pic: Carmen week1 team 842

[Chris Fultz]

From the rules, it is difficult to tell if this is legal or not.

Either way, though, have you considered this -

If you add the bumpers to these angled sections, you effectively make the hole in your chassis about 6" narrower - each bumper is 2-1/2 - 3" thick, and they would extend into this opening area.

Depending on how wide the opening is now (hard to tell from the picture) it might become very tight for a 9" game piece.

You might actually have a larger opening by having the front of the robot "flat" with 6" bumpers on each side, giving you a 16" wide opening.

I don't know how this fits in with you ball pick-up ideas, but something else to consider.

[Ian Curtis]

Originally Posted by GaryVoshol

While your interpretation sounds entirely reasonable, it can't be. That's not how BUMPER PERIMETER is defined:Carmen's front corners with the acute frame angles are outermost vertices, and so by definition are on the BUMPER PERIMETER.

An entirely reasonable interpretation, in my estimation, would be to allow 842 to mount non-standard bumpers on the angled pieces such that with the standard BUMPERS on the side the corners are fully protected. The angled pieces would have to count in the robot size and weight. Whether that reasonable (IMO) interpretation will pass, well I guess it's up to them to gamble or not.

And the GDC is fond of saying, "We do not comment on particular robot designs. Here's the rule."

<R08> mentions outermost exterior vertices. The term exterior is never defined, and I always defined it in my head as " both 'sides' of the corner are on the BUMPER PERIMETER."

However, reading the rules and looking at Carl Hayden's robot, I see where my definition falls apart. If their bumpers on the front corner are not exterior vertices, then they have no BUMPER PERIMETER. Yup, I was wrong.

[JHSmentor]

Originally Posted by falconmaster

loading photo ...

Alright - I didn't pour over all the posts to see if this was asked:

How much does this robot weigh? we have a very similar design but I am really concerned about building it to be robust without weighing a ton.

[Raul]

I think section 8 of update #2 makes it pretty clear that you cannot have bumpers that angles in and have them be considered legal. Notice the square opening in the illustations. If you could angle the bumpers inward on the corners, then the trailer could go in further.

[falconmaster]

Originally Posted by JHSmentor

Alright - I didn't pour over all the posts to see if this was asked:

How much does this robot weigh? we have a very similar design but I am really concerned about building it to be robust without weighing a ton.

45 pounds

[eschanz]

Originally Posted by thehurd03

They don't have to, The rules say you have to cover 75% (I think) of the perimeter of your robot.

but i heard that bumpers have to cover corners.

[GaryVoshol]

Good news or bad news?

http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread...4097#post24097

Confirms that both sides of all corners must be protected by BUMPERS.

Doesn't explain how a BUMPER could be legally attached inside the BUMPER PERIMETER.

[1708xMr.Roboto]

Very Nice Chassis, Although I think It's not legal.. Bumpers must me atleast 6"

[Karthik]

Final answer: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=11170

[Paul Copioli]

Translation: Carmen as shown in the first post is not legal and has no hope of being legal without relocating the angled sides. That stinks.

[jtd07]

This is kinda off topic but how did you direct connect your toughbox to your wheel??
and does it have bearings in it?

[lynca]

Originally Posted by jtd07

This is kinda off topic but how did you direct connect your toughbox to your wheel??
and does it have bearings in it?

One way of directly connecting a toughbox to a wheel is a 1/2" keyed hub (see link) for the 1/2" output shaft of the toughbox.

http://andymark.biz/am-0077.html