Go to Post It doesn't matter what material you pick, it matters how you execute your design. - JamesCH95 [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > Competition > Rules/Strategy
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
  #19   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 24-01-2007, 18:40
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #5 Posted

Quote:
Originally Posted by dlavery View Post
Wrong. Read all of Rule <R105> and Rule <R106>, carefully. Now read it again. Now read it again. Don't analyze it seventeen times. Don't try to read between the lines. Don't insert your own interpretation of what hidden meaning might be there. Just read the words. There is no inconsistency. There is no conflict between the rules. You are finding fault where there is none. If you still think there is a conflict, then post a question to the Q&A system and get an official response from FIRST on the subject. But you need to stop poosting incorrect interpretations of the rules and misleading other teams.

-dave
While that's generally good advice, you don't seem to realize that I did not attempt to read between the lines, nor did I insert some interpretation of hidden meaning.

Perhaps you need to look at what's actually written, and not what you (or whoever was responsible for this rule) intended to write. That's the salient point here: what's actually written. Teams are not bound by intent, they are bound by rules. You know as well as I that the officials can't just insert words and concepts as if they should (in someone's opinion) be there. While I certainly recognize that the intent of the rule is very important, if the rule doesn't actually say what it was intended to say, no amount of good intent can take the place of actually fixing the rule.

I'm not trying to mislead teams, but you're not helping matters by denying that the rule is potentially inconsistent. If they're misled, it will be because you refuse to acknowledge that there is a slight difference in the way that the rules are worded, and that omission has the potential to cause practical consequences.

I'm going to go over this in detail:
Quote:
Originally Posted by <R48>
  • Is the part a safety hazard or likely to damage robots, the field, or interfere with the humans or the controls?
    (No.)
  • Is the part used as a bumper?
    (No.)
  • Is the part used as a non-functional decoration?
    (No.)
  • Kit Part? Was the part included in the Kit of Parts?
    (No; that applies to the 2007 kit.)
  • Pneumatics? Is the part a pneumatic component?
    (Yes.)
  • Is it an Air Cylinder ordered from the Custom Cylinder Order Form?
    (No.)
  • Is it a purchased fitting or valve rated for 125 psi?
    (No.)
  • Is it a previous year's cylinder, valve, or tubing?
    (Yes; the Parker cylinder in question was a KOP item in several previous years.)
  • Is the part or material off-the-shelf or is it custom made by the team after the start of the 2007 Kickoff? (See Robot Section)
    (Yes; it is COTS, from Parker.)
  • Does it exceed quantity limits and/or cost limits? (See Robot Section)
    (No; <R105> specifically describes cost and quantity limits, and they would not be violated.)
  • Yes The part may be used
Quote:
Originally Posted by <R105>
There is no limit to the number of solenoid valves, air cylinders, pressure regulators, and connecting fittings that may be used on the ROBOT. They must, however, be “off the shelf” pneumatic devices rated by their manufacturers for pressure of at least 125psi. Besides the “free” pneumatic components listed on the Pneumatic Components Order form, additional air cylinders or rotary actuators may be purchased. However, they must be identical to those listed on the Pneumatic Components Order form (i.e. same part numbers), and obtained from a Bimba or Parker Hannifan distributor.
Quote:
Originally Posted by <R106>
The following pneumatics items may be added to the ROBOT:
  • Prior year FIRST Kit Of Parts pneumatic cylinders, solenoid valves, and pneumatic tubing may be used in addition to those items in the 2007 Kit Of Parts. Their costs must be accounted for explained in Section 8.3.4.3 Additional Parts - Cost Limits and Accounting.
...[The rest is not relevant.]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Update 5
~ Under Rule<R105>, the only pneumatic cylinders permitted are those that are identical to the Bimba Custom Cylinder Order form found on the last page of the Pneumatics Manual.
It satisfies the flowchart in <R48>.

The first sentence of <R105> says there is no overall quantity limit on cylinders. The second sentence says that they must be rated for 125 psi and COTS. So far so good.

The third sentence says that you may purchase cylinders. The fourth sentence says that they must be the same as the ones on the form (same part numbers), and obtained from a Bimba or Parker dealer. So, what's that saying? The word "they" bolded above logically refers to the objects in the preceding (third) sentence, namely purchased pneumatic cylinders. Not pneumatic cylinders in general. Not donated, found, stolen or bartered pneumatic cylinders.

If you take that fourth sentence to mean cylinders in general (referring to sentences one and two, but not three), its content is logically consistent, but grammatically disjointed. You wouldn't write an essay like that, and you can't reasonably expect people to read like that.

Going to Update 5, the relevant sentence references rule <R105>. We have previously established that the text restricting us to cylinders from the form applies to purchased cylinders.

If we are operating under <R105>, then the clarification ought to be referring to those items in <R105> which are in question—namely the ones with the restriction that needs clarifying, or in other words, the purchased ones (see sentences three and four). It makes no sense for the update to be referring to all cylinders (i.e. clarifying one of the first two sentences), because it isn't a mere "clarification" to add a new restriction where it never existed before. If the intent was to modify the rule, then you can't just call it a clarification, and expect people to treat it identically.

<R106> says, in the first sentence of the first bullet, that prior year KOP cylinders are allowed in addition to those in the KOP. The second sentence of that bullet says that these parts must be accounted for as explained in Section 8.3.4.3 (i.e. account for the cost like any conventional COTS item). Note that the word "purchased" doesn't make an appearance in <R106>.

Like I said earlier, there's a subtle point that was overlooked. It's your problem if you feel compelled to take it personally, but the fact of the matter is, given a reasonable application of English sentence and paragraph structure, I can't interpret it your way.

The stupid part of all of this, is that it's a tiny change to fix it to everyone's satisfaction.
 


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Team Update #3 Posted Katie Reynolds Rules/Strategy 26 21-01-2007 19:41
Team Update #2 is Posted geo General Forum 1 16-01-2004 10:56
Team Update 8 Posted! Harrison General Forum 1 30-01-2003 08:08
Team update #6 posted Joe Ross General Forum 6 22-01-2003 10:14


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:08.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi