Team Update 2

[bobbysq]

TL;DR Velcro isn't banned yet, but "superfusion" is, whatever that means.

(Q&A is also down, so no definitive answer :/)

[Bob Steele]

I would guess that superfusion might be something like melting the end of a nylon rope into a feature that is used in climbing. For instance... melting the end of the rope into a solid hook shape or something....

Just my guess...

[PayneTrain]

Nothing stopping the velcro brigade from fashioning a rope that coincidentally manages to mesh with the hook side of hook-and-loop fastening...

(at least until someone does it and hurts the GDC's feelings because someone found a way that made their challenge easier than they wanted it to be)

[engunneer]

I actually don't see any prevention of velcro in the current rules, Team updates, and Q&A AS LONG AS you pay attention to how the material is constructed, and how you attach it to your rope.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Assuming the GDC wants to ban Velcro, their easiest option is to just ban the use of hook and loop fastener to attach to the field.

[tig567899]

From what I interpret, you're still allowed to stitch non-tape velcro to the end of your rope, just not fuse your rope with velcro.

[Steven Smith]

I think if you read for intent and not just wording at this point.... the GDC could have very easily have just said the rope is a standard field element. They probably would have liked to, but know that many climbers are going to damage the rope over time, which will lead to a lot of backlash, so they put the onus on teams to bring their own rope.

If the wording is ambiguous, they will continue to qualify the wording to meet the intent, or teams will just run the risk of designing around something that gets banned post bag/tag.

Yes, there are ways to solve the problem via rope design, but the intent is to solve it via robot design (acquire/climb). I really don't see an about-face on this direction, and I think the very few updates we've gotten so far have been consistent with my reading of the original intent. If they are going to argue that the 4" whipped end cannot be modified to make acquisition easier, ONLY to prevent fraying, I cannot see why they would say the rest of the rope can be modified to make acquisition easier (short of the approved knotting).

[engunneer]

it's important to remember that the 4" end that has fraying prevention applied and the point that the rope length is measures to don't have to be the same thing. the rope anatomy diagram shows this clearly.

you can keep the end of your rope from fraying (using legal methods), and then tie that end of the rope into a knot or a loop, and that is NOT superfusion.

[efoote868]

consist entirely of flexible, non-metallic fibers twisted, tied, woven, or braided together except for the last 4 in. (~10 cm) of any cut end (E) which may be whipped, (with material that is flexible and non-metallic) or fused only to prevent fraying.

So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

[ASD20]

Originally Posted by efoote868

So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

See figure 9-1

[FrankJ]

Originally Posted by efoote868

So to anyone thinking that the hoops portion of Velcro is illegal, would a tow strap be legal?

The tow strap would have to be less than 1" wide with the metal hooks removed.

[BrianAtlanta]

Here's my $.02.

I "think" they don't want Velcro used, but the clarification seems to only apply to the modification to the rope to prevent fraying.

Community members are innovative and
may discover a way to fuse the end of the ROPE in a way that can be
leveraged for competitive advantage. This “superfusion” extends the
fusing’s purpose beyond only preventing fraying.

So as it stands currently, if you have a strap of Velcro that satisfied the definition for rope, I think that would still be legal since you didn't modify it. I just expect that they'll address that in the next update. So be careful about betting on Velcro as rope.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by FrankJ

The tow strap would have to be less than 1" wide with the metal hooks removed.

Then my question becomes, why would tow strap material be legal and the hoops portion of velcro not? The velcro loop is made up of fibers that are flexible, non metallic, and woven, same as the tow strap. In my opinion, neither would be categorized as rope in English, but both meet FIRST's definition in the rulebook.

[engunneer]

Originally Posted by efoote868

Then my question becomes, why would tow strap material be legal and the hoops portion of velcro not? The velcro loop is made up of fibers that are flexible, non metallic, and woven, same as the tow strap. In my opinion, neither would be categorized as rope in English, but both meet FIRST's definition in the rulebook.

you just described the pro-velcro argument. Find a piece of velcro that meets these specs (no adhesives, completely made of fibers, woven, braided or twisted, size, etc.) and you have a legal component for your rope.

there are MANY examples of velcro that are not legal, but not because they are velcro.

[nuclearnerd]

I'm going to stake a claim that hoop-side velcro strips will remain legal when all is said and done. We can keep lawyering the rules until you have a very fuzzy rope, and it would still work. It's just a *very* good solution to the problem. (Although the Ri3D 1.0 version still requires the drum to move. Lets see if we can improve that).

And I don't buy that lawyering the rules is outside the spirit of the game. This is a design challenge, with a very specific spec. If the "client" wanted something different, they'd put it in the spec.

And along those lines, if they wanted us to solve a specific rope climbing problem, they would have made the ropes a standardized game pieces and made us all use the same thing.

(sorry, this should probably go in the velcro thread)