2014 Orlando Regional

[Duncan Macdonald]

Originally Posted by R31

The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition, the ROBOT battery, is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:

Enersys (P/N: NP18-12)
MK Battery (P/N: ES17-12)
Battery Mart (P/N: SLA-12V18)
Sigma (P/N: SP12-18)
Universal Battery (P/N: UB12180)
Power Patrol (P/N: SLA1116)
Werker Battery (P/N: WKA12-18NB)
Power Sonic (P/N: PS-12180 NB)
Yuasa (P/N: NP18-12B)

A rose by any other name...

A robot battery is any battery with these part numbers, even if it is not connected.

[Kris Verdeyen]

Originally Posted by Duncan Macdonald

A rose by any other name...

A robot battery is any battery with these part numbers, even if it is not connected.

Sure, and as such, the second battery would not be a "legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition".

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Duncan Macdonald

A rose by any other name...

A robot battery is any battery with these part numbers, even if it is not connected.

The following is an admittedly picky discussion of English grammar. Stop reading now if that's going to make you tear your hair out. And yes, I'm stopping after this. Promise.

So two things. First, I've always understood that clauses surrounded by commas like that are meant to be non-essential to the meaning of a sentence. So the sentence should have the same meaning without that clause.

The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:

Second, I've always understood that such clauses are meant to describe the clause they're attached to. Which is why I removed the predicate of that sentence, since the predicate was modifying the subject ("The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition"). The clause ("the ROBOT battery") is also modifying/associated with that subject.

That's how I tend to read things anyways. If I wanted to convey your version of meaning, I'd have phrased it:

The ROBOT battery is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:

This battery is the only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition.

Anyways. Stopping now because at this point I've fully expressed my opinion on the battery counterweight issue. And the T6 inspection issue requires more and more detailed information from the teams in question as to the timing of modifications, re-inspection, etc.

EDIT: Also, your version of the rule would imply that you can use a battery as ballast on the robot, as long as it doesn't have one of those part numbers. My version also implies this, with the addition that those part numbers can also be used if they're not sourcing electricity.

[Arrowhead]

Have they announced awards yet?

[vikesrock777]

Originally Posted by Arrowhead

Have they announced awards yet?

http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/Eve...OR/awards.html

[Arrowhead]

Originally Posted by vikesrock777

http://www2.usfirst.org/2014comp/Eve...OR/awards.html

Thanks!

[Max Boord]

Ok so here is what happened from the perspective of someone who was standing 5 feet from them and spoke with there alliance members about it.

1902 (exploding bacon)'s shooter was not on there robot for elims. they needed to dead weight to play there primary role as a defender. they loaded 2 extra batteries onto there robot totaling approximately 24 lbs. they did NOT go to inspection with them on. (i assume they where thinking that there robot weight did not include ANY batteries) Due to R35 this is prohibited and caused them to violate T10 resulting in a red card for the alliance.

Both quarter finals matches where played before a member of 179 (Children Of The Swamp) noticed this and challenged the match based on the T10 violation by steeping into the question box. It was ruled to be illegal. The #1 seed alliance of pink, cryptonite, and exploding bacon where DQ'd. As this violation could have impacted the outcome of QF 1-1 and QF 1-2 they advance.

[wendymom]

[quote=Max Boord;1359337

1902 (exploding bacon)'s shooter was not on there robot for elims. they needed to dead weight to play there primary role as a defender. they loaded 2 extra batteries onto there robot totaling approximately 24 lbs. they did NOT go to inspection with them on. (i assume they where thinking that there robot weight did not include ANY batteries) Due to R35 this is prohibited and caused them to violate T10 resulting in a red card for the.[/QUOTE]

You are incorrect and should only speak if you know the facts and not just what you have heard

[Moon2020]

Were ballast batteries added; and if so, exactly at what time were the ballast battery/batteries added?

Originally Posted by wendymom

You are incorrect and should only speak if you know the facts and not just what you have heard

[45Auto]

Originally Posted by wendymom

You are incorrect and should only speak if you know the facts and not just what you have heard

Is there some particular reason that the "facts" are not being made public?

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by 45Auto

Is there some particular reason that the "facts" are not being made public?

My assumption would be because it's only been hours since the event occurred, and they haven't had time to properly collect their thoughts and calm their emotions (or even get home, in some cases). I'd be surprised if at least one of the involved parties does not post in the coming days.

[cruzr]

I'm hoping to see this discussed further. Not exactly sure on what happened with the DQ, but that wasn't the only thing that went wrong on this regional. It was riddled with really bad calls and inconsistencies on the refs' and judges' part.

[Anupam Goli]

I just find it odd that an alliance would be DQ'd after both of its quarterfinals matches were played. Only some very egregious violation of a rule should warrant eliminating a team after they won their first two matches. Even at peachtree last year, a team made changes but didn't pass inspection, but they got disabled in a match and reinspected promptly.

[AlexD744]

Congratulations to all teams at the Orlando regional for an amazing event! It was great working with our friends from Brazil again! And thank you to 3932 for joining our alliance! I was very happy with our performance, and think that those semi's could have easily gone either way. That being said, congratulations to the winners, a very deserving 1592, 180 and 4901!! We look forward to playing with 180 in South Florida, and hope to see 1592 and 4901 in St. Louis.

Also, as far as speculation about quarters 1, I've heard a lot of rumor floating around, and I think it best to wait for one of the teams involved to inform of the details if and when they are comfortable doing so. All of the #1 alliance teams are exemplary role models in FIRST (note they are all RCA winners) and lets give them the benefit of the doubt that they did not intentionally break the rules and a chance to explain the facts for themselves.

[PayneTrain]

Originally Posted by Anupam Goli

I just find it odd that an alliance would be DQ'd after both of its quarterfinals matches were played. Only some very egregious violation of a rule should warrant eliminating a team after they won their first two matches. Even at peachtree last year, a team made changes but didn't pass inspection, but they got disabled in a match and reinspected promptly.

You would think that, but the hammer of T6 to the nail of R31 has the potential to make quite the coffin for anyone with the misfortune of not paying absolute attention. While Chief Delphi's match.com profile would include possible first date ideas of "long walks through the Ace hardware store, a 48-pack of Mountain Dew and 14 straight hours of machine shop time, and a long night of rampant, unchecked, emotionally-based speculation" it's probably best to leave this one alone until the LRI, HR, the teams themselves, and/or the intrepid crew up in Manchester touch this beast with a 200 foot pole.