Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

R14 - something it was transporting

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: R14 - something it was transporting

    Originally posted by CCVH View Post
    If the robot doesn't get it perfectly placed, it will be straddling the line, and incur an immediate junk penalty.
    Tie a string loosely between the robot and the tray so that they are always in contact and the tray is never stranded. Make sure it's a genuine Lego string.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: R14 - something it was transporting

      Since "transporting" is the key here, a dictionary definition (per GP2): "take or carry (people or goods) from one place to another by means of a vehicle, aircraft, or ship"

      Looking at that, I would say that "movement caused by the robot" is not a reasonable "common/dictionary" definition of "transporting."
      Team members and coaches in North Carolina, direct your rules questions to referee@nc-fll.com

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: R14 - something it was transporting

        Obviously, I'm struggling with several of the concepts in this re-write of the rules. Please don't anyone complain at me if my opinions today don't match the ones I posted a few days ago. I'm asking questions here so I don't ruin the day for whole bunch of FLL teams.

        Regarding the bars that constitute the building portion of the "bracket plus building plus valuables" mission model:

        Once the building is knocked over, does each bar become its own mission model?

        Let's assume that knocking the building over is NOT interpreted as "transporting" it. So, nothing in R14 applies with regard to the bars lying on the mat.

        R10 says that bars which land outside of Safety stay there. No problem. The team gets to deal with any debris they create on the table.
        No rule says the team cannot touch objects that are inside Safety. So they are allowed to collect them by hand.

        Regarding R14: What logic is there in the refs scooping up bars that happen to be partly in Safety? That's a big reason why I think R14 doesn't apply to this scenario. The purpose of of impounding Models that don't get all the way back inside Safety is to penalize a robot that doesn't successfully bring back a model they were intending to retrieve. Knocking over a building is a different sort of action. Are we to penalize teams (by removing bars from the field) if the team carelessly allowed the bars to fall "partly inside Safety", when both the "inside Safety' and "outside Safety" locations are perfectly fine?

        If R14 doesn't apply, then I only have to be sure the team only picks up models that fell entirely inside Safety. They can still retrieve the other bars later if they have a mission to do that.
        FIRST LEGO League Mentor and Referee/Head Referee since 2011.

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: R14 - something it was transporting

          Originally posted by WilliamFrantz View Post
          Tie a string loosely between the robot and the tray so that they are always in contact and the tray is never stranded. Make sure it's a genuine Lego string.
          That's a very old-school rule.
          FIRST LEGO League Mentor and Referee/Head Referee since 2011.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: R14 - something it was transporting

            Originally posted by williamfrantz View Post
            tie a string loosely between the robot and the tray so that they are always in contact and the tray is never stranded. Make sure it's a genuine lego string.
            :d
            Last edited by CCVH; 09-29-2015, 12:31 PM. Reason: Its putting in the wrong smiley! Supposed to be laughing hard and uncontrollably....

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: R14 - something it was transporting

              Originally posted by Tom Mosher View Post
              Regarding R14: What logic is there in the refs scooping up bars that happen to be partly in Safety? That's a big reason why I think R14 doesn't apply to this scenario. The purpose of of impounding Models that don't get all the way back inside Safety is to penalize a robot that doesn't successfully bring back a model they were intending to retrieve. Knocking over a building is a different sort of action. Are we to penalize teams (by removing bars from the field) if the team carelessly allowed the bars to fall "partly inside Safety", when both the "inside Safety' and "outside Safety" locations are perfectly fine?

