How does 469 not violate <R19>?

[KrazyCarl92]

http://usfirst.org/uploadedFiles/Com...0Game_RevK.pdf
Straight of the FIRST website:

<R19> ROBOTS must be designed so that in normal operation BALLS cannot extend more than 3 inches inside:
a) the FRAME PERIMETER below the level of the BUMPER ZONE (see figure 8-5).
b) a MECHANISM or feature designed to deflect balls in a controlled manner that is above the level of the BUMPER ZONE.

Now I haven't actually seen the robot in action but from I have read in forums, part b sounds like it is exactly what 469's robot does. If someone could post a video of these ridiculous matches where they scored 25, 26 points or shed some light on how it doesn't violate this rule that would be great.

[Chris is me]

It's very simple.

ROBOTS must be designed so that in normal operation BALLS cannot extend more than 3 inches inside a MECHANISM or feature designed to deflect balls in a controlled manner that is above the level of the BUMPER ZONE.

It does not extend more than 3 inches in said mechanism.

[KrazyCarl92]

how could it run along the entire robot and not go more than three inches along the robot...explain

[apalrd]

Their ball return funnel is not more than 3 inches deep. Thus, it is never more than 3 inches into the MECHANISM.

[Paul Copioli]

Read the team update that specifically allowed their design. It was one of the last updates. They got called for one active penalty as they were moving their flipper when a ball touched it. Other than that one incident (the drive coach had to do push-ups), the machine is perfectly legal.

I was at Cass Tech, I saw their robot, and I am familiar with the rule. They are perfectly legal according to the rules and updates. You have to see it to believe it.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by David Dawson

469 can be stopped with a simple strategy. Just "hit them" the ball only sits 3" inside of the the ramp. So when we played them in the Cass tech finals 305 gave them a slight tap to knock the balls off their ramp and it worked just about every single time....Only problem was we couldn't stop 217 from scoring, and lets face it those guys can win a match 3 vs 1.

I haven't seen it in person, but it seems from this post that 469 followed the rule exactly. It does put a slight limitation on their amazing capabilities (9 inch ball on 3 inch deep ramp is not as good as large funnel into 10 inch tubes)

Originally Posted by Paul Copioli

Read the team update that specifically allowed their design. It was one of the last updates.

Team Update 2 clarified the necessary rules to make their design legal. Oddly enough, the update was released a day after this type of design started to be discussed on Chief Delphi.

As a proponent of this design concept, I am happy to see it is effective and feasible within the other design parameters for this game. Props to 469 for building it and to the GDC for not making it illegal with a later Update (widely considered a possibility by many people I talked to).

[KrazyCarl92]

The ` are spacers, the . are the funnel and the , are the balls
````,,,,,,,,`````````````````````````,,,,,,,
```,,,,,,,,,,,,``````````````````````,,,,,,,,,,,
``,,,,Ball,,,,,,``````` ................``` ,,,Ball,,,,,
```,,,,,,,,,,,,````````.....................|,,,,, ,,,,,,
````,,,,,,,,`````````|....................|...,,,, ,,,
.................```````|.....................|... ............
......................````|<-15 inches-->|....................
|..|........................
|..|............................
|..|................................
|..|...................................
|<>---------1 inch

Why is this not a penetration of more than 3 inches? Or is my diagram innaccurate? I feel like it is in fact penetrating further and further into the feature as it would roll down the rampish thing.

[Thuperscout]

It is legal because the 'mechanism' above the bumpers is not active, the only active piece is the part that changes which goals the balls will score to, and that only changes when the balls are NOT in contact with the robot.

If I'm understanding your picture correctly, the balls are only going into the mechanism by three inches... the funnels or ramps whatever you call them, only redirect the balls, and the ball enters them three inches in, and leaves three inches in, so there is no fault. The robot is not possesing the ball, only redirecting.

[KrazyCarl92]

Okay i get it now, but would it be feasible for a team to get into the tower on the platform and block the balls that are coming down their funnel?

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

Okay i get it now, but would it be feasible for a team to get into the tower on the platform and block the balls that are coming down their funnel?

Only if you want to risk 2 penalties per ball blocked. See <G47>.

[KrazyCarl92]

<G47> talks about balls coming down the return, I was asking about balls coming down 469's funnel/ball director.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

Okay i get it now, but would it be feasible for a team to get into the tower on the platform and block the balls that are coming down their funnel?

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Only if you want to risk 2 penalties per ball blocked. See <G47>.

I think he means when the ball is on 469's ramps not in contact with the ball return, so no <G47>. However, I think it would be hard to interact with ball on top of 469 without violating <G30> or <G38>.

You would have to design a superstructure such the lower half of your bot can drive most of the way into the tunnel and would the superstructure be close enough (not touching) to 469's ramps so a 9 inch ball would get stuck (on both ramps hopefully). Since your bot can't expand (not your tower) you are at a disadvantage (not sure if its physically possible). If it is possible, a major disadvantage is that as only defender you leave both goals wide open while you sit there. 469 might be able to undeploy and back up to free the balls for others to score. Although, that might cause a (few) <G45> penalties on 469 if it actively touches balls during undeploy (debatable if these penalties are caused by your defender). Thats at least something to think about. If I were on 469, I wouldn't let other teams near the ramps with a tape measure

[KrazyCarl92]

<G29> makes it clear that an alliance could have one robot in the tower, thus in the way of 469's funnel, and another blocking shots from other robots in the defensive zone.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

<G29> makes it clear that an alliance could have one robot in the tower, thus in the way of 469's funnel, and another blocking shots from other robots in the defensive zone.

By "in the tower" do you mean in the tunnel? (Then see my last post). Or on the platform? Then the obvious question is: how do you get up on the platform, without grasping the opponents tower, in autonomous before 469 gets there?

[EricH]

Originally Posted by KrazyCarl92

<G29> makes it clear that an alliance could have one robot in the tower, thus in the way of 469's funnel, and another blocking shots from other robots in the defensive zone.

You know how hard it is to get onto those towers from the bumps unless you were already designed to do that, right? And if you're hanging, you're violating your normal configuration, right? It's not your tower, so no protection from penalties, right? You have to get off before the finale period, right?

And, if you're talking under the tower, I don't think there's room for 2 robots down there. <G29> gets called

Now, come up with a design that will not get a penalty, and will block 469 while somebody else is defending, and we'll talk.