Am I the only one that can’t see an answer to Q&A39? It is referred to in Q&A 70 as that answer would be of interest.
Just a little confused.
I agree, it is weird that Question 39 does not have an answer as mentioned in Answer 70.
Inside joke? Can’t rule definitively so no answer to linked Q?
I believe Q4 answers Q39.
No, Q39 is requesting CLARIFICATION of the answer to Q4.
Q100 is asking for the answer to Q39, well done by team 6886.
They posted the answer to Q39
In answering Q4, you state that a robot can have flexible materials extend downward farther than 7 inches below the top of the bumpers as long as those materials would be within 7 inches when the robot is placed normally on a flat floor. In the blue box below R24, you state “This measurement is intended to be made as if the ROBOT is resting on a flat floor (without changing the ROBOT configuration).” What constitutes a change in robot configuration (if not the bending of a flexible material)?
Answer
If the ROBOT is purposefully readjusted, realigned, compressed, moved, etc., it’s considered having had its configuration changed. If no purposeful attempt is made to alter the ROBOT in moving it to its flat floor (i.e. people are only moving it), then no reconfiguration has happened.
$1 says someone will ask a followup about if folding a ramp without touching it by moving the robot to a flat floor falls under “purposefully readjusting etc.”
I’d rather not lose a dollar…
I thought their answer to this question was very clear. To put it in different words: “gravity can do its thing.”
Didn’t say it wasn’t clear (after a little thought).
Doesn’t mean some FIRSTer won’t ask, because FIRSTers want very specific requirements on the robot and very loose requirements on the gameplay, or vice versa, whichever works in their favor. 