Robotics Education & Competition Foundation
Inspiring students, one robot at a time.

The official VEX V5 Robotics Competition Question & Answer system has closed for this season.

Official Q&A: VEX V5 Robotics Competition 2024-2025: High Stakes

Usage Guidelines All Questions

2182: Removing Four Corner Rings with Concave Angle at Once


Julie Robbins (Event Partner)
9-Oct-2024

Possession by definition includes "The Robot is moving the Scoring Object in a preferred direction with a concave face of the Robot (or inside of a concave angle formed by multiple mechanisms/faces of the Robot).

During matches, robots flip out a small arm from the front of their robot, drive up to the four rings and sweep all four out of the corner while the rings are touching the arm and another perpendicular face of the robot (two faces of a 90-degree angle), breaking the 2-ring possession rule by momentarily possessing four rings at once based on the portion of the possession definition above. After they have cleared the four rings, they proceed to either put their goal into the corner or load some of the rings onto a stake. What should happen in this situation:

  1. Team should be given a minor violation for possessing four rings at once, but there should be no "match affecting" considerations since all scoring was done after the robot was no longer violating the possession rule.
  2. Team should be given a minor violation, but warned about committing the violation again. If they commit the same violation again by using the same method and possessing four rings while sweeping them out, they should be disqualified based on the clear intentionality of breaking the possession rule for their own benefit. (Violation note: "Any egregious or clearly intentional Violation by an Alliance who wins the Match will be considered a Major Violation.")
  3. Since the team committed a violation to clear the corner and get access to the rings and the corner, any rings scored or points scored by immediately placing their goal in the corner should be considered when doing "match affective calculations".
  4. Not consider it a violation since illegal possession of rings was remedied before scoring.

<SC6>

Answered by committee
17-Oct-2024

The first thing a Head Referee will have to decide in this scenario is exactly how many of the 4 stacked Rings were Possessed by the Robot. In this case, any of those Rings that aren't in direct contact with the 'inside of a concave angle formed by multiple mechanisms/faces of the Robot' aren't Possessed by that Robot; they're only being Plowed.

Let's look at two possible outcomes (of a wide range of possibilities) in a scenario where a Robot Possesses no other Rings and moves a stack of 4 Rings out of the corner with the inside of a concave angle formed by an arm and a perpendicular face:

  1. The arm is contacting only the bottom 2 Rings in the stack; the perpendicular face is contacting all 4 Rings. 2 of the stacked Rings are Possessed, and the others are Plowed. This Robot is only Possessing 2 Rings, and is not in Violation of rule <SG6>.
  2. The arm and the perpendicular face are both contacting all 4 Rings in the Stack. All 4 of these Rings are Possessed, and the Robot is in Violation of rule <SG6>. To determine whether this is a Major or Minor Violation, our response to Q&A 2181 applies.