Interesting Q/A's

[meaubry]

Is it me or are the responses to some of the questions this year worded oddly?

I can't tell if the responder is trying to be funny or sarcastic - makes me laugh and cry at the same time. Shield the entire field???

Anyways, what I don't get is the one Bill brought up - How can something done on purpose (if this is the normal method..), be considered "incidental"???

[Billfred]

Originally Posted by meaubry

Is it me or are the responses to some of the questions this year worded oddly?

I can't tell if the responder is trying to be funny or sarcastic - makes me laugh and cry at the same time. Shield the entire field???

Anyways, what I don't get is the one Bill brought up - How can something done on purpose (if this is the normal method..), be considered "incidental"???

I think that Q&A is similar to the one where the team asked about using a horn on the robot--the robot would be given massive shocks and all, but then they backed it up with the no-obnoxious-noisemakers rule in the event section. At the same time, a robot that used a love tap (and didn't ram or anything) against the wall to release jammed balls would (if I read the intent of the answer correctly) be allowed.

Someone feel free to seek clarification.

[AmyPrib]

Here's a few more

Question:
<G42> Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN
PLAYERs (pre-college team members) and the head referee.

Our question is, if the coach is a pre-college team member, can there be rules dicussion between her/him and the head referee?

Answer:
Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN PLAYERs and the head referee. COACHes, regardless of age, are not part of these discussions.

Question:
We intend to have a door open up and deposit balls into the lower goal.
If the door swings open and transits outside of the starting footprint but ends up inside the footprint would this be legal?

Answer:
If the door is part of a shooter mechanism (see this question/answer), then it cannot transit outside the 28" x 38" starting footprint without violating Rule <S03>. If the door is not part of the shooter mechanism or is part of a ball delivery system in which the balls are motivated solely by gravity (see this question/answer) then it may be permitted to extend beyond the starting footprint. However, it must still satisfy all relevent 2006 FRC rules. In particular, any sloped surface upon which balls roll out of the robot may be subject to Rule <R04>.

[Jon K.]

Question:
<G42> Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN
PLAYERs (pre-college team members) and the head referee.

Our question is, if the coach is a pre-college team member, can there be rules dicussion between her/him and the head referee?

Answer:
Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN PLAYERs and the head referee. COACHes, regardless of age, are not part of these discussions.

That makes a change from last year. Last year I was a student coach and all the Ref's would have no issue, granted we had the same head ref for all three competitions but still.

[lukevanoort]

<G42> Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN
PLAYERs (pre-college team members) and the head referee.

Our question is, if the coach is a pre-college team member, can there be rules dicussion between her/him and the head referee?

Answer:
Any discussions regarding rules, scores, or penalties must be between the DRIVERs or HUMAN PLAYERs and the head referee. COACHes, regardless of age, are not part of these discussions.

Yeah, when I asked this question I was pretty sure that the answer would be yes... it seemed logical at the time. So, now, as the team's rules guru, I'll have to be a driver (can't shoot worth anything), which hurts our team if CENSORED doesn't work. (I'm not the best driver, as the others have experience) Either that or the Human player (either one of two members: Robbiw or Duwayne), David (our main driver), or our backup driver will need to memorize the rules. This whole rule is sort of nonsensical, since the coach could coach the students in their argument.

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

Yeah, when I asked this question I was pretty sure that the answer would be yes... it seemed logical at the time. So, now, as the team's rules guru, I'll have to be a driver (can't shoot worth anything), which hurts our team if CENSORED doesn't work. (I'm not the best driver, as the others have experience) Either that or the Human player (either one of two members: Robbiw or Duwayne), David (our main driver), or our backup driver will need to memorize the rules. This whole rule is sort of nonsensical, since the coach could coach the students in their argument.

Not sure why this forces you to be in one position or another exactly. But though you may have a student coach that can't discuss with the head ref, it doesn't mean the coach can't discuss with your other 3 driveteam members and have them debate it with the refs. Personally, I think all driveteam members should be required to know the rules inside and out.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by AmyPrib

Personally, I think all driveteam members should be required to know the rules inside and out.

