https://firstfrc.blob.core.windows.net/frc2016manuals/TeamUpdates/16.pdf
Well, it looks like 254/1678’s ceiling touching camera poles won’t be legal any more under this rule. I wonder how that affects the visibility from the cameras.
Put cameras on poles 3 ft long, attach to ceiling. Problem solved.
EDIT: They also did not enforce that the cameras had to be connected only to the driverstation and driverstation shelf at the madera event this weekend. I saw most teams mounting them to stands on the ground (which to me seems a lot safer than having a pole on a driverstation shelf that is getting rammed by robots all the time). Maybe they will change that rule, too.
On the bright side, now we aren’t limited by our shops ceiling for practice!
-Mike
Do we think the new height limit applies to the whole driver station, or does it exclude the elements held/worn by the drivers. In other words, can I make a taller camera pole as long as someone is holding it and it is deemed safe?
Does anyone know the nominal height of the driver station shelf? The manual gives width and depth, but not height for that part… and knowing that height is going to be important for figuring out the max height for cameras, as it’s defined “above the floor”.
FE-00004 shows 34 inches from floor to bottom of shelf.
The shelf is 34.25" above the floor.
The driver station rules make sense, and the fixed backup bot rules are a relief.
The clause added to the contact above the midline doesn’t really make sense though. Who gets the foul now? Both teams? And what is the intent of this rule?
I believe since they purposely added this after the note that the max height is the max height regardless of whether or not a driver is holding it.
11’8"??? Hmmmm…
I guess FIRST was worried about teams not fastening their poles properly and creating a dangerous situation!
Best Regards,
RM
I am actually glad the height limit has been implemented.
While we designed our “Eyes in the Sky” to be safe and quick to assemble, I can’t say the same for every pole at CVR. Seemed like some teams were making them just because 254/1678 had one, with little consideration to the strategic advantage they may/may not have received. Safety was not always a priority with these rushed assemblies.
To be clear, our set up, which included a 27" screen, secondary 13" screen, and a go-pro on a pole, was completely designed and assembled before the event with safety in mind.
I hope future events will be safer with the new height restrictions in mind.
-Mike
So if shockwave won worlds does that mean the maximum height would be 448’8"?
I am somewhat disappointed we don’t get to see how high they would have ended up being at the Edward Jones Dome.
Why the G13 change? It only makes 2 ball auto more dangerous and really how effective can throwing your one auto boulder at the other alliance be?
Exactly, I think at that point a view looking down at the roof of the dome wouldn’t strategically viable… just a guess…
I imagine it would’ve looked similar to this:
Well it would appear that our periscope will now be modified to be 8’8". Benefits of using a pool slimmer pole is that it allows us to adjust height easily.
Agreed. I can’t quite make out why this change was made, or how it really helps anything. The way I read it, both teams going for a center ball would receive a penalty. I don’t think there have even been any center-line ball battles yet, so maybe this is a pre-emptive effort to stop something?
The only thing I guess that this could effect would be that teams that have 2 ball autos or 2 ball auto defensive strategies could now be at risk for yellow cards. If that is truly the intent, that really disappoints me because effective autonomous routines are some of the most inspirational things in FRC.