Game Manual - Team UPDATE - 2014-03-18

FIRST General Forum
1

Posted on the FRC Manual site, 3/18/2014: [http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/Updates/0#term 176](http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/Updates/0#term 176)

Game Manual - Team UPDATE - 2014-03-18

Game Manual

General Announcements

As a follow up to last week’s Team Update, Team Update 2014-03-11, we strongly encourage all teams to replace any 2013, white Clippard tanks distributed via *FIRST *Choice last year. For Teams attending remaining events this season *FIRST *will supply new Clippard AVT-PP-35 tanks for trade at no cost to Teams. Please understand that these are not tanks to be used as “spares” – they are only to be traded for the 2013 white Clippard tanks that are currently on your Robot.

If you’re using the white Clippard tanks on your Robot, please check in with the Inspectors at your event as we’re having new tanks shipped to their attention.

For those teams that will not be attending any more events this season, did not participate in Clippard’s trade program last year, and are thus still using the 2013 white Clippard tanks, please contact [email protected] and we work with you to trade tanks after the 2014 *FIRST *Championship.

We’d like to thank Clippard Instruments Laboratory, Inc. for their rapid response to the tank concerns last year and for their continued support to mitigate safety concerns. They have been a long-time, generous Supplier to the FIRST Robotics Competition, and their generosity is greatly appreciated.

Section 3.1.2: MATCH Logistics
If an ALLIANCE’S BALL becomes stuck in or permanently trapped by an ALLIANCE’S ROBOT, the ALLIANCE may signal to the Head Referee that the BALL is “dead” by holding the yellow “DEAD BALL” placard against the DRIVER STATION acrylic.

If an ALLIANCE’S BALL becomes stuck in or permanently trapped by an opposing ALLIANCE’S ROBOT, the Head Referee will signal an extended infraction of G12 (the assumption is that the ALLIANCE has already been penalized for the initial G12 infraction).

Section 3.2.3: General Rules
G12

An ALLIANCE may not POSSESS their opponent’s BALLS. The following criteria define POSSESSION:

  1. “carrying” (moving while supporting BALLS in or on the ROBOT or holding the BALL in or on the ROBOT),
  2. “herding” (repeated pushing or bumping),
  3. “launching” (impelling BALLS to a desired location or direction via a MECHANISM in motion relative to the ROBOT), or
  4. “trapping” (overt isolation or holding one or more BALLS against a FIELD element or ROBOT in an attempt to shield them).

Violation: FOUL, if unintentional and inconsequential (i.e. does not significantly impact MATCH play). TECHNICAL FOUL per consequential instance. TECHNICAL FOUL per extended instance. [strike]If extended, another TECHNICAL FOUL.[/strike] If strategic, RED CARD for the ALLIANCE.

http://i.imgur.com/scpDfX4.png

Section 4.1: General ROBOT Design
**R1
**
Each registered FRC team may enter only one (1) ROBOT (or ‘Robot’, which to a reasonably astute observer, is a Robot built for FRC) into the 2014 FRC. A Robot is any The ROBOT must be built by the FRC Team to perform specific tasks when competing in AERIAL ASSIST. The ROBOT must include all of the basic systems required to be an active participant in the game – power, communications, control, and mobility. The ROBOT implementation must obviously follow a design approach intended to play AERIAL ASSIST (e.g. a box of unassembled parts placed on the FIELD, or a ROBOT designed to play a different game would not satisfy this definition).

Section 4.8 Power Distribution
R31

The only legal source of electrical energy for the ROBOT during the competition, the ROBOT battery, is one of the following approved 12VDC non-spillable lead acid batteries:

  1. Enersys (P/N: NP18-12)
  2. MK Battery (P/N: ES17-12)
  3. Battery Mart (P/N: SLA-12V18)
  4. Sigma (P/N: SP12-18)
  5. Universal Battery (P/N: UB12180)
  6. Power Patrol (P/N: SLA1116)
  7. Werker Battery (P/N: WKA12-18NB)
  8. Power Sonic (P/N: PS-12180 NB)
  9. Yuasa (P/N: NP18-12B)
  10. Panasonic LC-RD-1217
  11. Interstate Batteries BSL1116
  12. Enersys (P/N: NP18-12BFR)
  13. Enersys (P/N: NP18-12B)

Exception: Batteries integral to and part of a COTS computing device or self-contained camera are also permitted (e.g. laptop batteries), provided they’re only used to power the COTS computing device and any peripheral COTS USB input devices connected to the COTS computing device and they must be securely fastened to the ROBOT.

