Bumper Restrictions

[RoeeVulcan]

During our inspection problems kept coming out with the way we did our bumpers. In result i have two questions:
1) Where can i see a list with the full bumper restrictions? Do any of you have one? I remember searching for one with the height of the ground our bumpers can have, without any luck in the manual, and than having it on the inspectors list.
2) Have the bumper rules ever change since they were first introduced? Is there a possibility that a solution for the bumpers i will find this year be banned by the next?

[IKE]

Please check section 4.1.6 of the manual for bumper rules:
http://frc-manual.usfirst.org/viewItem/3#4

R03 also defines the frame perimeter wich is important to the bumpers.

Each year, many of the rules change a little bit or a whole bunch. The bumper rules have been around since 2005, with continuous refinement. In 2010, the FRC Game Design Commitee switched over to the Red/Blue configurations with numbers on them. Often there is a change in height from the ground and whether they must be continuous or may have gaps. It would seem that these changes are primarily dependent on the game pieces and how they want the game to play.

Bumpers can be a very frustrating part of the inspection process. There are a lot of detailed rules that must be followed. Often teams that have the most trouble are focusing their design at the limits of the rules. IE, if the bumper length mus be 8" from the corner, they make that segment 8". Unfortunately if the cut is slightly short, of the bumpers don't fit tightly, you can end up in a condition where your bumpers are only 7 3/4" from the corner of the frame perimeter, and thus non-compliant. My recommendation is that teams add a little margin to their design if they can.

[Jon Stratis]

Originally Posted by RoeeVulcan

During our inspection problems kept coming out with the way we did our bumpers. In result i have two questions:
1) Where can i see a list with the full bumper restrictions? Do any of you have one? I remember searching for one with the height of the ground our bumpers can have, without any luck in the manual, and than having it on the inspectors list.
2) Have the bumper rules ever change since they were first introduced? Is there a possibility that a solution for the bumpers i will find this year be banned by the next?

1 - The "BUMPER Rules" section of the ROBOT RULES lists everything specific to the bumpers. For the bumper height, R25 clearly states the "BUMPERS must be located entirely within the BUMPER ZONE, which is between 2 and 10 in. from the floor, in reference to the ROBOT standing normally on a flat floor."

2 - Expect them to change every year, and you'll never have an issue at inspection. Read the rules, and figure out your bumper design just like you would your drive train - bumpers are just as important as everything else, and must be constructed legally!

[RoeeVulcan]

Originally Posted by Jon Stratis

1 - The "BUMPER Rules" section of the ROBOT RULES lists everything specific to the bumpers. For the bumper height, R25 clearly states the "BUMPERS must be located entirely within the BUMPER ZONE, which is between 2 and 10 in. from the floor, in reference to the ROBOT standing normally on a flat floor."

2 - Expect them to change every year, and you'll never have an issue at inspection. Read the rules, and figure out your bumper design just like you would your drive train - bumpers are just as important as everything else, and must be constructed legally!

it is just that i have an idea for a little more- tactical-bumpers and i wanted to know if they were legal. anyway thanks for the answer. i hope it won't be a one trick pony before first restricts it.

[EricH]

Originally Posted by RoeeVulcan

it is just that i have an idea for a little more- tactical-bumpers and i wanted to know if they were legal.

Basic word of advice: If it complies with all of the bumper rules, it probably is legal. If it doesn't comply with one or more, it is not legal. If you aren't sure, you're probably best off asking Q&A about it before you get to your first event; that way the inspectors aren't either telling you to change it or asking the GDC and then telling you to change it.

I do remember hearing about some weight-transferring bumpers back before the standard bumper design came out (2006); those were effectively banned by the bumper rules in 2008 (standard bumpers were optional in 2006 and 2007).

[DELurker]

Originally Posted by RoeeVulcan

it is just that i have an idea for a little more- tactical-bumpers and i wanted to know if they were legal. anyway thanks for the answer. i hope it won't be a one trick pony before first restricts it.

The bumper rules are actually quite self-explanatory this year, with the major changes being 3 points:

1. Hex and Star pool noodles are now allowed
2. 3/4" thick durable wood is allowed, rather than just plywood, and
3. Team numbers can be split across bumper gaps

Of course, I have to ask, knowing that I will probably regret it... What the heck is a tactical bumper?

[Grim Tuesday]

I mean, given the current rules, it would be legal to use (if you could find it) some 3/4 pieces of ironwood, if you wanted to weigh your robot down for some reason. I even suppose you could weight half your bumpers with a heavy wood and the other half with a light one but I don't know how much within the spirit of bumpers this is.

