Canburglar Safety

[faust1706]

Originally Posted by JVN

Are these high energy, super fast canburglars safe?
Depends who you ask. Safe is not quantifiable. Safe is not defined in the manual. Safe is relative.

One could quantify the safety of these mechanisms by measuring how much force they can produce...but you're absolutely right. I'm waiting for teams to go back to winches like many shooters last year had, if they haven't already. One could impose a limit to how much potential energy can be stored upon loading a robot onto the field maybe?

Originally Posted by Basel A

None of your programmers have ever accidentally started the robot in practise mode and run auton without intending to?

Oh lord, at an open house 2 years ago we were demoing our robot. Something happened and it started our vision assisted autonomous. The vision system tracked metal picture frame about 20 feet away, auto lined up to it and nailed it perfectly with all 3 shots, shattering the glass. The principle was more impressed than upset. There's a video of it somewhere....

Originally Posted by Bennett548

Stored energy in the form of springs is naturally the next thing to turn to. Unfortunately, I believe that these spring loaded designs are going to lead to much more dangerous situations.

I think if there are no limitations to the amount of potential energy allowed while loading, teams will be able to at the start of autonomous release their winch design and start driving forward at the same time and still get them.

I anxious to see if there will be a gentleman's agreement at the highest level in which each team gets two center bins, but that most likely won't happen. Citrus Curcuits, 1114, 2056, 254, 118, and many other elite teams will allow for einstein teams to have 2 canburglar robots and a 3 tote autonomous robot.

[Bennett548]

I think the danger is different this year: tip speeds are going to be much faster in general, because can burglars are usually long. From the videos I have analyzed, several canburglars go faster than 18 m/s [~40 miles per hour].

Canburglars also tend to reach out much farther from the robot that launchers did.

Last year our ball shooter used 4x 180N [~40lbf] constant force springs, but our motor powered can burglar still concerns me more because it deploys a somewhat sharp metal hook at high speeds about 1.8m [~6 feet] from the robot.

[Basel A]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

Extending that argument, then all motored system should have safety latches and/or pins.

I don't think that's a good solution.

Obviously it's a matter of degrees. Most motored systems aren't moving that quickly, don't have that much kinetic energy. These canburglars honestly seems more dangerous to me than a robot driving full speed. Compare those to an actuating tote-grabbing mechanism. You don't think the average inspector can tell the difference?

Originally Posted by Chris is me

He said "disabled or unpowered" - so why would the robot be moving? This is a distinctly different situation than what you're describing, which is accidentally enabling in auton instead of teleop.

Show me a robot that has an ultrafast canburglar and is always disabled or unpowered when it isn't on the field.

[IronicDeadBird]

What we are making inherently is not safe. If making robots was a safe thing to do then we wouldn't have so many rules. In my opinion if your design is justified then safety in that situation is not only making the design as safe to handle as possible, but it also includes being around it. Securing springs, monitoring air pressure, safety isn't just making things not hurt, its about stopping the situations that get people hurt.
This is from the experience of having a can burglar on our robot that straight up scares me and being in charge of field reset for our teams drive practice.

[faust1706]

Originally Posted by Bennett548

Last year our ball shooter used 4x 180N [~40lbf] constant force springs, but our motor powered can burglar still concerns me more because it deploys a somewhat sharp metal hook at high speeds about 1.8m [~6 feet] from the robot.

Assuming you use one of those constant force springs: the torque would be 332.77 NM (that's metre), or for Americans: 1.2652092 x 10^-13 ounce-lightyears (running joke at my university, "how many ounce lightyears is that?)

[asid61]

I would argue last year's bots were far more dangerous, as they had to launch heavy balls. Our burgulars are motor-powered, so no energy is stored on the bot.
Finding the correct rule to limit this would be tricky.

[smistthegreat]

Originally Posted by asid61

I would argue last year's bots were far more dangerous, as they had to launch heavy balls. Our burgulars are motor-powered, so no energy is stored on the bot.
Finding the correct rule to limit this would be tricky.

