Rule 2b) size limit

A discussion forum for proposed changes to the AWS rules (2014)

Moderators: petec, administrator, BeligerAnt

Forum rules
* Only one rule per thread. Any deviation will be moved by the moderators.
* Keep the discussions on-topic, relevant and polite. Anything else WILL be removed by the moderators.
* If you start a new thread (to discuss a different rule) quote the existing rule in the first post so everyone knows what you're talking about.
* The existing rules (version 4.2) can be found here: http://robotwars101.org/ants/rules.htm
User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3505
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Rule 2b) size limit

Postby peterwaller » Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:19 pm

I managed to start a discussion in one of Dave Lawrie's topics so to avoid further hijacking I will open it here.
The rule is:
2b) Size limits: robots must fit completely (including aerial) inside a cube of the following dimensions
Fleaweight: three inches (76.2mm)
Antweight: four inches (101.6mm

Robots may only expand from their size limit once they are in the arena, and only if the expansion is instigated by remote control (i.e. not just by being springy).


I was suggesting that a robot that had an acetate sheet on the front that would not fit into the cube without bending and that relied on the robots weight to hold it bent until the robot reversed allowing to spring open was not within the rules.

First when we say a robot has to fit in the cube that infers the robot can just be placed in the cube without having to apply external forces to alter the robots size or shape.
Secondly the bit at the end of the robots may expand clarification (ie not just by being springy) excludes the method of expansion.

User avatar
EpicentrE
Posts: 1075
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Coventry
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby EpicentrE » Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:36 pm

Re-posting what I posted in the thread:

---

To me, the defining word is "Not just by being springy". If it expands because something is allowed to spring out through remote control, that to me would fit the rules.

So I guess it comes down to the matter of how it fits in the cube; with what you've said, a robot with a footprint of less than 10x10cm could use unfolding acetate, as it could sit on the floor of the cube as it would on the floor of the arena, and be "stable". But if it was longer/wider and thus needed to fit into the cube diagonally, it could not, as there would be no "floor" at that angle to hold the acetate in the starting position it would be in within the arena.

This all feels a bit messy. Maybe a discussion on what the rule should mean, and a rule edit for clarification, is required.

---

Since then I've given it a bit more thought, and I think I misunderstood Pete. The best definition of what Pete's interpretation of the rules is is that your robot should be able to be the shape it is in the cube without any outside force. Imagine your robot floating in zero-G; could it be in the same configuration and shape it is when it's in the cube? That's what Peter is getting at I believe - correct me if I'm wrong.

This actually makes a lot of sense, but I'm still not sure where I sit on the issue. I think people's internal definition of what the "cube" is is to blame. Do we literally need to fit a robot into a physical cube without outside influence, or do robots have to fit within an imaginary cube (at any orientation) when sitting on the arena surface?
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3505
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby peterwaller » Mon Mar 02, 2015 3:51 pm

When I was talking about outside forces I just meant if you have to manually alter the size or shape of your robot to get it to fit into the cube and the robot is not capable of retaining that size and shape when removed from the cube it doesn't fit.
Also the rules state it must fit in a cube which suggests a physical cube which is what we test it in anyway.

User avatar
Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:25 pm

I think I understand this. I can use my robots for examples.

4-LOM (my big green flipper at the last AWS) had the acetate folded between the flipper blade and the main wedge of the robot. This meant the flipper mechanism activated the expansion and the robot could sit that way in or out of the cube, without using the arena floor as a prop. This would be ok in Peter's version.

A robot such as Kellog's Corn Snake tucked the acetate between the robots body and the arena floor, then when it reversed the acetate folded outwards. This wouldn't be allowed in Peter's interpretation.

Basically if a robot has folded acetate, would it stay folded if the robot was floating in mid air? If it wouldn't (IE, it needs the arena floor to stay in place) Peter would argue this isn't allowed.

The problem I have with this interpretation is it is majorly complicated, banning one type of deployment but not the other, even though both create the same effect, and therefore not really that warranted.

Also, I would argue that Peter's interpretation could be used to argue any robot that fits in the cube on the diagonal. If the cube wasn't there, the robot wouldn't sit at that angle.

So if a robot that is, say, 13cm long is allowed to use the wall of the cube to prop it up in order to fit inside it, then shouldn't a robot be allowed to use the floor of the cube to keep acetate in place, as long as it can do the same deployment in the arena?

