Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Denman
i must say that i agree with the majority here that they are a viable defensive option. however i have seen a superb bumper design on another robot. Did anyone see the bumpers on694's bot? They were designed so that when a bot hit them they would move back and reduce the force on them. I can't see any photos though... i'll have a look on my computer at home later
|
Sadly, the bumpers weren't as effective as we would of liked. The idea was amazing, but we didn't implement perfectly. I'd like to try it again next year myself. We ended up reducing the bumpers to not come out, and just remain as cushioning. We replaced one side with a rather steep flopout wedge, but since it didn't go all the way to the ground, it never came close to flipping anyone, and we were careful not to push too much with that side.
At any rate, the bumpers have absolutely no effect on a wedged bot. One such robot flipped us over in the qualifying rounds, pushing us into a vision tetra untll we tipped. This team went on to topple several robots in the elim rounds, just barely losing in the elims. Wedges are all fine and dandy, but a team with a wedge should be responsible if they flip a bot over as a result of that wedge. It leaves room for a judgement call, but a very clear one: If they're pushing with their wedge and a bot falls, they get DQ'd. The rules prohibit putting a part of your robot under another bot and lifting, and what does a wedge do except lift as it moves foward?
There's nothing wrong with a wedge to have your bot "hold" another and transfer weight, but when you make it too steep, you're lifting, not holding.
__________________
Team 694
2005 Championship - Galileo Semifinalist
2005 New York - Regional Chairmans Award
2005 New York - Semifinalist (Thanks 1257,1340)