Quote:
Originally Posted by Cal578
I agree that the eyebolts should be above the center of gravity, which leads to the question of orientation. We're concerned about how inspectors will interpret this.
(emphasis mine)
Our robot climbs the outside of the pyramid corner on its belly. We put the eyebolts near the front corners of the chassis, so that if the robot were to slip and be supported by the belay ropes, it would pretty much stay safely in place.
One interpretation of "near the balance point" might lead us to put the bolts on the sides around the geometric center of the robot. In that case, if the robot were to slip, it would suddenly try to level itself. It would swing down, past level, and oscillate until something dampens the oscillation. That something might be a body part near that height, such as a head.
So, I think we're following a safer interpretation of the rule. Do you think inspectors will see it that way?
|
I won't be inspecting at your regional, but I think all the inspectors are on the same page - the belay points are there for safety, and should be placed on the robot in a way that makes the robot safe to lower.
That said, you may be questioned as inspectors will be looking for them to be near the center of gravity, and will be inspecting it while it's sitting on the floor. If you explain how its safer and demonstrate the robot removal process for them (at the practice field?), I would personally be surprised if you were forced to change the belay points to some place that makes the robot less stable (and thus less safe) while lowering it. Of course, this is all based on your description, without having seen the robot, how it climbs, or how you remove it from the pyramid. Actually seeing the process is what would form my decision.