Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Driver Controlled Period - Answers

Collapse
This is a sticky topic.
X
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Driver Controlled Period - Answers

    Official Answers to questions about the Driver Controlled Period can be found here.

  • #2
    Originally posted by FTC12833
    Subject: <GS11> Obstructing Travel Between Lander and Crater

    We are looking for clarification on a robot "obstructing travel between lander and crater" in <GS11>.

    Question 1: Is it considered as obstructing another robot's path of travel even if no other robot is trying to get to that area?

    Question 2: In other words, can a robot stay in that area more than 5 seconds at a time, and perhaps for the entire match, as long as no other robot is trying to get through?

    Answer 1: No
    Answer 2: Yes

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by FTC10131
      Subject: <GS7> Latching before the End Game

      Question 1: If during the driver-controlled period, a team supports some or all of their weight on the Lander Support Bracket but then later moves so no weight is supported by the Lander Support Bracket and no contact is being made with the Bracket, is the team eligible to Latch on during End Game and receive the 50 Latching points, or does GS7 apply preventing the team from scoring the 50 points? Examples here might be a robot that didn't fully deploy during autonomous but deploys in the first 10 seconds of the driver-controlled period, or a robot that, while scoring minerals in the Lander during the driver-controlled period, accidentally connects to the Lander Support Bracket for a few seconds but then releases fully and moves away from the lander.

      Question 2: During autonomous, a robot lands but is unable to fully separate from the Lander Support Bracket. All of the weight of the robot is supported by the playing field floor but the robot remains in contact with the Bracket for all of the driver-controlled period. Is the robot eligible for the End Game 50 Latching points if during the End Game the robot re-supports all of its weight back onto the Lander Support Bracket and is fully supported by the Bracket at the end of the match?

      Answer 1: A Robot that doesn't fully Deploy from the Lander during the Autonomous Period may separate from the Lander during the Driver-Controlled Period to become eligible to earn the End Game Latching Score.

      A Deployed Robot is not allowed to intentionally Support any portion of their weight with the Lander Support Bracket prior to the start of the End Game per rule <GS7>. Contacting the Lander Support Bracket while Scoring Minerals is allowed. If the Robot's Latching mechanism attaches to the Lander Support Bracket while the Robot is Scoring Minerals, the Referees will likely consider this to be a violation of rule <GS7>.

      Answer 2: In this scenario, if the Lander Support Bracket supports any portion of the Robot's weight it violates rule <GS7>. For example, a Robot resting on the Playing Field Floor and tethered to the Lander Support Bracket using a hook and string is partially supported by the Lander Support Bracket.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by FTC10131
        Subject: <GS7> Latching before the End Game

        First, thank you for your answer to our previous question on GS7. Follow up questions:

        Question 1: GS7 says "Deployed Robots are not allowed to intentionally Support any portion of their weight with the Lander Support Bracket prior to the start of the End Game. Robots that attempt to Latch to the Lander Support Bracket before the start of the End Game are not eligible to Score the End Game Latching achievement." Can you clarify what "intentionally" means in this rule, or give an example of where intentionally comes into play? For example, if a team lands during autonomous but is not able to separate from the Lander due to a malfunction in their bracket connection or robot, does this count as intentionally supporting their weight prior to End Game in GS7? Is a robot in this scenario able to simply re-Latch and score 50 points in End Game or not?

        Question 2: If a team lands during autonomous but is not able to separate from the Lander due to a malfunction, but their connection does NOT place any weight on the bracket (e.g., a hook on an arm that is completely supported by the robot and arm), are they eligible for the Latching achievement in the End Game?

        Question 3: Must a robot completely separate from the Lander Bracket at some point during the match in order to be eligible for the Latching achievement in End Game? [We ask because the Game Manual appears to say that a robot must be Deployed, and Deployed is defined as "Not Latched," and Latched is defined as "Fully Supported by the Lander Bracket," so from these definitions, it would seem as though a robot could be Deployed if it is not fully supported by the Lander Bracket even if it is still attached to the Bracket in some way as long as it is no longer Fully Supported by the Bracket.]

        Answer 1: In the context of this rule, "intentional" is a "deliberate" action (i.e., "done on purpose"). The Robot in this scenario violates rule <GS7> and is therefore not eligible to earn the End Game Latching Score.

        Answer 2: Technically, the Robot described in this scenario is not violating rule <GS7>. However, Robot actions need to be clear/obvious to a Referee standing outside the Playing Field Wall. It is possible that a Referee viewing this Robot interacting with the Lander Support Bracket will consider this a violation of rule <GS7>.

        Answer 3: Yes, because of rule <GS7>. Deployed Robots are not allowed to intentionally Support any portion of their weight with the Lander Support Bracket prior to the start of the End Game.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by FTC7253
          Subject: <GS3> Control/Possession Limits of Minerals

          In match during a tournament this weekend, our alliance partner was assessed a penalty for controlling too many minerals. They were collecting 2 minerals from the opposing alliances depot with an active intake. During the process, due to the density/proximity of minerals in the depot, their chassis moved minerals [without de-scoring them] while their intake held two minerals they had just acquired. The robot was attempting to leave the depot when this happened, and the contact with the additional minerals was incidental to their acquisition and de-scoring of the 2 possessed minerals. Should this be considered a penalty?

          Answer: The Robot's actions described in this scenario do not violate rule <GS3>. The Referee watching the Robot's actions may have viewed the action differently and correctly called a Penalty for violating rule <GS3>.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by FTC13259
            Subject: <GS3> Control/Possesion Limits of Minerals - Blocking access to Minerals in a Crater
            Is it a legal defensive strategy to park a robot in the crater-thereby potentially preventing access to minerals-either actively or passively. This would be a robot that rarely leaves the crater. This is a robot that can easily climb in the crater and would block teams from picking up Minerals. They essentially would used their robot to prevent other teams from reaching in and grabbing Minerals. This assumes that an opposing team is trying to retrieve minerals and is denied some access to the crater by the parked robot. is this legal? gs3?

            Answer: The scenario described In the point violates rule <GS3> depending on the amount of access denied to the opposing Alliance Robot(s). Referees watching the Match will make this determination.
            Last edited by Buzz; 01-07-2019, 03:01 PM.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by FTC10138
              Subject: <GS3> Control/Possession Limits of Minerals - Minerals along the outside of the Crater Rim

              A discussion among drivers on our team brought up an interesting series of questions regarding herding and plowing. Of specific concern though is the following:

              During play, it's common for occasional minerals to be knocked out of the crater to remain along the outside edge. These are not being strategically controlled and are in fact a nuisance as the robot using an extending "arm" to reach into the crater to pick up minerals is being blocked from approaching as closely as they may like. Once the robot has their two minerals, they retreat from the crater, deposit said minerals into the lander and return to the crater edge. In doing so they re-establish contact with those loose minerals along the outside crater rim. For sake of discussion, assume they are blocks and they push up to, but do not break the plane of the outer rim (if they break the plane, they are then "in" the crater and the strict limit of 2 is different).

              Question: Would this contact be ruled plowing (thus no <GS3> penalty) or herding (and thus penalized)? The reason for concern is once the robot picks up their two minerals inside the crater, those being bumped into on the outside of the crater rim will exceed two if it's ruled a controlling position. There is no strategic advantage to the contact but it would be great to get an official ruling.

              Answer: The action described is Plowing and it does not violate rule <GS3>.

              Comment

              Working...
              X