View Single Post
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 15-02-2014, 21:43
MrBasse MrBasse is offline
Registered User
FRC #3572 (Wavelength)
Team Role: Coach
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Rookie Year: 2010
Location: Norton Shores, MI
Posts: 680
MrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond reputeMrBasse has a reputation beyond repute
Re: On-Robot Controls

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan Anderson View Post
You will find it impossible to cause the cRIO to activate any motors when the robot is not enabled. That's a safety feature that cannot be bypassed by any code you can write.

My suggestion is that you provide a way to disconnect the motor from its speed controller and then connect it to a separate battery through a manual switch.
What would be the difference between this and simply placing a switch that will send forward or reverse voltage to the motor from the robot battery? I don't see how this would be illegal but a separate battery and switch would be.

Honestly I don't understand why it is a problem to have manual control that is inaccessible unless purposefully controlled for safe travel from the field. I don't know why there can't be a blue box allowance of some sort to R54 to allow for safe transport. I think an inspector could judge whether a manual switch would pose a hazard or not. Think of a goalie robot with a ten foot arm extended going through a door to get to the pits...

To the OP, I think it is against the rules since you are controlling an actuator rather than the robot computer per R54.
__________________
Andrew Basse
Coach - FRC Team 3572 - Wavelength