[ChrisH]

Personally, I thought many robots violated the light rules as originally stated. But because of all the whining, including much on this forum, the rule in practice was modified into something unrecognizable and practically unenforcable.

Much of that came from the attitude "Let's just do what we want, they'll change the rule to make it easier anyway". Based on past experience I don't blame people for having that attitude, but it still disgusts me, especially when I hear it from my own team (which I did, repeatedly).

Assume at the outset that rules are rules and if you violate them, you may have to pay the price, even if it means you don't compete. That should go for name teams as well as rookies and vice versa.

My suggestion for clear rules based on this year's light:

The light shall be mounted in such a way that it is vertical in the robot's normal operating position.

The light shall be EXPOSED for a minimum of 4 inches. Exposed means there is nothing between the surface of the light dome and the eye (or corrective lens in my case) of the observer.

The light may be occluded by robot structure or protective cages, however the total width of the occlusion shall not be more than 50% of the light diameter at any angle. (so if the light diameter is 3" you can't have a structural element bigger than 1.5" or more than 6 1/4" rods for a protective cage)

For purposes of this rule ANY material between the dome of the light and the observer is assumed to be OPAQUE. This includes materials that are normally transparent because the reflections that occur from field lighting on such materials can and do make it impossible to determine the light color under competition conditions.

It must be possible for the team to change the light color in 15 seconds or less. If the there is any doubt about the ability to accomplish this, the team will be asked to demonstate to the inspectors in a timed test that this is indeed possible.

The burden of proof for compliance will rest on the teams. That is, a light is assumed to be non-compliant unless the team can demonstrate that it's placement in fact complies with the above rules.

Any comments?