|
|
|
![]() |
|
|||||||
|
||||||||
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
|
Ramp deployment a hazard?
Is a robot allowed to simply use gravity to deploy its ramps? We are considering a mechanism that releases our ramps and allows them to fall like wings on either side of our robot. Or would this pose a safety hazard, and require it to be done in a controlled fashion (e.g. pulley and rope system)?
|
|
#2
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
Quote:
|
|
#3
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
Quote:
|
|
#4
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
This question has been covered in the FIRST Q&A System in the "Ramp Question" thread. Gravity deployment is OK, but there is a caveat. So read the answer carefully.
-dave |
|
#5
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
If the ramp has the capacity to damage another robot seriously (to the point of malfuntion). Then I believe it would be considered hazardous.
|
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
The GDC has said "done in a safe manner (Rule <S01>) and must be controlled so that it does not damage the field (Rule <G34>)". They didn't say controlled so that it does not damage another robot.
![]() |
|
#7
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
If the ramp is capable of damaging a 135 pound aluminum robot, then it clearly is also capable of damaging the field.
|
|
#8
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
Re: Ramp deployment a hazard?
I wouldn't say that is necessarily true.
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Motor Ramp Up/Ramp Down Function | Tom Bottiglieri | Programming | 12 | 03-12-2006 23:31 |
| To ramp, or not to ramp? | phrontist | Rules/Strategy | 27 | 26-01-2006 17:56 |
| Apple recalls batteries due to possible fire hazard | Jay H 237 | Chit-Chat | 10 | 22-05-2005 12:20 |
| Hazard on Dome Floor | TravisCarpenter | Electrical | 21 | 20-04-2004 10:07 |
| Ramp | archiver | 2000 | 5 | 24-06-2002 00:08 |