"Heading" balls?

[JasonStern]

The following rules apply to robot interaction with the balls:

<G44> BALL CARRYING – ROBOTS may not CARRY BALLS.

<G45> Active BALL control - ROBOTS may not control BALL direction with active MECHANISMS above the BUMPER ZONE.

<G46> BALL Penetration Restriction – The BALL must not extend more than 3 inches inside the FRAME PERIMETER as defined in Rule <R19>.

<R19> ROBOTS must be designed so that in normal operation BALLS cannot extend more than 3 inches inside the FRAME PERIMETER below the level of the BUMPER ZONE.

Do I read this correctly to mean we can "head" balls in the air if we don't possess or carry them? Does this also mean we can control the ball direction if the ball falls within our bumper zone from above as long a) the active control mechanism falls within the bumper zone and b) the ball never falls below the bumper zone?

Thanks!
Jason

[DMetalKong]

According to G45, the restriction on above-the-bumper active mechanisms, it would seem that a device to 'head' balls by hitting them back up would be against the rules. I believe that the 'bumper zone' it is referring to here is the area between and 10" and 16" off the ground, not the area exclusively above the bumpers, and thus G45 applies to above the whole robot.


Edit: Didn't read the original post too well. If the active mechanism is within/below the bumper zone, heading the ball might work. Back to the rules.

[Lil' Lavery]

I'm going to agree with DMetalKong's interpretation of <G45> and say you cannot use an active mechanism to interact with the balls above 16" from the ground (top of the bumper zone). However, a passive "head" with a frame of the robot would probably be acceptable, though very hard to do consistently or in a controlled fashion.

[BRAVESaj25bd8]

I cannot find a definition of "active". If it is simply any moving piece, then we should be able to have a stationary ramp or something on the robot which the ball can roll down so long as the track is stationary. If "active" means any part put there solely for the purpose of directing a ball somewhere, then this strategy is not legal. Thoughts?

[zaphodp.jensen]

So then could you put an active mechanism in the bumper zone(10 to 16 in.) without violating G45? The mechanism wouldn't be above the bumper zone, so technically. . .

[NorviewsVeteran]

"When reading these rules, please use technical common sense (engineering thinking) rather than “lawyering” the interpretation and splitting hairs over the precise wording in an attempt to find loopholes."

[s_forbes]

An actuated mechanism used to "head" the balls would very likely be a violation of G45.

However, I haven't spotted anything yet that would restrict heading with an inactive mechanism. It seems like a plausable way to deflect deposited balls back to your half of the field.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by zaphodp.jensen

So then could you put an active mechanism in the bumper zone(10 to 16 in.) without violating G45? The mechanism wouldn't be above the bumper zone, so technically. . .

Your bumpers are in the bumper zone and cannot be articulated.

[zaphodp.jensen]

Also, what would the definition of carrying be? The rules aren't very clear. They state:

CARRYING: POSSESSING a BALL that is not in contact with the FIELD

POSSESSION: Controlling the position and movement of a BALL. A BALL shall be considered in POSSESSION if, as the ROBOT moves or changes orientation (e.g. backs up or spins in place), the BALL remains in approximately the same position relative to the ROBOT.

So, how long would the ball have to be on the robot before it would be carrying?
Theoretically, if a ball falls on you while you are moving, and it stays on top of you, that would be carrying.

In response, the bumpers would close to the bottom of the zone so that the active mechanism could be closer to the top.

[DMetalKong]

Originally Posted by zaphodp.jensen

Also, what would the definition of carrying be? The rules aren't very clear. They state:


So, how long would the ball have to be on the robot before it would be carrying?
Theoretically, if a ball falls on you while you are moving, and it stays on top of you, that would be carrying.

Yes, that would be carrying. It makes it very important to have a sloped top to your robot so that balls cannot stay up there.

[zaphodp.jensen]

But how long could the ball stay on the robot while stationary before it becomes carrying?

[buddyb]

Originally Posted by zaphodp.jensen

But how long could the ball stay on the robot while stationary before it becomes carrying?

I'd guess it's up to the judges. Your best bet is to move your robot so that it is no longer carrying the ball, just in case (ex. if the ball drops on to your robot and is on a ledge, move your robot so the ball moves off) .

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by zaphodp.jensen

But how long could the ball stay on the robot while stationary before it becomes carrying?

The moment you're in possession of it.

[dodar]

But you are allowed to be in possession of a ball just as long as the ball is moving relative to where your robot is

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by dodar

But you are allowed to be in possession of a ball just as long as the ball is moving relative to where your robot is

Yes, but if you're in possession of a ball while it's not touching the ground, it's carrying.

Originally Posted by Section 7, Definitions

CARRYING: POSSESSING a BALL that is not in contact with the FIELD.