2023 Draft Rules Public Discussion #soccer-rules-2023

Hello everyone,

some of you may have already seen activity on GitHub (give the Rules Repository a follow if you always want to be first to know).

Changes incorporated into the 2023-draft-rules branch of the repository:

  • Scrapped 9V limit proposal for reasons outlined in this thread.
  • Allowed multiple cameras and all kinds of optics (lenses, mirrors, etc., including off-the-shelf parts) based on reasons outlined in this thread
  • Allow colored clothing to be worn as walls are high enough that tape is sufficient to block robots from viewing colored clothes discuss here
  • did not end up requiring golf balls to be matte, advised teams to be prepared for anything and advised tournament organizers to choose matte and hard surface balls as much as possible discuss here
  • Enlarging the playing field (just lines, not the table) so it ends just before the ramps on the side to prevent many lack of progress and out of reach situations. discuss here
  • Change kicker regulations: discuss here:
    • Increased kicker power limit for Open League
    • new testing method
    • max. 48V boost voltage for safety
    • create regulations to safely make chip-kick possible (this has been postponed as we could not figure out how to make a chip-kick safe).
    • testing data wanted
    • ideas wanted for increase in LWL
  • Introduced compatibility with communications module tested at Bangkok 2022 as a requirement only for intl. teams this year but everyone in the future. Discuss current and future plans here

Cheers,
David

1 Like

If there are any other suggestions, deficiencies, ambiguities or anything else you think we could do to make the rules better please do let us know, just create a new thread, put #soccer-rules-2023 into the title and I will link it here.

Hey everybody, we have merged most of the changes into the 2023-draft-rules branch the current version of which automatically gets built to this URL: https://robocupjuniortc.github.io/soccer-rules/2023-draft-rules/rules.pdf

Pending pull requests also get built at https://robocupjuniortc . github. io/soccer-rules/<branch name after the ‘from’/rules.pdf (for example the PR https://github.com/RoboCupJuniorTC/soccer-rules/pull/68 gets built to https://robocupjuniortc.github.io/soccer-rules/aquahika/omnidirectional-lens/rules.pdf)

There are also a couple more changes I added to the first post of this thread:

  • We added ±10% tolerance on the 20mm line width
  • We reflected the reality that lines are frequently not painted but taped or installed as white carpet in the rules
  • Limited maximum voltage anywhere on the robot to 48V safety reasons
  • Introduced communications module for the future

We had an issue using the 2022 rules in lightweight and 1vs1 open about the line
In Lightweight, the robot must not emit infrared light.

This is a clear statement, but it still was subject of many discussions.
As you cannot see IR light, you can only prove that a robot emits IR light by another robot that gets disturbed. Unfortunately some teams changed this clear statement to something like “you have to prove that your robot gets confused by our robot” and that moved the discussion from the inspection-desk to the field and caused discussions (sometimes even arguments) between teams.

So the easiest way would be to stick to this rule and disqualify the IR-Light emitting robot until the IR-light emitting devices are removed (and not called “switched of” by the team).

But on the other hand actual lidar sensors could replace ultrasonic sensors. They are better, cheaper and last longer. So I can understand the desire to use them.

But then we need a rule change.

It is possible to build a IR-detecting ring that can cope with getting IR-laser lights right into the sensor and we could say that good teams should know how to build a proper IR-ring.
But if we have the rule of “no IR at all” just the beginning teams should rely on this and should be fine with the most simple IR-ring possible.

If we want to allow IR-lidars we should make this clear and introduce a rule like “Teams have to be aware of IR-pollution on the field and have to build ball-detectors being capable of this”.

Both would be fine, but please clarify this in advance.
I do not want to see teams arguing with each other on the field instead of having an enjoyable and fair game.

So if we want to stick to the “no-IR” I would suggest the additional line “In Lightweight, the robot must not emit infrared light. IR-emitting devices (including IR-lidars) are not allowed on the robot, even if switched of”. This would bring the discussion about it back to inspection desk where it belongs.

Nevertheless these great lidar sensors should be recommended for 2vs2 open or any other league that does not use the IR-balls.

Best regards
Roland

Hey Roland,

Was the team claiming interference using IR receivers or just IR sensors? I’m trying to find out if boards like the popular VL53L0X emit pulses similar to the IR ball’s carrier frequency. Understanding that saturating the field in IR would cause issues even if filtering for ambient IR - I’m wondering if there may be some sort of compromise that IR VSELs could be allowed if mounted at a minimum height (noting that the walls now should now be higher), perpendicular to the field (which is the most likely how it would be used correct?), and be limited in number (e.g. four per team).

It would be great to see if any teams reading this could verify if there are conditions in which lidar can be used and unlikely interfere with other teams detecting the ball.

Thanks,

Mike

I agree with widening the field, but am I correct in understanding that the 10cm width of the perimeter means that the out-of-bounds rule only applies to the penalty area? Am I correct?

The current out-of-bounds rule is “if the robot’s entire body goes out beyond the white line of the field,” but if the outer area is reduced from 22 cm to 10 cm, it would be practically impossible for a robot’s body of 18 cm in diameter to go all the way beyond the white line into the outer area.

If the above is correct, I feel that the out-of-bounds strategy would be much easier as it would only need to be within the penalty area.
Under the previous rules, it was easy to do out-of-bounds at high speeds, which also served as a sort of speed limit, but I am concerned that the new rules will lead to higher speeds, especially for LightWeight.

In fact, my impression from the Bangkok tournament was that the out-of-bounce strategy proved to be not easy, as teams with a decent out-of-bounce strategy, both LightWeight and Open, were strong.

This change will have an impact not only on future matches, but also on robot development. In other words, in exchange for the increased difficulty and reduced burden on referees gained by a larger field, will not the difficulty of out-of-bounds strategies be reduced, causing robots to go faster?

Best regards,
Mika

I quoted your question and posted a response into the corresponding thread.

@stiebel @Mike I created a discussion thread for the IR emissions/IR detection issue here. Let’s continue the discussion over there.

Thank you! That is what I wanted!