Scrambler C

iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1112
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX

Re: Scrambler C

Postby iwonder » September 12th, 2014, 8:27 am

Because truthfully it is a bonus. Teams can chose to ignore it and run it pretty much like last year. Or (and more logically) a team can get one good run in without going for the bonus, and then go for the bonus on the second run.

I'm getting more confused. Doesn't "going for the bonus" merely imply that the car: 1. pass to the right of the can 2. stay within the track 3. Trigger both photogates (if used) ??
Since the can is halfway down the track, doesn't this just mean that the car went a little over half way? There were only one or two cars that didn't do this last year at our event.
Most of the competitors were more likely "going for under a meter" which blows "going for the bonus" away.
Reread those rules I posted. Rule 5.d explicity states that the EGV passes the can on its left, the narrow side between the can and the vehicle. Also drawing a picture might help :P

(and if it triggers both photogates it's gone more than halfway)
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown

joeyjoejoe
Member
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 12:56 pm
Division: C
State: GA

Re: Scrambler C

Postby joeyjoejoe » September 12th, 2014, 9:02 am

No, I got that. The rules state that the entire ETV successfully passes the can on it's (the vehicle's) left or, as I said above, passes to the right of the can.

I guess there is some ambiguity on which noun the word "It's" is referring to in the above sentence.

iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1112
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX

Re: Scrambler C

Postby iwonder » September 12th, 2014, 9:04 am

No, I got that. The rules state that the entire ETV successfully passes the can on it's (the vehicle's) left or, as I said above, passes to the right of the can.

I guess there is some ambiguity on which noun the word "It's" referring to in the above sentence.
You're definitely going to want to submit a clarification on that one. I'm pretty sure it's talking about passing the can on the narrow side and not the wide side, since passing on the wide would be pointless.
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown

JonB
Coach
Coach
Posts: 283
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL

Re: Scrambler C

Postby JonB » September 12th, 2014, 9:24 am

Because truthfully it is a bonus. Teams can chose to ignore it and run it pretty much like last year. Or (and more logically) a team can get one good run in without going for the bonus, and then go for the bonus on the second run.

I'm getting more confused. Doesn't "going for the bonus" merely imply that the car: 1. pass to the right of the can 2. stay within the track 3. Trigger both photogates (if used) ??
Since the can is halfway down the track, doesn't this just mean that the car went a little over half way? There were only one or two cars that didn't do this last year at our event.
Most of the competitors were more likely "going for under a meter" which blows "going for the bonus" away.
Let's see if I can successfully add this .pdf drawing. I cannot take full credit for it (credit to Bro. Nigel). I think this should clarify. Photogates at 0.5m and 8.5m. The car must go to the left of the can for the bonus.
Attachments
scrambler.pdf
(65.45 KiB) Downloaded 491 times

iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1112
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX

Re: Scrambler C

Postby iwonder » September 12th, 2014, 9:41 am

JonB, that looks to be exactly what was intended, but joey has a point in that the reference it's is, as always, slightly ambiguous and it could be interpreted as the EGV passing the can on the EGV's left (which would be the wider 'lane' of the track), which is not as intended. If it becomes a bigger issue it will probably need official clarification later on in the season.
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown

joeyjoejoe
Member
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 12:56 pm
Division: C
State: GA

Re: Scrambler C

Postby joeyjoejoe » September 13th, 2014, 2:18 pm

I agree that what is in JonB's picture is probably what they meant.

I just think that the following negatives will negate any benefit the -100 points gives you:
1. More complex design
2. Much more difficult to make a good distance score
3. Definitely worsens your time score
4. Much more difficult (near impossible?!?!) to not incur a competition violation.

I can just hear competitors saying: "Do we really want to try a -100 pt hook-shot through that 1/2 meter keyhole at the risk of a 1000 pt penalty? I think I'll bone-up on my free-throw."

iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1112
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX

Re: Scrambler C

Postby iwonder » September 13th, 2014, 2:47 pm

1. Most of the scramblers I've seen from schools that would be serious about the bonus already have adjustments for steering to help the vehicle track straight.
2. All you need to do is calibrate the turn before the contest and angle the launcher correctly. Both of those are easy to perform consistently (protractors, etc)
3. It adds (see attached picture) 6.5cm to the distance over the first 8m of the run. For my vehicle, which did the 8m timed portion in 1.2sec (if I recall correctly), it adds .01s to the time score, this is within the error of timing or just the variation from venue to venue/run to run.
4. If you're referring to not leaving the vehicle lane, remember you've got a full 50cm of width. That's a lot wider than a general vehicle and gives you plenty of room to mess up in. It's not just '1/2 meter keyhole', it's a full 1/4 the width of the track.

