Pnumatic Rules Suggestions/Gripes

[Rickertsen2]

Over the summer i have been working for a pnumatics company. The other day i was thinking about FIRST and realized that the pnumatic systems involved in FIRST robots seemed almost silly and absurd after the things i have been working on. I laughed when i whough about the cobbled together mass of disposable cylinders and haphazardly strewn about valves by different manufacturers. I would like to hear what other peoepl think about lifting some of the pnumatic restricions. Below are some of the areas whre i have a problem and what I would do to change them if i were supreme dictator of the first world.

NEGATIVE PRESURE SYSTEM RESTRICTIONS:
Ok this is the big one. This is what really prompted my post. I have worked with vacuum handling systems for microchips, cardboard boxes and water bottles all the way up to full 80 gallon drums. I have been amazed at how useful and how versatile, effective and at the same time how simple such systems can be. I think that FIRST should allow Vacuum generators and suction cups.. This alone would open a whole new dimension to they way FIRST robots manipulate things... If there were two components that i could have added to the KOP, they would be a vacuum generator and a suction cup. Its unbeliavable how easy it is to pick up just about any object with these things.. Of course, Vacuum generators are somewhat of air hogs. We would either need a higher primary side pressure, larger accumulators or a beefier compressor. I havnt' done the math, but matches are rather short, and It seems to me that if we were given larger accumulators we would be okay. The past few years, FIRST has allowed us to use cups with integrated vacuum generators, so why not allow us to seperate them. If you can come up with any reason whatsoever why we should not be allowed to sue vacuum systems, I would love to hear it.

ACTUATOR RESTRICTIONS:
Why are we limited to what are more or less bottom of the line plain jane cylinders. There are many places whre a rodless cylinder, Pnumatic gripper, multipostion cylinder etc would be of great benefit. It seems to me that the reasons behind most of the actuator restrictions are safety related. Chioces do not have to be sacrificed to achieve this. If i were supreme dictator of the FIRST world, i would allow any actuator by any manufacturer so long as if fell within a certian maximum output force criterion.

VALVING RESTRICTIONS:
I think teams should be able to use whatever valves they want so long as things come to rest when the E-Stop button is pressed (IE: everything electrically actuated. No air piloted valves and air logic.) Actually on second though i think teams should be able to use all the air logic, porportional valves etc they desire. The following is a common practice in industry and someting that could apply to a first robot to allow some of the pnumatic restrictions to be safely lifted. We have a NO 3-way single solenoid valve controlled by a spike relay. Port one( input) is plumbed to the output of the primary regulator. Port 2 is connected to to all downstream components. Port 3 is vented. When the robot is disabled, so are spikes and thus our safety valve. No compents other than the compressor, primary regulator, and acumulators have any pressure. Everything else is vented Once the robot is activated, the valve shifts and everythign gets pressure.

I'm getting bored of writing now, and i havn't proofread any of this, so if it makes no sense o well.. I'm not sure how many peope hang out on these forums during the summer, but if there is anybody here, I think this would make for an interestin discussion and i am eager to hear other peope's opinions.