Puck sensor

[IPostedWhat]

Not too mention that the pucks need to be frozen and they are getting hit with a lot of force during a game. I don't think a sensor would even work very long, if at all.

 

[Gooch1034]

I say we clone Mini-Me and cut eye holes through 1 goalie leg pad and stick those little fuckers in every goal and let them decide.

 

[puckhead]

Not too mention that the pucks need to be frozen and they are getting hit with a lot of force during a game. I don't think a sensor would even work very long, if at all.

the average baseball has an active life of 7 pitches. I don't see an issue with changing the puck at every whistle or commercial break, and donating the used ones to minor hockey.

 

[anderwho2513]

the average baseball has an active life of 7 pitches. I don't see an issue with changing the puck at every whistle or commercial break, and donating the used ones to minor hockey.

But baseballs don't come with sensitive electronics implanted in them.

 

[puckhead]

But baseballs don't come with sensitive electronics implanted in them.

the chip inside (encased in 3 inches of hard rubber) doesn't need to be sensitive. It just needs to have a readable signal. That's easily a solid-state function.
now, that may mean that the signal reader at the net might be more fragile. could be an issue with collisions with the net.

the fox-track puck from 10 years ago had a chip in it too. no functionality problems there, that i can recall.

anywho, no sense getting all engineery on me, it's just a concept.

 

[Comeds]

Libraries in my area switched to RFID stickers for check out. Its chip embedded in nothing more then a very thin sticker. Even some grocery stores have experimented with the idea. Its cheap and could easily be used in the NHL to tell if a puck crossed the line.

The question would be does the NHL want to remove that human element from the game. Also there would eventually be a case where according to the chip the puck crossed the line (and it really did) and all camera angles make it look like it did not and everyone would think its some kind of conspiracy.

 

[buffhockey]

RFID is the way to go. The chips are small (the size of a grain of rice) and cheap (I think 50 cents or less).

Sensors in the ice at the distance from the goal line that is equal to the width of the ENTIRE puck crossing the goal line should be able to determine if the puck crossed the line or not.

Any engineering types here?

 

[Darkstone42]

Considering the technology used in a lot of the chemical anaylsis tools I use, I don't think it's necessary to have the sensor encase the puck as some have suggested. The complexity and number of calculations these instruments can do, and the short amount of time in which they can do them are incredible. If the puck has a sensor and it transmits information back to a computer, that computer can perform all necessary calculations on the puck's angle and displacement with extremely limited error.

That is to say, this sensor could transmit not only where the puck is on the ice, but whether the puck is flat, on edge, or somewhere in between, and the computer could calculate whether or not the puck crossed the line based on the position and angle transmitted.

Now, in order for this to work and be cost effective, those RFID chips would have to be modified a little bit, and they would probably be ideal (for now). The transmitter would be in the net with the net sensor, and that sensor would read the angle and position of the puck based on the sensor on the puck, and then send it to the computer to do the calculations. It would all take about 1.5 seconds or less, I would estimate.

In the future, using liquid crystal tuning technology, puck sensors could be created on the molecular level, be even more accurate, and would have absolutely no noticable effect on mass or aerodynamics. I'll be working on that next year, so I'll let you guys know how it goes.

=)

 

[BOSSMANPC]

Just make the inside of the goal a ten foot deep pit. If the freakin puck falls into it....It's a goal.

 

[D-sizzle]

Just make the inside of the goal a ten foot deep pit. If the freakin puck falls into it....It's a goal.

Ha ha ha! you're aewsome Boss.

And just when someone asks for an engineering type, Dark shows up. Couldn't be more perfect.

I don't know about chip technology, but one way to reduce the amount of situations where it's hard to tell if the puck is in or not is with a different overhead camera. The one they use now is positioned above the rink looking down through the top of the net. I say, especially with current camera technology, that a better way would be to attach camera's (very small in size) to the inside of the posts and crossbar so you get multiple overhead and from the side views of the goal line. The camera's would be no bigger than the width of the posts, and would be mounted on the backside of them so they wouldn't interfere with anything. I would say a camera just above ice level on each post, one in each top corner, and one in the center of the crossbar.

It obviously wouldn't solve all the problems as you still wouldn't be able to see a puck completely underneath a pad, but it would drastically improve what they currently use.

 

[elocomotive]

There's a difference though. You have to judge location and angle relative to another position, in this case the goal line. The idea is great, but honestly if this was actually feasible, the NHL would have done it.

Come on people. Why are we arguing about the feasibility of this? It is clearly possible. If you want to argue it might not be cost effective, so be it. But this is EASILY possible.

You have the chip relay information on where it is exactly and what angle it's on so you could know precisely whether it's over the line or not. You can embed the chip in the middle of the puck where it is protected (Fox has already done this before - they put a circuit board and a battery in a puck sixteen years ago, see here) Let me reiterate this.... Fox did this SIXTEEN years ago.

The technology is definitely there. I think the issue is that sports league's generally are resistant to this type of thing. There seems to be a "preserve the human element" to them. I understand this for certain aspects of the game, but this is a simple and VERY important issue that technology could handle.

 

[elocomotive]

Libraries in my area switched to RFID stickers for check out. Its chip embedded in nothing more then a very thin sticker. Even some grocery stores have experimented with the idea. Its cheap and could easily be used in the NHL to tell if a puck crossed the line.

The question would be does the NHL want to remove that human element from the game. Also there would eventually be a case where according to the chip the puck crossed the line (and it really did) and all camera angles make it look like it did not and everyone would think its some kind of conspiracy.

Hahaha. I just read your post after posting my one above. But good post, I agree that is the essential issue. And I also agree that just b/c you make a shift to technology does not make you mistake-proof. But I think it would result in fewer controversial incidents.

 

[Eddie_Shack]

Just make the inside of the goal a ten foot deep pit. If the freakin puck falls into it....It's a goal.

Do you know how many goalies Scott Hartnell and Corey Perry would kill?

 

[Eddie_Shack]

On a more serious note, I like the idea. They could try it out in the AHL for a year and see how it works. If there are lots of glitches (like comeds said, the puck clearly didn't cross but the sensor said it did, or vice versa) then can the concept.

What would it do for calls like the Brad May goal? On that one the puck was OBVIOUSLY in the net, but because Toronto didn't want to override the ref and the ref didn't want to admit a mistake, it was tough shit.

I think this is something that no matter what, it's never going to be perfect and we are just going to have to deal with it.

 

[scottflyers88]

Ha ha ha! you're aewsome Boss.

And just when someone asks for an engineering type, Dark shows up. Couldn't be more perfect.

I don't know about chip technology, but one way to reduce the amount of situations where it's hard to tell if the puck is in or not is with a different overhead camera. The one they use now is positioned above the rink looking down through the top of the net. I say, especially with current camera technology, that a better way would be to attach camera's (very small in size) to the inside of the posts and crossbar so you get multiple overhead and from the side views of the goal line. The camera's would be no bigger than the width of the posts, and would be mounted on the backside of them so they wouldn't interfere with anything. I would say a camera just above ice level on each post, one in each top corner, and one in the center of the crossbar.

It obviously wouldn't solve all the problems as you still wouldn't be able to see a puck completely underneath a pad, but it would drastically improve what they currently use.

i have said this before also. just put cameras on the inside of the posts near the ice.

also, i think ipw said something about putting cameras in the ice. this would make complete sense and be much easier than sensors. put a camera strip right behind the goal line under the ice with a wide enough angle lens to see where the goal line ends. if a puck is under a pas you could still clearly see it. the only problem would be whether or not a puck crossed the line while in the air although the cameras now are good enough to do that. easier than putting sensors in pucks and technology can malfunction. it might be rare although lets say the sensors says the puck crossed the line when it did not. then people would be blaming the sensors. i say just put a camera under the ice and use your eyes to see the puck cross the line.

 

[Darkstone42]

i have said this before also. just put cameras on the inside of the posts near the ice.

also, i think ipw said something about putting cameras in the ice. this would make complete sense and be much easier than sensors. put a camera strip right behind the goal line under the ice with a wide enough angle lens to see where the goal line ends. if a puck is under a pas you could still clearly see it. the only problem would be whether or not a puck crossed the line while in the air although the cameras now are good enough to do that. easier than putting sensors in pucks and technology can malfunction. it might be rare although lets say the sensors says the puck crossed the line when it did not. then people would be blaming the sensors. i say just put a camera under the ice and use your eyes to see the puck cross the line.

While the camera idea would mostly work, it would be nearly impossible to see it when it was covered by a pad because no light would be entering from above the puck. If the camera had its own light source, then it would be visible, but that might prove distracting for the goaltender.

 

[scottflyers88]

i also thought of that. cameras do have night vision as well that works quite well. and i already said before i think goalies should not be allowed to use black pads. this is not as related although i think it would help. it happened during a flyers penguins game. i am not sure if it was the gagne goal or not although they were reviewing the play and you could not see anything because johnson had black pads.