New Off-season Defenses

[maxnz]

Let me ask this: Where exactly was the problem on the portcullis? I know what the problem is but I just want to know what part of the portcullis caused the problem. Then we could try to think of a new portcullis that removes this problem.

[Doug Frisk]

Originally Posted by maxnz

Let me ask this: Where exactly was the problem on the portcullis? I know what the problem is but I just want to know what part of the portcullis caused the problem. Then we could try to think of a new portcullis that removes this problem.

The problem is, the springs on each side are 40 pound constant tension springs which means the actual door within the portcullis is 85 pounds total. With the springs attached, the door can be easily raised to about 10 feet at which point the assembly becomes very top heavy and tippy. Without the springs attached, the door can be lifted even higher and I understand that may have caused an incident or two. The springs themselves are metal ribbons with, while not a sharp edge, and edge that can cut ungloved fingers as the door moves up and down. Think of someone running 4 feet of the edge of a tape measure across your fingers. The wheels at the bottom of the door present a crush hazard as they roll up and down as well.

The assembly when finished is very easy to tip and has no hand holds or way to lock the door in place.

So, an improved portcullis is:

• lighter.
• has no exposed counterweight components.
• has fewer sharp edges.
• has a door that can be locked in place during transport.
• has handholds for the field reset folks.

I'm sure there's more.

[Karibou]

Originally Posted by DareDad

So, an improved portcullis is:

• lighter.
• has no exposed counterweight components.
• has fewer sharp edges.
• has a door that can be locked in place during transport.
• has handholds for the field reset folks.

I'm sure there's more.

I'd specifically say "has no exposed track components" - the weighting isn't the issue regarding pinch points (aside from the top-heaviness), it's the exposed track/wheel And if you cover that, you also pretty much cover the spring. But otherwise, that's a solid list. Just adding a latch/lock or handholds alone would have saved a lot of fingers.

[scott.smith]

I have heard a lot of ideas for a rolling log defense, and I really like the concept, but I feel one rolling log would be impossible to get over. I think that a better design for the defense would have 3-5 rolling cylinders, so it still has challenge, but isn't impossible.

[Doug Frisk]

Originally Posted by scott.smith

I have heard a lot of ideas for a rolling log defense, and I really like the concept, but I feel one rolling log would be impossible to get over. I think that a better design for the defense would have 3-5 rolling cylinders, so it still has challenge, but isn't impossible.

Something like 5 lengths of 1 1/2" PVC suspended across the base on taut paracord?

I like it, but it seems to me that something would have to be added to slow the robots down, otherwise crossing that defense would simply be a matter of charging at it at full speed at which point the defense wouldn't last more than a couple of matches.

[notmattlythgoe]

Originally Posted by DareDad

otherwise crossing that defense would simply be a matter of charging at it at full speed

This was the strategy for over half of the defenses this year... including the portcullis.

[techhelpbb]

A box with closing walls. Cause everything should get a great big hug:

>:)<

or
Something like this:


Drive fast...drive true...otherwise it will kind of crush you:

}:)

[ctt956]

Originally Posted by techhelpbb

A box with closing walls. Cause everything should get a great big hug:

>:)<

or
Something like this:


Drive fast...drive true...otherwise it will kind of crush you:

}:)

YES! Definitely! This or a Bomb-Omb, or maybe a Chain Chomp. Goombas and Koopa Troopas would probably be good too.

[notmattlythgoe]

Just wanted to give everyone a heads up of what I've heard from HQ.

Matt, thanks for your patience on this.

We just sent emails to District management instructing them not to supply the full portcullis to off-season events, but giving them the OK to supply the portcullis bases (as you have pictured below). As the game-specific elements stay with the Districts after the season is over, they have control of their own destinies on this.

We’ve also provided similar instructions to AndyMark.

