2W 2012 Gateway Robot

I just uploaded some pictures of how 2W has evolved. Our design changed a bit as we built it, but it was essentially the same idea.


Feel free to ask some questions if you have any!

1 Like

What is that that you piled into the 5 hole c-channel?

How much did this robot weigh?

Did someone have to carry this robot or did you wheel it around?

They are scrap 1x metal strips lined up inside a 1x5x1 c channel for added weight. We have two of these on our robot.

The robot weighed about 50-60 pounds.

We initially carried it around but found it was way too heavy. We made a make shift robot dolly with the lid of the box, some bungee cables and a smaller dolly.

1 Like

Congrats guys! Beast of a robot. Can’t see what you hit us with next year. Looking forward to good competition in the last year for the original WASABI members!

This robot was extremely annoying in the Engineering division finals (in a good way), you guys definitely took the wallbot design to the extreme. Great job and congrats on winning worlds.

Wait… you guys had a little goal latch thingy? I thought it was illegal to attach your robot to any game pieces?

only in this years game

I’m pretty sure we couldn’t in gateway either, because we looked into it for out wallbot.

You definitely could for Gateway.

they didnt attach the lid to the goal. It rested on top.

no, their wing had a lexan latch so they couldn’t be pushed back.
shown here.


Just a question I asked on the Q&A before desigining one of our bots that latched onto the field. I know it says college, but this was a gameplay rule not a field modification rule, I think it would be reflected in all aspects of the game MS, HS, and College.

Hopefully that will clear some things up.

For the record I really liked this robot its like a mini HOG concept :slight_smile:

Please provide a rule. :slight_smile:

  • Andrew

There is no rule. That’s why it’s legal.

Obviously it must have been legal, or 2W would’ve been disqualified for it.

Please refer to the link in my post.

Personally. If I had competed this year AND we had built a different robot because what I said in the link was deemed “illegal” and then only to find another team did it and not get any problems with it at the World Competition and WIN worlds with it. I’d be just a little bothered. Nonetheless its a great robot and deserves the win. But something needs to be cleared up here.

Disclaimer if needed. This is not an attack on 2W. Just expressing thoughts.

Also, I could also get more technical but I wont for the direct sake of early discussion.

  • Andrew

You only found them annoying in the final?
We found them annoying even at the semi… just couldn’t figure out a way to beat this beast.

Well… at least we can say that we lost to the eventual champion :slight_smile:

But it is really a beast and an awesome robot :slight_smile:

1 Like

Oh, I loved that robot. Just can’t push against that 5-1 ration. Glad you were on our side. Best of regards for Sack Attack from your alliance and fellow champions

Team 569

We actually took the latch out so we had the option of unlatching when we wanted to move forward. It never made it to the final robot as we found it prevented us from closing in further. The force was not against the lexan if we were being pushed, it had no purpose. Our final hook ended up being open in the middle. Hope this clears it up!

Yeah, Engineering Finals was actually the first time my team went up against them

That’s what my teammates and I have said


That looks a lot better than the one in the facebook album, but against the standard of “locking onto the field is never permitted, no matter what precautions are taken” I think it would have been reasonable for a ref to call you on it. If I had been competing against you and had the presence of mind to do it I would definitely have pointed this out to the ref, because it’s likely that this rule escaped their attention and there’s definitely a judgement call to be made here.

I don’t think saying that “Team X did this in the finals, and the finals have the highest standard of reffing anywhere, so it must be legal” is all that sound. A disqualification of a team in the Worlds final for something they’ve been doing the entire tournament is a huge cost to the entire VEX program. It leaves a sour taste in the mouths of not only the team disqualified but also every team that played against them previously and lost, and all the spectators who don’t get to see a real match. It reflects poorly on the standard and consistency of refereeing at VEX’s most important tournament and on the credibility of the competition as a whole. It’s going to become an especially nasty situation if the rule or ruling is obscure and the action is minor, not unambiguously illegal, and doesn’t actually lead to the situation the rule or ruling is trying to avoid. Those are all the case here. The rule was only clarified in a College Q+A thread and the device wouldn’t have actually damaged the field. So, while it might not be the most *fair *way to referee, refs in finals matches don’t have much choice but to rule on the lenient side regarding anything that a team has already been doing all tournament.

Things like this need to be settled in the qualifications. The responsibility doesn’t only belong to the division refs because they are hard working volunteers who don’t have four sets of eyes and don’t know the rules as well as teams do. It’s important for teams to (politely!) point out the obscure rules to refs when other teams might be breaking them and allow those refs to make the call. I don’t know if someone showed the Q+A thread linked above to the Engineering division ref in relation to 2W, but that’s what should have happened. As for what the ruling would have been, I honestly think it could have gone either way. I also don’t think a ruling against the hook would have stopped 2W from winning.

My reasoning was not the fact that they did it in the finals, but the fact that they were NEVER disqualified at any point for it. I saw several robots at Worlds that locked between the gate and the center goal, and I don’t think any of them were penalized.

Technically, the rule that Karthik cited in the Q&A post was a Robot Rule, so the issue should have been addressed during the robot’s inspection.