[strike]To seek approval for an equivalent battery, please contact [email protected] with the battery supplier and part number. Approved batteries will be added to the list above.[/strike]

2

Anyone know what caused the change to R1? I assume there was a specific robot/thread/Q&A question that caused it, but I can’t think of any that would have.

3

I wonder why they added more approved batteries in the middle of the season. Maybe there is a shortage of the other models?

4

It might be because of the withholding allowance change to prevent teams from bringing whole practice robots.

5

QA for R1: https://frc-qa.usfirst.org/Question/447/if-we-have-a-non-competition-promotional-robot-made-of-kop-parts-and-unique-structural-pieces-which-can-only-drive-are-we-allowed-to-bring-it-to-competition-for-use-as-a-display-in-our-pit-will-thi

6

I’m glad they changed the rule on possessing opponents’ balls. Our alliances have gotten technicals for “trapping” on a few occasions, but usually the technical was not the biggest factor in the score for those matches.

7

I’m not sure that’s it. This team does not plan to enter the robot into competition, only put it on display.

Well, at least this update is some progress. I was hoping for more… but I was also kind of expecting nothing.

8

Looks like they are no longer accepting suggestions about what could be a legal battery this year. My suggestion apparently did not make to the approved list.

9

They may not have been planning on entering it, but bringing it into the pits raises a huge load of question about witholding allowances, etc. And whether they could enter that robot in the event their competition robot, say, explodes before it ever sees an inspector.

On the other hand, I heard tell of a rookie team that apparently had a serious misunderstanding and showed up with a Vex bot that pretty clearly had little or nothing to do with Aerial Assist.

10

what even

11

Just a Vex bot :confused:

If they had one along with the competition bot and inspectors thought it counted as “parts” or something, that might also be messed up.

12

Could anyone with more information please elaborate on this? I’m genuinely baffled as to how a team could pay the $5,00 entry fee and not even think to look at the game. There must be some rational explanation.

13

A team thought those models were equivalent batteries and asked FIRST if they agreed, just like the blue box said before it was removed (which I don’t get).

14

Could whoever the OP heard this from have been talking about a rookie team bringing only a minibot to the Logomotion competition? This could be plausible as the minibots could be shared among teams if I remember correctly and were they not made out of VEX (Tetrix) components?

15

They were, but OP specifically referred to Aerial Assist, so it must have been this year.

16

I for one, really appreciate the updates to G12.
Nice work GDC, glad to see our comments are not falling on deaf ears.

17

I am really concerned about the new wording of G12. Maybe it will cut down on the number of Technical Fouls, but it seems like they could hand out a Foul for every time that your opponents’ ball touches you.
If the the criteria for a Foul includes “unintentional and inconsequential” infractions, then that opens the floodgates. It negates the qualifiers for intentional possession like “desired location” and “overt isolation or holding.”
The combination of the definitions + the new Foul qualification for “unintentional and inconsequential” actions + the Blue Box make for a confusing set of rules that can be interpreted in a multitude of ways. I expect that some Refs are going to start handing out Fouls like candy and the defensive game will have to completely change since the Ball becomes a Foul button.

18

This is my favorite Team Update thus far. Thank god for that rule change.

19

I have seen many many instances where a team defending deliberately knocks a ball away from an offensive robot attempting to pick it up. Because this didn’t meet the technical definition of herding in the manual it wasn’t a foul. I always thought this was wrong. Deliberately deflecting a ball to me is possession, even if it’s one hit. I wonder if this update effects this in any way. I would love to see a 20 point foul assessed for this action.

20

I’d be all for that, if they also loosened up the purse strings for handing out inital assists for inbounders one-bumping a ball to the next team.

Seems the only way to get that inital inbound assist is for the inbounding team to hold the ball in their machine.

If the purpose of the game is to work together, we need to make it easier for teams to contribute to their alliance.

Although, I’m not convince the refs can tell the difference between deliberate and accidental bumping of a ball. This would probably just add more penalties to the game.