Team Update #3

[Racer26]

...Far as I'm concerned theres no real need for all this lawyering of this rule.

You get FIVE functions to work with. Buttons 1,2,3,4, as well as what to do if no button is pushed.

Which to me, you could have something like

No Action: Run laps around the track, dead reckoning, using sensors, however you like.
Button 1: Get trackball from position 1
Button 2: get trackball from position 2
Button 3: get trackball from position 3
and Button 4: go to other side of track, and wait for one of buttons 1,2,or 3

and thats all you really need, and as such I suspect we're going to see ALOT of veteran teams known for good autonomous modes to have a setup much like this.

I dont think we'll see that the robocoaches signalling device is going to be super reliable, and thus realtime control is more or less out of the question.

Besides which, using a series of keys to issue a realtime operation seems a bit like trying to smash a nail into wood using your face for a hammer, as far as user friendliness goes, never mind that its breaking the rules.

Hybrid mode was not INTENDED for realtime operation. Thats what teleoperated is for. Why you would even want to try to operate one of these robots in real time with just four buttons is completely beyond me.

I race cars on the track in my spare time, I know how to 'lawyer' competition rulebooks, but I don't with respect to FIRST because finding a loophole thats obviously against the spirit of the competition takes away from the fun of solving the challenge, where in the racing world, we don't have this notion of gracious professionalism, rule-lawyering happens all the time by everyone, and to be frank, the only real goal is to be the fastest.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

...Far as I'm concerned theres no real need for all this lawyering of this rule.

You get FIVE functions to work with. Buttons 1,2,3,4, as well as what to do if no button is pushed.

Which to me, you could have something like

No Action: Run laps around the track, dead reckoning, using sensors, however you like.
Button 1: Get trackball from position 1
Button 2: get trackball from position 2
Button 3: get trackball from position 3
and Button 4: go to other side of track, and wait for one of buttons 1,2,or 3

WRONG. Read Update 3, particularly the fifth paragraph, quoted below.

Originally Posted by Update 3 paragraph 5

The actions that the Robot takes in response to the messages received should be repeatable and predictable. In practical terms, this means that when the RoboCoach presses Button #3, Action #3 always occurs. Robot responses that are time-dependent or message sequence dependent are not allowed. For example, programming the Robot so that it initiates Action “A” if Button #3 is pushed during the first five seconds of the Hybrid Period, and it initiates Action “B” if button #3 is
pushed during the second five seconds of the Hybrid Period, etc. would not be allowed. This time-dependent context for the message interpretation is equivalent to the ability to send more than four single, unique messages, and is contrary to the intended RoboCoaching concept.

(emphasis mine)
This is closest to the situation you describe. I thought there was something more specific in there, but there isn't. I would say that having a "time-dependent context" (say, a "if no command received for x seconds do this") also violates the intent.

Please, don't make the GDC make a rule about "No command will be counted as a signal and limit you to three buttons." Partly because that will be unenforceable, partly because it isn't needed with the current rules.

[jgannon]

Originally Posted by EricH

WRONG. Read Update 3, particularly the fifth paragraph

I have to disagree with you on this one, Eric, if I'm understanding 1075guy's post correctly. There is no rule to say that the robot can't start acting at the beginning of the match without a signal from the Robocoach (obviously, since this would disallow full autonomy). If the Robocoach pushes a button, then it will do something different. It will do the same thing every time you push that button, regardless of when you push it. This satisfies the requirements as I understand them. As such, in some sense you can think of this as five actions: a default, and a response to each button. I suspect that many teams will have "do nothing" as their default action, but I also imagine that there will be a number of teams who will start moving at the beginning of the match before the Robocoach presses a button, and they will do so legally.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by jgannon

I have to disagree with you on this one, Eric, if I'm understanding 1075guy's post correctly. There is no rule to say that the robot can't start acting at the beginning of the match without a signal from the Robocoach (obviously, since this would disallow full autonomy). If the Robocoach pushes a button, then it will do something different. It will do the same thing every time you push that button, regardless of when you push it. This satisfies the requirements as I understand them. As such, in some sense you can think of this as five actions: a default, and a response to each button. I suspect that many teams will have "do nothing" as their default action, but I also imagine that there will be a number of teams who will start moving at the beginning of the match before the Robocoach presses a button, and they will do so legally.

