Go to Post With three robots, I was expecting better scores but I guess more robots means more penalties, not more points. - sanddrag [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

 
Closed Thread
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #31   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 01:42
Vogel648 Vogel648 is offline
Student Programming Leader
FRC #0648 (QC Elite)
Team Role: Student
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Sherrard
Posts: 64
Vogel648 is on a distinguished road
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Quote:
Originally Posted by ErikSR71 View Post
This potential loop-hole is blocked in section 8 <R65>. "signaling devices shall... communicate no more than four messages, states or conditions to the ROBOT" A signal sent by pressing multiple buttons would be a 5th message, and any action 5th action would be a 5th state or condition. There is no loop-hole with this rule.
That's not a message sent from the device, that's the interpretation done by the controller.
  #32   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 01:54
Uberbots's Avatar
Uberbots Uberbots is offline
Mad Programmer
AKA: Billy Sisson
FRC #1124 (ÜberBots)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Avon
Posts: 739
Uberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

but what if your button setup was something like this...

button 0 : toggle bit 0 high or low
button 1: toggle bit 1 high or low

and so on, which would allow for 2^4 - 1 combinations of events.

technically, i don't think that is actually encoding a message from the remote, nor is it dynamically changing the rule set.
but still, i think it is probably illegal... and probably dumb idea considering that the robocoach would get confused very easily.

Dave's advice from the kickoff of having the control do something extremely high level is really good advice... i think (keyword...) we are pursuing a completely autonomous robot that can be 'nudged' by the robocoach.
__________________
A few of my favorite numbers:
175 176 177 195 230 558 716 1024 1071 1592 1784 1816
RPI 2012
BREAKAWAY
  #33   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 04:12
JohnC's Avatar
JohnC JohnC is offline
my other name is nigel
FRC #0360 (360 Revolution)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: user_routines.c
Posts: 100
JohnC is a jewel in the roughJohnC is a jewel in the roughJohnC is a jewel in the roughJohnC is a jewel in the rough
Send a message via AIM to JohnC
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthew2c4u View Post
It looks to me that this means your entire alliance can send commands to your robot Think of the possibility if theres 12 commands
Think about the board though. That board only has four outputs, so you would have to talk your alliance partners into giving you their IR boards to mount on your robot for the match.

Nevermind, <R69> expressly prohibits that anyway.
__________________
What place are we at? ... TODAI!
  #34   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 06:00
galewind's Avatar
galewind galewind is offline
... more like a temperate breeze
AKA: Chris Gregory
FRC #1089 (Team Mercury)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Hightstown, NJ
Posts: 410
galewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to galewind
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

while it's very clear that you can only send 4 commands... what I don't think is clear, but is implied, is that these commands do not have to be single-step operations. For example, you can have the robot autonomously drive full-bore until you hit a button, which then slows your robot down to 3 f/s, then pops a piston up to knock a ball off, pulls the piston back down, and resumes speed.

In the past, we've put a on-board switch bank on our robot connected to digital i/o that would allow us to switch between different auton modes depending on what our alliance partners needed. You can also write separate hybrid mode routines that remap what the IR commands do, but those have to be chosen before the match, and you need to make sure that the correct command card is brought up to the field before the match starts.

I'm not saying we're doing that, but we're tossing around the idea
__________________
Chris G
Advisor, Team Mercury (1089), Hightstown High School
  #35   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 08:57
Ziaholic's Avatar
Ziaholic Ziaholic is offline
Elec/SW Mentor
AKA: Marc
FRC #1164 (Project NEO)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Las Cruces, NM
Posts: 194
Ziaholic is a jewel in the roughZiaholic is a jewel in the roughZiaholic is a jewel in the roughZiaholic is a jewel in the rough
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Glad I read this thread ... we were considering using the 4 commands for the first portion of the Hybrid mode, then changing states for the final seconds of the Hybrid mode so the 4 commands would perform something different.

After re-reading <R65> this appears to NOT be legal.

Then, reading <R69> it's confirmed to be a No No.

