View Single Post
  #10   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 07-27-2014, 11:47 PM
nuclearnerd's Avatar
nuclearnerd nuclearnerd is offline
Speaking for myself, not my team
AKA: Brendan Simons
FRC #5406 (Celt-X)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Rookie Year: 2014
Location: Hamilton, Ontario, Canada
Posts: 440
nuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant futurenuclearnerd has a brilliant future
Re: Pneumatic Restrictions & Improvments

Quote:
Originally Posted by sanddrag View Post
And this is why they should be legal. The only conceivable safety concern I can come up with relating to their use is you can move fast in two directions instead of just one with an open port Anyhow, to the OP, great thread.
Agreed. Without quick exhaust valves, you're forced to either halve the flowrate by running exhaust air back to the valve, or introduce some other mechanism to retract the cylinder - a complicated waste of weight.

I maintain that rules that discourage the use of pneumatics actually reduce safety. I would trust a factory-tested solenoid valve over a gerry-rigged latch holding back hundreds of pounds of spring force.

Last edited by nuclearnerd : 07-27-2014 at 11:50 PM.