Now that I look again, you're right. Gary (below) would also be right.

For example, if your default was "drive straight" and every button had a "after x action, default" (or just "drive straight"), I would say that is legal.

What I thought he said was "I do nothing for x seconds and have that as a command." That is having more than one command, unless you have a default.

Maybe any team using a default should put the default action at the top of their card with a note that "the robot will do this unless I tell it to do otherwise."

[Elgin Clock]

From the following page:
http://www.usfirst.org/community/frc...nt.aspx?id=482

Briweld Industries - Practice Driver station kits

is not a valid link.

[Mr MOE]

GDC - thanks for the clarification.

When I read the fourth paragraph of Team Update #3, I could almost hear it being read by the folks in Monty Python and the Holy Grail.

"The number of commands shall be FOUR. The associated number of actions shall be FOUR. FIVE is RIGHT OUT!"

Thus speaks the GDC on the usage of the Holy RoboRemote.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by 1075guy

...Far as I'm concerned theres no real need for all this lawyering of this rule.

You get FIVE functions to work with. Buttons 1,2,3,4, as well as what to do if no button is pushed.

Which to me, you could have something like

No Action: Run laps around the track, dead reckoning, using sensors, however you like.
Button 1: Get trackball from position 1
Button 2: get trackball from position 2
Button 3: get trackball from position 3
and Button 4: go to other side of track, and wait for one of buttons 1,2,or 3

and thats all you really need, and as such I suspect we're going to see ALOT of veteran teams known for good autonomous modes to have a setup much like this.

That is the way that I read it also. Of course, for any sort of an official interpretation, you would need to pose the question to the official FIRST Q&A System (my mantra for the year: "NONE of the answers you get outside the official Q&A System have any authority or certification, and will not be considered by the referees"). But your interpretation seems to be reasonable.

-dave


.

[Kevin Sevcik]

I'll toss in about the arm position toggling. I don't think this would be too much of a stretch, but it'd depend on how you implemented it. If you counted how many times the toggle button was pressed, it'd be illegal because it'd depend on a software state. I think it'd be legal if it started a "move arm" routine that depended on the physical position of the arm. Obviously this sounds a lot like arguing semantics, but I think it makes sense.

[GaryVoshol]

Let's change the descriptions a little (my emphasis):

Originally Posted by 1075guy

...Far as I'm concerned theres no real need for all this lawyering of this rule.

You get FIVE functions to work with. Buttons 1,2,3,4, as well as what to do if no button is pushed.

Which to me, you could have something like

Default Autonomous Action: Run laps around the track, dead reckoning, using sensors, however you like.
Button 1: Get trackball from position 1 and then revert to Default
Button 2: get trackball from position 2 and then revert to Default
Button 3: get trackball from position 3 and then revert to Default
and Button 4: go to other side of track, and then stop

Those button commands always have the same associated actions, so there should be no problem. As Dave suggests, ask Q&A if you want to be sure.

[IbleedPink233]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

Let's change the descriptions a little (my emphasis):

Those button commands always have the same associated actions, so there should be no problem. As Dave suggests, ask Q&A if you want to be sure.

This makes sense to me, after all, there has to be some allowance for good ol' autonomous programming to come into play. The default is just autonomus programming, is't it? It isn't another signal, so it is perfectly legit.
I don't think that you necessarily need to "revert back to default" for every command to make it legal. You may make it a part of your strategy, but it doesn't make it any more legal.

About arm toggling - I know lots have already commented on it - you'll probably have to Q+A that. From a software standpoint, you could easily make a toggle function that does the same thing every time, but I think that the referees may decide the legitimacy based on the black box approach - where they judge based on the actions of the robot, regardless of how it is programmed. I don't blame them, it is by far the most objective way to do it and doesn't require inside knowledge of the bot.
I'd suggest that you either Q+A it or hope that you can do it, but prepare in case you can't.