2 sets of bumpers legal?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

As you are only using one set of bumpers at a time, there is no effect on overall robot weight during a match. I would expect the Q&A to agree that this is legal. However, each set of bumpers will still need to be inspected and weighed separately. Please check in with your lead inspector for the latest if the Q&A is not answered. If you showed me two different designs for the bumpers, i.e. they are not identical in form, function and weight, I would ask you to choose one.

[ChuckDickerson]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

As you are only using one set of bumpers at a time, there is no effect on overall robot weight during a match. I would expect the Q&A to agree that this is legal. However, each set of bumpers will still need to be inspected and weighed separately. Please check in with your lead inspector for the latest if the Q&A is not answered. If you showed me two different designs for the bumpers, i.e. they are not identical in form, function and weight, I would ask you to choose one.

Thanks for the info Al. Your logic seems reasonable and would be what I was thinking when I told the team to build two sets. As an inspector how exact would you feel the weights of the two sets must be? Other than color the two sets were made as exactly the same as we could make them. Same lengths, materials, bolts arrangement, etc. but one set weighed 0.1 lb more than the other. I assume this may just be the accuracy of our scale or the variance in the density of the plywood on one set or the other or the number of staples, etc. Is 0.1 lb nit-picking or should we worry? I'm not asking for an official ruling just as a previous inspector would you accept or reject the second set that was 0.1 lb different if the offical Q&A comes back as you have stated above?

[Al Skierkiewicz]

0.1 lb seems kind of trivial as a difference. Humidity could make that much change if you were near 18 lbs. What I would be looking for was one set over 18 and the other set under 18. I could not allow either to be over 18 for obvious reasons. An inspector has to know why the difference. Simply having two colors of the same bumper should not make a difference. I know of many teams that have two sets, one for qualifying and one for elims.

[ChuckDickerson]

Thanks Al.

[dlavery]

Originally Posted by DeepWater

This year we built 2 complete sets of bumpers for our robot. One red set and one blue set. We would like to be able to swap out the bumpers from match to match depending on if we are on the red alliance or blue alliance simply to match the alliance color (and the color of the trailer we are attached to). I am wondering if other teams have done this in the past and if it is legal. How would multiple sets of bumpers be viewed in the rules and during inspection?

(NOT an official opinion, but provided as a thought-provoker): Why are the two sets of bumpers different colors? If the different colors selected are purely arbitrary and make no practical difference when playing the game, then one might argue that the colors are purely decorative. As such, the two sets of bumpers could be argued to be functionally identical, and therefore spares for each other. However, if the bumper colors are repeatedly changed to correspond to the alliance assignment, then some would argue that they provide a tactical purpose (aiding identification of the robot) and are therefore functionally different. As functionally different parts that are used selectively based on conditions of a particular match, it could be further argued that they would fall under the constraints of Rule <R13>.

I would recommend posing a question to the official Q&A system on this one. The question might be posed in the context of the considerations discussed above.

-dave



.

[Al Skierkiewicz]

Food for thought...
Would two color bumpers be any different than interchangeable lexan panels of different colors? What if the panels were red on one side and blue on the other with velcro fasteners?
Can I respectfully submit that bumper color on the robot in this year's game could provide very little advantage? (my early morning GDC wannabe is coming out again.)

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

If you're referencing 1519, that's a completely different issue. Let's try and keep that issue apart from this one to avoid confusion.

Even though it's a completely different matter and unrelated to the original question in this discussion, 1519's bumpers last year between both robot configurations were within the 15-pound weight limit. We had a set of of six bumpers (some of which were quite short) which altogether weighed less than 15 pounds. Only four of the six bumpers would be on the robot for any given match.

If you can make your two complete sets of bumpers together satisfy the weight limit (as well as all the other bumper requirements) I would think you should be fine.

However, the GDC took the exact opposite perspective last year, ruling that all the bumpers needed to be on the robot at one time.

