Your tall opaque robot is now illegal

[bachster]

Originally Posted by waialua359

Sorry for not responding earlier, I just read this.
The zip ties on the sides of the bumper is our fault. One of my kids put them on for the sake of doing it which was not neccessary.
As for the corner in question, he did that because the corner in was somehow bent a little after a much earlier previous match and he used zipties to try and straighten them out. After being asked to secure it with screws, we did it in the heat of the moment because I didnt want to miss a match. I do still believe that the bumper was within the height requirements though. The robot passed reinspection.
Was it measured on the field?
I think it was more of a cause and effect seeing the zip ties.

From my recollection, I think the concern from the LRI's perspective was more about the rigidity of the mounting and less about the height. I remember I had the impression that something must have broken or come loose on the normal mounting system because it seemed like the front corner(s) had some play in them, but I definitely didn't get a chance to look at it for long, and you're right, it could have partially been an effect of seeing the zip ties first. I can't speak for any feedback you might have gotten from the ref.

Originally Posted by EricH

Also, depending on the application, you could get called for "hard parts beyond 1".

Correct. In this particular case they were around the whole bumper so they violated the "hard parts beyond 1" and the bumper cross-section from R21. I agree that supplementary zip-ties are likely better than nothing in a pinch, but R21-G does specifically call them out as not meeting the definition of "rigid fastening system."

Glenn, hopefully your team didn't leave with the impression that rules were applied incorrectly or unfairly. Thanks for being willing to make the quick modification!

Apologies for the extreme tangent to the thread.