Robot Arm C

peartree423
Member
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 4:43 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by peartree423 »

Bazinga+ wrote:
peartree423 wrote:Hey Bazinga+

Have you been able to complete your second design? Your first one looks really great, and I'm just curious if you've been able to top it with an updated design

-peartree423
I'm still working on it and hope to have it fully operational by MIT.

Alright cool, good luck man! Let us know how it goes :)
RoboMarth
Member
Member
Posts: 71
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2014 7:51 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 25 times
Been thanked: 32 times

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by RoboMarth »

Hi All,

I was wondering if else has had an ES interpret rule 6.g.iii (run must stop if competitors contact the Competition Area a second time after being warned once) in a way so that "contact" is defined as having a hand or head in the air directly above the 75.0 cm x 75.0 cm square of the Competition Area, but not in physical contact with the surface.

It seemed a bit strange and doesn't appear to me to be implied anywhere in the rules - I don't believe there's any mention of the Competition Area having a third dimension.

Would like to have one less thing to worry about with MIT coming up soon. = P
User avatar
bernard
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2412
Joined: Sun Jan 05, 2014 3:12 pm
Division: Grad
State: WA
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Has thanked: 177 times
Been thanked: 756 times

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by bernard »

RoboMarth wrote:Hi All,

I was wondering if else has had an ES interpret rule 6.g.iii (run must stop if competitors contact the Competition Area a second time after being warned once) in a way so that "contact" is defined as having a hand or head in the air directly above the 75.0 cm x 75.0 cm square of the Competition Area, but not in physical contact with the surface.

It seemed a bit strange and doesn't appear to me to be implied anywhere in the rules - I don't believe there's any mention of the Competition Area having a third dimension.

Would like to have one less thing to worry about with MIT coming up soon. = P
Rule 5. defines the Competition Area as a square, a planar surface by definition.

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.
"One of the ways that I believe people express their appreciation to the rest of humanity is to make something wonderful and put it out there." – Steve Jobs
Complexity
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:49 pm
Division: C
State: MI
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by Complexity »

Is our arm with the pennies allowed to extend out of the testing boundaries? For the back left stack, our arm can slide it to target, but the path involves moving the pennies out of the tape for a little bit.
peartree423
Member
Member
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat May 09, 2015 4:43 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by peartree423 »

Complexity wrote:Is our arm with the pennies allowed to extend out of the testing boundaries? For the back left stack, our arm can slide it to target, but the path involves moving the pennies out of the tape for a little bit.
I just checked the rules and there isn't anything prohibiting that, so yep looks like that's fine
laidlawe18
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: Tue Sep 01, 2015 2:03 pm
Division: C
State: RI
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by laidlawe18 »

Complexity wrote:Is our arm with the pennies allowed to extend out of the testing boundaries? For the back left stack, our arm can slide it to target, but the path involves moving the pennies out of the tape for a little bit.
You are certainly allowed to do that, but there are no guarantees as to how far whatever surface the competition area is on extends. It could be a 75 cm square, with no space around the competition area.
User avatar
dragonfruit35
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 296
Joined: Sat Feb 28, 2015 7:49 am
Division: Grad
State: VA
Pronouns: She/Her/Hers
Has thanked: 7 times
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by dragonfruit35 »

bernard wrote:
RoboMarth wrote:Hi All,

I was wondering if else has had an ES interpret rule 6.g.iii (run must stop if competitors contact the Competition Area a second time after being warned once) in a way so that "contact" is defined as having a hand or head in the air directly above the 75.0 cm x 75.0 cm square of the Competition Area, but not in physical contact with the surface.

It seemed a bit strange and doesn't appear to me to be implied anywhere in the rules - I don't believe there's any mention of the Competition Area having a third dimension.

Would like to have one less thing to worry about with MIT coming up soon. = P
Rule 5. defines the Competition Area as a square, a planar surface by definition.

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.
That's a weird interpretation of the rules. I'm sure I bent down while operating my robot arm and I did not have either run stopped (I like to look closely to make sure the end effector is aligned with the pennies).
tjhsst '20
virginia tech '24
2x codebusters national medalist

"it's not a pen, it's a principle!" - annie edison
RJohnson
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: Mon Apr 04, 2016 8:47 am
Division: C
State: OH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by RJohnson »

laidlawe18 wrote:
Complexity wrote:Is our arm with the pennies allowed to extend out of the testing boundaries? For the back left stack, our arm can slide it to target, but the path involves moving the pennies out of the tape for a little bit.
You are certainly allowed to do that, but there are no guarantees as to how far whatever surface the competition area is on extends. It could be a 75 cm square, with no space around the competition area.

Along with the usual disclaimer that this is not the place for rules clarifications, I would agree with Laidlawe18. I personally practice on a 75cmx75cm sheet of 3/4in plywood because you have to assume that the conditions won't be suited to your needs...
Complexity
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: Tue Jan 10, 2017 1:49 pm
Division: C
State: MI
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by Complexity »

Recently I have been hitting scores from about 100-120. Would that be considered good? This is with the inner ring worth 5 points, and so on outwards. I cannot flip any of the coins, and can reach 4 of the 5 stacks. My strategy is to drag the stacks to the center, and smooth them out well. Usually get a large layer of pennies one-thick with about 7-8 in inner ring and like two dozen in the second ring. Rest are scattered in outer rings. +10 point bonus for lifting arm. Taking it to a semi-competitive invitational this Saturday
User avatar
windu34
Staff Emeritus
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 1382
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 37 times

Re: Robot Arm C

Post by windu34 »

Complexity wrote:Recently I have been hitting scores from about 100-120. Would that be considered good? This is with the inner ring worth 5 points, and so on outwards. I cannot flip any of the coins, and can reach 4 of the 5 stacks. My strategy is to drag the stacks to the center, and smooth them out well. Usually get a large layer of pennies one-thick with about 7-8 in inner ring and like two dozen in the second ring. Rest are scattered in outer rings. +10 point bonus for lifting arm. Taking it to a semi-competitive invitational this Saturday
Without flipping the coins, I wouldn't consider a device competitive...you are certainly doing well with what you have right now, but I would highly recommend focusing on finding a way to flip them
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
University of Florida Science Olympiad Co-Founder
Florida Science Olympiad Board of Directors
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

Return to “Robot Arm C”