Summer Design Competition 2015

We are back, and this time with the summer design competition that everyone’s been asking for. We’ve got a new game, a longer design period, and some new awards. A huge thank you to Koko Ed for inspiring this summer’s game.

I’ll try and keep this one short:

Taken from the last competition thread:

For those of you unfamiliar with the design competition, the basic idea is a group of friends and I have created our own FRC game in order to provide a challenge to the FIRST community to better prepare people for the strategic design and game analysis required at the beginning of the FRC season in hopes that participants will utilize what they have learned from the competition to make their 2016 FRC team perform at a higher level of play. Individuals (or groups of people) design their own complete robot to participate in this year’s game, Quad Quidditch.

The manual for Quad Quidditch may be found here, and the game documents and CAD models may be found here (Solidworks) and here (STEP file).

Also taken from the last competition thread:

Each team of contestants must turn in a CAD design for their robot as well as written documentation detailing their robot, their strategies for the game, their strategic design and thought process. Basically anything in the normal season that cannot be portrayed simply via the CAD model would be helpful having in writing. It will help your score to have more documentation about your processes.

For the above, the written portions can be as short as you want (it’s easier for us that way) - they don’t need to be professional essays, we just need to be able to read them and understand your thought process / strategic design. Some aspects of the normal FRC game have been changed, so how you adapt to these changes in your strategy will have an affect on how you are scored.

This is a relaxed competition. Like hella relaxed. This means you don’t need to be 100% complete with your CAD. Don’t leave out subsystems, but nuts/bolts/shafts etc aren’t required for judging. As long as your general design gets across and you can explain it in words, you will be able to be less attentive to minor details on design.

Our time frame for the competition has been increased. The competition starts today, June 1st, and ends on the 15th of August. Submissions will be accepted any time up until 11:59 on August 15th.

For submission, if you use Solidworks, Pack and Go your assembly and put the zipped folder in a folder with your documentation. Otherwise simply send a STEP file along with your documentation. Submissions should be emailed to [email protected].

A final note about the rules: We have put a lot of work into developing the game manual, trying to be as thorough as possible while remaining concise. We have gotten as much outside opinion as we could, however there is still a chance that we may have missed something. We’re not perfect, we’re human, it happens. Ask any questions here, and we shall reply with official answers, and update the manual as needed. To prevent any confusion, we ask that you take the rules for how they are intended, and try to minimize any lawyering of them. There will always be ambiguity with interpretations differing person to person, but we hope that consistent and transparent communication between the community and this GDC will help make that less of an issue.

With that being said, thank you to everyone who has helped in developing this project, and to everyone who takes the time to compete in it. Good luck, and we won’t see you at the competitions because this is all theoretical.

The snitch is one of the coolest dynamics here.

whatever FIRST was planning for next year they should just drop it and do this. The bad taste from the last two games will be easily forgotten.

“Hey guys, remember that terrible Recycling-themed stacking game with no defense? Neither do I!”
-Every FIRST-er after Quad Quidditch

It would be so cool if you could make flying robots for the game. Who cares about a silly water game when you can see your robot catch air!

I have literally been wanting something… anything! like this since I first joined 3 years ago. This is amazing.

Thank you so much for putting the time into making this.

Wow, this is fantastic. I’ll be using this as part of my team’s summer design training.

Thank you so much for this amazing resource.

Under rule G10, it states that robots may not blockade the field or partake in an action that halts the flow of the match.

What classifies as “an action that halts the flow of the match”?
For an example, does persistent defense count as an action that halts the flow of the match?

If you used your alliance robots to create a continuous blockade that prevented opponents from traveling to the other side of the field. Another example would be if you used your robots to block the opposing alliance’s human loading station, as this would prevent the natural flow of a part of the match. These kinds of actions are illegal. Normal defensive play, however, is expected and encouraged.