[TheMagicPenguin]

There is no problem with the portcullis.
I competed at MAR district and even was a field reset volunteer at one of the events. I never hurt myself on it (wasn't wearing gloves either), and I haven't heard of anyone else hurting themself on it. Sure it's possible but after you get a cut once you learn to not put your fingers there. That simple. Getting rid of it because a few people weren't paying attention is ridiculous. With that logic we may as well get rid of all defenses because people can cut themselfs on it.

Getting rid of the portcullis penalizes all the teams (like mine) who spent hours on a autonomous for it. Even if HQ is nit letting people ship it out, make a almost identical defense, that doesn't penalizes teams who built a specific mechanism for it.

[CalTran]

Originally Posted by TheMagicPenguin

There is no problem with the portcullis.
I competed at MAR district and even was a field reset volunteer at one of the events. I never hurt myself on it (wasn't wearing gloves either), and I haven't heard of anyone else hurting themself on it. Sure it's possible but after you get a cut once you learn to not put your fingers there. That simple. Getting rid of it because a few people weren't paying attention is ridiculous. With that logic we may as well get rid of all defenses because people can cut themselfs on it.

Getting rid of the portcullis penalizes all the teams (like mine) who spent hours on a autonomous for it. Even if HQ is nit letting people ship it out, make a almost identical defense, that doesn't penalizes teams who built a specific mechanism for it.

If it were in season, you can bet that all of us would be up in arms over this. Hell, look at the reaction when they changed the material of the low bar, let alone got rid of an entire defense.
Since it's off season though, I don't feel quite as shafted that they're not distributing the Port. It's large, difficult to see around when reffing (Particularly when it's in position 2 or 3), and there seems to be a few "major" injuries related to it (Or at least, more injuries than I've heard about from past seasons field reset), and teams have already had a chance to use whatever mechanisms that were purpose built.
And on the plus side, if you take off your Port manipulator, you might now have enough weight to cheesecake a climber on!

[TheMagicPenguin]

Originally Posted by CalTran

Since it's off season though, I don't feel quite as shafted that they're not distributing the Port. It's large, difficult to see around when reffing (Particularly when it's in position 2 or 3), and there seems to be a few "major" injuries related to it (Or at least, more injuries than I've heard about from past seasons field reset), and teams have already had a chance to use whatever mechanisms that were purpose built.

I see your points and your certainty not wrong, but I still believe it's not enough of a reason to get rid of it.

Originally Posted by CalTran

And on the plus side, if you take off your Port manipulator, you might now have enough weight to cheesecake a climber on!

I would normally agree with this however we already have a hanger and a pound or two to spare. Another good point though.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by TheMagicPenguin

Sure it's possible but after you get a cut once you learn to not put your fingers there. That simple.

I'm not trying to single you out, but I wish people wouldn't have this sort of calloused attitude towards safety. I'm certain the people that broke fingers or required stitches from volunteering have a different point of view.

[TheMagicPenguin]

Originally Posted by efoote868

I'm not trying to single you out, but I wish people wouldn't have this sort of calloused attitude towards safety. I'm certain the people that broke fingers or required stitches from volunteering have a different point of view.

When a volunteer signs up for field reset I believe they should have expected some level of danger. When I did feild reset this year I defiantly got some cuts on my hands and such (as I expected to), but I didn't complain saying that the rough terrain should be forbidden because I got hurt on it. I put my hand where I shouldn't have and after that I didn't do it again.

I don't disagree that breaking fingers and getting stiches is a little different, however by signing up to volenteer you know what the job is and the dangers it could potentially bring. You know what your getting yourself into.

My solution to this problem would have been after the first time there was a "severe" inquiry would have been to give volunteers an option to not work with the portcullis. Better training for handling it would have helped too. Obviously it's a little late for that now.

[Arhowk]

Originally Posted by maxnz

Let me ask this: Where exactly was the problem on the portcullis? I know what the problem is but I just want to know what part of the portcullis caused the problem. Then we could try to think of a new portcullis that removes this problem.

1) Size
2) Little bit topheavy
3) The giant blade that can easily deal enough damage if it slides on its track
4) the fact that, atleast in FiM, you have to have four people grab the portcullises and shove them on top of everything else