Why just the driveteam members? I'm not on drive (and am not likely to be on drive), but I know the rules at least as well as anyone else on the team, if not better. How about the whole team knows at least Section 4 better than the backs of their hands?

[Taylor]

A little background:

Question:
We intend to have a door open up and deposit balls into the lower goal.
If the door swings open and transits outside of the starting footprint but ends up inside the footprint would this be legal?

Answer:
If the door is part of a shooter mechanism (see this question/answer), then it cannot transit outside the 28" x 38" starting footprint without violating Rule <S03>. If the door is not part of the shooter mechanism or is part of a ball delivery system in which the balls are motivated solely by gravity (see this question/answer) then it may be permitted to extend beyond the starting footprint. However, it must still satisfy all relevent 2006 FRC rules. In particular, any sloped surface upon which balls roll out of the robot may be subject to Rule <R04>.

Rule <R04> "Wedge” robots are not allowed. Robots must be designed so that interaction with other robots results in
pushing rather than tipping or lifting. Neither offensive nor defensive wedges are allowed. All parts of a
robot between 0 and 8.5 inches from the ground (the top of the bumper zone – see Rule <R35>) that might
push against another robot must be within 10 degrees of vertical. Devices deployed outside the robot's
footprint should be designed to avoid wedging. If a mechanism or an appendage (a ball harvester, for
example) becomes a wedge that interferes with other robots, penalties, disabling, or disqualification can occur
depending on the severity of the infraction.


My question is this: If we have a drawbridge-style gate that has an axis of rotation above 8.5 inches off the floor, and that is deployed only at the corner goals with no intention of being operated anywhere else, sort of like the red robot with the dumping basket and white paddles in the game animation, would that be considered an infraction of the above? It will only be used at the corner goals, and is not intended to "become a wedge that interferes with other robots."

[Peter Matteson]

Originally Posted by boiler

My question is this: If we have a drawbridge-style gate that has an axis of rotation above 8.5 inches off the floor, and that is deployed only at the corner goals with no intention of being operated anywhere else, sort of like the red robot with the dumping basket and white paddles in the game animation, would that be considered an infraction of the above? It will only be used at the corner goals, and is not intended to "become a wedge that interferes with other robots."

My understanding of this is that it will only be ruled an infraction if some one actually drives up the ramp.

It would however behoove you to use a passive device like a loop of tubing that is taller than the balls but when combined with the ramp makes a rectangle approximately the size of the bumper zone to show intent not to use the ramp to tip others. This should keep most robots from driving on it anyway.

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by EricH

Why just the driveteam members? I'm not on drive (and am not likely to be on drive), but I know the rules at least as well as anyone else on the team, if not better. How about the whole team knows at least Section 4 better than the backs of their hands?

I didn't say JUST the driveteam members, as it was a response to another comment.
I agree that the whole team should know the rules well, as it may look bad when sponsors or anyone really comes up to a team member and asks what the game is about and they say... "eh, I don't know".... Our whole team takes a game test and must pass it.

Another Q/A:

Question:
Regarding the answer to this http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=125 it says if balls are in the center goal but not counted yet, the photoswitches will detect them and trigger a 5sec wait to allow balls to be counted.

I wanted to confirm if there is going to be a 5sec delay between periods regardless, because based on other answers, a ball in flight before the buzzer (period ending) will still be counted. If that ball is still in flight, and not in the center goal yet, it wouldn't be able to trigger the 5sec wait in order to be counted.
Can you clarify how balls in flight will still be counted when they finally get to the center goal?

Answer:
With the exception of the end of the autonomous period, there is no delay between game periods. Balls in flight when the period ends will be counted for the period.

I suppose I am confused on this? If there is no delay for counting balls, and your scoring zone turns off as the period changes, how will a ball in flight be counted, and who is going to keep track of that? Besides the fact that there was a Q/A referred to that says it will trigger a 5sec wait to count balls if it detects them in the center goal. Maybe they confused delay in match play, vs delay in scoring deactivation? Anyone help clarify?

[GaryVoshol]

Originally Posted by AmyPrib

Another Q/A:

I suppose I am confused on this? If there is no delay for counting balls, and your scoring zone turns off as the period changes, how will a ball in flight be counted, and who is going to keep track of that? Besides the fact that there was a Q/A referred to that says it will trigger a 5sec wait to count balls if it detects them in the center goal. Maybe they confused delay in match play, vs delay in scoring deactivation? Anyone help clarify?

