pic: Is this corner considered protected?

[Scott Hill]

Take it step by step.

Initial paragraph relevant sentence..."If implemented as intended, a ROBOT that is driven into a vertical wall in any normal PLAYING CONFIGURATION will always have the BUMPER be the first thing to contact the wall"...

Comply? Yes, assuming the corner on the opposite side of the hitch is similar the BUMPER will hit the wall first.

A. Comply? Yes, the segment appears to meet the 6" min. dim.
B. Comply? Yes, stacked pair of noodles.
c. Comply? Yes, assuming the solid board is a prototype stand-in for the required 3/4" plywood.
D. Comply? Yes, assuming the duct tape is a stand-in for the continuous fabric.
E. Comply? Yes, assuming final weight under 18 lbs, easily attainable.
F. Comply? Yes, assuming easy installation, relatively easy to accomplish.
G. Comply? Yes, assuming rigid robust connection, relatively easy to accomplish.
H. Comply? Yes, granted.
I. Comply? Yes, the exterior corner is protected by the BUMPERS. It passes the initial paragraph vertical wall test.
J. Not applicable to the left end of the BUMPER segment as this is the free end of one BUMPER segment, not a corner or joint between BUMPER segments. The corner/joint shown looks ok.
K. Comply? Yes, assuming 2/3 of BUMPER PERIMETER is protected.
N. Comply? Yes, assuming BUMPER cross section construction requirements met.
O. Comply? Yes, if you lose the miter on the BUMPER backing board at the junction of the segments.
P. Comply? Yes, assuming the BUMPERS are mounted at the correct height in the BUMPER ZONE.

I make several assumptions in this discussion but I think they are permissible in getting to the main point(s) of contention.

With respect to the Q&A reference above by dtengineering (http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=11257) which is the GDC's answer to my question, the GDC states "No. Figure 8-2 is intended to only illustrate the legality of some of the possible ways in which BUMPERS could be arranged on exterior corners. Please do not infer any other conclusions from that example." Fig 8-2 shows 5 different BUMPER-corner conditions, 3 labeled "ok", 1 labeled "not ok", and one not commented on. The GDC response also says "...some of the possible ways in which BUMPERS could be arranged..." which leads me to conclude that there may well be additional ways which are not commented on which may or may not be legal.

Since the condition in question has been shown as an example but has not been directly commented on in the MANUAL or the TEAM UPDATES I believe the prudent thing to do is apply the step by step as above. Having done that, as above, I believe the condition can clearly meet the intent of <R08>.

I sincerely welcome challenges/comments to my attempt at logic.

Thanks and apologies for the length,

Scott