<R69> Reaction of the ROBOT to communications received from the SIGNALING DEVICE must meet all of the following criteria:
• For a single MATCH, the ROBOT shall be limited to react to a maximum of four distinct commands - either through hardware or software limitations, or a combination of the two.
• The ROBOT shall not dynamically change the recognized command set during a MATCH.
__________________
----
There are 10 types of people. Those who understand binary, and those that do not.
Team #1164 - Project NEO Robotics
  #36   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 09:14
BrianD's Avatar
BrianD BrianD is offline
Registered User
FRC #2046 (TRC)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Maple Valley, WA
Posts: 3
BrianD is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

I was thinking about having a control set up so that if no signals were being recived it would stop. Would this be legal?

example: button 1 - drive forward
2 - turn right
3 - turn left
4 - fire piston
none being pressed - stop

Does that stop count as a fifth command?
__________________
-------13 1)
  #37   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 09:51
ALIBI's Avatar
ALIBI ALIBI is offline
Registered User
FRC #0141
Team Role: Parent
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 271
ALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to all
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Can you do the following using your RoboCoach:

Hybrid starts and by pressing signal 1, 2 or 3 you communicate to the robot which position your trackball is in. Meaning, you call up a routine that will start a series of preprogramed auton actions to remove the trackball from any of the three positions.

Yes, I read the sections, I just do not understand them in plain terms.

Thankyou for your help!

Last edited by ALIBI : 07-01-2008 at 10:27. Reason: Spelling
  #38   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 10:23
Bongle's Avatar
Bongle Bongle is offline
Registered User
FRC #2702 (REBotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 1,069
Bongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to Bongle
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Note: this whole post is based on my potentially fallible interpretation of the rules
Quote:
Originally Posted by ALIBI View Post
Can you do the following using your RoboCoach:

Hybrid starts and by pressing signal 1, 2 or 3 you communicate to the robot which position your trackball is in. Meaning, you call up a routine that will start a series of preprogamed auton actions to remove the trackball from any of the three positions.

Yes, I read the sections, I just do not understand them in plain terms.

Thankyou for your help!
I think that would be legal, since each of your modes could be explicitly written as "bump out ball 1, bump out ball 2, bump out ball 3, etc"

Quote:
We're using an Apple remote. It has the typical circle of four buttons with one in the middle.

Top: Increment speed (both motors)
Bottom: Decrement speed
Right: Increment right motor speed (for turning)
Left: Decrement right motor speed

Is that legal?
I don't think so, since each one would depend on the previous internal state of the software in terms of speed. It could be argued that you're dynamically changing your 'top' response from "go to speed 137" to "go to speed 147" to "go to speed 157", etc. after each button press.

Quote:
button 0 : toggle bit 0 high or low
button 1: toggle bit 1 high or low

and so on, which would allow for 2^4 - 1 combinations of events.

technically, i don't think that is actually encoding a message from the remote, nor is it dynamically changing the rule set.
but still, i think it is probably illegal... and probably dumb idea considering that the robocoach would get confused very easily.
I think that'd violate R69: your robot would be reacting to more than 4 distinct commands, and it'd have to store its state from previous button presses. Also, it'd be dynamically changing its command set depending on what other buttons had been pressed earlier: if b1 was set and button 3 was pressed, the command that button 3 represent would have changed.

Quote:
It looks to me that this means your entire alliance can send commands to your robot Think of the possibility if theres 12 commands
You'd need 3 IR boards though, since you can't train your team's board to recognize more then 4 commands. You could distribute remotes to all your alliance partners I guess so they could control yours as well when it is in their corner, but I imagine that is banned by some rule regarding how many SIGNALLING DEVICEs alliance robocoaches may carry. I should emphasize though that there may not be such a rule, I'm not sure.

Quote:
For example, toggling the arm could be one button, toggling drive direction could be another.
I don't think this would be legal because you'd be dynamically changing your command set. Button 1 would be "drive forward" at one point, and "drive backwards" at another.

