View Single Post
  #12   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-03-2008, 14:16
wilsonmw04's Avatar
wilsonmw04 wilsonmw04 is offline
Coach
FRC #1086 (Blue Cheese)
Team Role: Teacher
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Rookie Year: 2007
Location: Midlothian, VA
Posts: 1,884
wilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond reputewilsonmw04 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Are the mandatory bumpers helping or hurting?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery View Post
Having bumpers not only means that robots take less damage, but that they deal less damage to other robots as well. I'd much rather be hit by a robot with bumpers than a robot without them. It's much like car insurance in a way.
Mandatory bumpers means that robots will be less capable of hurting another robot. Even if your robot won't get hurt in the collision, will the other robot survive?
That an engineering question. Robustness should be incorporated into all designs. If your robot cannot handle a hard hit, put bumpers on it. If you build it to take a hit, you shouldn't have to add 6 inches to your robot's width.

A side note: If bumpers are mandatory next year, they should not count in the size of your playing configuration. By making them not count for your starting size but then make them count for your playing size effectively reduces the polygon of support of your robot and could indirectly lead to more tipping.

In summary: bummers are good, but they should be optional.
__________________
Currently: Coach FRC 1086/FTC 93
2006-2011 Coach FRC 2106/FTC 35
If you come to a FRC event to see a robot competition, you are missing the point.
Reply With Quote