Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

My point is that they disallowed tape for bumpers, so there must be a basis for doing so. The only basis I can see is that tape is not specifically allowed (since tape is an allowed fabrication material this year). By that interpretation, then staples are not allowed either. The rules DO allow wood screws, either with or without the optional angle. You can't argue one without the other.

I deal with government requirements all he time. They are usually poorly written and have a similar Q&A system, and answers are often similar to the short capricious answers given by the GDC. Each answer has huge implications to other rules based on the basis for that answer.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

Where do you see tape as a fabrication material?

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

I stand corrected. Tape used to be specifically disallowed, but has been legal since 2009. I remember a caveat that they would re-evaluate its use and if tape became an issue they would make it illegal again. They have not yet done so, but it is not specifically allowed. Then again, as I said, neither is aluminum, fiberglass, carbon fiber, wood, polycarbonate, PVC etc.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

OK, thought I was losing it...
As a side story, we all thought for years that Duct Tape was a disallowed material only because Dean and Woodie once discussed they thought it was ugly. (and rightly so) However as once pointed out to me by a GDC member, Duct Tape was never on a disallowed list. However, even today it is not considered a fastener and should not be used as such.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

(emphasis mine)

From the 2008 robot rules:

And then in 2009, that rule disappeared.

From the 2009 Q&A:

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

You have GOT to be kidding...that just kind of steams me. As for the duct tape issue, we have always used one strip on each end to secure noodles. At this point I am glad we haven't wrapped ours in fabric yet so we can remove the tape.

The bottom line as far as I am concerned is that the GDC got a question and answered the question. Period. What they say goes no matter what or how I think about the rule.

Look at this in terms of producing an engineering product for a customer. If they say a particular part cannot be used it's their call they are paying for your services. You choose whether or not you can fulfill the order under those specifications.

Same thing here. While 'payment' is a non-factor we are electively participating in a 'real world engineering project' and if a part is disallowed it is disallowed. Just glad Gregory posted it here so everyone would know.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

This is exactly the way I look at the rules, as a set of customer specifications. I deal with specification and requirements every day. The problems (both in work life and FIRST) comes in the interpretation of those specifications and requirements.

When the GDC answers a question, it is often interpreting the rules. When you receive a rule interpretation on a specific question, that interpretation applies that rule across the board, not just to that question. That is why companies are very careful when asking questions about specifications and requirements. If the question is not carefully worded, the answer can have broad reaching implications, far beyond what the questioner intended.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

I should have added that a team long ago used tape to change (compress) the profile of the pool noodles. This is likely the history behind the answer. Not a valid explanation I know but just some history.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

This is real-world stuff.

I saw a promising engineer's career get derailed when he did not "lawyer" the customer's specification for the project he was leading. The project went way over-budget as a result.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

Point taken and agreed to.

And in most companies there is someone to head off those types of questions (right or wrong is for someone else to decide) but in FIRST the ultimate decider of what get's posted in Q&A is (or should be) the lead coach/mentor. If this was a legit question for their team then it was appropriate to ask and if it was intended by the GDC all along then we all needed to be honoring it anyway.

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

I absolutely agree. All we need to know in order to do that is; what was intended by the GDC?

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

I guess asking them to clarify would be pushing the envelope? ::rtm::

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

I believe it is a necessary follow up. Obviously needs to be very carefully worded, however.

Would I be stirring the pot more to point out that duct tape is technically "cloth,"* certainly smooth, and demonstrably rugged.

* From Webster's Dictionary"
Cloth - a pliable material made usually by weaving, felting, or knitting natural or synthetic fibers and filaments

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

Suggestions for appropriate wording would be highly appreciated :D

Perhaps,

'In seeking clarification on [insert previously stated question here] is it permissible to:
1. Secure the noodles to the bumpers so that when the fabric is removed the noodles remain attached to the backing
and
2. Use staples to attach the fabric to the bumper backing'

Thoughts?

Re: Non-sagging Bumpers Q&A Response
 

Perhaps adding:

3. Please give a rules basis for your answer

And hope that it is not taken as "bad attitude", or any other negative connotation.