Bumpers w/pneumatic cylinders

I've had this idea of placing pneumatic cylinders behind our bumpers (see below) for a few possible applications:

1. Shock absorbers: Add a bit of air to small cylinders, small enough to make only a small difference in bumper width from the robot, and use them as shock absorbers for collisions.

2. To use as a "defensive push": Basically, add the cylinders to the the bumpers, and when someone gets a little too close for comfort, we just launch out our bumpers. This could also be used to redirect another robot, or to assist in a pin.

What do you think? Is it legal?

Attachment 11133

[Duke461]

Someone will probably get a more technical definition soon, but im too lazy .
The first thing you need to remember is that bumper rules change from year to year, so you can't rule out anything yet.
However, using the 2011 rules, I would say illegal, because there would in a sense be "gaps" in you robot. see here.
Hope this helps,
-duke

EDIT: This should help a lot:

Originally Posted by Duke461

Someone will probably get a more technical definition soon, but im too lazy .
The first thing you need to remember is that bumper rules change from year to year, so you can't rule out anything yet.
However, using the 2011 rules, I would say illegal, because there would in a sense be "gaps" in you robot. see here.
Hope this helps,
-duke

And if you make it so the bumpers go over the gap length?

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

And if you make it so the bumpers go over the gap length?

Im not sure what you mean here, sorry.

Originally Posted by Duke461

Im not sure what you mean here, sorry.

Me neither, but it's probably possible. I can think of a few ways, but they would be way too advanced. There are other, simpler ways, but I don't know. Just thinking, that's all.

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

Me neither, but it's probably possible. I can think of a few ways, but they would be way too advanced. There are other, simpler ways, but I don't know. Just thinking, that's all.

Yeah i definitely like the concept.
Maybe you could do what the dragonfly robot did, and then on top of that, those appendages could shoot out with pneumatics. That would be awesome.

Originally Posted by Duke461

Yeah i definitely like the concept.
Maybe you could do what the dragonfly robot did, and then on top of that, those appendages could shoot out with pneumatics. That would be awesome.

I like that, but the goal is to avoid hitting opponents above the bumper line. That's why I had the bumpers move, for more bumper on bumper action, and less robot on other robot killing second robot and disqualifying first robot action, if you know what I mean.

[Duke461]

Originally Posted by SuperNerd256

I like that, but the goal is to avoid hitting opponents above the bumper line. That's why I had the bumpers move, for more bumper on bumper action, and less robot on other robot killing second robot and disqualifying first robot action, if you know what I mean.

They wouldn't hit above the bumper line. The bumpers, as 3553 did, would be on the ground flush with the real bumpers. Youd simply need some kind of linear slide on the appendages, and the pneumatics would shoot it straight out into the opponents bumper.

Originally Posted by Duke461

They wouldn't hit above the bumper line. The bumpers, as 3553 did, would be on the ground flush with the real bumpers. Youd simply need some kind of linear slide on the appendages, and the pneumatics would shoot it straight out into the opponents bumper.

I see. I like that! Thanks!

[EricH]

I would be VERY cautious with using a drop-down active bumper system. If someone tips over while it's active next to them, you're probably going to get warned, possibly carded and penalized. Also, bear in mind the expansion rules, and that you're putting extra weight in there that could probably be better spent elsewhere.

Just some things to keep in mind.

You *might* be able to pull your first option off within the rules, but the "rigid mounting" might get you, at least last year it would have.

I probably should have said this at first, but unless the game next year and manuel give us a distinct advantage, I doubt I'll ever be using it. I just had the idea, and wanted CD's input. From what I'm hearing, the 1st option may be viable, so I'll test that on my own time.

Thanks everyone!

[EricH]

In past years, you'd be moving the bumpers off of the frame perimeter, or expanding the frame perimeter. This would result in gaps in the bumpers' coverage of the frame perimeter, or a violation of mounting rules.

In other words, if the rules don't change on mounting, you're going to be in trouble with the perimeter coverage rules. This is some of what Duke was getting at--<R07-A> in the 2011 rules.