Keepers in Teleoperated mode

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by Kevin Kolodziej

Does anyone have any insight into this??

Yes. The legal justification is <G14>, and the practical justification is to prevent ringers from inadvertantly being scored during the switchover from autonomous to teleoperated, as happened during the elimination rounds in New Jersey today.

[The Lucas]

All auto coders and operators should be careful that their gripper does not open as teleoperated mode starts after autonomous. The tube at NJ was scored at the start of teleoperated mode not in between auto and tele (the bot's program opened thier gripper). There is no good reason that the refs should have to wrestle with a gripped tube. They should only have to remove ones that were released and hang precariously without scoring. The team should be responsible for disposing of their keepers after auton.

FIRST should issue a warning via team update and reiterate it at the driver meeting. It is not the refs responsibility. Any team that doesn’t comply and scores a late keeper (even unintentionally) should be DQed for scoring the late keeper. Any team that can auto program, can program their bot to hold onto the keeper when user mode starts (operator may need to set a switch as well). First week should get a pass because it was unexpected (I never thought about it either).

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Originally Posted by jgannon

Yes. The legal justification is <G14>, and the practical justification is to prevent ringers from inadvertantly being scored during the switchover from autonomous to teleoperated, as happened during the elimination rounds in New Jersey today.

G14 says that refs may remove ringers that are not hanging. Take them off the field...thats fine. But to go in and remove one from posession of a robot?? I disagree. I DO NOT want any ref coming on to the field and disturbing my robot, let alone forcing open a gribber that is not meant to be open when its not supposed to be open. The robot I saw the ref wrestle a ring from was not in scoring position and would have had no problem dropping the keeper as soon as the teleoperated mode started.

The case where the keeper was scored in the dead period is a gray area, but the practical solution, in my eyes, is just to say that that ring is on the rack but doesn't count and there is no penalty. Actually, a more appropriate ruling, I think, would be an update that is similar to last year (balls shot before the buzzer, but in flight when the buzzer sounds, still counted), allowing for keepers to count that were released before the buzzer (lets say I have a ringer above the third spider foot, I release, the buzzer goes off, and then it settles on to the rack). If my robot is touching the keeper before teleoperated mode (I scored it but didn't released, as was the case today, or I let go, but then my manipulator sags and touches it), that keeper is void. All there needs to be is a standard 5 second minimum delay for refs to verify scored, null, or nothing (obviously the longer delay is acceptable as well if they need to go on the field to look........but I still have my issues with that), and the problem is solved.

[mtaman02]

Originally Posted by T. Hoffman

A robot actually hung the keeper after autonomous but BEFORE teleoperated period during one match at NJ. It seems the field control dudes can delay the start of the teleoperated period. After autonomous, the arm was disabled and drifted down from the middle row, dropping the keeper down to the lower row and scoring it. The refs stopped the match and forced a reset.

That head ref seemed rather agitated at having to go extract keepers from the robot death grips....

The scoring table has the ability to keep the tele - operated period from occuring for an unknown amount of time after autonomous period ends. Thats why some periods would run a few seconds quicker then others b/c the head ref can tell the scoring table when to start the next phase of the match. As for the head ref at NJ being agitated - I must agree he seem angered having to go out on the field after autonomous to remove any keepers from being accidentally scored as if someone was forcing him to do go out there and get the keeper out of the robots possession. I mean he was just tossing the keepers all over the place as well as rocking the robot around and forcing open motored and pneumatic grippers. I don't care if he's been head ref'ing for 20 yrs. One should take great care in handling someone else's property to ensure it doesn't get damaged while being handled. Teams should not have to spend more time on fixing there robots all b/c a ref decided to rip the keeper from the robot. Teams have already spent 6 wks in building now they may have to spend hours trying to fix that mistake.

[dbell]

at the BAE GSR, after the autonomous mode the head ref would come out onto the field and take away the tubes that robots were holding. this might happen at other regionals too. you can't score a keeper in tele mode anyway so I don't know why he did that.

[Dan Petrovic]

The head ref from BAE removed any keepers from the grips of robots. If they were on the floor he left them.

In the first match, one team had a keeper in their gripper so tightly that the head ref took out a knife and completely destroyed the thing.

I think he did it as a "What a way to open the day!" kind of thing. It was kind of amusing.

[Wayne Doenges]

Something funny happened at the NJ regional. During autonomous, a robot went out towards the rack and was just getting ready to place the keeper when time ran out. When the teleoperated mode started he dropped the keeper and it fell onto the spider and scored. The refs left it there and continued play but the match was stopped. I don't know if it was because of the illegal keeper or another problem. When they replayed the match the same robot went out and still didn't drop before time ran out. Before the teleoperated mode started a ref came out and had to forcibly remove the keeper frome the robots grasp.

