Drawbridge Door Contact Question

[wjd13]

So I was thinking of something similar, along the lines of driving off of the drawbridge, letting it spring up, and then catching it with some sort of arm mechanism. I think you should definitely let the referees know about your strategy beforehand, but from my reading of the rules it seems legal.(by the reasons mentioned earlier in this post)

It should also be pretty easy for your robot to be in the neutral zone, since the drawbridge is 37" long, and thus would extend ~25" into the neutral zone when fully down (-12" for the 12" ramp). And since you can't have your arm extending >15" out from your frame/bumpers, that means that when you employ this strategy you should always be ~10" from the outerworks at the very least. One thought is that perhaps you could sit on the door just a second before doing your tapping/ catching of the door on the way up, just so the refs have a chance to catch it.

[dieDoktor]

Originally Posted by InspectorGadget1073

I interpreted this since that the OUTER WORKS is infinitely tall zone and the robot cannot be in this zone and completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE at the same time. I assume that the ramps are part of the OUTER WORKS also.

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

So no.

However, the drawbridge extends past the volume defined as the OUTER WORKS.

The OUTER WORKS is an infinitely tall volume bordered by, but not including, the GUARDRAIL, the
SECRET PASSAGE, the COURTYARD and the NEUTRAL ZONE. It consists of a series of five (5)
DEFENSES, five (5) PLATFORMS, and five (5) Shields arranged in a line across the FIELD and is designed
to impede the passage of ROBOTS and BOULDERS in to the COURTYARD. Three (3) of the DEFENSES
are selected by the ALLIANCE, one (1) is selected by the audience, and the one (1) is a permanently
mounted Low Bar. (Figure 2-4 shows the locations of the Low Bar, ALLIANCE, and audience selected
DEFENSES.)

The door of the drawbridge extends significantly into the NEUTRAL
ZONE. And more importantly outside of the volume defined

A DEFENSE is CROSSED by a ROBOT when that ROBOT
■ starts free of contact with the DEFENSE and completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE

Therefore, if you manipulate the very edge of the door, remove contact for an unspecified time reuirement and reapply, you're good to go.

[bjtheone]

Alternatively, why not hold the door open or drawbridge down with your ROBOT, and wait for a team member to enter the DEFENSE from the NEUTRAL ZONE. As they move forward, you back out of the DEFENSE into the COURTYARD.

Two ROBOTs should have no issues playing train through the DRAWBRIDGE. The SALLY PORT requires a bit more driving but is doable.

Nothing in the rues about having to traverse completely through a DEFENSE once you enter it or number of ROBOTS contacting a DEFENSE at one time.

CROSSING is defined, by the movement of the ROBOT attempting the traversal. Nothing is said about the state of the DEFENSE, (opened/closed or occupied/unoccupied) at the begining of the attempt.

[seg9585]

Originally Posted by bjtheone

Two ROBOTs should have no issues playing train through the DRAWBRIDGE. The SALLY PORT requires a bit more driving but is doable.

Yes this is well established and even demonstrated in the Kickoff video. But it requires relying on another team to work with you. I've experienced matches where the other 2 robots on my team are disabled on the field (or stuck, or flipped over, etc).
The same can effectively be said about the other obstacles -- another robot could just push you over the debris field/moat/rock wall from behind, but that's not what we're trying to solve here.

[apm4242]

The OP's maneuver is legal. As per the GDC -

Q. If a ROBOT moves from the opponent's COURTYARD through the opponent's OUTER WORKS and is completely in the NEUTRAL ZONE but is still in contact a DEFENSE, for how long does the ROBOT need to be free of the DEFENSE before attempting to traverse the OUTER WORKS again? For example, if a ROBOT were to push the Sally Port or Drawbridge away momentarily before traversing again, would this result in a CROSSED DEFENSE? PS: Section 4 in the 1/13/16 Game Manual seems to be Section 4 from the Admin Manual

A. Per the Blue Box in Section 3.1.3, it is the responsibility of the DRIVE TEAM to make clear to the REFEREE that they have satisfied all requirements of CROSSING a DEFENSE. If it is not clear to the REFEREE whether or not the ROBOT was initially free of contact with the DEFENSE prior to the CROSSING attempt, REFEREES are instructed to not award credit. It is in the DRIVE TEAM'S best interest to make it abundantly clear that the ROBOT is initially free of contact with the DEFENSE prior to CROSSING.

https://frc-qa.firstinspires.org/Que...d-to-be-free-o

[Chak]

Ri3D team REDACTED used this method in their reveal video. Can any referees out there comment on which way they would call it? If you're looking for it beforehand it's pretty clear that they're not contacting for a moment, but if you're looking off-hand it almost looks like they didn't move at all. How do refs plan to deal with this?

[rich2202]

I assume we will get instructions. Until then ...

At this time, I would apply a literal interpretation and allow it. From a physics viewpoint, as long as the contact mechanism moves fast enough, there is separation.