Go to Post The main use of Chiefdelphi is self expression of what FIRST means to you. - Koko Ed [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > Robot Showcase
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 3 votes, 5.00 average. Display Modes
  #76   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 13:12
Ken Leung's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Ken Leung Ken Leung is offline
Dare to Live!
FRC #0115 (Monta Vista Robotics Team)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Palo Alto, California
Posts: 2,390
Ken Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Ken Leung
Re: Great Robot

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul Copioli


As far as the pinning goes, I would be VERY suprised if a team got DQ'd for pinning you if your outriggers are reacting with the midfield barrier. Team 217's interpretation of the rule is that the midfield pipes are there to make it harder to cross the field. Any other use of the barrier is probably illegal.

The argument that you're not touching the barrier until someone pushes you is a pretty weak claim, because it is clear to me that you are straddling the midfield bar for a specific purpose.

For what it's worth, I think you have an amazing design.

-Paul
I said it in a reply once, and I will say it again... There's a fine line between intentionally using the 14" bar to block robot, and blocking a limbo bot with your robot in front of the bar because your robot won't fit in.

Consider these 3 scenario that involve the bar to block opponent robot:

1. Putting bins in front of the bar, so opponent robot can't go under because the bin is in the way,
2. Putting your 14"< robot in front of the bar, and even though the opponent robot could out push your robot, your robot will never fit under, thus blocking your opponent
3. extending an arm in front of the barrier and block the enemy robot because the bar is supporting it from behind.

Now, obviously the first scenario is legal, because they intentionally design the bar so bins won't fit under, and FIRST should've taken into account that robots will be blocked because of that. For the 2nd scenario, it should be legal also, because the opponent robot will be pinning your robot against a wall if they keep pushing.

As for the 3rd scenario, I agree with Paul that you may not use the 14" bar to make a part of your robot functional. If the bar isn't there, I doubt the arm will stop robot from going across. Sure, it is legal to use it when the arm isn't touching the barrier, which will happen when opponent robot sees that they can't go under when the arm is there. But as soon as the opponent robot touch the arm, and the arm use the 14" bar to react, then it will be illegal, at least that's the way I see it.

So, unless FIRST change the rule regarding robots reacting against field barriers, I honestly believe it is illegal to deploy such a device to block enemy robot, imho. Otherwise, it is unfair for teams who strictly follow the rules. If it was legal, a lot of robots would've use the bar to flip themselves over, or use the side barrier to lock themselves in place.

Please don’t take this the wrong way, because I believe this is one of the most creative idea I’ve ever seen this year…

Please ask FIRST about this, and show them the picture.
__________________
Hardware Test Engineer supporting RE<C, Google.

1999-2001: Team 192 Gunn Robotics Team
2001-2002: Team 100, 192, 258, 419
2002-2004: Western Region Robotics Forum, Score Keeper @ Sac, Az, SVR, SC, CE, IRI, CalGames
2003-2004, 2006-2007: California Robot Games Manager
2008: MC in training @ Sac, CalGames
2009: Master of Ceremony @ Sac, CalGames
2010: GA in training @ SVR, Sac.
2010-2011: Mechanical Mentor, Team 115 MVRT
  #77   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 13:17
Joe Matt's Avatar
Joe Matt Joe Matt is offline
Wake Up Get Up Get Out There
no team
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: CAK
Posts: 5,067
Joe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond reputeJoe Matt has a reputation beyond repute
Quote:
Originally posted by Gadget470
I think some of the argument comes from teams that considered a limbo block from the HDPE but decided against it due to rule interpretation.

Just like the mousebots last year, many teams were upset by their use because they didn't build one because they interpreted the rules differently. Only a few teams made "LEGAL" tether's, most had a high chance of entanglement but were still given the OK.
I agree. Last year we had a nice design where a big piece of plastic that would be hard to run over and get entangled on would fall out, and more would flip out from the inside of that and so on untill we are in the scoring zone. But then we go to VCU and we find people who have wire shooting from their bot and then a robot PURPOSFULLY push a goal on our teather, now that ticks me off.
__________________
  #78   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 13:40
Rook's Avatar
Rook Rook is offline
Registered User
#0267 (The Demolition Squad)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 64
Rook is an unknown quantity at this point
It's a fine line interpretation of the rule. This isn't really much different from a tall and long robot parking itself in front of the bar. You couldn't push it out of the way, in fact, you would be guilty of pinning the bot against the bar. I am gonna side with T3 in this case. The rule isn't really clear, and I don't think T3's design is impenetrable. As someone pointed out, I can see them being tipped by a wedge or getting tangled up in the deployment process. Nonetheless, they look like a formidable opponent.
__________________
Aaahhhhh! The atmosphere! Aaaahhhh!


(Things you might hear a meteor say.)
  #79   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 15:10
Jnadke Jnadke is offline
Go Badgers!
#0093
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Appleton, WI
Posts: 775
Jnadke is on a distinguished road
Send a message via ICQ to Jnadke Send a message via AIM to Jnadke Send a message via Yahoo to Jnadke
Quote:
Originally posted by Rook
It's a fine line interpretation of the rule. This isn't really much different from a tall and long robot parking itself in front of the bar. You couldn't push it out of the way, in fact, you would be guilty of pinning the bot against the bar. I am gonna side with T3 in this case. The rule isn't really clear, and I don't think T3's design is impenetrable. As someone pointed out, I can see them being tipped by a wedge or getting tangled up in the deployment process. Nonetheless, they look like a formidable opponent.

That's a very poor analogy. The tall robot has no option of where to go, therefore it's pinning. T3 can simply lift its arms up. They are in that position by choice, not by chance.


The question isn't whether they can be beat. Of course they can be beat. Nobody is unbeatable. That has been illustrated last year. The question at hand is whether or not they are in direct violation of the rules. I am sure many other teams have thought of this type of design, but went against it.
__________________
The best moments of our lives fall in two categories: those that did happen and those that did not.

Last edited by Jnadke : 21-02-2003 at 15:27.
  #80   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 15:23
Paul Copioli's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero Woodie Flowers Award
Paul Copioli Paul Copioli is offline
President, VEX Robotics, Inc.
FRC #3310 (Black Hawk Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Rockwall, TX
Posts: 1,393
Paul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond repute
No Need ...

O.K., there is no need to get nasty. I know a few of the engineers on team 68 and believe me, they have a conscience.

The fact of the matter is that rule GM31's first sentance states:

"The outer field barriers are safety features of the playing field and robots should not be designed to react against them"

It goes on to clarify that the midfield pipes are considered field barriers. We can argue over the wording, but the intent is clear - do not rely on the field borders to hold position.

That said, see the previous posts about the outriggers and their ability to transfer weight. My guess is that they transfer their weight to the outriggers and don't rely on the midfield barrier at all.

-Paul
  #81   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 15:59
Unsung FIRST Hero
JVN JVN is offline
@JohnVNeun
AKA: John Vielkind-Neun
FRC #0148 (Robowranglers)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Greenville, Tx
Posts: 3,159
JVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond reputeJVN has a reputation beyond repute
Re: No Need ...

Quote:
Originally posted by Paul Copioli
O.K., there is no need to get nasty. I know a few of the engineers on team 68 and believe me, they have a conscience.

The fact of the matter is that rule GM31's first sentance states:

"The outer field barriers are safety features of the playing field and robots should not be designed to react against them"

It goes on to clarify that the midfield pipes are considered field barriers. We can argue over the wording, but the intent is clear - do not rely on the field borders to hold position.

That said, see the previous posts about the outriggers and their ability to transfer weight. My guess is that they transfer their weight to the outriggers and don't rely on the midfield barrier at all.

-Paul
Paul, for what it's worth, I agree with your interpretation and analysis exactly. I'm eager to see if FIRST clarifies this potential controversy.

68 - Great bot again!
As a member of another ramp-domination team I'm impressed with they way you guys accomplished it. To tell you the truth, we thought this was illegal during our brainstorming. I hope it works out for you guys...
See you in Houston.
__________________
In the interest of full disclosure: I work for VEX Robotics a subsidiary of Innovation First International (IFI) Crown Supplier & Proud Supporter of FIRST
  #82   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 16:26
Rook's Avatar
Rook Rook is offline
Registered User
#0267 (The Demolition Squad)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 64
Rook is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally posted by Jnadke
That's a very poor analogy. The tall robot has no option of where to go, therefore it's pinning. T3 can simply lift its arms up. They are in that position by choice, not by chance.


The question isn't whether they can be beat. Of course they can be beat. Nobody is unbeatable. That has been illustrated last year. The question at hand is whether or not they are in direct violation of the rules. I am sure many other teams have thought of this type of design, but went against it.
It's still very gray to me. Let's take a look at five examples.

Robot 1: Is 25 inches high due to it's design and function, the team couldn't make it any lower. They decided going under the bar wasn't a big deal to them. The contact with the bar is not by design and it is incidental.

Robot 2: Is 25 inches high, with arms that extend out making a barrier. Their design has nothing that grabs onto the bar, but due to their height, you can't push them under it. The contact with the bar is intentional but incidental.

Robot 3: Is 13 inches high, but has a cylinder that extends to increase it's height. The cylinder has no other purpose but to prevent another robot from pushing it under the bar. The contact with the bar is by design AND intentional.

Robot 4: Is 13 inches high and has an arm used to pick up boxes. When the arm is extended it increases the height of the robot and prevents it from being pushed under the bar. If the arm is lowered, the robot is free to move under the bar. The contact with the bar is not by design and is incidental.

