Rookie Team Passing Inspection (video)

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by popnbrown

I'm worried about R33, there's a picture in there that says that the 10in gap is okay, but the rule says it has to be 8in. It's an issue for us, because there's a section where we have to have the bumper attached at two points that is 10in.

Look closely -- the 10" OK is really talking about the 1/4" gap between bumper and frame; it has nothing to do with the max 8" of unsupported bumper. I've always thought that diagram was confusing.

Take a look at http://www.chiefdelphi.com/forums/sh...6&postcount=78 and see if that helps.

[popnbrown]

Originally Posted by Jaxom

Look closely -- the 10" OK is really talking about the 1/4" gap between bumper and frame; it has nothing to do with the max 8" of unsupported bumper. I've always thought that diagram was confusing.

Haha oh wow. I finally see it, the arrow was pointing to just the 1/4". Grr, that's annoying they should have put a Not OK as well for the 10" or at least made it smaller than 10", because that part of the diagram even if it is 1/4" is not legal. They should really fix that, that's very very misleading.

Also, seg9585, I understand what they called you guys on. I got worried that it might be an issue for us too, but I think we're safe on the ball opening. Our side bumpers are the overlapping ones so that means the ones at the ball opening are 8in and so is the frame on that side.

Well, looks like it's time to prep for making some more brackets. Our bumpers are pretty secure, I made sure they aren't easily yank-able, but they do wobble a bit. Better be safe than sorry and get plan on securing them a little more.

[SenorZ]

Ah, the memories. Seems like it was just last year we... oh, yea, it was!

[PAR_WIG1350]

Originally Posted by popnbrown

Haha oh wow. I finally see it, the arrow was pointing to just the 1/4". Grr, that's annoying they should have put a Not OK as well for the 10" or at least made it smaller than 10", because that part of the diagram even if it is 1/4" is not legal. They should really fix that, that's very very misleading.

But it is legal, the rules say that gaps between the frame and bumper and be either 8'' wide and as deep as you want, OR 1/4" deep and as wide as you want.

[R33]Bumpers must be supported by the structure/frame of the Robot (i.e. each end of the Bumper must be rigidly attached to the Frame Perimeter, the gap between the backing material and the frame must not be greater than ¼ in. and no section of Bumper greater than 8 in. may be unsupported). See Figure 4‑7.

The wording is confusing, but what it says is a bumper 1/4" or less from the frame is "supported", sections of bumper that are not "supported" can be no more than 8 inches in length. since the 10" gap is only 1/4" deep the bumper is considered to be "supported" across this gap, thus the 8" limit does not apply.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Let me try and explain the difference between 1/4" gap and 8" opening. We all know that no matter how hard we try, bolt heads, welds, rivets and staples will prevent the bumper from full contact with the frame. After a few years of discussion, First realized that the movement of a bumper in a full hit with a 1/4" gap behind it, is not going to compromise the bumper structure. However, a opening in the frame of greater than 8" in width and more than 1/4" behind the bumper will actually result in cracking of the 3/4" plywood or total failure of the bumper. We want you to play as much as is possible. If your bumper fails and parts of your robot get damaged or start dragging around the field, your chances of fulfilling the "play as much as possible" go down the drain.

[Squillo]

Are teams getting dinged for bumpers (for example, let's assume full coverage bumpers, no 'cutout' or "c-shaped" frame) that meet the other rules (no gap more than 1/4" deep) but are not connected at the very end? Say, securely connected to the frame 3" in from the end of the plywood?

There was a lot of discussion on here a while back about the "connected at the end" part of the rule. Is that tripping up a lot of teams?

[sandiegodan]

Originally Posted by Squillo

Are teams getting dinged for bumpers (for example, let's assume full coverage bumpers, no 'cutout' or "c-shaped" frame) that meet the other rules (no gap more than 1/4" deep) but are not connected at the very end? Say, securely connected to the frame 3" in from the end of the plywood?

There was a lot of discussion on here a while back about the "connected at the end" part of the rule. Is that tripping up a lot of teams?

I inspected in San Diego and I didn't see any of that particular issue. It was mostly about the 8" minimum supported bumper from the vertex when the bot had a ball opening on the narrow end of the frame.

[Jaxom]

Originally Posted by sandiegodan

I inspected in San Diego and I didn't see any of that particular issue. It was mostly about the 8" minimum supported bumper from the vertex when the bot had a ball opening on the narrow end of the frame.

The bumper issues I remember were almost all this 8" problem, although we also had a few with numbers that didn't meet the rules.

I did have one robot I inspected that had to add an attachment when they went from a 6" to a full 8" section at the side of their opening. There was only one attachment on the original segment & it was closer to the corner than it was to the opening; adding the extra 2" would have left a pretty wobbly bumper without a 2nd attachment.