How to score some scenarios?

[alkotz]

This has been a fun event to learn about (though I think frustrating for some
teams with less experience to draw from in electronics and code). It is certainly
easier to figure out how the event *should* be done than how to score borderline
situations that should have been corrected long ago in the competitor's design process.

Here are a few scenarios that I have seen at invitational events and I'm including in
some of them how I thought they should be scored. Overall, I've seen a number of
battery violations and a few code impound problems relating to internet and programming
usage. Feel free to offer other thoughts on how these should be scored, especially on the last
few that I am not guessing on.

• Robot is powered by a 9VDC alkaline battery or by 8 AA batteries.
  These are both construction violations under 3b, but the robot would be allowed to run
  with the violation.

• Robot is powered by an unlabeled (sealed) pack and competitor does not know what
  type of cells it contains.
  This sounds like both 3b and 3i construction violations. Should we accept the competitor's
  assurance that the battery is not Li or Pb? Or should we count it as a 3c violation also and not
  allow the robot to run?

• Does a failed run based on 6.p.ii (out of bounds = "outer perimeter lines") occur when
  the last contact point of the robot exits the 2m square track area? Or when the last contact
  point leaves the boundary tape (2.05m square)?

• Does a minimal successful run consist of a robot that moves a few mm forward onto the
  track so that the dowel is inside the boundary, but not far enough for any contact points
  to be inside the 2m square? Or does at least one contact point need to end inside the 2m
  square? (perhaps this scenario depends on the answer to the last one.)

• Robot code is uploaded via a WiFi connection from a laptop that uses a stand alone IDE.
  Based on an existing FAQ referencing rule 6.c.i in the title, the stated answer is either a
  violation of 3a, 6b or 6.c.iii. How do we choose? These three rules involve a 300 pt
  Construction violation (3a), a 150 pt construction violation (6b) and a 5000 pt impound
  violation (6c.iii).

• Competitors couldn't launch their Arduino IDE. In that case, it was likely because
  it had a non-stand-alone version that requires an internet connection to compile and upload.
  I assume that if they get a connection and run the IDE, it would be a violation, but of which
  rule? It sounds like the same list of violations as in the previous scenario.

If anyone thinks of other scenarios they have encountered but grading wasn't clear, feel free
to add them.

Thanks in advance!

[brian9640]

As I have run several Robot Tour invitationals this year, here are my opinion based on the rules and FAQs. Plus I have seen many of these too. Robot Tour is a new event and there is not a lot of experience for teams to pull from.

• Robot is powered by a 9VDC alkaline battery or by 8 AA batteries.
  These are both construction violations under 3b, but the robot would be allowed to run
  with the violation.

The robot can run but will receive a construction violation - 300 points added to all runs.

• Robot is powered by an unlabeled (sealed) pack and competitor does not know what
  type of cells it contains.
  This sounds like both 3b and 3i construction violations. Should we accept the competitor's
  assurance that the battery is not Li or Pb? Or should we count it as a 3c violation also and not
  allow the robot to run?

This is up to the event supervisor. As I have ruled, if I cannot verify the batteries, then a team will get Participation Points (rule 3.c)

• Does a failed run based on 6.p.ii (out of bounds = "outer perimeter lines") occur when
  the last contact point of the robot exits the 2m square track area? Or when the last contact
  point leaves the boundary tape (2.05m square)?

Per rule 6.p.ii, all contact points must exit the track. One wheel exiting the track is not a failed run.

• Does a minimal successful run consist of a robot that moves a few mm forward onto the
  track so that the dowel is inside the boundary, but not far enough for any contact points
  to be inside the 2m square? Or does at least one contact point need to end inside the 2m
  square? (perhaps this scenario depends on the answer to the last one.)

A valid run can occur when the robot only moves a short distance. I have had several teams only move 1 cm then stop. These are a valid run. Per an FAQ, the robot must be moving for a team to declare a run as a failed run.

• Robot code is uploaded via a WiFi connection from a laptop that uses a stand alone IDE.
  Based on an existing FAQ referencing rule 6.c.i in the title, the stated answer is either a
  violation of 3a, 6b or 6.c.iii. How do we choose? These three rules involve a 300 pt
  Construction violation (3a), a 150 pt construction violation (6b) and a 5000 pt impound
  violation (6c.iii).

Using WiFi would be a construction violation in my opinion. The impound penalty only occurs if the students are viewing information downloaded from the Internet. There is an FAQ that allows teams to use web browser as the IDE provided the students are only modifying the impounded source code files.

• Competitors couldn't launch their Arduino IDE. In that case, it was likely because
  it had a non-stand-alone version that requires an internet connection to compile and upload.
  I assume that if they get a connection and run the IDE, it would be a violation, but of which
  rule? It sounds like the same list of violations as in the previous scenario.

I have not ruled this as a violation as this is similar to web browsers for an IDE which are allowed. Teams would need to view downloaded information from the Internet. Libraries for the Arduino IDE or the HTML/Javascript code does not count as information viewed by the students. As I have read the FAQs, as long as students are only viewing and modifying their impounded source code files, then there is no violation.


Other items I have seen are:

• Students are using a graphical interface to program the robot's motions. This is a violation of rule 6.d.i (software violation). Which is a competition violation.

• Teams were not modifying their impounded source code files. Teams were using an interface on the robot to configure the motions. Since no source code were modified, they received a competition violation.

[RKoosam]

Along with the 6 AA (1.5V) batteries, can we use a 5V power bank to power our robot's Raspberry Pi (Our form of control)? We will be using AA batteries for motors, and the power bank for our Pi. Is this alright to do as per the rules?

[brian9640]

Along with the 6 AA (1.5V) batteries, can we use a 5V power bank to power our robot's Raspberry Pi (Our form of control)? We will be using AA batteries for motors, and the power bank for our Pi. Is this alright to do as per the rules?

For the 5V power bank, is this coming from the 6 AA batteries or another set of batteries? If there were any additional batteries beyond the 6 AA, then that would be a construction violation.

I have seen teams use a 5VDC regulator to reduce the voltage from the batteries. The 5VDC regulator output would then power the Raspberry Pi at the correct voltage.