Answered: Entanglement

In previous thread it was approved for a robot to remain attached to parts via string. The strategy may not imply intent to entangle another robot (<G9>) but it would impose an entanglement hazard especially for your alliance partner (<R3>c). Would inspectors see the ability to remove parts attached to string as a “necessary risk” of entanglement?


Teams who entangle their own partners, will not be subject to <G9>.

When evaluating whether a robot is in violation of <R3c>, inspectors will be determining whether the entangling device will be deployed such that it could entangle a partner (no violation) or an opponent (possible violation). Because of the divided nature of the VEX Clean Sweep field, inspectors will be paying extra attention to any devices that cross the *center wall *or are intended to be deployed near the center wall.

In general devices that are deployed by robots attached only by a string like device, but remain on your own side of the field would not be considered a “necessary risk” of entanglement. (Please note that “in general” is not equivalent to “all”)

Note: Many teams have mentioned “string” in their discussions about potential VEX Clean Sweep robots. Just so there’s no confusion, as it currently stands there is no string in the VEX product line and no provisions for the use of string in <R7>. Teams who wish to use string like devices will have to exercise some creativity in their material usage.