Slip Ring

Well now, where were we? Slip rings are good and ummm, they should be allowed... or something.

[Matt Attallah]

somebody asked what their main purpose was...

[Matt Krass]

If I'm not mistaken the one they started is MIA due to server 'hiccup'.

[Jeff Waegelin]

Originally posted by Cory
there is no need to start a new thread. please respond in the one you started yesterday.

Cory

That thread was deleted, somehow. If you look at Brandon's announcement about "downtime" he said the Slip Ring thread is MIA.

[Cory]

oops, sorry about that guys

Cory

[FotoPlasma]

Originally posted by Cory
there is no need to start a new thread. please respond in the one you started yesterday.

Cory

It seems as though that thread was the only casualty of the downtime, today.



Anyway, earlier today, I found two questions about using slip rings on the jive.ilearning.whatever message board, both of which had answers which practically stated that they would need to be on the Restricted Parts List to be legal robot material, however, as M. Krass pointed out, Anderson Power's connectors aren't on said list, but are "quick disconnect" components. You might be able to argue that slip rings are a saftey feature, and, if they have the kind of lax inspection system as this and previous years (doubtful), you might be able to get away with it.

However, again, I believe there was a post in the previous thread stating that other teams (66 in 2002, was it?) have used slip rings without penalty.

So, it seems to be rather up in the air, at this point...

<edit>

Joe Ross was kind enough to point out that, on the Restricted Parts List of 2003, there was this specific item:

From page 43 of The_Robot.pdf
Electronics:
...
Insulated Electrical Connectors:
Any amount/size, off-the-shelf, proper gauge/current rating

To my knowledge, this means that as long as a slip ring is "off-the-shelf" and properly insulated, it's entirely legal.

Just a little more stirring of the water...

</edit>