Robot 5: Is 13 inches high and has nothing to contact the bar at any time.


Robot 1 is a legal design. FIRST can't DQ a team because they chose not to go under the bar. Robot 1, isn't necessarily designed to block another robot, but in a match, it may have to.

Robot 2 is also legal. The robot was designed to block other robots. Because of it's height, the robot can not be pushed under the bar. It is not illegal to make a robot that can not clear the bar.

Robot 3 is illegal. The cylinder was designed to interact with the bar.

Robot 4 is not illegal, but if the arm is up, it can not be pushed under the bar. Does a team HAVE to let another robot push it around? My guess is this team will not be DQ if it used it's box picking arm to prevent it from being pushed under the bar. That is unless the arm itself had some kind of lip or hook to help it hold on. Then that would be illegal.

Robot 5 is of course legal.

I think T3's robot falls into the gray area between Robot 2 and Robot 3. If the bar didn't exist, then T3's design would be perfectly legal, but not quite as effective. This is definitely one for the judges. I understand those teams that see this as a violation. But even though T3 knows another robot will push them into the bar. Their contact is intended by design, but incidental. If nobody pushes them, then they are not interacting with the field. I think the rule is put in place to prevent damage to the field. I don't see T3's design as posing any particular kind of damage threat. T3's strategy is no different than building a robot 13 inches high and then welding a 5 inch bar on top just so another robot can't push it under. The only difference is T3 blocks the entire play field.
__________________
Aaahhhhh! The atmosphere! Aaaahhhh!


(Things you might hear a meteor say.)

Last edited by Rook : 21-02-2003 at 16:38.
  #83   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 16:49
Paul Copioli's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero Woodie Flowers Award
Paul Copioli Paul Copioli is offline
President, VEX Robotics, Inc.
FRC #3310 (Black Hawk Robotics)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Rockwall, TX
Posts: 1,393
Paul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond reputePaul Copioli has a reputation beyond repute
Your Examples

Your examples do not highlight the biggest part of the intent of the rule. Getting pushed around on the playing field and designing a robot to be immovable on the ramp (one big key this year) are 2 entirely different things. If a King of the Hill Bot uses the field borders to gain its immovability, then it is in violation of GM31. This is NOT incidental. It is intentional. 25 points and complete positional domination is gained by a method prohibited by rule GM31. I am inspector at 2 regionals this year and if I run across a robot designed like this, I will notify the head referee and get his or her opinion on the issue citing GM31.

However, I say again that I am willing to bet team 68 is pushing hard enough against the floor to make this a non-issue for them.

Time will tell...
  #84   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 16:59
Matt Attallah's Avatar
Matt Attallah Matt Attallah is offline
Now at sub 14's in a 5000lb vehicle
AKA: Maher Attallah
FRC #0005 (Robocards)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Detroit area, Michigan
Posts: 1,660
Matt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond reputeMatt Attallah has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Matt Attallah Send a message via MSN to Matt Attallah Send a message via Yahoo to Matt Attallah
Can we just let it go and say "nice robot?" The rules are there for the Judges/Refs to interpret, not us!

Nice robot from team 5!!!!

__________________
That rug really tied the room together...
  #85   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 17:04
GregT GregT is offline
Registered User
no team
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: FL
Posts: 400
GregT will become famous soon enough
Send a message via AIM to GregT
Re: Your Examples

I agree with Paul, while I think your design is interesting and will probably be effective, I also feel it violates the rules about field interaction. If your legs only had 1 pole one 1 side of the bar, I could say "While interaction with the field is likely, it doesn't look like it is central to their design". As it is now, it sure looks like all your strength will come from the bar...

Only time will tell and I do admire the design.

Greg
__________________
The above was my opinion. I'm wrong a lot. I'm sarcastic a lot. Try not to take me too seriously.
  #86   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 17:08
Rook's Avatar
Rook Rook is offline
Registered User
#0267 (The Demolition Squad)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 64
Rook is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally posted by Lauren Bendes
As posted earlier our robot's arms dont actually touch anypart of the side bars or the plexiglass. The rule states to touch with the intent of supporting your robot and we have all of our support on the HDPE. We have taken into consideration many different aspects of contact and have cleared all of them. It will be okay...

Thanks for your concern.



Lauren
This is a quote from an earlier part of the thread where they say they have all their weight on the HDPE. As for their imobility as King of the Hill. I see your point. But, I don't think that is the intent of their design. The design is intended to prevent other robots from going under the bar, or did I miss something? I wouldn't blame you for bringing this up at an inspection. I think the judges will let it slide though.
__________________
Aaahhhhh! The atmosphere! Aaaahhhh!


