|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Car Nack Predicts 3/06
FIRST will have problems handling the numerous claims that robots are exceeding the ball shooter intial velocity of 12meters per second.
Car Nack has spoken. |
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Agreed.
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I certainly hope Car Nack is wrong, but I'm pretty sure he's right. We shall see.
|
|
#4
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I am 99% sure that he is right!
|
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
It's going to be pretty difficult to judge how fast the balls are coming out.
|
|
#6
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I think that Car Nack will be wrong on this one _IF_ FIRST adopts one simple policy. In NASCAR, if Team A believes Team B has put a car with prohibited modifications on the track, they can request a tear down inspection by the authorities. If they are right and Team B has an illegal car, then Team B is penalized appropriately (up to and including having a "win" rescinded). However, if Team A is wrong and the challenged car is perfectly legal, then Team A has to pay for the tear down and rebuild. This is their penalty for filing a false charge. A similar policy could be instituted at the competitions if excessive spurious "they are shooting too fast!" charges become a problem.
-dave |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Quote:
|
|
#8
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I definitely agree with Car Nack, and completely disagree with Dave. (Sorry, Dave
)Although it is a fantastic solution, I feel that the desire for low match turnaround time at a FIRST event will overpower any "checks" such as Dave proposed, or any other additional "check" than the inspection at the beginning. I can imagine that after the first time a team overturns a decision based on ball speed, teams will be more attune to the problem and thus request a check more often than if the issue was nipped in the bud even before the event begins. Teams need to trust that every team is keeping within the rules set out by FIRST. I know they don't all the time, but I think the only way to stick to the idea of "referees calls are final" is by not allowing an overturn. Poor match calls can make-or-break the team perspective of an event, and thus referees should be chosen for their experience, so that if a situation arises it can be handled quickly and correctly. Selecting experienced referees also cuts down on the amount of issues missed, and decreases the amount of overturns. Bottom Line? Which would you rather have, more matches while trusting your opponents are keeping within the same rules that you stuck to, or less matches and distrust of every team out there? I think we've come too far as the FIRST Community to regress to the latter decision. Side note: If it is not addressed in the season, I think FIRST will be overwhelmed in the team forums about this particular point. And, it's not like that hasn't happened before! |
|
#9
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Since FIRST is incorporating an UL person to help with Safety Inspection, they should incorporate a State Trooper with a speed gun to check the exit velocity of the Poofballs.
The team is issue a speeding ticket and require to appear in front of the Robot Inspector again- 3 times and you're DQ. Seriously, maybe a speed gun can be used to check the speed of the balls? Has anyone try it? ![]() |
|
#10
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I apologize for not following every Q&A thread, but didn't FIRST say that the ball exit velocity was going to be judged based on going X distance when fired at Y angle?
It seems to me that this should be the test. A team is supposed design robots that meet this test. There are 100's of ways to cheat, but we don't plan on teams cheating. Teams could sneak in extra fix it window hours or fudge accounting or or or. I think that most teams will try to follow this rule if they are given a way to know if they are in violation. A simple rule that is easy to verify seems to me to be the best friend of folks who want to see teams play by the rules. Joe J. |
|
#11
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Quote:
|
|
#12
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
I think i like Dave's Idea, play it like Football you ask for a play to be reviewed and you are wrong you pay the consequences, If redabot says that blueabot's balls were being shot too fast and redabot was wrong, then Redabot should either get a 10 point penalty or possibly even a DQ for the soul reason of causing a hold up
and it shouldnt be just one team, if there are 3 teams in an alliance then the 3 teams should agree upon the review of the robot if they dont then no go, |
|
#13
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Quote:
|
|
#14
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Perhaps the simpler solution is to use a nice and natural part of the planet to our advantage: gravity.
If you can tilt a robot so that it shoots vertically and measure the height from floor to shooter in centimeters, you can have it fire a ball and time how long it's airborne. Throw in some simple math, and bada-bing, you can tell in about ten seconds whether it's legal on the velocity side. In fact, I'm sure Kevin Watson has been hiding in his workshop doing some black magic with an old RC, some limit switches, and a piece of string cheese to accomplish just that. ![]() |
|
#15
|
||||||
|
||||||
|
Re: Car Nack Predicts 3/06
Quote:
you can't be sure that 100% of the teams are going to be able to fire straight up, there are alot of teams with gravity feeds. I am personally a fan of the radar gun. We had an officer come in and test ours yesterday and it seemed fairly accurate based on our calculations. The main thing is FIRST just needs to make it a standard for each comp. If a radar gun is used the same person set up in the same way for every team, so even if the gun is off everyone will be on the same playing field. I was also thinking maybe we could make a custom poof ball with a build in accelerometer and a tiny micro processor. Then the teams would have to shoot that ball and whatever it says goes. just like these for baseballs. http://www.lillianvernon.com/catalog....jsp?pdId=2877 Now that i think about it i might go buy one of those baseballs and transplant it into a poof ball to see how it works. |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Car Nack Predicts #4 | Car Nack | Car Nack's Corner | 1 | 14-04-2005 10:57 |
| Car Nack Predicts #4 | Car Nack | Car Nack's Corner | 0 | 29-03-2004 11:18 |
| Car Nack predicts #3 | Car Nack | Car Nack's Corner | 2 | 03-03-2004 09:24 |
| Car Nack Predicts #2 | Car Nack | Car Nack's Corner | 1 | 06-02-2004 12:48 |
| Car Nack Predicts | Bill Beatty | Off-Season Events | 4 | 11-11-2001 12:12 |