VCU DISQUALIFICATION!

[Nuttyman54]

Originally Posted by MrBamboo

it seems there are a lot of DQ's with robots entering the corner goal. I have one question about this. If our robot puts down a draw bridge to score but it is outside the goal. and then an opposing alliance's robot pushes us from behind therefore shoving our draw bridge into the corner goal. Does that count as breaking the rule as it was non-intentional?

I think so, which is why a number of dumper teams have put devices that keep them from being able to fit through.

It couldn't have been a DQ for the alliance, because they're back for the 2nd match. It would have to have been a disable.

[Tim Delles]

No it was a dq. the elimnations are best out of 3. So if you get dq one match you can still play the others.

[Nuttyman54]

Ahh, sorry, i had a different conception of DQ. In this case it just means a 0 score for the match?

[Tim Delles]

Yeah. A dq is just for the match.

[Kevin Sevcik]

It's not a safety violation, the rule is G21:

ROBOT Incursion into the Corner Goal - Incidental incursion into the corner goal that occurs as a result of a ROBOT pushing balls into the goal is permitted, not to exceed a distance of approximately 3 inches. Intentional incursion, for example to use a ball gathering mechanism to drop off balls inside the goal, or extending a portion of the ROBOT through the goal opening to activate the ball counting system, will result in disqualification of the offending ROBOT.

Also, the rule specifically says intentional. So if you get pushed in, it can't be intentional. As long as you're not pushed in more than 3 inches, you're okay. I'll check the Q&A real quick to cinfirm this, though.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

SF 1.1 resulted in a DQ for the red alliance due to incursion in the corner goal during autonomous mode. Was that the correct call? Without seeing what exactly happened, I know its difficult to say, but no where in the rules or Q/A is it stated what happens during autonomous incursion. Typically there is a grace period or some sort of minor penalty and temporary disablement if a team breaks a rule during autonomous and not a DQ. Any idea?

Kev

[Thecandyman]

In our first match at the Pacific Regional, we got pushed by another robot into a corner box while trying to dump balls in and got a 5 point penalty, but not a DQ. This was not in autonomous mode.

[AmyPrib]

Actually, I had asked once in the Q/A about incursion into the goal more than 3in... and they said that was a DQ. Didn't give any exceptions for being pushed, etc, which implies that your robot should be designed not to go in more than 3in period. That is a safety violation whether you did it or got pushed.

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread...ight=incursion

You can bet it's the same in autonomous.

In our first match at the Pacific Regional, we got pushed by another robot into a corner box while trying to dump balls in and got a 5 point penalty, but not a DQ. This was not in autonomous mode.

This is interesting, since a safety violation is 10pts. Nowhere in the rules that I can see does it talk about a 5pt penalty for this regardless of how you got in the corner goal.

[Lil' Lavery]

414 was well into the corner goal (interesting considering I don't beleive their autonomous had done that before), at least an inch past the 3 in "barrier". They have an unfolding flap and drops to release all the balls into the corner goal, so that's how they managed to get that far in.

[Wetzel]

Originally Posted by Kevin Kolodziej

SF 1.1 resulted in a DQ for the red alliance due to incursion in the corner goal during autonomous mode. Was that the correct call? Without seeing what exactly happened, I know its difficult to say, but no where in the rules or Q/A is it stated what happens during autonomous incursion. Typically there is a grace period or some sort of minor penalty and temporary disablement if a team breaks a rule during autonomous and not a DQ. Any idea?

Kev

Originally Posted by G21

ROBOT Incursion into the Corner Goal - Incidental incursion into the corner goal that occurs as a result of a ROBOT pushing balls into the goal is permitted, not to exceed a distance of approximately 3 inches. Intentional incursion, for example to use a ball gathering mechanism to drop off balls inside the goal, or extending a portion of the ROBOT through the goal opening to activate the ball counting system, will result in disqualification of the offending ROBOT.

It says right there what happens during autonomous mode, which is the same as driver controlled time.

414 was far enough into the goal that they were over the light panel, which happens to be a more than 3 inches inside the goal. At that point they were potentially interfering with the counting system hence the DQ.

Wetzel

[Chriszuma]

Originally Posted by Wetzel

It says right there what happens during autonomous mode, which is the same as driver controlled time.

414 was far enough into the goal that they were over the light panel, which happens to be a more than 3 inches inside the goal. At that point they were potentially interfering with the counting system hence the DQ.

Wetzel

It really seems like they (FIRST) could have designed that system better so they wouldn't have to make such a minefield of disqualifications. I know nobody wants to hear more complaining about first, but this is kind of ridiculous.

[Wetzel]

Originally Posted by Chriszuma

It really seems like they (FIRST) could have designed that system better so they wouldn't have to make such a minefield of disqualifications. I know nobody wants to hear more complaining about first, but this is kind of ridiculous.

What is so ridiculous? FIRST made a rule, don't go into the corner goal. They listened last year and said we'll spot you ~3 inches.

What would you have them do better?

Wetzel

[kjohnson]

Originally Posted by Chriszuma

It really seems like they (FIRST) could have designed that system better so they wouldn't have to make such a minefield of disqualifications. I know nobody wants to hear more complaining about first, but this is kind of ridiculous.

The scoring system this year is real-time. Once points for robots on platforms are added and any penalties are given, the score is ready to be displayed.

The scoring in the lower goals is counted by a camera (of course with a human back-up in case a robot goes into the goal). There are lights under the goal, with a camera mounted at the top of the player's station. A wire mesh is mounted inside the goal to keep the HP's from reaching over the light (one swipe of a hand across the light and the camera counts 5-7 balls). The 2-3 inch margin teams are given for going into the goals is the space from the outer edge of the goal, to where the camera begins scoring. Anything that crosses that light can be scored by the camera, including a robot.

[Lil' Lavery]

FIRST designed a system which allows you 3 inches of space, so follow it. Almost every team at VCU didn't have a problem with it, why should it be changed to help the few that don't follow the rules? This isn't by any measure a new rule. It's been in place for the entire season, you should plan accordingly. In 2004 there were similar rules, that didn't even give those 3 inches.

[Chriszuma]

What is so ridiculous? FIRST made a rule, don't go into the corner goal. They listened last year and said we'll spot you ~3 inches.

What would you have them do better?

Wetzel

All i'm saying is that they should strive to make disqualifications as rare as possible, since they really make the game less spectatorish. What they could have done differently is design the scoring mechanism so that it can't be thrown out of whack by a robot accidentally sticking something in there 3 inches.

Just my 2 cents.