(Things you might hear a meteor say.)
  #87   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 17:13
Rook's Avatar
Rook Rook is offline
Registered User
#0267 (The Demolition Squad)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 64
Rook is an unknown quantity at this point
I just saw the thread where they say they can transfer weight to the arms. I don't know. Like I said, it's one for the judges. I hope they let it go. I want to see if our robot can beat it somehow.
__________________
Aaahhhhh! The atmosphere! Aaaahhhh!


(Things you might hear a meteor say.)
  #88   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 17:24
Ken Leung's Avatar Unsung FIRST Hero
Ken Leung Ken Leung is offline
Dare to Live!
FRC #0115 (Monta Vista Robotics Team)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Palo Alto, California
Posts: 2,390
Ken Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond reputeKen Leung has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Ken Leung
Quote:
Originally posted by Rook
I just saw the thread where they say they can transfer weight to the arms. I don't know. Like I said, it's one for the judges. I hope they let it go. I want to see if our robot can beat it somehow.
I think the refs probably will let it go... Just because its a really creative idea, and also because a lot of the referees aren't that familiar with rules because they don't build robots like us (well, I can't say all refs because I happens to know quite a few who used to be on teams). I remember some incidents where the robot react against the field to make part of their robot functional, and it wasn't called on.

So, that's why I suggest Team 68 ask FIRST staff about this, because they know the rules the best. Why risk having the change out the device when you can think about it if you ask them now? I am not saying you will be asked to take it off, but its just much better to get a clarification as soon as possible.

I think FIRST better have a solid clarification about this, or it might develope into this year's "tether/mouse bot" issue. I would hate to see teams getting answers saying "no you are not allowed to..." and at National everyone put on a new arm (which I think will be unlikely) and block the ramp with it.

And even if they managed to lift up the whole robot onto those arms, they are still bounded to be pushed against the 14" bar when the opponent robot are stronger than they are...

I think people are worry about this not because they thing the 68 will be undefeatable... Its just because everyone put so many times chewing on the rules, figuring what's the best thing they can do while following the fules. Remember last year when FIRST change the rules regarding tethers? Its not something that can be easily forgetten.
__________________
Hardware Test Engineer supporting RE<C, Google.

1999-2001: Team 192 Gunn Robotics Team
2001-2002: Team 100, 192, 258, 419
2002-2004: Western Region Robotics Forum, Score Keeper @ Sac, Az, SVR, SC, CE, IRI, CalGames
2003-2004, 2006-2007: California Robot Games Manager
2008: MC in training @ Sac, CalGames
2009: Master of Ceremony @ Sac, CalGames
2010: GA in training @ SVR, Sac.
2010-2011: Mechanical Mentor, Team 115 MVRT

Last edited by Ken Leung : 21-02-2003 at 17:29.
  #89   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 18:57
Rook's Avatar
Rook Rook is offline
Registered User
#0267 (The Demolition Squad)
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: West Palm Beach, FL
Posts: 64
Rook is an unknown quantity at this point
Quote:
Originally posted by Ken L
Remember last year when FIRST change the rules regarding tethers? Its not something that can be easily forgetten.
I remember that all too well. My team, Team 267, thought long and hard on how to make a tail within the rules, but then we get to the competition and everybody has mouse tethers, and tape measures. Hell, we could have done the same thing and saved us a headache.

Now, I know not to let this kind of stuff get on my nerves. 68 has a nice design, but it's not going to be too effective against our design. That is, we hope.
__________________
Aaahhhhh! The atmosphere! Aaaahhhh!


(Things you might hear a meteor say.)
  #90   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 21-02-2003, 19:25
Solace's Avatar
Solace Solace is offline
Head Hurts. Coffee. More. Now!
AKA: Jake
#0571 (Team Paragon)
Team Role: Alumni
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Windsor, CT
Posts: 569
Solace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to beholdSolace is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to Solace
maybe its just me, but it seems like there's just enough space under those arms to let a robot with a low profile slip under them. Will the arms be useless against under-bar bots?
__________________
...What is a man,
If the chief good and market of his time
Be but to sleep, and tool? A nerd, no more.

2004 UTC New England #2 seed
2004 UTC New England Champions with 716 & 230
2004 Archimedes #2 seed, undeafeated in Qualifiers (for what its worth)


Jake
Team Paragon #571
Closed Thread


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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The Death of FIRST Anton Abaya General Forum 23 03-05-2006 17:18
pic: Here is the real robot from Team 1313! CD47-Bot Extra Discussion 6 04-03-2003 12:45
Team 68's Robot Alexander McGee Robot Showcase 25 16-02-2003 14:32
More 'Best' Robots (a well thought list) archiver 2000 2 23-06-2002 23:11
Disqualifications archiver 1999 13 23-06-2002 21:53


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 14:24.

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