              If R14 doesn't apply, then I only have to be sure the team only picks up models that fell entirely inside Safety. They can still retrieve the other bars later if they have a mission to do that.
              I agree with this thought process. The bars stay sitting partially within safety until the robot retrieves or removes them. As you said, the role of the ref here is to make sure teams only touch the bars that completely entered safety.
              Team members and coaches in North Carolina, direct your rules questions to referee@nc-fll.com

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: R14 - something it was transporting

                Originally posted by Tom Mosher View Post
                Regarding R14: What logic is there in the refs scooping up bars that happen to be partly in Safety? That's a big reason why I think R14 doesn't apply to this scenario. The purpose of of impounding Models that don't get all the way back inside Safety is to penalize a robot that doesn't successfully bring back a model they were intending to retrieve. Knocking over a building is a different sort of action. Are we to penalize teams (by removing bars from the field) if the team carelessly allowed the bars to fall "partly inside Safety", when both the "inside Safety' and "outside Safety" locations are perfectly fine?
                Regarding how to interpret the word 'transporting', I absolutely see how different people can honestly interpret it differently (carrying on/in/by a vehicle vs. intentional movement vs. any robot-caused movement vs. ?). Not being an official Ref myself, I am in the fortunate position that my 'opinion' might very well change and in any case will likely become quite unambiguous after I've had a chance to talk with one of our Refs here in Minnesota.

                But leaving that aside and just looking at mission design and fairness, demolishing a building (in the real world) is in fact something that needs to be done carefully and with due regard to where the debris will land. Maybe that's why it's been placed just near enough to the Safety arc that careful demolition or designing something to contain the debris lets you keep all the pieces, while being careless might mean that you lose some of the bars.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: R14 - something it was transporting

                  Originally posted by CraigP View Post
                  But leaving that aside and just looking at mission design and fairness, demolishing a building (in the real world) is in fact something that needs to be done carefully and with due regard to where the debris will land. Maybe that's why it's been placed just near enough to the Safety arc that careful demolition or designing something to contain the debris lets you keep all the pieces, while being careless might mean that you lose some of the bars.
                  Interpreting the rules based on "real life" is something that the rules explicitly discouraged in previous seasons and something I would continue to be wary of.
                  Team members and coaches in North Carolina, direct your rules questions to referee@nc-fll.com

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: R14 - something it was transporting

                    Originally posted by SamLast View Post
                    Interpreting the rules based on "real life" is something that the rules explicitly discouraged in previous seasons and something I would continue to be wary of.
                    Absolutely -- It's clear from GP2, as well as many other discussions here on this forum and among the FLL community, that no "real life" interpretation is to be added to the literal meaning of the rules text.

                    What I'm speculating is something else entirely, regarding the design of the mission and the rules -- that the placement of the mission at that location near the Safety arc, and the resulting similarity to the real life challenge of demolishing a building while controlling where the debris goes, might actually be a Clue. And this Clue would tell us that R14 might actually be intended to apply to the bars in the building.

                    Imagine Scott initially wrote R14 mainly to address cases where the team is bringing something back to Safety, but then starts thinking ...

                    "Hmm, in real life when people demolish buildings they need to be careful of where the debris lands. How about if I place this mission pretty near the Safety arc, and have R14 apply to these tumbling bars as well. The kids will need to think about how to make sure they won't strand a bar partially in Safety, and the mission will be more like the real-life situation that inspires it."
                    ... "oh, and I'd better change that word 'transporting' to something more general to make this all clear"

                    ... he wakes up the next day feeling really devious and thinks "ahh, but when engineers deal with demolishing buildings in real life there are always confusing and conflicting codes and statues and regulations they need to deal with -- how about if I just leave it as 'transporting' ..."



                    ... sorry ... sorry ... gone down the rabbit hole ... If anyone's looking for me I'll be over in the corner sorting LEGOs ...





                    ... OK, feeling better ...

                    I think I've talked myself into someonewhobikes' interpretation --

                    Originally posted by someonewhobikes View Post
                    "Intentional" wasn't a very good word choice on my part. "Purposeful" might be a little better, but it's still not quite what I want. I can make a distinction between running into the building and driving into it with an attachment obviously designed to try and collect and/or direct the bars. I'm just not sure if there's enough of a difference to treat the two cases differently.
                    -- neither 'intentional' nor 'purposeful' seem quite right, but 'transporting' probably means something more than just robot-caused motion.
                    Last edited by CraigP; 09-29-2015, 10:06 PM.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X