Go to Post We don't do battle bots, but we play hard. - Gdeaver [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
  #76   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 15:57
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,526
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin Clock View Post
It will happen, so be prepared to be upset.
The teams would not be competing legally btw.
They would rather have a team compete being illegal, than miss out on the experience because it is too much work to modify something on a lone practice day that they spent 6 weeks making.
They will be told that they are in violation & be given time to fix it, but if it's not perfect, they will be able to slide unfortunately.
I've seen it happen before & it will happen again.
Would you deny a team to compete if they made the effort to fix their problem that practice day? I would say they gave a good effort, & give them credit or trying & allow it as long as it wasn't a clear safety hazard.
On the other hand, would you tell them they couldn't compete at all if they didn't care, & went on the field knowing they were illegal without giving any effort to fix it? I would.
It's something to shudder at thinking about it, but you get used to it; while hopefully not getting too stressed about it, & realizing it just comes with the territory.
The best thing to do, is help teams if yuo have the resources at your regionals to be fully compliant within the rules if they misinterpreted something.
We have all misinterpreted som rules at some time or another, so just help them if they do.
If they refuse to change, then bring it up with an inspector & let them handle it.
I'm familiar with the instances you're talking about, hopefully they would consider bumpers easy enough to add that they won't go back on this rule. Ideally, they'd let teams slide on bumper mounting (maybe not exactly on bumper perimeter, not supported along the whole length, etc..) rather than just let teams go without bumpers on all sides.
  #77   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:07
Aren_Hill's Avatar
Aren_Hill Aren_Hill is offline
Build Nifty Things
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Menlo Park CA
Posts: 1,219
Aren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond reputeAren_Hill has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #2

With all this stuff happening in regards to bumpers, i'm really wondering how many teams are even keeping track. I can picture quite a few ignorant teams showing up with non legal bumpers simply for not checking the updates and QandA system. I hope inspectors will have those teams make the bot legal before they can play qualifiers, otherwise everyones headaches trying to figure out bumper rules had no point when they could've just ignored them and still played.

last year i saw a bot with 2 van door motors, 1 of them being from 2006 and duct tape quite evident in quite a few places, and the bot still played, i didn't mention anything to the inspectors.
__________________
A guy who likes robots.
1625->3928->148->1296->971 oh dear
  #78   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:08
Elgin Clock's Avatar
Elgin Clock Elgin Clock is offline
updates this status less than FB!
AKA: the one who "will break into your thoughts..."
FRC #0237 (Black Magic)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: May 2001
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: H20-Town, Connecticut
Posts: 7,773
Elgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond reputeElgin Clock has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Elgin Clock
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard View Post
I'm familiar with the instances you're talking about, hopefully they would consider bumpers easy enough to add that they won't go back on this rule. Ideally, they'd let teams slide on bumper mounting (maybe not exactly on bumper perimeter, not supported along the whole length, etc..) rather than just let teams go without bumpers on all sides.
This is true. Unlike some previous years where bumpers were optional, so if you had a problem with them you could just take them off if they didn't comply, I hope by the end of week 6 that EVERYONE is on the same page of what is allowed & what is not regarding bumpers.
(I saw one team show up with duct tape over pipe insulation wrap on the side of their bot one year thinking that would pass as a bumper. It didn't, so they just took them off.)

The only reason I say this, is that a bumper is probably not the easiest thing to fabricate for teams with bad ones at a regional event. (Relatively speaking I guess. It's easier to make a set of bumpers than re-design a whole drivetrain, but you know what I mean...

When in doubt, bring two (or more) pre-made configurations of your proposed bumper designs for your specific robot, & ask the inspectors which one is legal at your first competition if you have any questions.

It will HAVE to be goverened on a case by case basis in that regard ONLY at the events in my opinion, unless the GDC starts taking submissions of pictures of every team's bumper designs & approving them on a case by case basis now (before shipping).

I don't want to see the GDC have to nit-pick now & do that, as they have already spent enough time on this issue as it is.
__________________
The influence of many leads to the individuality of one. - E.C.C. (That's me!!)

  #79   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:18
AdamHeard's Avatar
AdamHeard AdamHeard is offline
Lead Mentor
FRC #0973 (Greybots)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Atascadero
Posts: 5,526
AdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond reputeAdamHeard has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to AdamHeard
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin Clock View Post
When in doubt, bring two (or more) pre-made configurations of your proposed bumper designs for your specific robot, & ask the inspectors which one is legal at your first competition if you have any questions.
That would actually require us to bring two different frames, and possible two different mechanisms; that's how much the bumper rules affect design.

