VCU DISQUALIFICATION!

[Tomasz Bania]

If any of you are watching the webcast, 1 alliance was just disqualified. I didn't exactly catch why they were disqualified, can someone post the reason here?

Thank You,
Tomasz Bania

[Tim Delles]

They entered the side goal with their robot. Which is a saftey violation (results in a Dq)

[Tomasz Bania]

ok, thats what I thought I heard, but I didn't think that was a disqualification but rather a disable. Oh well.

Tomasz Bania

P.S. That freaks me out as I might be our teams driver and those bumpers easily go under those goals.

[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?

[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.