Looking for input.
We climb to L3. We are fully supported by the L3 horizontal surface, our bumpers are above the plane.
We have a piece of X, could be rope, cable, plastic, aluminum, whatever, that is touching the face of the HAB wall. It provides no support.
Would this be a legal 12 point climb?
Per TU#3: It depends. Would a human being looking from the side of the field easily consider it to be supporting your robot? If yes, then you’ll get L2. If not, you’ll get L3.
I would not suggest aluminum or plastic be hanging down as it’s harder for an observer from a distance to tell a lack of support. Rope or cable, you can probably get away with it. Of course this is depending on the exact implementation.
Make it unambiguous to a human observer.
IMO that means nothing to question if you are fullly supported by L3 platform . I have seen in the past stuff (Bumpers, arms etc) hanging off bots invalidate otherwise good climbs by hitting the carpet either solo or transitively (supported by rung and carpet) . In this game the side of L3 is not above L3 its below L3. “Supported” means 100% of robot weight supported by L3 platform itself, anything lower engaging HAB sides likely would not make that true to a casual observer. There is a Q and A that goes over this in more detail. In the end you have to convince the referees based on the staff at your event.
They seem to have clarified for this game the threshold with this phrasing:
Contact with” does not necessarily mean “supported by,” read on
Q50 : The Answer
HAB PLATFORM Levels 1, 2, and 3 (as described in Section 4.5) define the starting elevation for each Level. To be credited for a Level climbed, the ROBOT must fully meet the criteria defined in Section 5.3 for that Level or greater - that includes not being supported by any surfaces lower than that Level. The only surface of the HAB PLATFORM at or higher than Level 3 is the Level 3 deck/platform itself, so a ROBOT in contact with supported by side surfaces of the HAB PLATFORM cannot be credited with a Level 3 Climb. Instead, the ROBOT will be credited with the Level for which all of the evaluation criteria is true for, if such a Level exists. “Contact with” does not necessarily mean “supported by,” and such distinctions are evaluated and scored by human REFEREES. Teams are encouraged to make sure that it’s obvious and unambiguous that a ROBOT is not being supported by anything below the desired Level. (revised 1/15/19 per Team Update 03)"
When I read the third update, I remember this
Was about to ask about this same robot. Would that count as a level 3 climb? He’s holding onto the sides of the platform, so they’re technically being supported by something below the third platform’s level.
A creative design for sure, but alas I would argue no. UNLESS once they climb, they could retract the fingers. THEN I would say yes.
considering that the score is calculated at T-5 seconds, as long as the default position of these cylinders is open so that they are no longer touching the sides I would consider this Level 3, but if the default position is closed in – still grabbing the sides – I would count that as being supported on the sides.
I can tell you for sure that Koios is not supported by the sides of the L3 hab when the finger is unclamped, as it does at the end of the climb. But it’s not my job to defend it, so the first improvement I would make is to make it unambiguous. With longer throw pistons (and a finger on each side) it would probably be a lot more obvious that nothing is touching the sides of the HAB. This was the original plan, but we didn’t have the requisite cylinders to make it so.
I know it is not supported by those fingers but I was commenting to be absolutely certain that no ref calls that as a level 2 climb it would be smart to have the default position be out so that is how it is resting 5 seconds after the match. Great robot though, snow problem is always my favorite Ri3D to see.
Right. The way to make KOIOS unambiguous is to see about adding a way to retract those short arms so they flip back up above the level surface of HAB Level 3.
Not even above the surface really, just no touching the sides. the way the springs are pulling it in it would be quite hard to pull those arms back .
Keep in mind, a horizontal surface has a hard time providing zero support where a vertical surface doesn’t have that same issue. There’s an example somewhere on CD last year of a robot having strings hanging off their bumper that caused a climb to be negated. Things touching the ground are naturally supported by the ground (even if they wouldn’t need it). Things touching the side of a surface can easily gain no support from that.
I’d read the “make it unambiguous” to mean “if it looks like the robot might lean in a different direction without that contact, it’s gaining support. If there’s a piece dangling down that’s touching the side, we hope referees look at this and notice a lack of support. If they don’t, this is something you probably could have prevented.”
To me, to be “unambiguous” would be being able to have nothing below that level surface.
And to play devil’s advocate, let’s assume that you successfully climb, release your mechanisms and everything looks spectacular to everyone, and in the last 4 seconds, one of your alliance partners comes barreling onto the L1 platform and manages to bump into you sitting pretty up there. All of a sudden your mechanism that’s hanging over the side is now touching the side, and there’s nothing you can do about it… no climb for you.
I would argue that touching a vertical surface offers no support. When force is applied then support is possible.
I might lose that argument with the official or maybe not.
This is skating a fine line… even the lightest touch imparts some force! How do you define when that force is too much, from an observer standing halfway across the field?