Your tall opaque robot is now illegal

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by Tem1514 Mentor

The only time the Q&A answer becomes official is when it causes a team update to occur that causes the game manual to be changed. Not all Q&A answers cause team updates. Again please see 1.6 in the game manual.

I can tell you, from the perspective of an LRI, that I see the Q&A as official clarifications of the game manual. The rulings provided in the Q&A inform my own interpretation of the rules and the rulings I make at an event. While I do reference specific rules more often at events, I do pull out Q&A responses when explaining some rulings to teams.

The answers on there are official, they just aren't considered to be final. Final rulings come from the LRI and Head Ref.

[Tem1514 Mentor]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Threads merged

Gary,

Thank you for merging the threads.

Randall Thomas

[jspatz1]

Interpretations of the rules by the Q&A are official and LRI's and HR's will use them to make rulings. 1.6 says that Q&A answers do not "supercede" manual text, such as if they are contradictory. It does not say that answers which clarify and interpret the manual text are not official. 1.6 says answers "sometimes" result in team updates, it does not say they always do, or that they are not official and can be ignored if they don't. Not all answers require a manual update because not all answers are contradictory to the text. But all answers are official, whether or not they cause an update.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by bachster

Hi Glenn,

I'm not sure if the Head Ref was involved prior, but from what I witnessed (I forget which round), a field-side RI noticed that 359's bumpers had zip-ties around the bumpers and notified the LRI. The LRI checked the robot on the field and had the drive team remove the zip-ties since these aren't considered a rigid fastening system and aren't part of the legal bumper cross-section. I was on the field next to your robot when the zip-ties were removed and it was clear that the front corners were not very rigidly attached. I'm not familiar with your bumper fastening system, but it seemed like something must have broken or loosened during a previous match and the zip ties were added as a temporary fix. The LRI allowed 359 to play that match and required that the bumpers be more rigidly attached for the next match, which is when you added the wood screws. Maybe during that same match the Head Ref also noticed them sagging and also gave you a "warning," or maybe the Head Ref had noticed them sagging after the fastening system loosened and that's what prompted the zip ties, but either way, this does seem like an appropriate application of G19-1 (and as far as I know, you weren't fouled or disabled, just asked to fix it for the next match).

Sorry for not responding earlier, I just read this.
The zip ties on the sides of the bumper is our fault. One of my kids put them on for the sake of doing it which was not neccessary.
As for the corner in question, he did that because the corner in was somehow bent a little after a much earlier previous match and he used zipties to try and straighten them out. After being asked to secure it with screws, we did it in the heat of the moment because I didnt want to miss a match. I do still believe that the bumper was within the height requirements though. The robot passed reinspection.
Was it measured on the field?
I think it was more of a cause and effect seeing the zip ties.

[Sperkowsky]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Sorry for not responding earlier, I just read this.
The zip ties on the sides of the bumper is our fault. One of my kids put them on for the sake of doing it which was not neccessary.
As for the corner in question, he did that because the corner in was somehow bent a little after a much earlier previous match and he used zipties to try and straighten them out. After being asked to secure it with screws, we did it in the heat of the moment because I didnt want to miss a match. I do still believe that the bumper was within the height requirements though. The robot passed reinspection.
Was it measured on the field?
I think it was more of a cause and effect seeing the zip ties.

What doesn't make sense to me is why zip ties can not be used as a supplementary mounting system. Say you had 2 wood screws that were a little loose what is the problem with adding a few zip ties to help you out. The front of our 2015 off season bot was held to the drive train with zip ties held up fine through 5 quals and all the way through 3 final matches. The things are definitely strong enough in bulk to hold on a bumper.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by Sperkowsky

What doesn't make sense to me is why zip ties can not be used as a supplementary mounting system. Say you had 2 wood screws that were a little loose what is the problem with adding a few zip ties to help you out. The front of our 2015 off season bot was held to the drive train with zip ties held up fine through 5 quals and all the way through 3 final matches. The things are definitely strong enough in bulk to hold on a bumper.

Zip ties are SPECIFICALLY not counted as a rigid fastening system (they're called "cable ties" in the manual as I recall).

Also, depending on the application, you could get called for "hard parts beyond 1". Either one of those two is grounds for a reinspection/repair.

