|
Puzzling Rule
Below is quoted a question and answer from the FIRST BB:
_______________________________________________
M11 Use of Purchased Gas Springs
Home » Forums » Robot Rules Q/A
posted by: estokely (Jan 15, 2003 4:44 PM)
From: Tacoma Washington
Registered: Jan, 2003
M11 Use of Purchased Gas Springs Posted: Jan 15, 2003 4:44 PM
In the past we have been able to use Small Parts Gas Springs as an aid to arms etc.
If they are not compressed beyond 20 ft lbs at the start will they still be legal?
[Edited by: first on Jan 16, 2003 4:06 PM]
first
Posts: 961
Registered: Dec, 2002
Re: M11 Use of Purchased Gas Springs Posted: Jan 20, 2003 2:13 PM
Yes, gas springs are allowed.
OG1 __________________________________________________ __
FIRST's answer, in their typical terse fashion, fails to clarify whether the relaxed initial condition of the gas spring, as asked in the question, is implicit in their answer. M11 still stands as originally released, as you point out, and it would seem to clearly say that any gas springs on the robot must contain no more than 30 Joules of stored energy (per mechanism) at the beginning of the match. So I assume that FIRST means gas springs may be used if they are (mostly) relaxed at the beginning of the match.
My continuing problem with this rule is that I don't understand how it improves safety, its presumed intent. Yes, it limits the "spring" energy stored in each mechanism before the match, when people may be in close proximity to the machines. That's fine.
FIRST seems to be saying however, that cranking unlimited amounts of spring energy into a mechanism during the match, using motors or pneumatics, is allowed. OK, no people are near the machines at this time, so no problem.
Now, match over. Everybody come out onto the field and disentangle your bots' mechanisms, fold them back up, release those latches, relax those springs. And be quick about it! No rules speak to the hazards involved in this part of the match, and I believe that M11 is in fact counter-productive. It will cause less safe conditions in terms of potential rapid energy release than previous years' rules, in my opinion.
I'm sorry to just vent unconstructively, but I am confused by FIRST's inaction. They invited a concrete suggestion, Joe provided a reasonable one, and now they have let too much time go by for teams to incorporate any relief in their designs. Too bad.
Dodd
|