Go to Post There is always a way, you just have to find it. - Arefin Bari [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Technical > Technical Discussion
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #16   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2016, 16:57
GaryVoshol's Avatar
GaryVoshol GaryVoshol is offline
Cogito ergo arbitro
no team
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Rookie Year: 2000
Location: Royal Oak, MI
Posts: 5,764
GaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond reputeGaryVoshol has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankJ View Post
If they never pass inspection, they won't get DQed?
They get DQ'd but not shown a Red Card.

5.5.3 point H.
__________________
(since 2004)
  #17   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2016, 17:49
RoboChair's Avatar
RoboChair RoboChair is offline
He who fixes with hammers #tsimfd
AKA: Devin Castellucci
FRC #1678 (Citrus Circuits and 5458 Digital Minds)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Davis, CA
Posts: 715
RoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond reputeRoboChair has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris is me View Post
I am not sure how you're drawing the conclusion that I changed the words, I literally copied and pasted them verbatim from the manual.
What you quoted.
Quote:
ROBOT: an electromechanical assembly built by an FIRST Robotics Competition Team to perform specific tasks when competing in
FIRST STRONGHOLD. It includes all of the basic systems required to be an active participant in the game: power, communications,
control, BUMPERS, and movement. The implementation must obviously follow a design approach intended to play FIRST
STRONGHOLD (e.g. a box of unassembled parts placed on the FIELD or a ROBOT designed to play a different game would not
satisfy this definition)
Versus the exact wording in the Team Update and updated Game Manual https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.n...esComplete.pdf
Quote:
The ROBOT must be an electromechanical assembly built by the FIRST Robotics Competition Team to perform specific tasks when competing in FIRST STRONGHOLD. The ROBOT must include all of the basic systems required to be an active participant in the game - power, communications, control, BUMPERS, and movement. The ROBOT implementation must obviously follow a design approach intended to play FIRST STRONGHOLD (e.g. a box of unassembled parts placed on the FIELD or a ROBOT designed to play a different game would not satisfy this definition).
Based on how R1 has been worded in the Team Update, R1 is not defining what a ROBOT IS, it is describing what a ROBOT must HAVE to be allowed to compete.
__________________

12 Years and counting! Over a third of my life has been spent with FRC.
  #18   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2016, 18:32
Rachel Lim Rachel Lim is offline
Registered User
FRC #1868 (Space Cookies)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Sep 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Moffett Field
Posts: 253
Rachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond reputeRachel Lim has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboChair View Post
Based on how R1 has been worded in the Team Update, R1 is not defining what a ROBOT IS, it is describing what a ROBOT must HAVE to be allowed to compete.
Quote:
Originally Posted by R1
The ROBOT must be an electromechanicalassembly built by the FIRST Robotics Competition Team to perform specific tasks when competingin FIRST STRONGHOLD. The ROBOT must include all of the basic systems required to be anactive participant in the game -- power, communications, control, BUMPERS, and movement. [...]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glossary
ROBOT: an electromechanical assembly built by an FIRST Robotics Competition Team to perform specific tasks when competing in FIRST STRONGHOLD. It includes all of the basic systems required to be an active participant in the game: power, communications, control, BUMPERS, and movement. [...]
The basic difference between the two (besides that whoever was typing R1 doesn't like the space bar) is in this line:

The ROBOT must include...BUMPERS
It [the ROBOT] includes...BUMPERS

Since by definition (from the glossary), a robot includes bumpers, R1 is restating that in order to count as a robot that could pass inspection, it "must include" bumpers. As the definition of include is "to take in or comprise as a part of a whole or group" (Merriam Webster) bumpers are part of a robot.

This doesn't pose a problem with the frame perimeter, since R2 states that "The ROBOT (excluding BUMPERS) must have a FRAME PERIMETER contained within the BUMPER ZONE." Bumpers could legally be attached to the outside of frame perimeter during the match, since by bumper rules it will be less than 15" thick.

However, like originally pointed out, this poses a conflict with R4 and the starting configuration: "In the STARTING CONFIGURATION (the physical configuration in which a ROBOT starts a MATCH), no part of the ROBOT shall extend outside the vertical projection of the FRAME PERIMETER, with the exception of minor protrusions such as bolt heads, fastener ends, rivets, etc."

