View Single Post
  #14   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 14-01-2008, 15:03
ALIBI's Avatar
ALIBI ALIBI is offline
Registered User
FRC #0141
Team Role: Parent
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: Michigan
Posts: 271
ALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to allALIBI is a name known to all
Re: Q&A response - new interpretation of R16

Yea! We get a couple more inches to work with, even if bumpers stay included (I talked earlier in ohter threads about not including the bumpers in the 80 inches). I for one am a happy camper.

Re: <R16> Interpretation

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The rule states that the Robot may not have any two points more than 80 inches apart when measured horizontally. The parenthetical phrase is intended as a clarifying example, but it does not convey the same authority as the rule. It is recognized that a small set of configurations exist (with an equilateral triangle with 80 inch sides as the degenerate case) that are in compliance with the letter of the rule, but may violate the example. In all such cases the rule, and not the example, will be enforced

EDIT: Wait a minute, no we don't, now I "R" confused. In my head I saw a small window expanding in front of the robot, that is until I drew a picture. It all went away in a hurry. Two vertical poles, 80 inches apart, robot with bumpers on must past between the poles with any and all manipulators going through a full range of motion no matter what the orientation is.
Can we please exclude the bumpers? I know, if we excluded the bumpers then I would still want 83 inches. My head is finally starting to hurt! Thanxs Dave!

Last edited by ALIBI : 14-01-2008 at 15:27.