[Jon Stratis]

Why bother using exotic woods for weight on your bumpers? Just use enough steel in your brackets to get their weight up to 20lbs for the set (if that's what you're looking for). There aren't any rules to using heavy steel blocks with holes thorough them as bumper brackets, so long as you mind the weight limit.

[IndySam]

The bumpers are intended for protection and identification. I don't much like when teams start stretching the rules for some tactical advantage.

Pay heed if I am inspecting (or many other inspectors I know) your robot and you are lawyering or stretching the rules you better have a perfect robot in every other respect because you are going to get the most thorough inspection ever.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by IndySam

The bumpers are intended for protection and identification. I don't much like when teams start stretching the rules for some tactical advantage.

Pay heed if I am inspecting (or many other inspectors I know) your robot and you are lawyering or stretching the rules you better have a perfect robot in every other respect because you are going to get the most thorough inspection ever.

I don't think this is fair. If teams build their bumpers within the rules, and you don't agree with the rules, why should the team get a more difficult inspection?

It doesn't matter if you like it or not, if they comply with the rules, it is not your position to judge.

[IndySam]

Originally Posted by Gregor

I don't think this is fair. If team's builds their bumpers within the rules, and you don't agree with the rules, why should the team get a more difficult inspection?

It doesn't matter if you like it or not, if they comply with the rules, it is not your position to judge.

I'm not talking about being within the rules, I'm talking about stretching them to the breaking point. Mounting a 10 pound steel plate to a bumper that has no real practical reason is violating the spirit of the rules.

And as far as your second point, in fact, is is the inspectors job to judge if a team is complying with the rules.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I'm not talking about being within the rules, I'm talking about stretching them to the breaking point. Mounting a 10 pound steel plate to a bumper that has no real practical reason is violating the spirit of the rules.

And as far as your second point, in fact, is is the inspectors job to judge if a team is complying with the rules.

Stretching the rules is still complying with the rules. Until it is explicitly illegal to add weight just to add weight (assuming all other bumper rules are met), giving a team a harsher inspection is against the point of inspection. Is the point of inspection not to get all teams on the field, while ensure that they comply with all the rules?

It is the inspector's job to inspect the robot, they inspect the robot for compliance, end of story.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by Gregor

Stretching the rules is still complying with the rules. Until it is explicitly illegal to add weight just to add weight (assuming all other bumper rules are met), giving a team a harsher inspection is against the point of inspection. Is the point of inspection not to get all teams on the field, while ensure that they comply with all the rules?

It is the inspector's job to inspect the robot, they inspect the robot for compliance, end of story.

Yes, but....when teams don't know some of the rules, they tend not to know others. So while looking at the robot & talking to the team I get the sense that they don't really understand the basics, I take extra time to make sure they haven't missed some of the other things. So, if you don't know how to properly build bumpers (which, despite all the grumbling, are NOT hard) then I wonder if you didn't read the pneumatic rules either. So I'd better take an even harder look at something that could quickly become a safety issue.

[Andrew Schreiber]

Originally Posted by IndySam

I'm not talking about being within the rules, I'm talking about stretching them to the breaking point. Mounting a 10 pound steel plate to a bumper that has no real practical reason is violating the spirit of the rules.

And as far as your second point, in fact, is is the inspectors job to judge if a team is complying with the rules.

If the rules say they can do it then it is the inspector's job to pass them. Causing teams problems just because you don't like what they did within the spirit of the rules is wrong.

In my opinion (inspector at more than a number of events) our job is to inspect for adherence to the rules. Failing that, we inspect for adherence to the spirit of the rules. We ensure safety and fairness. Every team had the option to strap 10lbs of steel to their bumpers so it's completely fair.

[dtengineering]

Originally Posted by Andrew Schreiber

If the rules say they can do it then it is the inspector's job to pass them. Causing teams problems just because you don't like what they did within the spirit of the rules is wrong.

In my opinion (inspector at more than a number of events) our job is to inspect for adherence to the rules. Failing that, we inspect for adherence to the spirit of the rules. We ensure safety and fairness. Every team had the option to strap 10lbs of steel to their bumpers so it's completely fair.

While I certainly agree with the fact that inspectors should actively seek to pass robots that are in compliance with the rules, I do want to take a bit of issue with the final sentence.

Teams did not have the option to strap 10lbs of steel to their bumpers. Teams did have the option to design ridiculously heavy bumper mounts... but unless that mass is somehow involved in connecting the bumpers to the robot, it is not allowed under the bumper rules. It is a subtle difference, but not an insignificant one. To allow a team to just come along mid-competition and bolt ten pounds of steel onto their bumpers might be unfair to those teams who took the time to read the rules, assess their design options and then integrate heavy bumper mounts as a design choice.

I tend to agree that inspectors should interpret the rules to the team's benefit as much as possible... but there are limits.

Jason