The answer says there will be no delay after periods 2 and 3 (and 4, I guess). This means there could be a delay after period 1 (autonomous) - I suspect that there almost always will be, so alliances can be informed by the system whether they are playing offense or defense.

It also says that balls in flight will be counted. Perhaps at the end of periods 2 and 4 everything applicable is turned off except the center ball counter, which stays active for 5 more seconds. (At the end of period 3, everything already on stays active; everything at the other end is activated for the final free-for-all.) I don't know how they would determine whether or not the balls counted in that period were in flight, stuck in the chute, or shot late by a robot.

[GaryVoshol]

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=674

Zip Ties

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Are we allowed to use zip ties on our robot?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes. After all, what would the world be without zip ties!

Only slightly different than what the world would be without duct tape!

[AmyPrib]

Guess I'm still not sure how they will accurately count balls in flight. Seems like it would be easier to just say, any balls not in the goal before the buzzer won't count. As a ref, I wouldn't really want to keep track of that, or be in a situation where I missed one, or added one incorrectly. Maybe they expect to have dedicated volunteers to only watch for that. Wish they would clearly state how. I can see a lot of debate happening on this type of instance, esp if it affects automode results (a last sec ball in flight, not detected by the goal yet, not sure how fast human interaction can happen there).

I guess that 5sec counting delay is only after automode, if it detects balls in the goal. Seems like it should do the same for other periods... same concept... we'll see.

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=609

Question:
As a followup, can you please clarify how balls in flight will still be counted after period 2 especially, if there is no delay in turning off the counter? Will the scoring counter still be active for a short time after the period ends to allow those balls in flight to be counted once they reach the goal? Otherwise, I am not clear on how balls in flight will be counted.

An answer to a previous question like this (specifically for automode) said if balls were in the center goal, but not yet funneled in the chute, it would trigger a 5sec delay to count them. However, that does not address balls in flight, as they would not yet be in the center goal.

Answer:
There is no five second delay after the second or third period. If ambiguity in the automated scoring is created by rapidly scoring robots, human intervention will be used to ensure that all balls in flight at the end of the period (and only those balls) are counted.

[lukevanoort]

Originally Posted by AmyPrib

Guess I'm still not sure how they will accurately count balls in flight. Seems like it would be easier to just say, any balls not in the goal before the buzzer won't count. As a ref, I wouldn't really want to keep track of that, or be in a situation where I missed one, or added one incorrectly. Maybe they expect to have dedicated volunteers to only watch for that. Wish they would clearly state how. I can see a lot of debate happening on this type of instance, esp if it affects automode results (a last sec ball in flight, not detected by the goal yet, not sure how fast human interaction can happen there).

I guess that 5sec counting delay is only after automode, if it detects balls in the goal. Seems like it should do the same for other periods... same concept... we'll see.

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=609

You have to remember that the other periods (except 4) only have one goal active. So, if redabot shoots into their goal, then it switches, that goal can count the balls since it has nothing else to do. The only issue would be if a robot fired after the period ended.

[AmyPrib]

Originally Posted by lukevanoort

You have to remember that the other periods (except 4) only have one goal active. So, if redabot shoots into their goal, then it switches, that goal can count the balls since it has nothing else to do. The only issue would be if a robot fired after the period ended.

I realize that one goal is active during the 2 middle periods. My point is, when the buzzer sounds, your goal is no longer active. So, if you shot a ball a split second before the buzzer sounded and it goes in, how do they count it? The system can't count it. Human interaction they say, but I just wonder how and how well that's gonna work...first having to be positive it shot before the buzzer, and second to be sure the amount is counted right. The same goes for automode... if a ball is in flight, it won't trigger any score delay, so there's a potential of incorrect automode score.

I feel like I'm missing something obvious, but I just don't see how it will work well to have human real-time scoring for these situations. Refs already have enough to watch. No one else has this concern?

I don't really want to debate it, but if anyone has a confirmed answer for that specifically, let me know.