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by Wayne Doenges

Something funny happened at the NJ regional. During autonomous, a robot went out towards the rack and was just getting ready to place the keeper when time ran out. When the teleoperated mode started he dropped the keeper and it fell onto the spider and scored. The refs left it there and continued play but the match was stopped. I don't know if it was because of the illegal keeper or another problem. When they replayed the match the same robot went out and still didn't drop before time ran out. Before the teleoperated mode started a ref came out and had to forcibly remove the keeper frome the robots grasp.

The match was stopped due to the Late Keeper. I'll say here what I said in the other thread.

Programmers and operators : Do not let your robot drop the keeper as the first thing it does in teleoperated mode; before an operator even touches the controls.

This late keeper is grounds for disqualification!

Set your program and/or OI switches so that the robot keeps the keeper in its death grip until the operators can properly dispose of it.

[Spencer E.]

Okay. So does this mean that I have to program my autonomous to automatically let go of the tube right after the auton period is up? I don't need to drop it do I? Can I just release the grip and that can be the end of it? One last question if there are any programmers in here, do spikes automatically set themselves to 0 once disabled?

[The Lucas]

Originally Posted by Spencer E.

Okay. So does this mean that I have to program my autonomous to automatically let go of the tube right after the auton period is up? I don't need to drop it do I? Can I just release the grip and that can be the end of it? One last question if there are any programmers in here, do spikes automatically set themselves to 0 once disabled?

I think you program your bot to hold onto the Keeper (if you didn’t drop it in auton) and let your drivers place it on the floor. In the disabled period between auton and tele all spike outputs are 0 and pwm (victors) are 127. If you have a single solenoid it will return to its default state. You shouldn't worry about what your bot does when disabled (it is out of your control you will not be penalized and the keeper might count if you score it right after being disabled). Just focus on what it does when tele mode begins. Don’t release and score a Late keeper before the drivers can even touch the controls.

[dpraedan]

Originally Posted by InfernoX14

The head ref from BAE removed any keepers from the grips of robots. If they were on the floor he left them.

In the first match, one team had a keeper in their gripper so tightly that the head ref took out a knife and completely destroyed the thing.

I think he did it as a "What a way to open the day!" kind of thing. It was kind of amusing.

The head ref at the UTC scrimmage did that several times as well. Doesn't seem right to me, as teams should be allowed to drop in the start of tele-op, but it's ultimately their call.

[VanMan]

Well that doesn't really make sense because at VCU one teams arm wasn't working properly ever so they always had the keeper in. I don't think they were penalized.

[Kevin Kolodziej]

Using knifes to slice keepers to remove them?????? What is going on here? There is no penalty for keeping a keeper in your possession after autonomous - just for scoring it. If I want to keep a keeper and use it so I have larger reach for defense, there is nothing that says that is not allowed! I am posting a Q/A question about this because I see absolutely no reason at all for refs to come on to the field to remove keepers from robots.

[Luke]

Originally Posted by Wayne Doenges

Something funny happened at the NJ regional. During autonomous, a robot went out towards the rack and was just getting ready to place the keeper when time ran out. When the teleoperated mode started he dropped the keeper and it fell onto the spider and scored. The refs left it there and continued play but the match was stopped. I don't know if it was because of the illegal keeper or another problem. When they replayed the match the same robot went out and still didn't drop before time ran out. Before the teleoperated mode started a ref came out and had to forcibly remove the keeper frome the robots grasp.

When I watched that event happen my first thoughts was that the rules as stated meant the NJ ref should have DQ'ed the team instead restarting the match. Each new match the ref continued to prevent the DQ offense from happening by walking onto the field and wrestling the tube off the robot after autonomous. My thoughts were that this is not what the rules says. But wait am I going defend a rule which I believe is too harsh? What I believe now is, we were seeing the ref was trying not to DQ a team due to a rule which carries an undue and too harsh Penalty and needs updating.

Why should this carry a DQ penalty? This is the goal of the autonomous and if you just missed but accidentally put the keeper on after, why a DQ? Usually a DQ is due safety or equipment damage or unfair advantage; I do not see that here.

I think FIRST should rethink this harsh penalty. From the actions of the NJ refs, I believe, that they DID NOT wanted to make that DQ call either.

GOOD CALL NJ REFS!!!

[Spider-Man]

Here's a post I made about this in another thread about this. Basically, not only do the rules say nothing about removing keepers from robots that can possibly be dropped and not scored, but this issue was addressed very clearly in the Q&A forum.