Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber
Thus, can we expect all stored energy launchers will be expected to demonstrate a dry fire as part of the initial inspection and any subsequent re-inspections?
|
No. You can expect any stored energy launcher that, upon review by the LRI, appears to present a risk of catastrophic failure resulting in parts leaving the robot, to probably be dry fired in a safe area. If the robot design is such so that risk does not appear to be present (mechanism is contained, mechanism is significantly robust) then it is reasonable to expect that a dry fire will not be necessary. If a shooter is modified and the modifications appear to possibly affect the structural integrity of the mechanism, then a possible demonstration during a re-inspection is possible. If you worked on some other part of the robot we are not going to re-inspect the shooter each time.
Rule R8 requires that robots not "be unsafe" or "cause an unsafe condition". The burden is on teams to be able to show compliance with the rule. I would welcome teams to provide written analysis that shows that the energy present in the mechanism is not sufficient to cause the materials used to exceed their yield strength, with sufficient margin, in lieu of physical demonstration of the mechanism.
Please keep in mind that if something goes wrong with a robot that we did not verify was safe, and parts go flying into the crowd, that in today's litigious environment, the lawyer's are going to sue everyone they can, including the robot inspectors that said it was safe.
The inspectors are not "out to break your robot". We want everyone to play with a fully functioning robot. But we are also responsible for making sure everyone goes home in the same condition they came in.