to ThatRoboGuy
First, as usual, the following is NOT official.
Why does that bother you?
Here's what the official FAQ says
Using the criteria in the FAQ. Can you buy a kit with ALL the pieces you saw and instructions to put it together that way? If you remove anything, can the device function the same way? I'd say not as the RC car by itself cannot pick up objects. The arm by itself cannot leave the starting square so would never score any points as it isn't long enough to reach zone B. Sounds like it meets the requirement to me.SOINC wrote:2014-01-06 03:21 If a commercial kit is used what would qualify as a funtional modification?
As per rule 2.c, commercial kits may be used, but must have at least one functional modification. A functional modification is already defined within the rule as the lack of a modification causing the robot to either not work or working differently. This means either a robot pulled out of a box or a kit built that exclusively follows a manufacturer's directions would not be legal for competition. A team is, however, allowed to start with the raw kit/device, run tests on the device, and make modifications prior to competition. Competitors are, in fact, expected to do so prior to the competition as there is no complete device designed for Science Olympiad Robo-Cross that is commercially available.fudgecake6 wrote:1nxtmonster wrote:
I'll say that 2nd place in Michigan was taken by a VERY similar approach. They didn't use duct tape, but the base was a tracked RC vehicle of some sort and that exact arm was attached on top. They'd souped up the arm some so it was faster and had some special attachments the claw could use to do the job better. Not even a question was raised on its legality. PS, while I am a Robocross ES, I don't run events in Michigan currently as I'm the State Director. So I didn't rule on the device myself.
Actually I was quite impressed and pleased. With a little thinking on the attachments, a lot of test and practice, this team had a robot costing less than $100 that took second in a very competitive state. Sure pokes holes in the cost argument for this event.
Regards,
Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI