Team Update 14 (2016)

[Hallry]

https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.n...Updates/14.pdf

[Basel A]

That is, in my opinion, an incredibly stupid rule change. For one thing, nobody can agree on what a robot is, and therefore it can only cause undue controversy (as if we needed any more). Additionally, the only time a team would do this was week 0.5, so it's a bit of a moot point. Finally, if some team did bag their practise robot for a non-week 0.5 event, this totally screws them over. I do not like this one bit.

[PayneTrain]

Check back later when someone has spent the time or money to circumvent this and another rule is made that still leaves the door open for someone to spend time or money to circumvent it just to see another rule made that...

[cmwilson13]

they need to get rid of the bag and tag it just benefits teams that can afford to build 2 robots.

my team among that teams that build 2 robots i want to be able to spend that money elsewhere

[cadandcookies]

In case anyone is wondering what specific drawings are being referenced:

GE-16019 on GE-16023 are the dividers between the defences

GE-16028 is the Cheval de Frise platform

GE-16038 is the Sally Port door assembly

GE-16178 is the Cheval de Frise platform assembly

GE-16181 and GE-16184 are the cleats at the bottom of the batter

GE-16185 is one of the batter segments

GE-16213 is the "roof" of the tower

and GE-16241 is a spacer for a U-bolt

[marshall]

Ohh well... Rule 5.5.900...

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by Basel A

That is, in my opinion, an incredibly stupid rule change.... I do not like this one bit.

Originally Posted by PayneTrain

Check back later when someone has spent the time or money to circumvent this and another rule is made that still leaves the door open for someone to spend time or money to circumvent it just to see another rule made that...

Are you talking about the blue box in 5.5.2?

[Alan Anderson]

I do not like the new blue box explanation of what "enter" means. I understand it, and I largely agree with what it is trying to do, but I don't believe it is right to twist the intent of the original in order to do it. The issue of a "spare parts robot" should have been addressed explicitly instead of wedged in to an unrelated spot.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Oh frabjous day! Finally we can just use any pressure regulator that's stopped down to 60 psi instead of having to find one that is both rated for 120 psi and has a maximum output pressure of 60 psi.

[marshall]

Originally Posted by Alan Anderson

The issue of a "spare parts robot" should have been addressed explicitly instead of wedged in to an unrelated spot.

To do that would be to acknowledge openly that the 6 week build season is a myth and that many teams have them.

[BrendanB]

Originally Posted by marshall

Ohh well... Rule 5.5.900...

Care to explain?

I agree the wording of this ruling is a little weird and would like a better wording of bringing it to the event and what does that constitute. Does an event mean a specific venue or larger like the campus an event is taking place at? There are definitely some characters in FRC who could give teams a hard time depending on how they interpreted that rule and it becomes a different issue when you are traveling from a great distance to an event and won't know how your robot faired until you get there.

[IronicDeadBird]

So now instead of making an extra robot and putting it together and then bagging it we just make an extra robot don't put it together and have those parts bagged?

[marshall]

Originally Posted by IronicDeadBird

So now instead of making an extra robot and putting it together and then bagging it we just make an extra robot don't put it together and have those parts bagged?

But thou shalt not assemble them into the form of a robot while at the event or place them in a configuration that to a "reasonably astute observer" could resemble a robot.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by marshall

But thou shalt not assemble them into the form of a robot while at the event or place them in a configuration that to a "reasonably astute observer" could resemble a robot.

Transformers robots in disguise...

[AllenGregoryIV]

Originally Posted by marshall

But thou shalt not assemble them into the form of a robot while at the event or place them in a configuration that to a "reasonably astute observer" could resemble a robot.

Can we ban the words "reasonably astute observer" forever. It's a bandaid when you can't come up with a concrete rule and shouldn't be in the rule book.
I would rather them say "Hey if you push this rule, HQ might tell you it's illegal. Its a risk you are taking." That's basically what it means.