[boomergeek]

I'm not sure that padded extensions are consistent with the spirit of <G48>
"no penalties will be assigned for incidental contact with such extended mechanisms."

If the extensions are intended to be pushed into other robots or intended to be placed in positions such that contact with other robots is intentional and not incidental, then my nonbinding interpretation of the definition of "incidental" and the letter of G48 is that padded (or unpadded) extensions beyond the bumper perimeter that - (even if they are well designed to prevent damage in collisions)- are not consistent with the clear demarcation: bumpers are for intentional contact, anything else is for incidental contact.

Are the inspectors going to need to inspect if a high speed collision with extensions are just as safe as collisions with the bumpers? Bumper rules currently only apply to bumpers: would some of them need to be interpreted for "extensions"? Somehow I don't see the GDC going down that path.

I find it more likely for the GDC to decide that intentional pushing or blocking with anything other than the official bumpers is not allowed by <G48>.


If you haven't already asked an official question to the GDC, then might I suggest:

"Is it allowable without penalty to intentionally (not incidentially) make contact with the bumper of other robots using parts of our robot other than the official bumpers mounted on the frame perimeter?