Ball Bounces Lands on Top of the Truss

[IronicDeadBird]

They should just switch to a ball caught on the truss if done "un-intentionally' should be called as a rematch if the ball can't be dislodged in x amount of time by field staff.

[page2067]

They should have not had a flat top to the top of the truss! but was an entertaining point of day, and did not affect outcome.

[bkahl]

A simple polycarb covering like the high goals would fix this too.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by bkahl

A simple polycarb covering like the high goals would fix this too.

Yeah, except...

[orangemoore]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

Yeah, except...

A ball stuck on the panel but scored is better because the cycle can then start.

[BBray_T1296]

Originally Posted by orangemoore

A ball stuck on the panel but scored is better because the cycle can then start.

Of course. Having the reset crew fixing something outside the course is 9 million times better than anything on-field, but it still was quite comical, especially considering the purpose those panels were supposed to serve

[Dan_Karol]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

Of course. Having the reset crew fixing something outside the course is 9 million times better than anything on-field, but it still was quite comical, especially considering the purpose those panels were supposed to serve

Those panels were there to stop balls from re-entering play after scored. they have nothing to do with causing them to continue through the goal.

[Botwoon]

Originally Posted by orangemoore

A ball stuck on the panel but scored is better because the cycle can then start.

It could definitely cause a ball to bounce back onto the field after entering the goal, however. That panel should really be angled back to prevent this sort of thing from happening. The truss itself should probably have been made with a triangular cross section to prevent stuck balls there as well.

I also feel that the field should really have been netted as was done last year. The fact that an alliance's single game piece can inadvertently be ejected from play, and that returning the ball to play sometimes requires 3+ people seriously disrupts the flow of the game. FIRST really dropped the ball (failed to drop it?) in terms of field design.

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by Botwoon

I also feel that the field should really have been netted as was done last year.

The entire netting system and the support poles would be knocked down by a ball going into it.

[Mrcope9]

We had one match back at Arkansas where our robot launched the ball, it hit the top of the truss and rolled across nearly the entire distance of it before falling off. We watched as it slowly rolled and nearly stopped, but it had just enough gas to make it off. Pretty exciting.

[Dival]

Originally Posted by BBray_T1296

Yeah, except...

Is it so hard to give that panel a 5 deg angle?

[MarcD79]

Originally Posted by Dival

Is it so hard to give that panel a 5 deg angle?

These are rented trusses. They are standard fabricated trusses that are used for audio/visual equipment. FIRST does not own them, nor do they build them.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by MarcD79

These are rented trusses. They are standard fabricated trusses that are used for audio/visual equipment. FIRST does not own them, nor do they build them.

Rotate them 45 degrees then.

[Botwoon]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Rotate them 45 degrees then.

The field would be out of spec.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Botwoon

The field would be out of spec.

Rotate the spec 45 degrees...