05-02-2006, 19:43
|
 |
 |
Curmudgeon
 FRC #0116 (Epsilon Delta) |
|
Join Date: Jun 2001
Rookie Year: 1996
Location: Herndon, VA
Posts: 3,176
|
|
|
Re: New rule Clarification changes plans
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Sachiel7
Guys, reread the first Q&A.
That device would not be a legal shooter . That means you cannot shoot balls rapidly out of it.
If you're not, you can still extend outside the 28x38 (or whatever) starting bounds.
So, your shouldn't have to redesign that much. Just lower the speed of your mechanism. I think FIRST needs to define a minimum velocity that defines a device as a shooter.
|
If the mechanism can eject a ball, it is considered a shooter. See this question/answer. The velocity of the ball while being ejected does not matter.
-dave
__________________
"I know what you're thinking, punk," hissed Wordy Harry to his new editor, "you're thinking, 'Did he use six superfluous adjectives or only five?' - and to tell the truth, I forgot myself in all this excitement; but being as this is English, the most powerful language in the world, whose subtle nuances will blow your head clean off, you've got to ask yourself one question: 'Do I feel loquacious?' - well do you, punk?"
- Stuart Vasepuru, 2006 Bulwer-Lytton Fiction Contest
My OTHER CAR is still on Mars!!!
|
The ideals that are held by myself and by many of the longtime FRC mentors and volunteers whom I consider friends and colleagues are bigger than FIRST, and we will find (or make) another vehicle for them if we are forced to. - Jared Russell [more] 
Similar Threads
Threaded Mode