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
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 10:42 am

I actually really like that we're debating rules a lot recently. It's something I've felt we should do more for a long time and it's nice to see. Not because I think rules should be constantly changed or updated, just that discussion is a far healthier option than "leave it alone because that's how it's always been", which appeared to be the dominant opinion until relatively recently.

It's also really good to get discussions on things that are possibly ambiguous - like the topic of this thread - concluded on the forums rather than have to have an argument at an event about whether a robot is legal or not.

That said, I of course also love logging on and seeing pictures of and information about people's creations.

I enjoy all of the posts.

Everything is awesome :).
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk

AntRoboteer
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby AntRoboteer » Tue Mar 03, 2015 3:58 pm

So is this rule going to be enforced this way at the next AWS? If so, I've got a bit of thinking to do. Does seem logical but I have always thought the rules referred to a physical cube.

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 4:10 pm

That's a difficult question. If this is a rule we were looking to change, I think it would be most fair to not enforce it at this AWS as people would not have time to prepare. However, it is not; it is simple a misunderstanding of the intention or specifics of a previous rule. One could argue that as this requires a specific interpretation of the rules to be taken as correct in order to be allowed, it's the sort of thing that should have been asked and clarified before designing a robot with the feature. However one could also argue that because this has been allowed in previous AWSs without being raised as an issue, it would be safe to assume it would be allowed in the future also.

I'd be interested to see your scenario, and use that to help judge what kind of effect enforcing this (or not) would have on your robot. I'd also be interested in hearing other's opinions as I'm a bit on the fence about this.
Scott Fyfe-Jamieson, Captain of Epic Robotics. Champion of AWS38/41/42.
http://www.epicrobotics.co.uk

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Hogi » Tue Mar 03, 2015 4:15 pm

that's a point. giANT would need a catch or something to hold that big ramp underneath. i love that robot! so innovative with the rubber ramp and the big wheels are cool! :)

i too like the friendly debates hence why i am often a participant. i like to see all different viewpoints and so on. i do hope the new rules can be officially put in place soon though.
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:35 pm

I think for the next AWS it'll be kept to what was allowed last time will be allowed this time for this, as its 3 weeks away and not really fair notice.
I'm also a bit on the fence like Scott. Ultimately, I'd like to see more ingenious solutions to the problem, but not sure that's a reason to enforce it seen as it hasn't caused an issue thus far. A big bit of folded acetate isn't exactly an automatic advantage - its extra weight, extra bulk and is often got under anyway as its more prone to knicks and kinks.

However I do think that the rule in place may already prohibit it.

Two minds. Happy to let it lie at least for now though.
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 5:52 pm

I definitely think that, now we've had the discussion, and come to a consensus, this interpretation shouldn't be allowed at future AWSs. However you're right in that it's too short notice to enforce it for this one as it's been allowed in the past.
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 6:34 pm

Might be worth doing a quick survey of the bots at the AWS to see how many actually use it. If its just a couple, then enforcing it from the next one will be easy to initiate.

Acetate (and similar) does need kept an eye on though. It has to be present at tech check, fit in the cube and weight limits without flexing (unless using expansion) and not added afterwards. In fact, every time new acetate is applied the robot should technically have to go through a check again.

Its hard to keep track of people adding it afterwards I know so its more about people being honest about it.
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

User avatar
Rapidrory
Posts: 1142
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:54 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Rapidrory » Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:19 pm

Yeah, i think it's gonna have to be a case of trusting people not to over do it; I regularly change my acetate during the day (though this time I'm not sure if any of my bots are gonna be running it), so if tech checks had to be done practically every time a robot enters the arena, things could get tedious :L
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:28 pm

It used to be hilarious back in the day. I remember everyone would pass tech check then go away and attach whacking great lumps of acetate to the front before a fight. Ha, good times.
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 7:41 pm

Really? I don't remember anyone doing that.
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 » Tue Mar 03, 2015 8:37 pm

Used to happen at Reading Robot Clubs a fair bit, where everything was a bit more casual. I remember Marco and Rhys trying to out-acetate each other at one.

There was also an AWS where the Vacuum guys brought some shim. Suddenly lots of robots had shim attached after the warm up
Die Gracefully Robotics
Winner - AWS 39

AntRoboteer
Posts: 373
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby AntRoboteer » Sun Mar 08, 2015 1:00 pm

EpicentrE wrote:I'd be interested to see your scenario, and use that to help judge what kind of effect enforcing this (or not) would have on your robot.


Alright then! Sorry for being a bit slow to respond but I have taken a look at GiANT and found that is was completely wrecked from the last few events so I decided to build a new one. It retains the old design though and only has a few tiny cosmetic changes. I found that yes, I could indeed add a servo in order to make it expand instead of using the floor so I shall be doing that from now on. I simply mounted a terrible SG50 on the top which releases the acetate. I'm not 100% happy with this method though as it bends the acetate upwards instead of downwards, making it practically useless. Also, it uses up more weight so the weight I saved with thinner armour which was going to be used to give it a 6V battery for more speed has now been used for a rubbish expanding mechanism. However, it is a more honest way of expanding and therefore I am OK with going ahead with it if it makes everyone else a bit happier.

When I came up with that design, it really wasn't planned well and I didn't even think about the rules when I did it. When I inspected it the night before AWS 45, I began to think it would not comply with regulations. However, it got through the tech checks OK and I thought no more about it. It was just intended to get the front low to the ground as the body of the robot moves about a lot and I needed a way of keeping something in contact with the floor at all times; this seemed the best way to do it at the time. However, I do accept that using the floor to do this may be considered a bit of a cheat method but really I have found it to be more of a curse than anything; most of the losses with GiANT have been due to the expanding section in some way or another such as the high ground clearance around the sides or not expanding properly. I am happy with the new rule being implemented but I shall still run GiANT with the expanding section, just I shall be using a catch to do it to make everyone happy. I should get it working well by AWS 46...I hope.

One other thing I would like to bring up is when a robot is in the cube, the base is generally not on a surface as it would be on the arena. This means the acetate does not flex as it does when it is placed on the arena floor, meaning the robots are, in effect, expanding by being springy, not by remote control. I have always found that to be rather strange and would link to know other people's opinions on this.

Anyway, sorry about that wall of text but I hope you have worked out one thing: that I too agree with the implementation of this rule.

User avatar
peterwaller
Posts: 3504
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby peterwaller » Sun Mar 08, 2015 3:27 pm

One other thing I would like to bring up is when a robot is in the cube, the base is generally not on a surface as it would be on the arena. This means the acetate does not flex as it does when it is placed on the arena floor, meaning the robots are, in effect, expanding by being springy, not by remote control. I have always found that to be rather strange and would link to know other people's opinions on this.

That is a good point.
I think the difference is that the weight is causing a flexible part to bend and is not using the spring to expand in fact the spring is trying to stop the expansion.
In most cases the increase in size is very small and the robot still fits the cube in both situations.

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Postby Hogi » Sun Mar 08, 2015 9:45 pm

i am thinking of making ant2D2 an expander now as it has always had a problem with ground clearance. if i had the acetate tucked in underneath the flipper and expanded it by lifting the flipper would that be ok? it would be in no way springy and the servo that would instigate the expansion is operated fully by remote control. just thought i'd better make sure before adding it onto the design.
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 » Sun Mar 08, 2015 10:43 pm

Yeah, that'd work Dan. Just tuck the acetate between the flipper and the robot, rather than the robot and the floor and you'll be grand.
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