The bonus isn't made to be easy. It's not designed so that every single person can hit it. But what it does do is differentiate those teams that put a little extra effort in and spend that extra practice time to make everything work. And at the high levels of competition, a hundred points is a whole lotta places.

I'm also a fan of the idea of doing on run without the bonus, and going for the bonus on the second run. That way you'll have a cushion of a decent score as well.
Attachments
yvYPE9dDSW9aO6RAuAYyWAhSDn8tAHyFTxm1Th4XNoQ.png
Track with Dimensions
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown

tanuagg13
Member
Member
Posts: 20
Joined: October 24th, 2013, 1:52 pm
Division: C
State: NJ

Re: Scrambler C

Postby tanuagg13 » September 13th, 2014, 3:45 pm

So, what has changed from last year? So far, from reading the forum I've gotten the following:
1. Obviously the curved bonus bit.
2. Scoring is now based on high score instead of low score (and as a result, an obvious scoring algorithm difference).
3. The distance is now fixed to 12.00 m?
4. Lane is now 2.0 m thick instead of 1.5 meters.
5. Ramps and integrated systems disallowed; ETV and launcher are separate?

Can anyone give me any specifics on the scoring formula this year?
2015 Events (Division C):
NJ States
Mission Possible -- 1st
It's About Time -- 4th
Cell Biology -- 5th
Montgomery Invitationals (NJ)
Cell Biology -- 4th
Mission Possible -- 2nd
It's About Time -- 2nd
Regionals (UCC, NJ)
Cell Biology -- 3rd
Codes and Algorithms -- 9th

iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1112
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX

Re: Scrambler C

Postby iwonder » September 13th, 2014, 3:55 pm

So, what has changed from last year? So far, from reading the forum I've gotten the following:
1. Obviously the curved bonus bit.
2. Scoring is now based on high score instead of low score (and as a result, an obvious scoring algorithm difference).
3. The distance is now fixed to 12.00 m?
4. Lane is now 2.0 m thick instead of 1.5 meters.
5. Ramps and integrated systems disallowed; ETV and launcher are separate?

Can anyone give me any specifics on the scoring formula this year?
1. Yup
2. Yup
3. Nope
4. Yup
5. Nope. But you still have to be able to detach the falling mass.

Score:
It's nothing to fret over. More or less the exact same as last year, penalties are handled differently and the bonus is there. Wait till you get the rules and you'll see :P
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown

joeyjoejoe
Member
Member
Posts: 142
Joined: December 27th, 2012, 12:56 pm
Division: C
State: GA

Re: Scrambler C

Postby joeyjoejoe » September 13th, 2014, 6:31 pm

So, what has changed from last year? So far, from reading the forum I've gotten the following:
1. Obviously the curved bonus bit.
2. Scoring is now based on high score instead of low score (and as a result, an obvious scoring algorithm difference).
3. The distance is now fixed to 12.00 m?
4. Lane is now 2.0 m thick instead of 1.5 meters.
5. Ramps and integrated systems disallowed; ETV and launcher are separate?

Can anyone give me any specifics on the scoring formula this year?
1. Yup
2. Yup
3. Nope
4. Yup
5. Nope. But you still have to be able to detach the falling mass.

Score:
It's nothing to fret over. More or less the exact same as last year, penalties are handled differently and the bonus is there. Wait till you get the rules and you'll see :P
For item 5, I'd say the rules are clear that ramps are indeed disallowed (2h).

Out of curiosity, how do push-rod launchers compare to spring and falling-mass launchers in terms of speed an accuracy in y'all's opinion. We've built the latter two but not a push-rod launcher.

Also, iwonder, if I remember correctly, you had a falling mass launcher last year and you still had 1.2 second runs? Where in the world did you order your pulleys?? Even our initial spring launcher (which had as it Achilles heel, sloppy, inaccurate vehicle travel), couldn't have performed anywhere near that well. I think the average we saw was in the 2-3 second range. Our final design was a falling mass launcher and although it was a bit slower (3-4s), it was far more accurate.


Return to “2015 Build Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest