Scioly.org

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

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

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.

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.

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

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.

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).

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...

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

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