[Molten]

Originally Posted by Ken Streeter

Even though it's a completely different matter and unrelated to the original question in this discussion...

If it is unrelated to the original question, please do not extend the thread with posts. If you are interested in revisiting the previous ruling, please create a thread specifically to discuss that.

Thank you, Molten

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by Molten

If it is unrelated to the original question, please do not extend the thread with posts. If you are interested in revisiting the previous ruling, please create a thread specifically to discuss that.

Thank you, Molten

Did you read the rest of the post? It's pretty clearly related to the bumper discussion...

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Molten

If it is unrelated to the original question, please do not extend the thread with posts. If you are interested in revisiting the previous ruling, please create a thread specifically to discuss that.

Molten,

Sorry about that. As I was writing my earlier post, it started out on a tangent. However, as I revised my post before posting it, what I ended up with actually ended up being quite relevant. Yet, the post is founded on information from last year, which officially doesn't apply at all this year, as just because something was allowed (or not allowed) last year doesn't mean it will be the same way this year.

My post should have read as follows:

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

If you're referencing 1519, that's a completely different issue. Let's try and keep that issue apart from this one to avoid confusion.

Even though this information is from last year (and thus doesn't have any official bearing on this year's rules), 1519's bumpers last year between both robot configurations were within the 15-pound weight limit. We had a set of of six bumpers (some of which were quite short) which altogether weighed less than 15 pounds. Only four of the six bumpers would be on the robot for any given match.

If you can make your two complete sets of bumpers together satisfy the weight limit (as well as all the other bumper requirements), my personal interpretation is that you should be fine.

However, the GDC took the exact opposite perspective last year, ruling that all the bumpers needed to be on the robot at one time.

Thus, if the GDC is being consistent with their reasoning from last year regarding the bumpers of the dual-configuration robot issue, then all of the bumpers of the set need to be on the robot for every round.

[Lil' Lavery]

Originally Posted by Ken Streeter

However, the GDC took the exact opposite perspective last year, ruling that all the bumpers needed to be on the robot at one time.

Thus, if the GDC is being consistent with their reasoning from last year regarding the bumpers of the dual-configuration robot issue, then all of the bumpers of the set need to be on the robot for every round.

That is, unless they second set of bumpers is functionally identical to the first set, so it can qualify as a spare part.

Originally Posted by Section 8

SPARE PARTS – A COMPONENT or MECHANISM constructed as an identical duplicate of an existing part of the ROBOT, for the purpose of replacing a broken or defective part. SPARE PARTS may be either COTS items or FABRICATED ITEMS, but they must be physically and functionally identical to the original part.

[Ken Streeter]

Originally Posted by Lil' Lavery

That is, unless they second set of bumpers is functionally identical to the first set, so it can qualify as a spare part.

Good point -- I hadn't thought of the second set of bumpers being considered a "spare part." That perspective then takes us back to the consideration that Dave Lavery raised above -- is the second set "physically and functionally identical" or is the color difference a "physical or functional difference"? Seems like if the different-colored bumpers are considered to be "physically and functionally identical" then they're okay; if not, no good...

[martin417]

Wow, here is a perfect example of over-thinking/over scrutinizing the rules. Using two different colors for bumpers is a perfectly logical thing to do since the bumpers on the trailer will reflect the alliance color, and matching the bot bumpers to the trailer bumpers will help BOTH alliances determine what side you are on. If we had decided to do this, it would never have occurred to us that there was any possibility that this would be illegal, or even questionable. It seems obvious to me, even now, that there is no rule that would prohibit this. As for functionally different, the function of the bumper is to protect the bots and field, color has no impact on this function. I don't see a situation where this practice could be seen as against any rule.

[ChuckDickerson]

Questions submitted to the Q&A with respect to all of the thoughts and concerns mentioned in this thread. No we wait and see...

[Rick Wagner]

Philosophical question: can robot parts have official psychological functions? As the rules are written (inferring intent), I don't think so.