Team Update 2

[nuclearnerd]

I'm going to stake a claim that hoop-side velcro strips will remain legal when all is said and done. We can keep lawyering the rules until you have a very fuzzy rope, and it would still work. It's just a *very* good solution to the problem. (Although the Ri3D 1.0 version still requires the drum to move. Lets see if we can improve that).

And I don't buy that lawyering the rules is outside the spirit of the game. This is a design challenge, with a very specific spec. If the "client" wanted something different, they'd put it in the spec.

And along those lines, if they wanted us to solve a specific rope climbing problem, they would have made the ropes a standardized game pieces and made us all use the same thing.

(sorry, this should probably go in the velcro thread)

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by SenorZ

Once robotics becomes an exercise in linguistics and semantics, we've lost our way.

Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

Teams are saying, "Hmmm, attaching to and climbing up Material X is easier than rope, and provides less of a challenge. Let's see if we can use Material X."

While there's nothing wrong with this, technically, it is not in the "spirit" of the challenge. As a teacher, I give game/challenge projects to my students. Every year I need to field a variety of "why can't I..." questions because they want to bend the challenge to meet their design preference. I know this is NOT the same thing as the "velcro controversy", but it has the same flavor.

Go to the rope section at Home Depot. If there is a spool of Velcro there, you have an argument.

I would go the other way with it. As a professional engineer, requirements are everything. You design to requirements... and sometimes the requirements are ambiguous, or your understanding of those requirements doesn't match the understanding of the product owner. I always look for the easiest way to implement a set of requirements - it'll be quicker and more reliable than a complex way. Heck, just today at work I was having a discussion with a product owner that disagreed with my design, because my design included text that wrapped from one line to the next. There was nothing in the requirements that prevented that, and in the design I felt it gave the best presentation. So, now we're looking at alternative solutions as we work together to modify the requirements.

[falconmaster]

Ok , I guess I am missing something here. In the team update 2 why are there two knots in the Rope Anatomy diagram in Fig 9-2?

Also is the end with the loop, showing an option that you could use a loop or a straight piece with fraying prevention?

[engunneer]

Originally Posted by falconmaster

Ok , I guess I am missing something here. In the team update 2 why are there two knots in the Rope Anatomy diagram in Fig 9-2?

Also is the end with the loop, showing an option that you could use a loop or a straight piece with fraying prevention?

one knot is required (to hang from the DAVIT). the other knot is optional, and can be no closer than shown in the diagram to the davit knot. the number of optional knots is from 0 to N where N is unknown, but large.

the loop on the end is made using a segment of the rope, as a result, the end with fraying prevention is not part of the loop. since the loop is longer than the fray-prevented part, the loop constitutes the end of the rope for the purpose of length measurement.

[jspatz1]

"...whipped or fused ONLY to prevent fraying." I interpret that to mean 'for no other purpose.' Q&A does not like to address specific design issues. They are trying to let us know Velcro will not be legal without saying it out loud.

[Hobbes Novakoff]

From the blog it looks like they are allowing Velcro (or a velcro-like material) to be used.

[Chris is me]

They are really going to need to address this Velcro thing one way or another at some point. I'm a bit worried that the Velcro questions in the Q&A are going to be dismissed as "can't rule on legality of specific designs" or something like that, and we'll carry this ambiguity past the first week of build season.

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

This is what any smart team is doing, I think, but the second that Velcro is confirmed legal is the second we can redirect those efforts elsewhere.

[nardavin]

Originally Posted by bobbysq

TL;DR Velcro isn't banned yet, but "superfusion" is, whatever that means.

(Q&A is also down, so no definitive answer :/)

I read this as yes, velcro is banned. From the example box: "FIRST Robotics Community members are innovative and may discover a way to fuse the end of the ROPE in a way that can be leveraged for competitive advantage. This 'superfusion' extends the fusing’s purpose beyond only preventing fraying."

You could, in theory, still use a rope that acts like the loop-side of velcro that you could grip with hook-side on your robot.

[GreyingJay]

Yeah, I read that as saying "you can't use a strip of Velcro and claim it is the mechanism by which you are preventing the end of your rope from fraying", as it then has more purpose than simply fusing the end of the rope.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

[efoote868]

Originally Posted by Kevin Sevcik

Velcro only on the end of the rope seems to be banned. I think Velcro sewn along the length of the rope is also banned, or will be one you guys push on it. Velcro as rope probably has a short lifespan as well. I'd suggest you temporarily forget Velcro exists and see if you can come up with a different climbing design, just to save time. It's not like a Velcro climber is hard, people.

From the Q&A and this update, it looks like if you weave the loops portion into the rope it'll be legal. And if the loops portion of specifically Velcro is banned, it should not be very difficult to find another natural fiber with similar properties. I don't think the GDC will come out and say "Velcro as a rope is legal," because you'll have some team that tries to use the hooks portion only of Velcro with adhesives when that doesn't meet the definition of rope.

[FrankJ]

If the Q&A is fixed long enough I think the Velcro question will be answered. But with I am thinking the way the update 2 is written, it will not be legal.

On the other hand you should be weave fibers in the rope to simulate the hoop part of the velcro. That would be enough to thread the rope on the lift drum. Think 'Superfrayed" the polar opposite of superfusion.

[lukekaiser]

My question is couldn't someone just braid, mesh or tie a rope of less than 1 inch out of yarn that would be strong enough to support a robot, and still use the "hook Portion" of the Velcro on the robots spooling mechanism? I feel like that would be really easy to create, and still have the "Velcro" properties that everyone is trying to achieve.

[Kevin Sevcik]

Originally Posted by Logan Byers

This is highly relevant. I forgot the strand part of the definition. I don't think braiding strips of Velcro will work, since a strip of Velcro is hardly a strand. I think the Velcro brigade is down to hoping that a strip of Velcro counts as a rope.

[SenorZ]

Once robotics becomes an exercise in linguistics and semantics, we've lost our way.

Instead of saying, "Hmmm, having my robot climb a rope is a challenge. Lets see if we can do that."

Teams are saying, "Hmmm, attaching to and climbing up Material X is easier than rope, and provides less of a challenge. Let's see if we can use Material X."

While there's nothing wrong with this, technically, it is not in the "spirit" of the challenge. As a teacher, I give game/challenge projects to my students. Every year I need to field a variety of "why can't I..." questions because they want to bend the challenge to meet their design preference. I know this is NOT the same thing as the "velcro controversy", but it has the same flavor.

Go to the rope section at Home Depot. If there is a spool of Velcro there, you have an argument.