179 Swamp Teasers

Originally Posted by Tom Line

Take another look. That appears to be the ball handling mechanism on the bottom of their ramp (look at the vertical channels and teh white gears). I'm guessing they are, essentially, a close in dumper. They plan on playing in the offensive zone. Since you're not likely to have 2 bots on defense, their ramp system only makes sense in the offensive zone.

Good find! Do you think they'll be shooting any higher than the second basket, though?

[Nolo]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Good find! Do you think they'll be shooting any higher than the second basket, though?

Does it matter? 10 points in hybrid + 40 points for balancing all 100% by one team. Great job guys! I'm amazed.

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Is this legal?

Robots may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any Arena structure. Robots may not push or react against the top of the Fender. (Robots may push or react against any element of the Arena that is not protected by another rule.)
Violation: Foul

That's the only rule they might have a problem with.

[Swampdude]

Thanks for the compliments!
Good luck copying this, there are many, many particulars to make this system work properly. If they successfully do at this point in the season then hats off to them. This posting is meant to inspire creativity, so if that's what it does GREAT! There are a lot of features not shown here like the ball shooter/collector and nuances about the balancing gauge alert system as well

It lays flat on the ramp surface when balanced. However I understand a recent Q&A would allow it to touch underneath as long as it comes off easy.

[Aren_Hill]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Is this legal?

From the looks of it they aren't reacting off of any surface but the top of the bridge, hence no grabbing or attaching or grappling.

my hunch says legal, can't find anything against it

[JB987]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Is this legal?

It looks like it would be legal if indeed at no point in time while engaged with the edge of the bridge the top and bottom plates of the channel touch top and bottom at the same instant (which would be considered a "grasp"). If enough weight is placed on the bot's elevated and forward cantilevered ramp it is conceivable that the bottom might not touch the underside of the bridge. Love to see it close up...

[Donut]

That is a brilliant solution for how to get 3 robots on a bridge. I wouldn't be worried about copycats considering how many robot designs would have to be completely scrapped to attempt anything similar to this.

Good luck this season, this will be a fun robot to watch.

[Justin Montois]

Per FIRST Q & A, Emphasis mine...

Q. Per this rule, would a device that utilizes a passive "appendage" deployed over the center line barrier (bump) to prevent your machine from being moved or twisted when hit (by applying forces to opposing sides of the barrier be considered a violation of this rule? Please elaborate on rule intent.

A. The intent of Rule [G10] is stated in its opening sentence, "Robots may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any Arena structure." While, we cannot comment on the legality of a specific design, holding on to a field element is considered grappling and a violation of Rule [G10].

Q. Is it permissable for a robot on the bridge to extend a device that can also react off the bottom surface of the bridge provided that device does not grasp the bridge firmly?

A. Rule [G10] does not put a qualifier on how a Robot may legally grasp the Bridge. It simply says it cannot do it.


I feel like they might be in trouble...

[techtiger1]

Dan looking good as usual ,very good execution of the idea, I almost expected to see a robot from you guys like that this year. Also, we will have no problem climbing up if needed hehe. Good job to the 179 crew as usual.

Originally Posted by Justin Montois

Per FIRST Q & A, Emphasis mine...

Q. Per this rule, would a device that utilizes a passive "appendage" deployed over the center line barrier (bump) to prevent your machine from being moved or twisted when hit (by applying forces to opposing sides of the barrier be considered a violation of this rule? Please elaborate on rule intent.

A. The intent of Rule [G10] is stated in its opening sentence, "Robots may not grab, grasp, grapple, or attach to any Arena structure." While, we cannot comment on the legality of a specific design, holding on to a field element is considered grappling and a violation of Rule [G10].

Q. Is it permissable for a robot on the bridge to extend a device that can also react off the bottom surface of the bridge provided that device does not grasp the bridge firmly?

A. Rule [G10] does not put a qualifier on how a Robot may legally grasp the Bridge. It simply says it cannot do it.


I feel like they might be in trouble...

IF it is illegal, maybe they'll let them compete because it's so awesome!

[Joe G.]

I don't see how this is illegal. The system does not grasp the bridge. It rests on top of it. The bulk of the robot just happens to be beneath the part doing the "resting."

Amazing job 179! I was hoping we'd see some creative ways to get the 40 point bonus.

[Basel A]

Another potentially problematic rule:

[R06]
Traction devices may not have surface features such as metal, sandpaper, hard plastic studs, cleats, or other attachments. Traction devices include all parts of the Robot that are designed to transmit any propulsive and/or braking forces between the Robot and the Court.

It appears to me as if a metal contact on the bridge propels the robot upward? However, if this strategy is legal, then it is absolutely brilliant! Nice work!

[Justin Montois]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Another potentially problematic rule:

It appears to me as if a metal contact on the bridge propels the robot upward? However, if this strategy is legal, then it is absolutely brilliant! Nice work!

Ut oh...

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by Aren_Hill

From the looks of it they aren't reacting off of any surface but the top of the bridge, hence no grabbing or attaching or grappling.

my hunch says legal, can't find anything against it

I initially missed the single contact, I assumed they were reacting on bottom as well.

Can't see any problems here; great design. Truly epic.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by Basel A

Another potentially problematic rule:



It appears to me as if a metal contact on the bridge propels the robot upward? However, if this strategy is legal, then it is absolutely brilliant! Nice work!

Could be covered in traction material or something... that's an easy rule to work with.

What concerns me is how do the bumpers work? Unless that ramp is 33 degrees there is no way to put a bumper under it when deployed. (Minimum height for top of bumper is 5")