My questions are. Does the string count as the robot being attached? Does the robot break any rules? https://youtu.be/Rznndditly0
In the past, soft and flexible tethers have been ruled to pose an excessive risk of entanglement, so my money is on “no”. (Excessive risk of entanglement is covered by <R3c>.)
Could you make a trailer if it stayed close like when the robot came off the main what if it was 3 inches apart is that legal?
Ask in the Official Q&A…
My concern is wire management structures being used for tethers between segments of the robots, is this legal? As written it seems so, but I think the intent was to protect intra-robot wiring, not to span across a whole field.
I mean in the NorCal Ri3D write up they wrote that to improve the current design you could use plastic segments like the ones used by OYES which would definitely be legal.
Edit: wrong link
Based on what I saw in the video, it currently looks like (as said above) an R3C violation, (also take a look at R3 A and B) but you may have a borderline violation of G16 (clamping robot to the field)
“Don’t clamp your Robot to the field. Robots may not intentionally grasp, grapple or attach to
any Field Elements. Strategies with mechanisms that react against multiple sides of a Field Element in
an effort to latch or clamp onto said Field Element are prohibited. The intent of this rule is to prevent
Teams from both unintentionally damaging the field and/or from anchoring themselves to the field.”
as well as potentially SG3 depending on how precise you can be (it will probably depend on who you are against and the ref)
Stay away from your opponent’s protected areas. Robots may not intentionally or accidentally, directly or indirectly, perform the following actions:
But honestly, a lot of it is going to depend on how precise your driver(s) is/are, and the people you are dealing with, the above design changes should definitely help, (The string may or may not count as being attached, but a little design rework should fix it perfectly.) and honestly, 3 inches away does not sound like that big of a deal, but you will at least want to try using multiple strings to make it look less like a second robot. Also, you may want to take a close look at your “walls” to make sure that they don’t “clamp” to the field in any way.
Good luck though! That is one heck of a robot!
I agree. So does it count if they place the wall down then a robot tries to pass and pushes into the wall. That is condered breaking R3C Correct? And it is like clamping to the wall too you really can’t avoid it.
Also, could we use a metal kinda 5-inch teather to like make a little trailer or something.
The only concern of legality of the bot in it’s design is the loose rope tether, which we stated in the document can be replaced with a OYES tether. There is no possibility of violating clamping because it doesn’t grab the wall… The robots can also control when to deploy, a robot would never get caught under or behind the wall.
As for the SG3 rule you sated (the g16 one was already somewhat covered by Tublord) the protected zone wall does not enter the opponent’s zone at all and the only way it could was if an enemy somehow pushed it there. In that case the enemy would potentially be violating G14 (you cant force a robot into a penalty)
For R3C concerning the wall, it doesn’t pose too much of an entanglement risk in my opinion, but since everyone’s bot it different, it is possible that someones robot (a clawbot for example) could get something stuck, and it would be considered an R3C violation by some, also, (correct me if i am wrong) but I am pretty sure that there is a rule somewhere that basicly says that if you are doing that type of defense, to expect some pushing and other offensive maneuvers, (update: rule G12, which also gives a specific warning about wall-bots, saying that they are an “at your own risk” type of deal) meaning that issues with G14 would be a warning at most, as the wall is not really going to get back into place after being taken down, making it a one time ordeal and G12 makes it clear that defense is going to encounter offense, and the opponent in this case is not going to be trying to force a violation, but get into their protected area.
That scissor wall CAN NOT move. It has mesh assist and is supported by both the perimeter and its sheer steely weight. In the reveal, 315G, a div finalist 6 motor base with base wedges, could not budge it.
We considered every legal situation we could when building the bot and I am confident the only issue needing improvement is a less imposing tether.
We also have string running inside the wire wrap so there is a completely legal material that actually acts as the tether. Even then, with a switch to an OYES style tether, entanglement would be out of the question, as well as any question about tether legality.
is it okay if you send that video into this thread by downloading it through streamable? Youtube doesn’t work in China. I was interested in seeing the reveal video ahead of time.
If it is not breaking any rules that’s a bit impressive. But there is a way to stop this wall from being deployed. If a robot is already beside the wall scoring it is considered pinning. You could just have a tag out were each robot waits for the other to take its position.
Actually, there is a statement in the trapping definition that says the opponent must be in a small confined area, approximately 1 foam field tile. It has been debated whether the wall bot is violating the trapping rule, but there still hasn’t been an official q and a, so we will see what happens later on.
You are correct in the narrow sense that this would stop us from deploying the full wall. However, remember that the wall can actually be deployed at 75% width, and that there’s a separate tank drive bot that can capably defend the tagged-out robot.
We have very intentionally designed the robot to be flexible and versatile. Simply preventing the full large wall deploy is not sufficient to beat this wallbot.
Well here’s how I am going to put it. You not going to get anywhere without a good teammate and we all know sometimes you don’t get a good teammate for all we know it can be a claw but. What are you going to do now. You cant drive around because you got string and can risk entanglement ? Also we could problem just move the wall with two bots. And the small one we can move for sure.
This wallbot like most defense bot is intended to be picked by a competent offense robot during the elimination round. The walls cannot be pushed out of the way once they are deployed on the tiles. They are heavy enough to sink into the tile, have mesh pressed into the foam, and are supported at the edges by the perimeter.
Well good luck with that. All I am saying is they will probably go for a bot to help them score and not Attempt to block the goals(It is possible to move).
I encourage you to build a quick model and test for yourself. Simply attach mesh to the surface of a 5 wide C channel, place the channel face down on the tile, and place a 10 or 5lb weight to mimic the large or small wall, respectively.
You would need to be able to pull (not push) such a weight away from the corners in order to mess with the walls. We were never able to make this happen; If you really are able to pull one of the wall models, I’d love to see a video of your technique so we can learn from it.