View Single Post
  #39   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 29-01-2010, 22:25
martin417's Avatar
martin417 martin417 is offline
Opinionated old goat
AKA: Martin Wilson
no team
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Rookie Year: 2008
Location: Buford, GA
Posts: 721
martin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond reputemartin417 has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Fasteners extending outside the FRAME PERIMETER

Quote:
Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz View Post
Martin,
Team Update 6 modifies the definition of the FRAME PERIMETER and as such modifies the rules that reference the definition including R16. My impression then is that fasteners as described in TU6 will not be considered to be outside the FRAME PERIMETER in the bumper zone or elsewhere. The drawings displayed this afternoon in this thread are therefore legal.
I agree that allowing the protrusions was probably the intent of the new wording, however, it was not the result of that wording. If you exclude the fasteners from the determination of the frame perimeter, then said perimeter is defined by the frame members. Anything outside the frame members is, by definition, outside the frame perimeter. There is no wiggle room. It can't be interpreted any other way. The frame perimeter is defined by the outermost vertices on the robot, exclusive of fasteners.

I'm not trying to be a pain, but words do have meanings, and in this case, I don't see any way to read those words except as stated above.
__________________
Former Mentor Team 1771
Former mentor Team 4509