Quote:
Originally Posted by GeeTwo
If the bumpers as built to protect also assist a function, that's certainly OK. If there's a part of the bumper that does not protect or attach, but ONLY serves another function, there are no rules against it, but its use may generate a rule change. It's similar to G11 this year: if you're playing the game and a by-product is a violation of a rule on your opponent's part, foul on him (her); if your action is (judged to have been) performed solely to draw the foul, foul on you.
|
This kind of structural bumper has been legal for years, and it would be very difficult to make this illegal as it would require an inspector to judge intent. You would essentially be saying there is a limit to how strong or rigid a bumper assembly could be, which is a pretty terrible precedent to set.
Take a look at 118's 2010 robot or 33's 2013 robot for examples of how the bumper is built "extra-robust" and then that robustness is taken advantage of by requiring less in the drivetrain. We certainly don't want to write rules demanding teams build drive frames to a certain robustness, and we don't want rules saying "if your bumper is too strong, you have to weaken it", so these rules are likely here to stay. The 20 pound bumper weight limit, along with practicality concerns with being able to remove the entire bumper assembly, will constrain these designs to a reasonable level.