There is one way around this though: the time during which "a ROBOT starts a MATCH" is only as long as the start of a match. However, since the state of the match goes from "before the match" to "during the match," that period of time is infinitely small, or alternatively, doesn't exist.

But since G7 states that "when placed on the FIELD for a MATCH, each ROBOT must be: [...] D. Confined to its STARTING CONFIGURATION," the match must start as soon as robots touch the field. Since robots and people do not move infinitely fast, this would make it seem like it is impossible to get robots into a configuration from which a match could start.

The glossary once again saves us though, as a FIELD is "a 26 ft. 7 in. by 54 ft. 1 in. carpeted area, bound by and including the inward-facing surfaces of the GUARDRAILS and two (2) CASTLES." The field is purely two dimensional, and robots not touching the carpet are not on the field. Therefore, before the match starts, robots not touching the carpet are exempt from G7, and can wait until the match starts.


Therefore, the only legal robots in 2016 are flying robots.
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 10-02-2016, 18:33
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is online now
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,797
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by RoboChair View Post
What you quoted.


Versus the exact wording in the Team Update and updated Game Manual https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.n...esComplete.pdf


Based on how R1 has been worded in the Team Update, R1 is not defining what a ROBOT IS, it is describing what a ROBOT must HAVE to be allowed to compete.
I was quoting the Glossary, not R1. The Glossary, by defining the word ROBOT, is defining what the word means. That's why I said "change to the definition of ROBOT" in my original post, and not "change to R1".
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
  #20   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-02-2016, 13:49
Hugekase Hugekase is offline
Registered User
FRC #1359 (Scalawags)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Lebanon, OR
Posts: 11
Hugekase is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

This is just a heads up to all in this forum, Team update 10 Has fixed this wording issue, and it no longer includes bumpers in the frame perimeter, so I hope that it helps everyone out.
  #21   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 13-02-2016, 22:42
whitetail's Avatar
whitetail whitetail is offline
Registered User
FRC #5407 (Wolf Pack)
Team Role: Driver
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 60
whitetail is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Wow, Time to start making new bumper mounts so that we will be the one team at the event who doesn't have an illegal robot. Even without this update the bumpers shouldn't define how your robot is build. They should just be a thing that you have to put on your robot to protect not destroy your ideas.
__________________
FRC Team 5407 -Driver, Programmer and Head Control Systems Engineer
2015 MAR Championship Rookie All Star Award
2015 MAR Hatboro-Horsham District Rookie All Star Award
2015 MAR Hatboro-Horsham District event Winner(Thanks 2590 and 2607)
2016 MAR Hatboro-Horsham District event Winner(Thanks 2607 and 1218)
  #22   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-02-2016, 15:15
Hugekase Hugekase is offline
Registered User
FRC #1359 (Scalawags)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Lebanon, OR
Posts: 11
Hugekase is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by whitetail View Post
Wow, Time to start making new bumper mounts so that we will be the one team at the event who doesn't have an illegal robot. Even without this update the bumpers shouldn't define how your robot is build. They should just be a thing that you have to put on your robot to protect not destroy your ideas.
As I said, Check Team Update 10, it fixes all of the issues.
  #23   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 10:31
Hale Talons 554 Hale Talons 554 is offline
Registered User
FRC #5547
 
Join Date: Feb 2015
Location: Hale Michigan
Posts: 1
Hale Talons 554 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Ok, for us new guys not understanding some if the intricacies of the rule books, and looking for a clear answer.... Our robot is 116 around the perimeter with out bumpers attached as per our understanding of the original rules, and would make it legal. But now bumpers have to be included in the perimeter measurement of 120 inches? We are getting confused and scared because at this point a reconfiguration of the chassis would be all but impossible. So...can some one who has a clear answer help us out?
  #24   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 10:47
rich2202 rich2202 is offline
Registered User
FRC #2202 (BEAST Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,285
rich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hale Talons 554 View Post
But now bumpers have to be included in the perimeter measurement of 120 inches?
As others have posted before your post (including the post immediately before yours), Team Update 10 fixed the problem.

