[Rickertsen2]

As an extension to my earlier post, i would like to give a few examples to highlight the absurdity of the pneumatic actuator rules. Last year, we had two 1 1/16" bore cylinders on our robot. When we went up for inspection, we were rejected, because the custom cylinder order form allows only for 3/4", 1 1/2" or 2" bore cylinders. I welcome any attempt to explain the rationale for such a thing. 1 1/16" is between 3/4" and 1 1/2". Does that particular size pose a safety hazard? That must be it.

How about this. For the 3/4" and 1 1/2" cylinders we are required to order them with DP mounting (1/4" pin in the back). If we want to, we are allowed to press the pin out leaving a 1/4" hole, but we are not allowed to order the cylinders with DXP mounting (no pin. just a 1/4" hole). Pressing the pin out and ordering a cylinder with DXP mounting leave you with the EXACT same result, but one is illegal.

There are other useful mounting styles that are prohibited as well such as the D mounting style which allows a cylinder to be mounted by two screws inserted near the front, perpendicular to the cylinder as a whole.

What about rod-less cylinders (picture a pneumatically powered linear slide) prohibited?

How about locking cylinders. These would be a heaven for multi-positioning. Seems like these would lead themselves to innovation to me.

How about multi-position cylinders. I can imagine all sorts of neat mechanisms with these. Again, great potential for all sorts of innovative mechanisms could be made with these.

How about double ended cylinders (a normal cylinder but with another rod sticking out the opposite end)

These are only a small sampling of the prohibited pneumatics actuators available that i think would be of great benefit. I could see logic in restricting parts such as off the shelf pneumatic grippers, but the parts i mentioned above a far from pre-built solutions. They are all very fundamental components.