Go to Post Pneumatic components always give me gas... - Alan Anderson [more]
Home
Go Back   Chief Delphi > FIRST > General Forum
CD-Media   CD-Spy  
portal register members calendar search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read FAQ rules

 
Reply
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2009, 18:12
Dad1279 Dad1279 is offline
Registered User
FRC #1279 (Cold Fusion)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2004
Location: NJ
Posts: 511
Dad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud ofDad1279 has much to be proud of
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong

Quote:
Originally Posted by MarcD79 View Post
There was a robot @ DC that utilized fan motion with drive wheels, I guess FIRST didn't remember the ruling.
There were multiple robots at DC with fans, including ours. Which are you referring to?

GDC Ruled fans legal here: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=10945

.....Regarding the third part of your question - there are no rules prohibiting the use of forced air for propulsion or thrust, provided it is not a safety hazard and does not cause damage to the field.
Reply With Quote
  #2   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2009, 20:15
BigWhiteYeti's Avatar
BigWhiteYeti BigWhiteYeti is offline
FIRST class flier
AKA: Patrick M.
FRC #0857 (Superior Roboworks)
Team Role: Driver
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Rookie Year: 2006
Location: Houghton, Michigan
Posts: 49
BigWhiteYeti has a spectacular aura aboutBigWhiteYeti has a spectacular aura aboutBigWhiteYeti has a spectacular aura about
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong

I've only seen two robots with fans and both were pointed horizontal, so they add thrust but not traction. If I remember right, one of the updates had a clause outlawing "mass manipulation" to gain a traction advantage. I guess it is up to the inspector to judge whether a fan is mass manipulation.

On a separate note, why the heck to they have this rule in the first place? The possibility of increasing traction got our entire team talking physics forced everyone to come up with creative designs. Why limit creativity??
__________________
-you're fired
Reply With Quote
  #3   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2009, 20:29
EricH's Avatar
EricH EricH is offline
New year, new team
FRC #1197 (Torbots)
Team Role: Engineer
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: SoCal
Posts: 19,813
EricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond reputeEricH has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWhiteYeti View Post
I've only seen two robots with fans and both were pointed horizontal, so they add thrust but not traction. If I remember right, one of the updates had a clause outlawing "mass manipulation" to gain a traction advantage. I guess it is up to the inspector to judge whether a fan is mass manipulation.

On a separate note, why the heck to they have this rule in the first place? The possibility of increasing traction got our entire team talking physics forced everyone to come up with creative designs. Why limit creativity??
There's more than 2.

The mass manipulation was in the Q&A; a team asked if they could, say, move the orbit balls for the sole purpose of traction. Fans are NOT mass manipulation; they simply move air. As they are explicitly allowed by the Q&A (given a horizontal direction so as not to violate <R06>), then any team can use them.

Why the rule? Why which rule? <R06>? It's part of the game challenge. However, you can't add traction by altering the reaction with the ground under <R06>. There only remains the chance of adding a reaction with air to increase speed, acceleration, and/or pushing power. Fans provide that, and are legal.
__________________
Past teams:
2003-2007: FRC0330 BeachBots
2008: FRC1135 Shmoebotics
2012: FRC4046 Schroedinger's Dragons

"Rockets are tricky..."--Elon Musk

Reply With Quote
  #4   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2009, 20:49
Lil' Lavery Lil' Lavery is online now
TSIMFD
AKA: Sean Lavery
FRC #1712 (DAWGMA)
Team Role: Mentor
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Rookie Year: 2003
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 6,639
Lil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond reputeLil' Lavery has a reputation beyond repute
Send a message via AIM to Lil' Lavery
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong

Quote:
Originally Posted by BigWhiteYeti View Post
I've only seen two robots with fans and both were pointed horizontal, so they add thrust but not traction. If I remember right, one of the updates had a clause outlawing "mass manipulation" to gain a traction advantage. I guess it is up to the inspector to judge whether a fan is mass manipulation.
The point he was trying to raise is that if the fan isn't transmitting force directly through the center of mass of the robot then it will create a torque (rotational force) on the robot as a whole. This torque will apply additional force to one set of wheels (the front if the fan is above the center of mass) and lessen the force on the other set. He was asking if this change in force distribution would be considered to be changing the traction properties of the robot.

Think of a car. When it accelerates the weight of the car shifts towards the rear wheels. When it brakes it shifts towards the front. Same reason motorcyclists do wheelies while they're accelerating and decelerate to bring the front wheel back down.

Now, I don't think this violates the rule, because the total normal force does not change. It is just shifted. Beyond that, if this violates that rule, so do any drivetrains where they don't apply force through the directly through the center of mass, which is likely every single team in FIRST.
__________________
Being correct doesn't mean you don't have to explain yourself.
Reply With Quote
  #5   Spotlight this post!  
Unread 08-03-2009, 21:42
Tristan Lall's Avatar
Tristan Lall Tristan Lall is offline
Registered User
FRC #0188 (Woburn Robotics)
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Rookie Year: 1999
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,484
Tristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond reputeTristan Lall has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Correct me if I'm wrong

The real problem is that FIRST has been equating normal force or frictional force with traction. They're not the same, but are obviously related: traction is a motive force derived from friction between surfaces and normal forces on the scale of interlocking surface features, while the overall normal force and frictional force are related to any downward components of force (e.g. from weight, downward thrust, momentum over time, etc.).

This has led to Q&A posts that do not frame the response in terms of the stated objectives and context of <R06>—to restrict devices other than rover wheels that would increase traction by interacting with the arena.

Only the craziest interpretation of <R06> leads to the conclusion that downward-thrusting fans that interact with the air are traction devices. It's crazy, because if you're going that route, the rules don't give any leeway to ignore the traction-increasing effects of weight and momentum. As far as the rover wheels are concerned, all downward force increases traction, no matter whether it is a result of gravity, or a fan pushing air upward.

And of course, because this information was released in Q&As, a team might quite reasonably object on the grounds that it is a non-binding statement, rather than an enforceable rule.

Note, also, that the statements about vacuum cups and similar devices stem from <G29> and <G30> issues (i.e. field damage). Even then, there is no prohibition; just a stern warning and the threat of being restricted from using the robot.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help, I'm a world class computer programming genius yet I'm totally lost. jratcliff Programming 37 15-01-2008 20:41
Correct me if im wrong, chairman's award M. Hicken Rumor Mill 5 29-08-2004 23:23
i'm in the charleston area, and i'm looking to help out a team near here... dickymon General Forum 2 05-08-2002 16:40
Tell me why I'm wrong. Please... archiver 1999 6 23-06-2002 22:28


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 17:09.

The Chief Delphi Forums are sponsored by Innovation First International, Inc.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright © Chief Delphi