What Questions are we going to ask for the Q&A

The following just got answered not too long ago:














The key takeaways (tl;dr) of the answers are:

  • PET sheets and other plastic sheets sold by VEX do in fact count towards the plastic limit.
  • Surprisingly, you CAN use match loads during a programming skills attempt.
  • Entanglement from endgame expansion mechanisms will generally be excused unless the intent was to genuinely entangle another robot.
  • It is legal to reorient the optical/distance sensor structurally, but it is illegal to replace the base of said sensor.
  • The correct tolerance of a disc’s mass is +/- 20 grams.
  • Taran’s diagonal robot concept is unfortunately not legal in its initial starting position (since it would be measured as if it was on a flat field tile, according to the GDC). However, it is legal in its diagonal position, it just wouldn’t be able to move.
  • Grant Cox is believed to be a blue cartridge that has been spraypainted green.

Questions asked about R11, R12g, and R7e received somewhat vague answers, however R11 is supposedly being clarified in a future game manual update. The questions regarding R6b, R12a, R7b, R20c and 515R’s vertical expansion are still unanswered.


My take away from this is that I could still theoretically use (cooked) spaghetti for my bot.

We got 2 more answers:



The questions regarding R6b were pushed back to next week’s update, but we got some solid answers about R20c. basically:

  • If you can figure out the logistics, you don’t have to use a motor cartridge, and you can use motor cartridges on the bot other than for the motor itself.
  • A robot’s legality is basically irrelevant outside of a match.
  • The Motor Cap and the threaded inserts are not considered electronic components with regards to R20.

I presume that the other unanswered qna regarding R6b will likely get the same response as the one already answered, but it’s interesting to see that you can run a direct flywheel if you figure out the logistics (the qna did make a specific note about it being unlikely to run a cartridge-less motor without breaking another rule, sounds like a challenge)


interesting conclusions from the gdc here. Following the logic in this response (motor caps not counting as electronic components), one could make the conclusion that cutting down the legs of a cap for a more compact motor would not violate any rules.

another follow up question could be whether physically modifying motor cartridges is legal. if the caps do not count as electronic components, by the same logic a cartridge should also not count.


Yes, I do believe that physically disassembling the motor carts is legal now, after this ruling.

This was far more permissive than I expected it to be.


Oh man, @Iogician, @LuxembourgIsACountry : This is incredibly useful and awesome. Not only you summarized but also translated from GDC to English. Can we pin this and maintain it? (constructive thought with zero sarcasm).


More answers:







In short:

  • The other R6b question was pushed back to this week’s game manual update.
  • The question regarding G15 (trapping) is also being pushed back to the game manual update.
  • In a decision that is bound to shock everyone, you cannot 3D print anything other than license plates and non-functional decorations.
  • The rule about tolerances is now in the tournament section.
  • The rollers are designed to get caught on the screw heads.
  • Anodizing robots with the PTFE treatment is considered a lubricant and falls under R7b (can be used on surfaces that do not touch game/field objects).

That leaves 3 questions yet to be answered: the endgame vertical expansion, replacing the panels on the portable fields, and the high goal chain modification.


Shout out to @LuxembourgIsACountry for going through and notifying us when a question is answered! Saves me from going through and reading through everything and trying to remember if I have already read this or not.


While playing around in CAD, I realized that flip-up 2” diameter blockers are not technically legal, based on the wording from the manual:

Since the manual uses the word “vertical” it can be assumed that the 2” theoretical cylinder limit cannot be rotated with the blocker that folds up. Essentially, a flip-up blocker like this one,

(with the horizontal blue line being the 18x18” height limit and the tall vertical blue line being the 24” virtual ceiling)

momentarily becomes illegal as it flips up, since the 45° diagonal orientation would be above 18” and outside of a virtual 2” vertical cylinder. (of course this type of mechanism would have a pneumatic cylinder that brings it up and down at will).

However, vertical linear 2” diameter expansions are legal (i.e. a c channel that shoots straight up on a linear slide).

This seems odd that the GDC would want to restrict teams to a certain way of building a blocker mechanism, and it seems to go against the intent of the rule. The rule literally exists just so people can make blockers. The only other thing one would think it would be used for is to mount a sensor, however all the relevant sensors for use here don’t actually fit within a 2” diameter.

I don’t currently have the ability to make a Q&A about this but I wanted to bring it to the attention of the people here, since it is a notable concern. I highly doubt this was the GDC’s intent with this rule.


I think that a similar issue was briefly discussed with things like string launchers; if launched at a certain angle they would become momentarily illegal as they passed the vertical expansion limit. Not sure if a qna has been made on that yet.

1 Like


Not answered yet, though.


Interesting outcome for Q&A 1138.

Motor cartridges CANNOT be modified in any way, however, in a big decision that may make motors more compact than ever, motor caps CAN be modified (although the tiny cap screws cannot be used for purposes other than a motor). This means you could shave down the motor inserts so that the motor is now flat in theory.