Rule 2b) size limit

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

Moderators: BeligerAnt, petec, administrator

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
EpicentrE
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Coventry
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by EpicentrE »

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

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

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

Rapidrory
Posts: 1160
Joined: Sun Nov 24, 2013 9:54 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Rapidrory »

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 Nuts

Robots: Nuts 2 and many more...

NanoTwo Motor Controllers: https://nutsandbots.co.uk/product/nanotwodualesc

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

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

EpicentrE
Posts: 829
Joined: Mon Jun 09, 2003 12:00 am
Location: Coventry
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by EpicentrE »

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

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

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: 440
Joined: Mon Mar 03, 2014 7:01 pm

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by AntRoboteer »

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: 3192
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2002 12:00 am
Location: Aylesbury Bucks
Contact:

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by peterwaller »

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: 1002
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 6:47 pm
Location: basingstoke

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Hogi »

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.
Daniel Jackson.

Team Hectic.

Many antweights

Super antweights: territorial.

Fleaweights: fleadom fighter, gaztons.

Featherweights: hectic (under construction)

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

Re: Rule 2b) size limit

Post by Remote-Controlled Dave »

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

Post Reply