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather get hit by a ball than whipped by a fishing pole/hockey stick/piece of PVC. I'm not sure what more can be done than making sure anything that has the potential to move is locked in place as part of the transport configuration, and that the driveteam is ready and willing to E-Stop in auto should something go wrong. Definitely not my favorite part of this game.

[AdamHeard]

Originally Posted by smistthegreat

I don't know about you, but I'd much rather get hit by a ball than whipped by a fishing pole/hockey stick/piece of PVC. I'm not sure what more can be done than making sure anything that has the potential to move is locked in place as part of the transport configuration, and that the driveteam is ready and willing to E-Stop in auto should something go wrong. Definitely not my favorite part of this game.

But you certainly wouldn't rather get hit by the launcher itself from last year (which would likely break bones).

[smistthegreat]

Originally Posted by AdamHeard

But you certainly wouldn't rather get hit by the launcher itself from last year (which would likely break bones).

Very true. I was mostly referring to safety during a match, where canburglars pose a risk to people standing near the field due to their long reach should they get turned away from the step. In the pits, in the queue, and on the practice field, a dry-firing catapult could easily cause more damage.

[Gregor]

Originally Posted by Loose Screw

If you build a mechanism that moves at high speeds with sharp hooks without at least 2 safety latches, don't be mad when the inspectors fail you.

How did you come to the number 2? Why not 1, 3, 4, or even none. Do you plan on failing every team with less than 2 safety latches? What if the inspector beside you is requiring 1, or none?

[themccannman]

Originally Posted by Bennett548

I have already decided on the level of energy that I am comfortable with: if we miss the hole and our hook punches through the trash can lid, we have too much energy and have to dial it back a bit.

woops... https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphoto...13&oe=55ADA0C9

[Richard Wallace]

Originally Posted by JVN

Who will determine which canburglars are safe? ...

Will the World Championship be determined by an inspector's subjective decision that 118's canburglar is safe, but 254's isn't?

Never fear, John.

Robot inspectors have lead robot inspectors to turn to when it is not obvious how to decide what is or is not allowed by the rules. A team that does not agree with their robot inspector's decision can also turn to the lead robot inspector. Lead robot inspectors have weekly conference calls. The leader of all the lead robot inspectors reads CD frequently. As does the leader of the FRC.

I count several layers of backup. Bring on those energetic burglars.

[Siri]

Originally Posted by Richard Wallace

Never fear, John.

Robot inspectors have lead robot inspectors to turn to when it is not obvious how to decide what is or is not allowed by the rules. A team that does not agree with their robot inspector's decision can also turn to the lead robot inspector. Lead robot inspectors have weekly conference calls. The leader of all the lead robot inspectors reads CD frequently. As does the leader of the FRC.

I count several layers of backup. Bring on those energetic burglars.

No argument on the appeals process. But given that inconsistency in rules enforcement at Worlds is anything but new, this is a reasonable concern for the year. Fortunately the real showdown this year will likely be at such a high level and within such a small and professionally inter-related group of teams that they'll be able to cross-check. (Certainly JVN must be well versed in navigating through the RI system.)

[JVN]

Originally Posted by Richard Wallace

Never fear, John.

Robot inspectors have lead robot inspectors to turn to when it is not obvious how to decide what is or is not allowed by the rules. A team that does not agree with their robot inspector's decision can also turn to the lead robot inspector. Lead robot inspectors have weekly conference calls. The leader of all the lead robot inspectors reads CD frequently. As does the leader of the FRC.

I count several layers of backup. Bring on those energetic burglars.

NEVER any fear here -- especially because I've never been accused of being energetic.
(Also, our robot tether isn't allowed in the auto zone pre-match, so the Batman as a Canburglar isn't really a thing.)

[Cash4587]

We can't have a canburglar either There are pros and cons of having a tether.. Ratman is pretty much confined to the feeder area.