Go to Post I hate having to wear official pants. - Cothron Theiss [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #11   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-01-2013, 22:41
Basel A's Avatar
Basel A Basel A is offline
It's pronounced Basl with a soft s
AKA: @BaselThe2nd
FRC #3322 (Eagle Imperium)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Rookie Year: 2009
Location: Ann Arbor, Michigan
Posts: 1,924
Basel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond reputeBasel A has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update 1-15-2013

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tristan Lall View Post
G23-1 mentions verticalness in relation to the robot. Barring the degenerate case where the entire robot is always in a fixed orientation with respect to the ground, that's proof that we can't use the ground as the sole co-ordinate reference.

In terms of using bumper edges as the reference, there are similar issues. The bottom edge of a legal bumper can (in theory) be between 2.0 in and 5.5 in from the ground, meaning significant angles are possible.

Edit: I re-read your post, and may have misunderstood it the first time. Are you suggesting that we construct the robot-relative co-ordinate system based on something like the the starting bumper orientation and the ground normal? (Hopefully the floor protector doesn't figure into this.) Then, because the bumpers can't articulate, we can use them to observe the orientation of the robot-relative co-ordinates during the climb? That has interesting implications (like when bumpers fall off), but could be feasible. However, I don't think the rules support this interpretation to the exclusion of others.
I did not spend as much time explaining my post as I could or should have, but you got the idea in your reread. I'm certainly not suggesting this is what's reflected in the current manual, but I do think this is would give results equivalent to both "common sense" and the likely interpretations of most referees. I'd challenge you or anyone else to suggest a potential rule that would be feasible and would contradict the the bumper-based model.

Note: Haven't figured out the rule that says bumpers must be "vertical." R24-E comes close, but doesn't quite do it.
__________________
Team 2337 | 2009-2012 | Student
Team 3322 | 2014-Present | College Student
“Be excellent in everything you do and the results will just happen.”
-Paul Copioli
Reply With Quote
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 23:19.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi