Log in

View Full Version : Bumper sleeve idea


JT the Fluffy
10-02-2010, 22:53
Alright, first thread posting. My team came up with an idea. Instead of making two sets of bumbers, why not make reversible sleeves? Now the idea is that we build the bumpers, attatch a black cover and then apply the reversible sleeves. Now the question is (Because I can't find any threads with an answer to this) Could some black show from behind the sleeves? (Read the rules, couldn't find anything on that)

ChrisP
10-02-2010, 22:54
Sounds like an awesome idea! Cant wait to see it at the competition!

_Tanto_
10-02-2010, 22:56
I dont see anything against it in the rules but it would probably look more professional if black was not showing. also how are you fastening the sleeves?

ChrisP
10-02-2010, 22:58
Tanto makes a pretty good point, how you go about attaching the sleeves would be a huge factor in its success.

big1boom
10-02-2010, 23:00
The fabric covering the BUMPERS must be solid red or solid blue in color. Visually, the red or blue must be as close to the corresponding color in the FIRST logo as reasonable (i.e. to a reasonably astute observer, they appear similar). The only markings permitted on the BUMPER fabric cover are the team number (see Rule <R15>).

I am fairly certain that no other colors are allowed to show through.

JT the Fluffy
10-02-2010, 23:01
Agreed, a very valid point indeed. Perhaps Velcro?

EricH
11-02-2010, 00:18
From Update #9: <R12>The color of the BUMPERS will be used to identify the ALLIANCE to which the ROBOT has been assigned, red or blue. Therefore, each ROBOT must be able to display red BUMPERS and blue BUMPERS. This may be done via either of two acceptable methods:

B. Alternately, the ROBOT may use changeable BUMPER covers. The BUMPER covers
− may be removable, reversible, or fixed
− must completely enclose the BUMPERS
− must show only a single color such that when the BUMPER covers are in use, only fabric of the assigned ALLIANCE color may be visible.
− must be constructed solely of fabric and a fastening/restraining system to hold the cover in place. The fastening/restraining system must extend no further than one inch beyond the FRAME PERIMETER (i.e. no further than any other hard parts of the BUMPER - see Rule <R07-N>). Please note that the fastening/restraining system MUST be designed with robust performance in mind. The restraints must hold the cover in place during vigorous interactions with other ROBOTS and FIELD elements during the MATCH without allowing the cover to come off.


Also see <R07-F>.

Based on your description, I'd say questionable or illegal. If any black shows, illegal under <R07-F> and/or <R12-B>. If black does not show, then it's more likely legal, except possibly having the black cover underneath. I would say that you should ask this in Q&A for an official answer--and if it's ruled legal, print and bring the Q&A with you.

Al Skierkiewicz
12-02-2010, 14:27
Jt,
Dave Lavery has weighed in on this subject in another thread in the last 24 hours. I would search for his response. It is clear and to the point. There is also several Q&A responses as well.

billbo911
12-02-2010, 14:39
Jt,
Dave Lavery has weighed in on this subject in another thread in the last 24 hours. I would search for his response. It is clear and to the point. There is also several Q&A responses as well.

Here (http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/showpost.php?p=917852&postcount=50) is the post Al referred to.

neurotrek
12-02-2010, 14:48
Here is the rule excerpt dlavert refers to:

8.3 Robot rules 2nd Paragraph,

"When constructing the ROBOT, the team is allowed to use the items in the 2010 KOP Checklist and additional materials. Many of the rules listed below explicitly address what and how parts and materials may be used. There are many reasons for the structure of the rules, including safety, reliability, parity, creation of a reasonable design challenge, adherence to professional standards, impact on the competition, compatibility with the KOP, etc. When reading these rules, please use technical common sense (engineering thinking) rather than “lawyering” the interpretation and splitting hairs over the precise wording in an attempt to find loopholes. Try to understand the reasoning behind a rule."