Penalties for a part falling off of robot?

[TubaMorg]

No penalty = no incentive to take action to ensure a robust design
penalty = incentive to fix a problem more robustly

Obviously no one builds their robot to explode on impact, but once parts start falling off, a team may decide to "tie wrap it back on" if there were no penalties. Loosing a point or two may make them to explore a more permanent repair.

[DonRotolo]

Originally Posted by TubaMorg

Obviously no one builds their robot to explode on impact

Team 1902 notwithstanding

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by TubaMorg

No penalty = no incentive to take action to ensure a robust design
penalty = incentive to fix a problem more robustly

Obviously no one builds their robot to explode on impact, but once parts start falling off, a team may decide to "tie wrap it back on" if there were no penalties. Loosing a point or two may make them to explore a more permanent repair.

I disagree with no penalty = no incentive to ensure a robust design.

Loss of functionality and/or perception by scouts that a team's robot is poorly constructed and unreliable should be the driving incentive for building a robust robot.

I don't believe the GDC intended <G41> or <R16> to apply to cases where mechanical or structural failures have occurred in robots. (We'll need to see the answer in FIRST Q&A to get this resolved).

[Radical Pi]

Originally Posted by David Brinza

I don't believe the GDC intended <G41> or <R16> to apply to cases where mechanical or structural failures have occurred in robots. (We'll need to see the answer in FIRST Q&A to get this resolved).

Don't forget G30. We got called on that once (lost us the semis too), and we got a warning about it once or twice (unrelated issue). If any part of the robot, including decorative panels breaks the frame perimeter illegally, I promise you that it is most definitely counted

[kirtar]

Honestly, it's not easy to make an absolute statement about this. As an example, if you drop a single bolt or a nut, I don't know that it should be called. However, if for example (with something that happened to us at Buckeye), the cover of your robot comes off completely or partially, you should at least get a penalty for extending beyond standard configuration. Of course, in the above mentioned case, it also made it so that we weren't elevated because it hung down a lot.

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by kirtar

Honestly, it's not easy to make an absolute statement about this. As an example, if you drop a single bolt or a nut, I don't know that it should be called. However, if for example (with something that happened to us at Buckeye), the cover of your robot comes off completely or partially, you should at least get a penalty for extending beyond standard configuration. Of course, in the above mentioned case, it also made it so that we weren't elevated because it hung down a lot.

My thoughts about penalties (which might be different than the referees or GDC) revolve around whether an alliance is gaining an advantage by virtue of the infraction.

If your robot extends beyond the frame perimeter and you are able to block shots or prevent an opponent from maneuvering past you - penalty!

If your robot is damaged, breaks off a wheel and can only drive in circles - no penalty!

If an opponent's robot impacts your robot and causes a part to come off, should this be a penalty? If so, WHO should be penalized?