Or are all over-long robots going to have to start incorporating a kick-stand so that they can "expand" from diagonal to horizontal without manipulation upon activate? Because I'm not sure you can argue that the rule oks one interpretation without the other.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
EpicentrE
Posts: 1075
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Coventry
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby EpicentrE » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:30 pm

I think it's a bit unfair to bring robots sitting in the cube at an angle into the discussion, because for that argument to have any weight you have to assume the cube is sitting on one of it's flat sides. The orientation is never specified in the rules, and thus a wide/long robot could fit perfectly flatly inside a cube if the cube was held at an angle. The discussion here isn't starting in the arena in the same way you fit into the cube, the discussion is whether an ant can physically fit into an imaginary cube without any outside forces being applied upon it.

Or rather, the discussion is whether the current interpretation of the rules supports the above.
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk

User avatar
Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:34 pm

True, I was.

I guess if the robot is on a flat surface, a theoretical diagonal cube could still insert itself over the robot at a different orientation.

Well played, Scott!

I can now see the issue Peter means. Folded acetate that springs out is fine so long as its wedged somewhere on the body of the robot, but not just tucked underneath.

I'm not 100% sure which interpretation I agree with now but I think he certainly has a point.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
Rapidrory
Posts: 1143
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:54 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Rapidrory » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:47 pm

Outside the argument itself, i don't see that this is enough of an issue to require any action; we've already had a discussion recently about trying to simplify the rules rather than plugging every little hole. There's not that many robots using folding acetate, and it's not a game breaker when people do. This rule change would only apply in a few cases and doesn't really add much to the running of the sport, so I just feel it would be adding needless complexity.
Rory Mangles - Team Mangler

Robots: Too Many...

NanoTwo antweight speed controllers. (viewtopic.php?f=1&t=2128)

User avatar
Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:54 pm

Hmm, "not really a game changer". I feel it helped me win when I won the AWS. However, have done it since and not won.

Regardless, I actually decided I wasn't using any acetate on my robots for this upcoming one before this discussion took place.

If others want to do so, folded or not, I'm happy for them to at this one at least.

It IS a complicated conundrum to get your head round.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3505
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby peterwaller » Mon Mar 02, 2015 4:56 pm

Actaully I would say you could argue that a robot with hinged acetate could be placed into the cube and removed from it without the shape changing but if you are relying on the spring of the acetate you cant.
I would prefer that there was some kind of catch to hold the hinged acetate in the folded position but I would still say it fitted.
Are beaten by a couple of posts.
I wasn't proposing a rule change just a discusion on how it is interpreted and enfoced.

Hogi
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm
Location: basingstoke

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Hogi » Mon Mar 02, 2015 5:12 pm

transit ant mark three coming up. :)

to be honest, the expansion of the acetate does put it at a slight disadvantage anyway. it means i have to spend valuable seconds deploying the acetate. see ya'll soon :)
Featherweight under construction.

Antweight to build list: 4Wd lifter, new clusterbot, secret project, walker of some description.

Team Hectic.

User avatar
Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Remote-Controlled Dave » Mon Mar 02, 2015 9:59 pm

I think I agree with you Peter, now I understand it all.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

Hogi
Posts: 946
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm
Location: basingstoke

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Hogi » Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:19 am

me too really. it makes sense. i just did because i knew it'd been done before and at the time it was considered legal . i now aggree that it's not really a fair method of expansion so i've built a new robot instead of the expanding one.
Featherweight under construction.

Antweight to build list: 4Wd lifter, new clusterbot, secret project, walker of some description.

Team Hectic.

User avatar
EpicentrE
Posts: 1075
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Coventry
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby EpicentrE » Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:45 am

Aww isn't it lovely when we all agree :). Hugs all round!
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3505
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby peterwaller » Tue Mar 03, 2015 9:43 am

It is good when a concensors can be found but I do quite enjoy a lively discussion :roll: as long as it stays civil and freindly.

User avatar
Remote-Controlled Dave
Posts: 3716
Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 5:30 pm
Location: Antrim, Northern Ireland
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Remote-Controlled Dave » Tue Mar 03, 2015 10:23 am

Nice debates are always welcome. We do spend a lot of time debating rules though. I look forward to the day when all rules are set and the forum is just pictures and videos of new projects and everyone is happy with our warmongering hobby...won't happen though!
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39


Return to “2014 AWS Rules Debate”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest