Penalties for a part falling off of robot?

[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?

[Zultraranger]

Long Island SBPLI Regional did not enforce that rule. They kept it consistent throughout the competition, robots would lose parts and they were not penalized.

[Rick Wagner]

A referee at LA explained it this way to me: if a part falls completely off a robot, there is no penalty. If a part (like a chain) is dragging outside the frame perimiter, penalty. That makes sense to me.

One team (to remain unnamed) had a bumper fall completely off three times in three different matches and got three penalties for it. The rule in this case is that robots must have bumpers all around.

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by Rick Wagner

A referee at LA explained it this way to me: if a part falls completely off a robot, there is no penalty. If a part (like a chain) is dragging outside the frame perimiter, penalty. That makes sense to me.

One team (to remain unnamed) had a bumper fall completely off three times in three different matches and got three penalties for it. The rule in this case is that robots must have bumpers all around.

I believe the BeachBots were penalized in the last finals match after they lost a chain - it was lying on the field, away from their robot. From what I heard, there was a lack of consistency in the calls at LA. Apparently, there isn't consistent interpretation across all of the events.

[Rick Wagner]

Originally Posted by David Brinza

I believe the BeachBots were penalized in the last finals match after they lost a chain - it was lying on the field, away from their robot. From what I heard, there was a lack of consistency in the calls at LA. Apparently, there isn't consistent interpretation across all of the events.

The way I understood the explanation from the referee, if the chain was dragging outside the frame perimeter before it fell completely off, that would be a penalty.

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by Rick Wagner

The way I understood the explanation from the referee, if the chain was dragging outside the frame perimeter before it fell completely off, that would be a penalty.

Perhaps...but what an "interesting" interpretation of the rules by the referees.

What advantage is gained by dragging a part around the field that should be working in a drive system or manipulator? I don't recall penalties being issued in prior years for having a robot component come off of the robot (unless it was a safety issue). Usually, such failures create such a significant disadvantage for the alliance that adding a penalty would seem unwarranted (or even mean)!

[Sumathi]

I believe it is normal to see this now. We lost points during the final matches because our bumpers were falling off. (frame was broken) At first I began to question why they would penalize us when it was the other robots fault for agressive driving. I finally reasoned what I think FIRST wants us to play by. There was a part in the rules saying that there would be lots of contact so be prepared, therefore we should have been prepared. Because our robot broke down we were not prepared and therefore should be penalized for the broken parts falling out side of the perimeter.

Disclaimer: This is the way I understand it, if you don't agree feel free to elaborate or offer a different view.

[,4lex S.]

Strange, I never remember it being this way. Especially back when we didn't have bumpers .

The GDC needs to fix this; it is pretty inevitable, unless your robot is one solid block of aluminum. It should be a judgement call, but I think it should be a much more lenient one. Thrown chain/ Lost Wheel? No penalty. Heavy opponent contact? No penalty. Unable to withstand basic rigorous motion? Penalty.

[Joe Ross]

Originally Posted by David Brinza

Given the inconsistency of penalty calls for loss of robot parts in various regionals, I posted a question in Q&A Section 7. If loss of robot part on the field is deemed a penalty, I asked whether it is still a penalty if the robot was damaged by impact from another robot.

Was there a response to this question? I looked and couldn't find it. It seems at this point that the drivers meeting would be the only way to get an answer.

[David Brinza]

Originally Posted by Joe Ross

Was there a response to this question? I looked and couldn't find it. It seems at this point that the drivers meeting would be the only way to get an answer.

I did post the question to Q&A on 3/29 and have yet to see a response. Someone should bring this up in the Driver's Meeting.