Thread: Rule G32
View Single Post
  #7   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 18-01-2009, 18:51
eugenebrooks eugenebrooks is offline
Team Role: Engineer
AKA: Dr. Brooks
no team (WRRF)
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Rookie Year: 2001
Location: Livermore, CA
Posts: 601
eugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond reputeeugenebrooks has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Rule G32

Check the QandA with regard to concave shapes carefully,
if you don't have the required 6 inch sections, with bumpers
attached, you will have to address the issue in your frame.

Eugene


Thread Tools
#1
01-11-2009, 02:17 PM
FRC1270
Junior Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 0
Bumpers and acute corners
In update #2 the robot is a rectangle with the front of the robot allowing for a 26” opening in the center. The two 6” front sections are perpendicular to the side rails and on opposite sides of each other. Would it be a violation of rule <R08-A> if the two side sections were angled 45 degrees towards the center of the robot – still covered with a bumper. Would the bumpers attached to the 6” angled section be considered enough protection to the corners and not in violation of rule <R08-C>?

#2
01-12-2009, 12:08 PM
FRC341
Junior Member

Join Date: Dec 2008
Posts: 0
Bumpers for Concave Designs
We have a question about exterior corners of the robot that are less
than 90 degrees. For clarification, this is one specific illustration
of this design, but our question refers to these sorts of corners in
general: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/32317?

It seems that there are four possible ways to interpret the rules about
such corners:

1. Bumpers must be present on either side of the corner (per this Q&A
response: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=11159). Thus, the
interior angled sections of the robot must have bumpers.

2. Bumpers must be located on the BUMPER PERIMETER (<R08>). Thus,
bumpers cannot be present on the interior angled section, as they are
not part of the convex hull of the robot polygon.

3. These sorts of exterior corners are not permitted because (1) and (2)
cannot simultaneously be satisfied.

4. The interior angled sections of the robot must be padded so as not to
damage the trailer (preserving the intent of the bumpers in the first
place), but since they are "bumpers" rather than "BUMPERS", they are not
exempt from weight and size withholdings.

Which is the correct interpretation? Thanks.

#3
01-16-2009, 12:28 AM
GDC
Senior Member

Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 1,664
Re: Bumpers and acute corners
Based on previously provided information, you have correctly concluded that all exterior corners must be protected by BUMPER segments (Rule <R08-I>). Each BUMPER segment must be a minimum of six inches in length (Rule <R08-A), and must be attached to the BUMPER PERIMETER (Rule <R08-L>). Effectively, this means that an exterior corner of the ROBOT can not be at an angle that is more acute than the coincident corner of the BUMPER PERIMETER. It follows that the example configuration you cited would not be permitted.