[IronicDeadBird]

Originally Posted by EricH

Zip ties are SPECIFICALLY not counted as a rigid fastening system (they're called "cable ties" in the manual as I recall).

Also, depending on the application, you could get called for "hard parts beyond 1". Either one of those two is grounds for a reinspection/repair.

Interesting note while the manual does not count them as a rigid fastening system, I have seen FTAs use them to great effect for patching field damage...
BIG SORRY ABOUT THE SALLY PORT!

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Sorry for not responding earlier, I just read this.
The zip ties on the sides of the bumper is our fault. One of my kids put them on for the sake of doing it which was not neccessary.
As for the corner in question, he did that because the corner in was somehow bent a little after a much earlier previous match and he used zipties to try and straighten them out. After being asked to secure it with screws, we did it in the heat of the moment because I didnt want to miss a match. I do still believe that the bumper was within the height requirements though. The robot passed reinspection.
Was it measured on the field?
I think it was more of a cause and effect seeing the zip ties.

Please note that reinspection is NOT another full inspection. During reinspection, we don't measure bumpers, or check frame perimeter, etc. We specifically look at what had changed. In the case of an elims reinspection, this is based on weight of the robot and talking with the team. Just because you passed reinspection does NOT mean everything is 100% legal, and when it comes to bumpers, the Head Ref does have some say on the field as to their legality.

You would not believe the stuff I've found at champs on robots that had passed inspection and reinspection at 3 or more prior events...

[bachster]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Sorry for not responding earlier, I just read this.
The zip ties on the sides of the bumper is our fault. One of my kids put them on for the sake of doing it which was not neccessary.
As for the corner in question, he did that because the corner in was somehow bent a little after a much earlier previous match and he used zipties to try and straighten them out. After being asked to secure it with screws, we did it in the heat of the moment because I didnt want to miss a match. I do still believe that the bumper was within the height requirements though. The robot passed reinspection.
Was it measured on the field?
I think it was more of a cause and effect seeing the zip ties.

From my recollection, I think the concern from the LRI's perspective was more about the rigidity of the mounting and less about the height. I remember I had the impression that something must have broken or come loose on the normal mounting system because it seemed like the front corner(s) had some play in them, but I definitely didn't get a chance to look at it for long, and you're right, it could have partially been an effect of seeing the zip ties first. I can't speak for any feedback you might have gotten from the ref.

Originally Posted by EricH

Also, depending on the application, you could get called for "hard parts beyond 1".

Correct. In this particular case they were around the whole bumper so they violated the "hard parts beyond 1" and the bumper cross-section from R21. I agree that supplementary zip-ties are likely better than nothing in a pinch, but R21-G does specifically call them out as not meeting the definition of "rigid fastening system."

Glenn, hopefully your team didn't leave with the impression that rules were applied incorrectly or unfairly. Thanks for being willing to make the quick modification!

Apologies for the extreme tangent to the thread.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

Please note that reinspection is NOT another full inspection. During reinspection, we don't measure bumpers, or check frame perimeter, etc. We specifically look at what had changed. In the case of an elims reinspection, this is based on weight of the robot and talking with the team. Just because you passed reinspection does NOT mean everything is 100% legal, and when it comes to bumpers, the Head Ref does have some say on the field as to their legality.

You would not believe the stuff I've found at champs on robots that had passed inspection and reinspection at 3 or more prior events...

Jon,
I totally get the whole reinspection part vs a regular inspection. From a quick visual, our bumpers are clearly not modified in anyway. I should have clarified that in my initial explanation.

[waialua359]

Originally Posted by bachster

Glenn, hopefully your team didn't leave with the impression that rules were applied incorrectly or unfairly. Thanks for being willing to make the quick modification!

Apologies for the extreme tangent to the thread.

Oh no worries.
I had to smile and laugh at why my drive team operator put zip ties all over the robot bumpers.

[FrankJ]

While acknowledging the no holding bumpers on with zip ties ruling was completely proper, and was really the only ruling possible under the current rules... I have seen a lot of robots allowed to compete with bumpers that could have benefited by a couple of well placed zip ties.

The Yin Yang of this is the goal of getting all the robots on the field is sometimes in conflict with the goal that all robots be fully rule compliant.