I think we'll be bringing some plywood, some pool noodles, and some nice bright orange bumper fabric. Hell, maybe we'll even make some 6" sections to hand out; first 10 teams to fail get 6" free!
  #80   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:23
tiger192 tiger192 is offline
Registered User
FRC #2987
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: Farmington, MN
Posts: 5
tiger192 is an unknown quantity at this point
Re: Team Update #2

Rule <R18> secion E states "The Trailer Hitch must be placed such that, as the TRAILER swings from side to side, the first contact between th TRAILER and ROBOT is BUMPER-to-BUMPER and not TRAILER-tongue-to-BUMPER."

Are there any other teams having a problem with this in their designs? With our hitch on a 28" side of our design which doesn't include 90 degree corners on the back, we can not seem to find a way to make our concept account for the trail bumpers hitting the robot before the tongue does.
  #81   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:24
Akash Rastogi Akash Rastogi is offline
Jim Zondag is my Spirit Animal
FRC #2170 (Titanium Tomahawks)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Manchester, Connecticut
Posts: 7,007
Akash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond reputeAkash Rastogi has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elgin Clock View Post
When in doubt, bring two (or more) pre-made configurations of your proposed bumper designs for your specific robot, & ask the inspectors which one is legal at your first competition if you have any questions.
This is a good plan...but I agree with Adam's and Corey's statement that it shouldn't come down to that in the first place. Kinda like saying "oh let's take two robots and see which one they say is legal we'll use."

But idk, the rules always seem this ambiguous to me anyway.

My pov, it shouldn't have to come down to making two configs. But you gotta roll with the punches I guess.
__________________
My posts and opinions do not necessarily reflect those of my affiliated team.
['16-'xx]: Mentor FRC 2170 | ['11-'13]: Co-Founder/Mentor FRC 3929 | ['06-'10]: Student FRC 11 - MORT | ['08-'12]: Founder - EWCP (OG)
  #82   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 16:25
JHSmentor's Avatar
JHSmentor JHSmentor is offline
Registered User
AKA: Bryan Molloseau
FRC #3210 (Falcons)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 84
JHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to all
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard View Post
The GDC has provided further clarification in this Q&A response.
while I agree that this response from the GDC answers nearly all concerns, it doesn't answer the question of what they consider a corner. Is it any angle between two pieces of plywood. Is it simply a change of direction? Is it something greater than 45*? Like the one picture in the rule book shows, there is a continuous section that rounds a 120* angle corner. Now - this corner appears that it probably has a 6" side on one part and a longer side on the other. So, I'm assuming this is a corner. I'm also assuming, however, that if this was a continuous arc in the frame rather than a sharp corner or change of direction, and if you could bend the plywood to match, then the total segment length could be 6" around the bend. Would this be a feasible design? I have no idea - never tried to make a roundish robot or even part of one and I have never tried to bend plywood. It may be physically impossible and a moot point.

So, is this relevent? Yes - if it were possible to do a curved section (or round robot for that matter) then it leaves open more flexibility.

Also, can someone please explain to me what is meant by "lawering" the rules? How can simply trying to understand the rules properly so that you know your appropriate limitations for your design be considered lawering? Anyway - just want to understand since I have seen it used in many different contexts.
  #83   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 17:04
hillale's Avatar
hillale hillale is offline
Formerly a Winnovator
AKA: Alec Hill
FRC #3617 (Cold Logic)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Marquette, MI
Posts: 184
hillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to hillale
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHSmentor View Post
Also, can someone please explain to me what is meant by "lawering" the rules? How can simply trying to understand the rules properly so that you know your appropriate limitations for your design be considered lawering? Anyway - just want to understand since I have seen it used in many different contexts.
Certain people consider translating the rules into a playable robot, while finding ways to make it more competitive than others might think the rules allow, to be lawyering.
__________________
  #84   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 17:57
JHSmentor's Avatar
JHSmentor JHSmentor is offline
Registered User
AKA: Bryan Molloseau
FRC #3210 (Falcons)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Oregon
Posts: 84
JHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to allJHSmentor is a name known to all
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by hillale View Post
Certain people consider translating the rules into a playable robot, while finding ways to make it more competitive than others might think the rules allow, to be lawyering.
okay - that makes sense. I can agree with that - as long as it applies to the intent of the rule. Correct?

So, in the case of the 6" long bumper rule - is the intent to allow for sufficient bumper to bumper contact to eliminate/reduce damage between the two contacted surfaces or is it to increase the design challenge? or something else?


I think it's just a rule to dictate proper protection. If someone can come up with a good (although potentially complicated) design that will allow them a wider opening (>16") on the 28" wide side of the allowable robot design then I call that good engineering.

I'm only saying this because that's what I want to do - engineer my way out of this 16" limitation if I can. I don't want to be called a cheat or something because others might think that I'm stretching the intent or letter of the rules. (BTW, I'm not saying that anyone will, but that is a fear that I have).

