Go to Post Right, play to win. Play to win the event or play to win one match? This year, unfortunately, they are not the same thing. - Paul Copioli [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-04-2016, 11:48 AM
Jake177's Avatar
Jake177 Jake177 is offline
Registered User
AKA: JT, Jake Troiano
FRC #0177 (Bobcat Robotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Cromwell, CT
Posts: 286
Jake177 is a splendid one to beholdJake177 is a splendid one to beholdJake177 is a splendid one to beholdJake177 is a splendid one to beholdJake177 is a splendid one to beholdJake177 is a splendid one to behold
Re: Running over a boulder foul

Based on what I saw from the stands, the way the refs at the Hartford District called G38 seemed very fair. If a robot was in possession of a boulder and happened to drive over a second boulder, a ref would signal a five second count (similar to a pin count). After five seconds, if the robot was still in possession of two boulders, a foul was called. This kept the refs from having to judge "intent" while still allowing a case for a no-call on incidental violations. It also gave the drivers a clear signal that they were doing something wrong with time to correct it before the foul was called.

For G41, they called a foul any time a robot caused two boulders to move into their opponents' courtyard in a single crossing. Most of these looked like they could have been caused by the drivers simply not being able to see the second boulder. Usually it was between the robot and the defense being crossed, so they just bulldozed it through the outer works. Even so, I think this is a fair way to enforce this rule. Whether intentional or not, having one more boulder in your opponents' courtyard most certainly gives you an advantage.
__________________
Once a Bobcat, always a Bobcat
2001-2004: Student
(I'm told the team had a couple good years in between here)
2012 - Present: Mentor
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-04-2016, 01:55 PM
philso philso is offline
Mentor
FRC #2587
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Rookie Year: 2011
Location: Houston, Tx
Posts: 938
philso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond reputephilso has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Running over a boulder foul

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake177 View Post
Based on what I saw from the stands, the way the refs at the Hartford District called G38 seemed very fair. If a robot was in possession of a boulder and happened to drive over a second boulder, a ref would signal a five second count (similar to a pin count). After five seconds, if the robot was still in possession of two boulders, a foul was called. This kept the refs from having to judge "intent" while still allowing a case for a no-call on incidental violations. It also gave the drivers a clear signal that they were doing something wrong with time to correct it before the foul was called.
This seems to be the most fair thing, especially with the Defenses (and robots, even low ones) blocking the drivers vision. Our robot sometimes got stuck for short times on the Boulders that started at the mid-line after pushing hard to get over the Defenses back in the the Neutral Zone. Occasionally, it would end up on top of two Boulders. I also saw a robot that was supposed to play defense against us come over the Defenses into their Courtyard and got stuck on top of a Boulder. Their robot had very little ground clearance so the Boulder supported most of the weight of the robot, leaving only one wheel barely touching the carpet. They ended up stuck on "the Soft Terrain" for almost half of the Teleop period, slowly spinning in circles until the Boulder rolled out. I suspect that the driver probably thought the Boulder would just get pushed out of the way rather than going under his bumper.
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 04-05-2016, 08:29 PM
NathanCJohnson's Avatar
NathanCJohnson NathanCJohnson is offline
Registered User
FRC #5517 (District 5517 The Engineers on Fire)
Team Role: Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2015
Rookie Year: 2015
Location: Burton, MI (USA)
Posts: 15
NathanCJohnson is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Running over a boulder foul

This was ruled a foul at both of our events (Kettering #2 and Howell). At least a few times, we had a boulder in our robot and accidentally drove over another one and a foul was called. I wish they wouldn't rule this as a foul as we aren't really "controlling" the boulder - we would drive off of the other boulder ASAP.
__________________
Team 5517 - The Engineers on Fire "Catching The Fire Of FIRST."
Facebook | Twitter | YouTube
Reply With Quote
Reply


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 01:12 PM.

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