Fasteners extending outside the FRAME PERIMETER

[Tristan Lall]

Originally Posted by Al Skierkiewicz

Tristan,
Team Update 6 is excluding the fasteners from defining the FRAME PERIMETER which in turn defines the vertical plane defined by the same. This ruling makes the determination of G30 easier for the refs, easier for the robot inspectors to determine <R16> and it takes the worry away from teams trying to apply a fix to fasteners that hold the frame together. It is rather an elegant solution, don't you think?

I think Martin provided an excellent summary directly above. By excluding the protrusions within the bumper zone from the frame perimeter, you make the frame perimeter polygon smaller (than it would have been under the original rule). Therefore, if you were relying on a bolt (in the bumper zone) directly above or below another bolt (outside of the bumper zone) to extend your frame perimeter and make the 2^nd bolt legal, you have to make a design change (because the 1^st bolt no longer counts as part of the frame perimeter).

I agree that it makes determination of <R16> and <G30> easier, but only because there's no longer any need to take certain protrusions into account (which could have been hidden behind the bumper and thus especially difficult for referees to call).

I imagine that the hoped-for response would have excluded bolt heads (etc.) located outside of the bumper zone from scrutiny under <R16> and <G30>. That's not the change that the GDC chose to make.

So, with regard to the images posted earlier, Martin's is still illegal, and Branden's is now made illegal. (In both cases, the bolts in the lower frame violate the frame perimeter.)