Of course, part of a good design (particularly for this case with the bumpers) would be that, even though the design would be fresh and innovative, would be very clear that the rules were followed to the "T" without question.
  #85   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 21:39
hillale's Avatar
hillale hillale is offline
Formerly a Winnovator
AKA: Alec Hill
FRC #3617 (Cold Logic)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Marquette, MI
Posts: 184
hillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to hillale
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by JHSmentor View Post
okay - that makes sense. I can agree with that - as long as it applies to the intent of the rule. Correct?

So, in the case of the 6" long bumper rule - is the intent to allow for sufficient bumper to bumper contact to eliminate/reduce damage between the two contacted surfaces or is it to increase the design challenge? or something else?


I think it's just a rule to dictate proper protection. If someone can come up with a good (although potentially complicated) design that will allow them a wider opening (>16") on the 28" wide side of the allowable robot design then I call that good engineering.

I'm only saying this because that's what I want to do - engineer my way out of this 16" limitation if I can. I don't want to be called a cheat or something because others might think that I'm stretching the intent or letter of the rules. (BTW, I'm not saying that anyone will, but that is a fear that I have).

Of course, part of a good design (particularly for this case with the bumpers) would be that, even though the design would be fresh and innovative, would be very clear that the rules were followed to the "T" without question.
I agree with your interpretation on the rule and I really hope that's the way it is clarified (if it ever is). However, given the exact design shown in team update 2, I'm not sure what's going to happen.
__________________
  #86   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 22:33
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,370
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #2

It's amazing how First is a microcosm of the real world. And as such it gives the students a chance to play the game of life without the threat of job loss or financial ruin. Team's don't have to like the rules, they don't have to make sense in you specific case. It doesn't matter what you think they should be or how they should be interpreted. The rules are the rules. You must follow Z RULES. You must be in compliance. Compliance is WHAT EVER THE RULE ENFORCERS SAY THEY ARE. PERIOD.
I'm in the construction business and a good part of my life is spent figuring out how to keep my jobs and business in compliance. It's a never ending battle to stay on top of all the rules and the interpretations of them. If I fail to to do it the financial repercussions could bankrupt me. So I would suggest teams take a conservative interpretation of the bumper rules and make your robot fit the bumper restrictions. Once again you don't have to like them. One the worst things that can happen is to show up practice day and not be in compliance. Been there, it's not fun.
  #87   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 22:57
MrForbes's Avatar
MrForbes MrForbes is offline
Registered User
AKA: Jim
FRC #1726 (N.E.R.D.S.)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Sierra Vista AZ
Posts: 6,033
MrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond reputeMrForbes has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by AdamHeard View Post
I think we'll be bringing some plywood, some pool noodles, and some nice bright orange bumper fabric. Hell, maybe we'll even make some 6" sections to hand out; first 10 teams to fail get 6" free!
Now you're talkin....that's a great idea!


  #88   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 23:10
hillale's Avatar
hillale hillale is offline
Formerly a Winnovator
AKA: Alec Hill
FRC #3617 (Cold Logic)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Rookie Year: 2005
Location: Marquette, MI
Posts: 184
hillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to beholdhillale is a splendid one to behold
Send a message via AIM to hillale
Re: Team Update #2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdeaver View Post
The rules are the rules. You must follow Z RULES. You must be in compliance. Compliance is WHAT EVER THE RULE ENFORCERS SAY THEY ARE. PERIOD.
I'm just really curious what the RULE ENFORCERS are actually saying. If they wanted us to only have a 26" opening on a wide-based robot, why not tell us that specifically? There is always going to be some gray area. Whether this is to leave space for innovation or to have the gray area defined by the respective regional referees, I'm not sure in this case. I'm hoping it's for the prior, but the past does not shed positive light on that path.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gdeaver View Post
So I would suggest teams take a conservative interpretation of the bumper rules and make your robot fit the bumper restrictions.
I'd much rather build something that plays the game well, thinks outside the box AND adheres to all of the existing rules (updates included). I always find those to be more inspiring... to everyone.
__________________
  #89   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 12-01-2009, 23:29
Gdeaver Gdeaver is offline
Registered User
FRC #1640
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: West Chester, Pa.
Posts: 1,370
Gdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond reputeGdeaver has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Team Update #2

The GDC has decided to expose the First community to bureaucratic double speak this year. Your lucky they didn't give it to us in the paragraph-sub paragraph 30 layers deep form that only lawyers can write. Compared to some of the regulatory documentation and insurance policies I have received this year, The Robot rules are clearly written.
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
Team Update 17 ntroup General Forum 33 14-03-2007 16:58
Team Update # 11 Bcahn836 Rumor Mill 6 21-02-2004 07:33
Team Update #3 dez250 General Forum 4 21-01-2004 11:56
Team Update 5 archiver 2001 4 23-06-2002 23:36


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:32.

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