2016 KIPR Open FAQ

8 replies [Last post]
KIPR Matthew
KIPR Matthew's picture
Title: KIPR Staff
Joined: 06/04/2009
Posts:
BotPoints: 154
User offline. Last seen 14 weeks 5 days ago.

The 2016 KIPR Open FAQ

This post is the home of the 2016 KIPR Open FAQ. The official rules are here. Updates and rules clarifications will be posted in this thread. If you have questions that you would like addressed, leave them in a comment to this post. Check back for the latest information

Questions:

- Since game pieces and storage bins are located in "out of bounds", is it safe to assume that is solely a golf term and robots are allowed to enter, operate within, and leave the out of bounds zones?

Answer: yes

- Since the ball bucket is within the upper starting box, are robots/structures permitted to start within or the vertical over the ball bucket?

Answer: yes

- Is there any available formal documentation for the Wallaby, other than that provided in the workshop presentations?

Answer: not yet

- I am looking for any information regarding programming the Wallaby using Java instead of the default C, a feature that (to my knowledge) was promised last year.
Also, would utilizing Java on the Wallaby be as easy as installing the JDK through the terminal? This is what I plan to try unless documentation in this is available.

Answer: Java has been put on hold to deal with more pressing issues; however, it is possible (if you know Linux) to add capabilities.

- The 2016 rules show 2 storage bins on the end of the green and 2 bins on the side of the green. However, the green in the rules is not to scale and based on the build specs for the board, there is only room for 1 storage bin on the side of the green. Would you describe how to resolve this discrepancy?

Answer: This is under review and will be resolved next week (possibly by using smaller bins for the bunkers if the bin spec is inaccurate ... the intent is to have the game as it has been pictured, but if the bins prove too large, an alternative is to reduce the number of bunkers as suggested). One more note: the balls place on the black center line will be held in position by using 1/2" plastic bone rings (a
sewing gizmo).

Note: Only minor modifications proved necessary. They are in the rules update 2016 KIPR Open Rules V1.2. The green has been extended 1/4" for better bin fit. The pattern for placement of the 4 bins serving as bunkers is detailed (as are dimensions of the 64oz bins). While the pattern differs a bit from the not-to-scale pattern shown in v1.1, it shouldn't impact strategy (and unlike golf, the bunkers can be moved around). Also the diagram supplied in v1.2 is drawn to scale to clarify positions and dimensions.

Join the Botball folding at home team!
http://folding.stanford.edu/
Team 87314 "Botball"
Stats: http://folding.extremeoverclocking.com/team_summary.php?s=&t=87314

JMonsorno
JMonsorno's picture
Title: NooBot
Joined: 11/28/2010
Posts:
BotPoints: 37
User offline. Last seen 39 weeks 5 days ago.

Can you publish a few pictures of the board setup or a 3D/iso render/view of the table with the game pieces on it.

--also--

2016_KO_Table_Construction.PDF

THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS
DRAWING IS THE SOLE PROPERTY OF
<INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE>. ANY
REPRODUCTION IN PART OR AS A WHOLE
WITHOUT THE WRITTEN PERMISSION OF
<INSERT COMPANY NAME HERE> IS
PROHIBITED

JMonsorno
JMonsorno's picture
Title: NooBot
Joined: 11/28/2010
Posts:
BotPoints: 37
User offline. Last seen 39 weeks 5 days ago.

Since game pieces and storage bins are located in "out of bounds", is it safe to assume that is solely a golf term and robots are allowed to enter, operate within, and leave the out of bounds zones?

Since the ball bucket is within the upper starting box, are robots/structures permitted to start within or the vertical over the ball bucket?

Botsquad
Title: NooBot
Joined: 02/25/2016
Posts:
BotPoints: 2
User offline. Last seen 1 year 41 weeks ago.

Is there any available formal documentation for the Wallaby, other than that provided in the workshop presentations? I am looking for any information regarding programming the Wallaby using Java instead of the default C, a feature that (to my knowledge) was promised last year.
Also, would utilizing Java on the Wallaby be as easy as installing the JDK through the terminal? This is what I plan to try unless documentation in this is available.

Botball Dad
Title: NooBot
Joined: 05/31/2016
Posts:
BotPoints: 6
User offline. Last seen 1 year 24 weeks ago.

The 2016 rules show 2 storage bins on the end of the green and 2 bins on the side of the green. However, the green in the rules is not to scale and based on the build specs for the board, there is only room for 1 storage bin on the side of the green.

Would you describe how to resolve this discrepancy?

Thanks,
Bill

John L. Scott
Title: NooBot
Joined: 07/18/2014
Posts:
BotPoints: 14
User offline. Last seen 23 weeks 2 days ago.

We have the same question.

Our working guess is that they will say that only one storage bin shall be placed on the side of the green.

Looking at it, we think maybe the PVC on the side of the green might have been meant to be shorter and to line up with the first empty tee fitting instead of the second one. This would have been almost exactly the right amount of space for the bin. As it is, the starting area is awfully big. But the easiest thing for them to do at this point is to simply get rid of the fourth storage bin. (Unless they've already built the competition tables...)

Stay flexible though.

Botball Dad
Title: NooBot
Joined: 05/31/2016
Posts:
BotPoints: 6
User offline. Last seen 1 year 24 weeks ago.

There are only 3 weekends left before the conference (which is when I have time to play with this project). It would really be helpful to know where the scoring bins are going to be. Please respond soon.

Here is a link to the problem:
http://oi64.tinypic.com/10dfcci.jpg

John L. Scott
Title: NooBot
Joined: 07/18/2014
Posts:
BotPoints: 14
User offline. Last seen 23 weeks 2 days ago.

While we wait for official word, I think it would be best to reach a consensus among ourselves as to what we think the answer should be and design accordingly.

I don't think changing the size of the starting box is a good option because people may already have designed to it.
I don't think having the fourth bin intruding in the starting box is a good idea because people may need the space for their robots and because it would be too easy to manipulate the bin.

Our assumption has been that the easiest thing to do is to remove the fourth bin altogether.

Any arguments against making this the consensus working assumption?

Botball Dad
Title: NooBot
Joined: 05/31/2016
Posts:
BotPoints: 6
User offline. Last seen 1 year 24 weeks ago.

"remove the fourth bin altogether" - This is the assumption we are working with as well.