoelaces untied. I tend to freak out, imagining that they're going to trip, most likely while carrying the robot.

[Alex Golec]

Hmm... this seems similar to the zip-ties used in 2005 in order for the robot to be in contact with the loading zone plate, because clearly straddling the plate was not enough. Three years, and we're still improvising to make up for a lack of common sense in the rules. However, this is tangent to the topic.

The string could be an entanglement hazard with other robot's wheels and be a nuisance overall. Great creativity though!

-Alex

[KTorak]

Originally Posted by Alex469

Hmm... this seems similar to the zip-ties used in 2005 in order for the robot to be in contact with the loading zone plate, because clearly straddling the plate was not enough. Three years, and we're still improvising to make up for a lack of common sense in the rules. However, this is tangent to the topic.

The string could be an entanglement hazard with other robot's wheels and be a nuisance overall. Great creativity though!

-Alex

Exactly what I was thinking!

[Rick TYler]

Originally Posted by Alex469

Three years, and we're still improvising to make up for a lack of common sense in the rules.

I respectfully disagree. You might not like <G22>, but it is crystal clear and easily enforced. Tying string on your robot is lawyering the game, in my opinion, and the time spent coming up with schemes like this might be more fruitfully spent learning to drive your robots in a way that did not violate <G22>.

[Valley Raider]

Originally Posted by Rick TYler

Tying string on your robot is lawyering the game, in my opinion, and the time spent coming up with schemes like this might be more fruitfully spent learning to drive your robots in a way that did not violate <G22>.

With all due respect lawyering the game is exactly what FIRST does, there just not very good at it. Every year they come up with some silly rule that dies need to be their. <G22> is a rule that has decided regionals, and not because of human driving. I have seen matches lost because two robots driving in Hybrid period have run into each-other and cross a line drawing a penalty. I know some will clam that this can be prevented but the fact is this rule is nit-picky.

FIRST makes up roles for their games without thinking about the practicality of them during game play. A great example of this is the 6 foot role that originally existed in the opponents home stretch. They pulled this rule after it became clear that the most teams were not going to be able to get the second trackball down. I say most because my team had a plan with in the rules for getting it down that would have work. This rule didn't need to be removed but it was because it offered nothing to the game.

<G22> is a rule that doesn't nothing to help the game. You already can't play defense for longer then 6 seconds. Tell me what does a team gain from driving backwards, nothing so why does this role need to be in place? Lawyering around the roles is part of the game and if someone can come up with a good way of getting around a pointless rule then good for the its time well spent.

Plus when your Robots in a crate there not much you can do to learn how to drive it better.

[jblay]

i think the whole point of the role is to keep robots moving in a similar direction and to promote scoring to make it more exciting but in practice it makes the games less fun to watch because they are often decided by penalties.

[JaneYoung]

It's a little strange to see the word, rule, changed into the word, role, in this discussion - at times skewing everything a bit more.