I think a good rule of thumb for your button assignments would be "if you have to write the word 'if' on your 3x5 card, then you probably broke a rule". Another thing to think of is to imagine that all your internal state variables get reset upon each IR signal, so you can't respond to your current state.
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 12:11
Uberbots's Avatar
Uberbots Uberbots is offline
Mad Programmer
AKA: Billy Sisson
FRC #1124 (ÜberBots)
Team Role: College Student
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Avon
Posts: 739
Uberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond reputeUberbots has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Quote:
I think that'd violate R69: your robot would be reacting to more than 4 distinct commands, and it'd have to store its state from previous button presses. Also, it'd be dynamically changing its command set depending on what other buttons had been pressed earlier: if b1 was set and button 3 was pressed, the command that button 3 represent would have changed.
yeah, but the distinct commands are flipping the bits...
__________________
A few of my favorite numbers:
175 176 177 195 230 558 716 1024 1071 1592 1784 1816
RPI 2012
BREAKAWAY
  #40   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 13:01
Bongle's Avatar
Bongle Bongle is offline
Registered User
FRC #2702 (REBotics)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2002
Location: Waterloo
Posts: 1,069
Bongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond reputeBongle has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via MSN to Bongle
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Disclaimer: These are just my interpretations, the official QA forum is a better place for discussions like this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Uberbots View Post
yeah, but the distinct commands are flipping the bits...
But by flipping the bits, you're still doing a different action depending on your robot's state. Suppose button 1 flips bit 1. If bit 1 is 0, then button 1 sets bit 1 = 1. If bit 1 is 1, then button 1 sets bit 1 to 0. So there, you have two possible actions for button 1: "set bit 1 to 0" and "set bit 1 to 1".

I think you may also conflict with this clause from R65:
Quote:
Signalling devices may
...
• not use changes in the signal states to encode or transmit larger messages
So by doing this bit-flipping stuff, you'd essentially be transmitting a larger message by remembering the robot state in your bitstring.

Another way to look at it is to look at your button press sequence as a large message. Let's say you used buttons 1, 2, and 3 to modify bits, and button 4 as a 'end of command' button. Then your keypress sequence would essentially end up being button-button-button-<enter>, which seems clearly against the spirit of the rules.

Just like dave said at the kickoff, you're not supposed to be able to drive the robot with the remote, you're supposed to give it high level commands and then it does some heavy autonomous work. You shouldn't need 8 commands since there really aren't that many things to do. Plus, you have to consider that driving the robot by IR will probably be impossible anyway. Other robots, 3-foot-wide balls, and parts of your own robot will obscure your IR board, making driving it accurately pretty much impossible.

Last edited by Bongle : 07-01-2008 at 13:07.
  #41   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-01-2008, 13:57
SgtMillhouse648's Avatar
SgtMillhouse648 SgtMillhouse648 is offline
Registered User
AKA: Malhon Godwin
FRC #0648 (QC Elite)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Davenport, IA
Posts: 153
SgtMillhouse648 has a spectacular aura aboutSgtMillhouse648 has a spectacular aura about
Send a message via MSN to SgtMillhouse648
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tomasz Bania View Post
Question: How's your robot going to see your light, or the 2 12" circle-covered balls as mentioned (Forgot where)
Isn't the camera still legal? since it is not a KOP item, wouldn't it be considered a COTS item? The camera can be used to track a light, but also a color or shape.
__________________
2007-
Midwest Regional-
Regional Finalists with 1000 and 447
Rockwell Automation Inspiration in Control Award
Regional Woodie Flowers - Ed Wegscheid



  #42   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 26-01-2008, 22:19
jacobhurwitz jacobhurwitz is offline
Registered User
FRC #0449 (Blair Robot Project)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Maryland
Posts: 45
jacobhurwitz has a spectacular aura aboutjacobhurwitz has a spectacular aura aboutjacobhurwitz has a spectacular aura about
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

This Q&A post clarifies a lot: http://forums.usfirst.org/showpost.p...95&postcount=6

