|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update #5 Posted
Quote:
We have nearly all of the pneumatics components that were in any of the previous year's kits - and we use 'em. (We used a 2001 cylinder on our 2005 robot.) We just want to be sure that we are within the rules! -Mr. Van Coach, 599 The RoboDox |
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update #5 Posted
I like the scoring simulator. Nice to give us a tool like that.
|
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update #5 Posted
Ok, so you can buy new pneumatic cylinders, or you can use old ones. Where is the complication? One point doesn't detract from the other.
This lawyering needs to stop! Just build a robot and have a good time. |
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Team Update #5 Posted
Someone said what I was thinking! Finally. This is the complete truth. There is so much, 'if i think this, im right' 'but if i think that, im wrong'. This has to be the worst year, of my three years of experience where people are trying to argue the rule in favor of themself. No, I do not mean that everyone has this intent either. However, the rules simply have not changed alot from previous years, and I will agree that some are unfair, while others are very beneficial. However, there is no need to (stealing from Tom here) lawyer the rules. I can guarantee that if an inspector says that you are in violation of rules, and you try to argue with them without say a specific Q&A response allowing your instance, you most likely will not pass inspection. The rules are not per your interpretation, rather the people who wrote them, FIRST.
|
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Team Update #5 Posted
Ok, now I'm confuesed - and rather upset.
We just completed our 3 cylinder order from Bimba - ordering three cylinders that are the same bore and stroke as previous kit PARKER cylinders that we already have. Why? Because update #5 makes these Parker cylinders illegal. Update #5 states that: "~ Under Rule<R105>, the only pneumatic cylinders permitted are those that are identical to the Bimba Custom Cylinder Order form found on the last page of the Pneumatics Manual." The FIRST Manual rule <R105> states that: "...additional air cylinders or rotary actuators may be purchased. However, they must be identical to those listed on the Pneumatic Components Order form (i.e. same part numbers), and obtained from a Bimba or Parker Hannifan distributor." The rule is quoted numerous times by the GDC in the Q&A forums. They go further to say: "...and you may NOT use purchased cylinders that are not IDENTICAL to those found on the Custom Cylinders Order Form." (emphasis in original post) PARKER cylinders do NOT have the same part numbers as BIMBA cylinders. They are NOT "IDENTICAL" (the piston shaft, for example appears to be stainless on the Parker and steel on the Bimba). Therefore, Parker cylinders are NOT legal parts. Is there any other way to interpret this? No matter what, I can see that teams will be upset at inspection time - either at having to swap out old Parkers or at learning that they didn't really have to take the rules literally... -Mr. Van Coach, 599 RoboDox PS. I now very much wish that I hadn't deleted my earlier post! |
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Team Update #3 Posted | Katie Reynolds | Rules/Strategy | 26 | 21-01-2007 19:41 |
| Team Update #2 is Posted | geo | General Forum | 1 | 16-01-2004 10:56 |
| Team Update 8 Posted! | Harrison | General Forum | 1 | 30-01-2003 08:08 |
| Team update #6 posted | Joe Ross | General Forum | 6 | 22-01-2003 10:14 |