R2: Robot (excluding BUMPERS) must have a Frame Perimeter
Definitions: Frame Perimeter ... without the BUMPERS attached
R3-a: Frame Perimeter sides must not exceed 120 in (by R2 and Definition, this excludes the Bumpers)
R4: Starting Configuration ... with the exception of its Bumpers

Is there any other confusion?
  #25   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 10:50
hectorcastillo's Avatar
hectorcastillo hectorcastillo is offline
Former Driver and Captain for 3481
FRC #0125 (NUTRONs)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Cambridge, MA
Posts: 140
hectorcastillo is a name known to allhectorcastillo is a name known to allhectorcastillo is a name known to allhectorcastillo is a name known to allhectorcastillo is a name known to allhectorcastillo is a name known to all
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Did no one else build a set of bumpers that fits around the frame perimeter and another one that sits inside???
__________________


365 Decontaminators (FLL) 2011 - 2012
6221 Panther Bots Alpha (FTC) 2012 - 2016
3481 Bronc Botz (FRC) 2012 - Present
125 NUTRONs (FRC) 2017 - Present
  #26   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 10:51
Chris is me's Avatar
Chris is me Chris is me is online now
no bag, vex only, final destination
AKA: Pinecone
FRC #0228 (GUS Robotics); FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Glastonbury, CT
Posts: 7,797
Chris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond reputeChris is me has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Chris is me
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hale Talons 554 View Post
Ok, for us new guys not understanding some if the intricacies of the rule books, and looking for a clear answer.... Our robot is 116 around the perimeter with out bumpers attached as per our understanding of the original rules, and would make it legal. But now bumpers have to be included in the perimeter measurement of 120 inches? We are getting confused and scared because at this point a reconfiguration of the chassis would be all but impossible. So...can some one who has a clear answer help us out?

The definition of FRAME PERIMETER does not include bumpers. The rules were always intended to be written this way. This thread just pointed out an instance where they forgot to specify this. It wasn't a very serious thread. You're fine.
__________________
Mentor / Drive Coach: 228 (2016-?)
--2016 Waterbury SFs (with 3314, 3719), RIDE #2 Seed / Winners (with 1058, 6153), Carver QFs (with 503, 359, 4607)
Mentor / Consultant Person: 2170 (2017-?)
.
College Mentor: 2791 (2010-2015)
-- 2015 TVR Motorola Quality, FLR GM Industrial Design -- 2014 FLR Motorola Quality / SFs (with 341, 4930)
-- 2013 BAE Motorola Quality, WPI Regional #1 Seed / Delphi Excellence in Engineering / Finalists (with 20, 3182)
-- 2012 BAE Imagery / Finalists (with 1519, 885), CT Xerox Creativity / SFs (with 2168, 118)
Student: 1714 (2009) - 2009 MN 10K Lakes Regional Winners (with 2826, 2470)
2791 Build Season Photo Gallery - Look here for mechanism photos My Robotics Blog (Updated April 11 2014)
  #27   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 11:22
rich2202 rich2202 is offline
Registered User
FRC #2202 (BEAST Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Rookie Year: 2012
Location: Wisconsin
Posts: 1,285
rich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond reputerich2202 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Quote:
Originally Posted by hectorcastillo View Post
Did no one else build a set of bumpers that fits around the frame perimeter and another one that sits inside???
We did, but had to add the TARDIS Chameleon circuit to the robot in order to accomplish it. Now we can remove it to save weight. It was also a real power hog.
  #28   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 13:11
Unsung FIRST Hero
Al Skierkiewicz Al Skierkiewicz is offline
Broadcast Eng/Chief Robot Inspector
AKA: Big Al WFFA 2005
FRC #0111 (WildStang)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Wheeling, IL
Posts: 10,798
Al Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond reputeAl Skierkiewicz has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

Do you guys have a lot of free time in the final week of build? We must have made the rules too easy.
__________________
Good Luck All. Learn something new, everyday!
Al
WB9UVJ
www.wildstang.org
________________________
Storming the Tower since 1996.
  #29   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2016, 13:38
Hugekase Hugekase is offline
Registered User
FRC #1359 (Scalawags)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2016
Rookie Year: 2013
Location: Lebanon, OR
Posts: 11
Hugekase is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Amusing Rule Inconsistency - Are All Robots Illegal?

I find it funny how people decide to look at the other posts in the forum, before posting a response when the answer to there question is in the forum, and in the rule book.
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


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 16:56.

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