Re: Team Update #2
 

Or like "You really shouldn't build something like this..."

Idk man....I'm not liking this very much still =/

But, I'm still open to changes.

Re: Team Update #2
 

The 6" bumper picture doesn't make sense. It clearly states in the rules that a bumper can use a pool noodle vertically oriented at the end or bevel the edges. If you bevel the edges you get 3" of bumper sticking out from the bumper perimiter and this is specifically legal. That leaves 3 more inches required to get 6. What they show is 9" of bumper, not 6" (my 4 year old showed me the math behind that one). Since when did 3 + 6 = 6?

Re: Team Update #2
 

Figure 8-2 is incorrectly drawn, by my interpretation. It shows the red line as the Bumper Perimeter. Then I assume the brown line outside that would be the plywood part of the bumper. If so, it should not be extended along the sides of the robot frame.

Figure 8-2 is illustrating where wood vs noodles go. If you blow it up to about 400% you can see there may be a tiny bit of space in the lower left corner. The wood cannot wrap around the corner - it cannot extend past the end of the frame. (The wood in the lower right corner is shown correctly.) But the noodles can go around the corners, and 8-2 shows a variety of ways that can be done. In fact, it seems to be saying that the noodles must go around the corner, as the upper right corner is marked "Not OK". Noodles may go around the corner as a mitered corner (lower right), butted up against each other (upper left), or bent and enclosed in one piece of cloth (lower left).

This update does not confirm or refute that each face side of a robot must have a bumper. There was an earlier related posting of a robot with a wide opening, no bumper on that side, and the foam extending beyond the end of the edge to protect the corner. Both of those issues still have to be asked in Q&A.

Re: Team Update #2
 

Alright, that makes more sense.

Re: Team Update #2
 

I edited the original post. I guess my brain wouldn't let me put 3 + 6 = 6 ...

Re: Team Update #2
 

Paul, my interpretation is that a bumper segment includes the backing board, which must be at least 6" and must be attached to the frame. Noodles can extend farther than that 6", but not less.

Re: Team Update #2
 

Yep Gary, you are right. Rule R8 sub part J makes this painfully obvious. Oh well.

Re: Team Update #2
 

it still isn't clear to me how the length is accounted for. I understand about the over hang and that what they are showing is 2 sections of bumper with the smallest being 6 inches, but what happens if you make a single bumper that wraps the corner as in 8-2 lower left. While the wooden joints can't over lap, I would argue that, the example shown is 1 bumper and not 2, which is definitely more then 6 inches.

Re: Team Update #2
 

We have to include the definition of a BUMPER into the updates to get the full picture -- A BUMPER by definition technically has a plywood backing, therefore it is also considered a 'hard' bumper by other clauses of the rule, which may not overlap in the corners. Hence, teams need 6" of a plywood-backed 'hard' BUMPER coming off of the corner of every side. Not only that, rule <R08-M> states that all BUMPERs must be supported by the robot, without gaps. This means you must have a piece of your robot backing the bumpers in every corner.

Hence, when you put all clauses of <R08> together, their drawing is correct and makes sense. We've had to rearrange the frame in some way or another over 8 or so drive train iterations to get it right to comply with the bumper rules :rolleyes: . Next year the bumpers need their own section, lol.

<edit> Of course, as I write this I notice clause <E> that states BUMPERS must not weigh more than 18 lbs, so by what I just said the vertical pool noodles shouldn't count towards the weight of the bumpers. But common sense tells us that the vertical noodles are apart of the bumpers... So eh, perhaps they could re-word it to state that the minimum length of 'hard' bumpers must be 6".

Re: Team Update #2
 

ha ha...ya i agree :ahh::confused:

Re: Team Update #2
 

Is the intent of this update to warn us for damage to our robot or the risk of penalty for contacting an oppositions trailer in this fashion?

Re: Team Update #2
 

Let's just hope that curved parts don't count as technical corners...then we'll see a whole slew of definitions for a CORNER and all of its ensuing confusion.

Since curves are not edges, I would presume that your drawing is ok for the front of the robot:

Re: Team Update #2
 

I'd like to think that an inspector, looking at a curvy bumper that is made well, will pass it. A well made curvy bumper (IMO) would have notched wood and notched angle stock to meet the profile as shown in the figure. If you notch it and form it well, it should meet the "intent" of the rule.


... but ... My team's not going curvy, so I'm very interested in the interpretation of the hard surfaces versus the "vertical" piece of floaty.

I could see that if there were 2 floppy piece-parts, backed with 2 separate boards, and only held together by the cloth and the vertical piece, then both of those pieces should be required to be 6" in length.

But, if my hard-parts were formed together as one piece, and rounded the corner as one rigid unit, with or without the vertical piece (i.e. cut angles in the floaties for an angled joint), then I can count the internal linear distance of the angled piece.

So an L-shaped bumper with 4 + 2 inches of coverage would satisfy the 6" rule ... as long as it's a rigid one-piece bumper.

Assuming I'm right, now they'll have to define what "protecting a corner" means. Minimum 1" of bumper? 2"? 3"?

[edit] if they say 6" is the minimum, then they'll also have to revise figure 8-2.

Re: Team Update #2
 

So is the consensus that this rule is saying that we must have two 6" pieces of bumper on the front or could it be less as long as it wraps around. If it is saying that we must have a certain amount of bumper isn't this getting a bit ridiculous how much regulation there is in the design. Where is the room for innovation?

Re: Team Update #2
 

... and another thing ... they should give us the 7" trailer hitch linear distance as a gimme. There are not many physical ways to poke into that area, so they should let us include that 7" linear distance as a part of our 2/3rds requirement.