So, to sum up my responses to all of the above questions:
  • Toggling an arm, bit, etc. is not allowed. Sort of. If you have a variable in your program to toggle, it's not allowed. But if the arm depresses a switch, you are allowed to say, "If the switch is depressed, move the arm up. Else, move it down." So toggling is allowed if it is based solely on sensor inputs.
  • To the person above who said increasing speed is not allowed: the Q&A post explicitly says it is.
  • I don't think having the robot stop if you press nothing is allowed. R65 says you can't use changes in the signal state to encode longer messages. I think pressing/releasing a button is a change in signal state, so you can't use that as an additionally message.
  #43   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-01-2008, 00:11
jgannon's Avatar
jgannon jgannon is offline
I ᐸ3 Robots
AKA: Joey Gannon
no team
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Pittsburgh, PA
Posts: 1,467
jgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond reputejgannon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Quote:
Originally Posted by jacobhurwitz View Post
I don't think having the robot stop if you press nothing is allowed. R65 says you can't use changes in the signal state to encode longer messages. I think pressing/releasing a button is a change in signal state, so you can't use that as an additionally message.
Let's apply the "same thing every time" litmus test to this one. Call the command "drive for 500 milliseconds and then stop". Your robot will do that every time you press the button. As far as I can tell, you are allowed to interrupt an action in progress with another button press. As such, if your robocoach is madly mashing the button, then the robot will continue going. When he stops, the robot stops. The robot performs the same action every time you press the button... you just don't happen to let it complete the action. This sounds legal to me.
__________________
Team 1743 - The Short Circuits
2010 Pittsburgh Excellence in Design & Team Spirit Awards
2009 Pittsburgh Regional Champions (thanks to 222 and 1218)
2007 Pittsburgh Website Award
2006 Pittsburgh Regional Champions (thanks to 395 and 1038)
2006 Pittsburgh Rookie Inspiration & Highest Rookie Seed

Team 1388 - Eagle Robotics
2005 Sacramento Engineering Inspiration
2004 Curie Division Champions (thanks to 1038 and 175)
2004 Sacramento Rookie All-Star

_
  #44   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-01-2008, 12:12
RyanW RyanW is offline
Registered User
FRC #0449 (Blair Robot Project)
Team Role: Programmer
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 40
RyanW has a spectacular aura aboutRyanW has a spectacular aura about
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

It's perfectly legal to have an autonomous routine execute when you aren't pressing any buttons down. So, for example, your commands could be "Go forward/back/left/right while this button is pressed", and your default autonomous routine could be "stop".

See this forum post for details:
http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread...ghlight=hybrid
Quote:
Originally Posted by GDC
The Robot may (and would be expected to) execute a default autonomous program that controls its behavior in the absence of any over-riding signal inputs from the RoboCoach.

SgtMillhouse648, the CMUCam itself is allowed, but the CMUCAM module given out in previous years is a custom part made specifically for those FIRST competitions. It may not be used. You'd have to get the unmodified CMUCam and mount it on your own.
  #45   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 27-01-2008, 13:25
galewind's Avatar
galewind galewind is offline
... more like a temperate breeze
AKA: Chris Gregory
FRC #1089 (Team Mercury)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Hightstown, NJ
Posts: 410
galewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond reputegalewind has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to galewind
Re: Robocoach signals loophole?

Would this be legal?

You have an IR command that signals the robot to execute command Y after it is finished executing command X, where X could be a routine from another signal or an automated routine.

If the robot is not executing X, it will execute Y immediately, and if it is executing X, it will execute Y when it is finished with X.
__________________
Chris G
Advisor, Team Mercury (1089), Hightstown High School
Closed Thread


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
Robotics Hand Signals JulieB Chit-Chat 21 19-06-2005 00:11
PWM Signals stevex Programming 1 28-10-2004 18:03
IR signals inverted Atheist Electrical 10 08-02-2004 16:27
Autonomous user-input loophole? Jeff McCune Programming 20 14-02-2003 22:44
Referee hand signals archiver 1999 1 23-06-2002 21:57


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 13:11.

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