Robo-Cross B

jander14indoor
Member
Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby jander14indoor » February 26th, 2015, 6:19 am

The theoretical maximum is 651 points. Everything in its max point location in less than a second.
15 pts for robot location
456 points for object location
180 pts for time (this is why its theoretical, that's less than 1 second!)
Practical maximum based on the top team performance at last years nationals, 50 to 90 seconds for a perfect score, 550 to 600 points.
Perfect score but take all three minutes (zero time points) is 461.

Somewhere the comment about missing one penny costing one point is misleading. A penny in the max score position is worth 12 points more than its starting point in zone B.
If you just move a Penny from in a jug in zone D to out of the jug that's 10 points.

Note, there should also a practical minimum score, assuming you can score at all. The starting point should be in the 180 range. Move one to zone C and call science. All scores should go up from there as you figure out ways to get more object points without spending more time than they are worth.

Regards,
Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4122
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby Unome » February 26th, 2015, 7:07 am

Perfect score but take all three minutes (zero time points) is 461.
Wouldn't it be 471?
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

RR
Member
Member
Posts: 4
Joined: January 29th, 2015, 1:03 am

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby RR » February 26th, 2015, 9:59 am

After doing the modifications for mounting the passive components on the robot the students started practicing. To our surprise there was design impact because of how the arm support was rearranged to make space for a platform to put passive components. Our practice scores were not looking good. A deterioration of 25% in scores. We still went with this new modification to an invitational last weekend where the ES asked the students to mount the passive parts on the robot before starting the run. The students obeyed. The scores achieved last weekend invitation were 25% less compared to our previous invitational. "Why would Event Supervisors persist with mounting passive parts on the robot at the start of the run?". The way I read the rules if passive components can seperate during the run of the robot, there is no rule preventing the seperation of passive and active components at the BEGINGING of the run inside the 28 cm cube. I did ask another question along these lines in the soinc:FAQ section. I didn't complain to the ES at the invitational or file an appeal either as these are merely to help teams fine tune their robot design which we are greatlful for. But now our Regionals is on Feb 28. It would be really good for our team (may be others) to get an answer from soinc:FAQ on this before our Regionals.
ps - Last year we had passive components NOT supported by robot at the begining of run (inside 30 cm cube) and we were allowed in Invitational or Regional or State. No Event Supervisor raised any issue with this.
If the passive component is not attached to the robot at the beginning of the run, in what sense is it part of the robot?
There is no such rule in SO manual that state "at the beginning of the run, all the robot parts need to be mounted on the robot". Until all the Robocross event rules and general SO rules are met then I see no reason a passive component need to be fully supported by Robot at the beginning of run.

I think robot passive parts are its parts whether its connected or not connected to the active part of the robot. The rules allow fair amount of flexibility for students to come with innovative design ideas. An example : a student can consider active component of robot for the same function to be fairly complex compared to a passive component. It is a design choice. If students come with creative solutions that SO rules don't forbid then I believe they should be allowed to demonstrate their creative solution at an tournament.

I got an email response from the soinc:FAQ question that I am going to share. It is NOT officially posted on soinc:FAQ (DISCLAIMER). So please don't use it as a rule or FAQ clarification in your tournaments (DISCLAIMER) until its officially posted on soinc:FAQ section

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:38 PM, <no-reply@soinc.org> wrote:
No

The original question is included for your records; there is no need to
respond unless you feel there is an error.
=========================================================
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

At ready to run state the robot and its passive components fit in the 28 cm
cube. The passive component is not supported by the robot and placed on the
floor inside the 28 cm cube. Will this lead to construction and/or
competition violation?

Robo-Cross

(section: 2 / paragraph: d,e / sub-paragraph: / line: 2d, 2e)

mineturtle314
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: March 22nd, 2014, 6:36 pm
Division: B
State: CA
Location: Jeffrey Trail Middle School

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby mineturtle314 » February 26th, 2015, 11:13 am

Well we usually miss 1 or 2 pennies and get an average time of about 2:20. The trick for Robo-Cross is practice. As long as the robot is sufficient and efficient then practice is the most important part.
Green Generation, Invasive Species, Can't Judge a Powder, and Meteorology.
Its amazing what a "hello" can lead to.

jander14indoor
Member
Member
Posts: 1560
Joined: April 30th, 2007, 7:54 am

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby jander14indoor » February 26th, 2015, 5:17 pm

Perfect score but take all three minutes (zero time points) is 461.
Wouldn't it be 471?
Dang, 6 plus 5 mark 1 CARRY 1, CARRY 1....