The match begins with a fifteen second AUTONOMOUS period… Teams get additional points for every robot that is in their ALLIANCE ZONE located between their alliance HOOPS and the opposing ALLIANCE WALL at the end of the autonomous period.

This description of the alliance zone does not appear to match what is depicted in the linked image of the field.

G7: During Auto, teams may not cross the white CENTERLINE. Also, teams who start in contact with their KEEPER ZONE must remain in contact with it until the AUTONOMOUS period is over.

If images of the field are correct in their placement of the alliance zones, it seems like this rule would make it impossible to get the autonomous points for being in your zone.

If the field drawings are not correct, it seems like the flow of the game would not work properly… so it looks as though something is up…

Is there something that I’m missing?

P.S. Super cool game! I love the concept! It reminds me a lot of 2013, but a lot more craziness.

This was a mistake on our end in an accidental reversal of the definition of the ALLIANCE ZONE. Both the zone definition and the autonomous points have been fixed and clarified to reflect the intent of the game. The zones will stay as they were in the images, and the points will be awarded for ending autonomous in your opponent’s alliance zone. Thank you for reporting this error.

Thanks for putting this together! Hopefully I will get the time to make something to submit.

One Question:

G8: During the match, robots may not extend above 10 ft tall UNLESS inside their alliance KEEPER ZONE, in which case an extension no larger than an cross-sectional area of 4 inches x 4 inches may rise above the 10 ft height limit up to a total height of 16 ft.

Does this mean that it would be allowed for a robot to extend anything with a 16 square inch cross sectional area above 10 feet or that anything extended above 10 feet must fit within a 4" by 4" column?

Thank you for addressing it so nicely.

I have a few more questions

ex… If a blue alliance robot scores a QUAFFLE and it lands in the red ALLIANCE ZONE and a red alliance robot picks it up, the red alliance robot can score the QUAFFLE immediately because the QUAFFLE was already in the red ALLIANCE ZONE when the red robot took possession of it.

Emphasis mine.
Is the bolded section necessary, or a consequence of your example? For instance, if one alliance mate passes the ball to another after it has been cleared, does the receiving bot need to clear it again? Does the quaffle even need to be in the possession of a robot when it is in the alliance zone in order to be considered cleared?

Can a quaffle be scored through the hoops backwards to receive points?

Is it indented that quaffles that are thrown through the hoops, will be kept on the field by some sort of net?

What is the alliance selection order?

That would be pretty awesome. This would be a crazy game to referee, and one alliance will likely sequester all the Bludgers to take them out of the game, and building/maintaining the snitches would be troublesome. But overall it would be awesome.

How can we submit this to FIRST?!


Extensions must fit within a 4" by 4" column. The intent of this rule is to prevent someone from making a thin blocking mechanism the width of the goal.

The process of clearing a quaffle does not require a robot to possess it. As long as the quaffle has been within the volume of the ALLIANCE ZONE of the robot that intends on scoring it since it has last been grounded/scored, it will be clear for free use (sorry if that’s a bit wordy. tl;dr quaffles don’t need robots to be cleared).

Quaffles can be scored through any side of the hoop.

There is a net in the field design behind the alliance walls (more easily seen with a colored background to the field), however all game pieces will be returned to the field should they exit anytime during the match.

Alliance selection will be as follows:

This has been added to the manual under T3.

This game would be a nightmare to ref or score. We decided that because this was a design challenge, we could sacrifice playability in exchange for higher quality design and strategy opportunities.

I guessed that, but wasn’t sure. Thanks for clarifying!

Actually this game reminds me more of last years game except with two more goals on each side. More game pieces and an end game minus the need for assists.

I can’t tell if you were joking…

But I got a good laugh out of it anyway :stuck_out_tongue:

Although now that I think about it, I can see some resemblance.

This is great, thanks for putting it together.

I really do love the element of the snitch and I am so excited that our team is taking on the challenge this summer. Looking forward to seeing all of the designs!