Drivetrain is irrelevant. The problem here is people who run wedges and skirts. Any reasonable drivetrain will be able to drive over. If you use skirts and wedges and get stuck on normal field elements… thats a you problem.
I am not referring to anything so subtle as drive gearing… you just need a drive base that can clear a 1" barrier. Anything below that is a choice you make that can lead to being trapped against or stuck on the barrier. Anything below .78" and you are at risk of getting stuck on discs.
So, yes, if you choose a low clearance build and the opposing team isolates you in the corner with discs, that is NOT trapping. (Even with G17.) You must be able to move around the field, which has discs and barriers to overcome. Failing to meet that requirement is not the fault of an opposing team.
Wait … the answer to the Q&A is completely about the drivetrain and which way the wheels are facing.
I believe that this is not true. Many teams this year have opted for 2.75" omnis on their drivetrain for a more favorable gear ratio. However, using these omnis with a 2-wide c-channel gives you less than an inch of ground clearance (correct me if I’m wrong) and thus renders you unable to clear the barrier without any aid from other robots. This ruling changes a lot for those teams – so I believe a debate is necessary.
If I ask another Q and A question, what would you guys want to see? Should be a wiki if you want to add.
List of points
-
How do holonomic drives count when determining parallel or perpendicular to the barrier?
-
What other design factors do teams need to take a calculated risk on when determining trapping? (ex. drive torque, drive size)
-
Given the fact that the low goal barriers are known to tear field tiles if hit hard or constantly pushed on, is a game strategy that involves trapping people in a legal way or a team constantly and purposefully trapping people in a legal way (their base is perpendicular to the barrier) a violation of S1? or would that be a “calculated design risk” from the event organizers to not use the field fix to minimize this risk? (maybe don’t use the last part of this question if it is seen as too passive aggressive)
<S1> Be safe out there. If at any time the Robot operation or Team actions are deemed unsafe or have damaged a Field Element or Disc, the offending Team may receive a Disablement and / or Disqualification at the discretion of the Head Referee.
Just because you have skirts doesn’t mean you cannot go over the barrier.
(Credit to 36905X)
It did? There is nothing in the definition of trapping that protects teams unable to cross the barrier. Not being able to go forward into the low goal because the barrier is in the way is not the fault of the opposing team.
I also agree that pushing against the barrier should be un-penalized if the wheels are anything but parallel (including X Drive). There are many avenues of escape like driving back over the barrier, or getting your teammate to help you. But, I think this design-choice argument can only be applied for the barrier. Obviously any trap could be invalid from a design choice perspective, but designing for the barrier should be part of this game.
Good skirts are fine, and I argue should be a more commonplace design element in VEX. I LOVE good defense. It makes it fun to watch and distinct from its FIRST counterparts.
I do not call trapping if you high center an opponent on a disc, and they are immobilized. It is poor design to allow yourself to succumb to a game object like that. I do disagree with the flat side of the ramp pins, but I think if you get pushed onto and then stuck on the ramp, that’s once again a you-problem
Use Pillow Bearings?
out of curiosity, when will you be posting this Q and A?
Thanks for the reminder:
Answered. Apparently the design considerations only matter for the low goal barrier and also don’t matter for drive train design considerations. sigh
It is what it is.