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

User avatar
earthbot25
Member
Member
Posts: 90
Joined: April 26th, 2009, 10:46 am
Division: Grad
State: PA

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby earthbot25 » February 27th, 2015, 9:11 pm

Can anyone tell me how the scoring would break down in the following situation? I'm having trouble interpreting the rules:
6a. If the Robot (parts touching the ground) is completely in:
i. Zone A at the end of the competition, the team will receive 0 points
ii. Zone B at the end of the competition, the team will receive 3 points
iii. Zone C at the end of the competition, the team will receive 5 points
iv. Zone D at the end of the competition, the team will receive 15 points
v. Robot parts (including dropped pieces) touching the ground in multiple zones, receive the lesser zone score.
Does this mean if the robot splits into various parts throughout the run, and for example, a passive part ends up in zone B, but the main moving part of the robot ends up in part D, how many points are received? Is solely the active part of the robot scored for its final position? I understand 6.a.v. to mean that if the active part of the robot is for example in both zone B and C, it receives zone B points (3), but why do they mention scoring dropped pieces in multiple zones?
Harriton Class of 2014

Past Events: C: Materials Science, Chemistry Lab, TPS, Experimental Design, Mission Possible, Microbe Mission, WIDI, Helicopters. B: Bio-Process Lab, Towers, Microbe Mission, Robocross, Physical Science Lab

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2090
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby chalker » February 28th, 2015, 6:12 am

Can anyone tell me how the scoring would break down in the following situation? I'm having trouble interpreting the rules:
6a. If the Robot (parts touching the ground) is completely in:
i. Zone A at the end of the competition, the team will receive 0 points
ii. Zone B at the end of the competition, the team will receive 3 points
iii. Zone C at the end of the competition, the team will receive 5 points
iv. Zone D at the end of the competition, the team will receive 15 points
v. Robot parts (including dropped pieces) touching the ground in multiple zones, receive the lesser zone score.
Does this mean if the robot splits into various parts throughout the run, and for example, a passive part ends up in zone B, but the main moving part of the robot ends up in part D, how many points are received? Is solely the active part of the robot scored for its final position? I understand 6.a.v. to mean that if the active part of the robot is for example in both zone B and C, it receives zone B points (3), but why do they mention scoring dropped pieces in multiple zones?
In your example, you'd only get points for Zone B, not for Zone D. There is no active vs. passive (or main vs. dropped piece) analysis that takes place. As always though, this is not the place for official comments or clarifications.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

Flavorflav
Member
Member
Posts: 1358
Joined: February 5th, 2006, 7:06 am
Division: Grad
State: NY

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby Flavorflav » March 1st, 2015, 5:29 am

Some results from yesterday's competition:
33 teams at the competition entered 17/21 events. Only 14 chose to enter robocross. Top score was 249, second place was 179. Only one oversized bot used the strategy of driving through B to C and calling science; had they been legal, they would have come in second. Also, two teams had no technical documentation; since the rules say that the six questions come from the technical documentation, I gave them both zeros. This resulted in negative scores, which meant that the 20% missing documentation penalty actually improved their scores.

IMO, the time bonus is clearly too large at the regional level. An RC car with a plow would have beaten all but one bot, which all had many hours of work put into them. Perhaps the bonus could scale with competition level?

Flavorflav
Member
Member
Posts: 1358
Joined: February 5th, 2006, 7:06 am
Division: Grad
State: NY

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby Flavorflav » March 1st, 2015, 6:02 am

I got an email response from the soinc:FAQ question that I am going to share. It is NOT officially posted on soinc:FAQ (DISCLAIMER). So please don't use it as a rule or FAQ clarification in your tournaments (DISCLAIMER) until its officially posted on soinc:FAQ section

On Fri, Feb 20, 2015 at 4:38 PM, <no-reply@soinc.org> wrote:
No

The original question is included for your records; there is no need to
respond unless you feel there is an error.
=========================================================
ORIGINAL MESSAGE:

At ready to run state the robot and its passive components fit in the 28 cm
cube. The passive component is not supported by the robot and placed on the
floor inside the 28 cm cube. Will this lead to construction and/or
competition violation?

Robo-Cross

(section: 2 / paragraph: d,e / sub-paragraph: / line: 2d, 2e)
Interesting ruling. As a supervisor, I don't see how I could circle "Yes" for "Team enters only one robot" in those circumstances. A robot and a box sitting next to it are not a robot. Also, while I don't have my rules on me IIRC the competition rules say that competitors place their robot in the square, not their robot and any other equipment, Absent a clarification on Soinc. I would not allow it.

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2090
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Robo-Cross B

Postby chalker » March 1st, 2015, 9:00 am

Also, two teams had no technical documentation; since the rules say that the six questions come from the technical documentation, I gave them both zeros. This resulted in negative scores, which meant that the 20% missing documentation penalty actually improved their scores.
I'm not sure I follow this. Are you saying that because they didn't have documentation you didn't let them run at all? (you should have if you didn't) Or were they unable to run at all? (they should be marked as 'P' for participated but unable to generate a score on the scoresheet). Did you use the event-specific excel spreadsheet to calculate the scores? It handles these types of situations automatically.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair


Return to “2015 Build Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest