Dear forum and dear chair members,
I do not know where to post this message if not here.
I just read the final rules for soccer 2022 which are no surprise.
But then I read the line: “For the 2023 rules, the Soccer Committee intends to limit the voltage to 9.0 V
nominal for both leagues.”
I know there where discussing about this right here and I definitely want to protest to this decision!
Every single soccer team I know uses LiPo or Li-IO batteries which have 7.4V, 11.1V or 14.8V per definition.
So If you want to reduce power from 15V (where I still do not understand the reason), than you have to consider these voltage steps.
If you set a voltage limit to 9V, you push us to using 6 non-recharchable 1.5V batteries or to reduce to 7.4V with a 2S Lipo setting.
This will have only one effect: all the motors and motor drivers the teams kept buying over the last years will be pushed beside to buy some other motors with higher currents to provide the torque needed to run the robot. This will have no effect to reduce speed.
Please rethink this decision!
If - at all - reduce to 12V for all classes. This could possibly bring teams to user their existing stuff, but if you half the voltage of the open2vs2 robots, you will generate plenty of e-waste without any need and without any benefit.
You make a valid point about not making equipment obsolete - that should only be done if it’s worth it for the improvement in gameplay, please also argue this in the battery thread linked above.
Dear chair and forum members,
the proposed Rule to lower the “nominal” Voltage to 9.0 V with the supposed Goal of reducing the speed, is in my mind quite problematic.
As other members here have pointed out, this will not result in a speed reduction, it will only force higher cost and difficulty in designing a drive chain. Also, will it not improve controlled movement on the field. I probably will elaborate, in the more technical thread, about this topic.
If you want to have more controlled and precise game play on the field, a proper rule would be to limit the velocity of the drive. This rule can easily be checked even during a game or after it, if for example suspicious activity or accusation have been found.
This will create more equal ground without forcing to compete with ever more expensive motors and drives. Also, 9V does not make sense in terms of Battery Technology. In addition, it will complicate electromagnetic kickers which do not use voltage pumps, also something I would never allow any of my students to use in such a robot, in my opinion this is irresponsible at best.
Taking into consideration that there is very little space to accelerate and a very short distance available on soccer fields combined with the inaccuracy of the human-with-stopwatch-measurements means you won’t get good data there. I do agree with most your other points though.
I don’t think it is too hard, just need one robot length to measure in a video, and you have the speed to a satisfactory accuracy. It will also be quite obvious if someone is driving too fast on the field. I think any other measure to reduce speed besides defining a specific drive train, which I think is also not a good idea, will be more difficult to define/check. With little space, the speed limit will probably not be reached, or it would have to be very low. But yes, we have to think about that more closely, voltage is definitely not the solution we are looking for.
You still don’t get good resolution from handheld cameras held at the side of the table but even if you could it is unrealistic to pixel-analyze video footage without severely disrutping tournament schedules.
I think we are all in agreement that reducing voltage isn’t going to have the effect we’re trying to achieve.
Given the aforementioned, will the committee still be intending to go ahead with its 9.0V voltage limit drop in the year 2023 as previously mentioned? Thanks!
For the 2023 rules, the Soccer Committee intends to limit the voltage to 9.0 V nominal for both leagues.
so this really was not set in stone in any way Though I am not able to speak for the whole committee, I can assure you that this sort of feedback will be taken into the account when the final decision gets made. This is also why the intention got announced this way – so that the community could provide its feedback and so that if it did happen, the change would not be a complete surprise, but it never meant that it would have to happen.
I hope that makes the situation a bit more clear. To me this shows that it might make sense to provide a bit more clarity in the rules themselves. I will try to convey that to the committee as well.
Even if there would be way to measure the speed of a robot, do we have to buy motors with the speed in the rules, or can we control the speed by software?
Because it would be impossible to find motors, with an exact speed limit and good power.
@Elias you bring up one of the points that makes limiting the speed so challenging! As of right now, there is no intent to limit what motors you can/cannot have on your robots regrading the idea behind restricting speed. The only announced intention was to lower the voltage in hopes that it would restrict the speed. As already pointed out in several places, lowering the voltage doesn’t seem to be the best solution .
Thanks for you answer @Mike . I already read about the new voltage and that it will hopefully not come.
To make my point clear, I don´t see any sense in regulation in speed or power.
I see the Problem of teams with a low budget Robot, but regulation in speed or power is not the way. (At this point, I don´t know a better solution, if I get one, I will probably post it here).
And even if there will be a regulation in Speed or Power, how will you stop the Ball, if it comes fast because of a good kicker?
Hi, I was reading the rules for this year and I’m confused with the rule 4.2.2, specially at this part “2+/-1cm rise”. Does it mean that the height is 12 or 2 cm? or does it reffers to its diagonal?
What you term “height” in your image would be “rise” in terms of the rules. Hence the height is supposed to be 2 centimeters, with a tolerance of 1 centimeter either way.
Though I am not able to speak for the whole committee, I can assure you that this sort of feedback will be taken into the account when the final decision gets made. This is also why the intention got announced this way – so that the community could provide its feedback and so that if it did happen, the change would not be a complete surprise, but it never meant that it would have to happen.
