Electrical connections and multimotor mechanisms

[kmcclary]

Does the "no switches" basically apply to commercial switches?

Complex mechanisms often have safety or sequencing "devices" to allow for proper positioning.
Can we use allowable materials to create something that will make, break or change simple electrical connections based on physical position of one mechanism section (such as an end of travel condition) to enable or disable a second motor on a single Spike channel? This allows for motor "motion sequencing" in a complex mechanism by pushing one button, or attaining a proper actuator position even if operator visibility is blocked.

For example, can we use two pieces of copper pipe coming in contact with each other (or separating) to start or stop a second motor attached to the same Spike channel once a certain position is reached, or to disable it so it won't try to move something else for mechanism safety? In essence,
may we homebrew connections of ANY kind?

Thanks!
- Keith McClary, Huron High Team 830

[Joe Johnson]

Sorry, No.

Safety, simplicity and our inspector's sanity are our primary concerns.

I know that this rule limits some creativity, but we feel that it is best not to allow this at this time.

[kmcclary]

OK. That's fair.

**NOW** that it is ruled illegal, I'll talk about some of the things we were considering. <grin>

1) We were running out of control channels, but we still wanted a set of "deployment" widgets running.

The biggest problem with deployment widgets that use motors or pumps is that if you simply try to parasitize another channel it may try to "undeploy" if the channel is run the other way, UNLESS you can break the circuit to the deployment device at End Of Travel (EOT).
That requires some kind of a switchlike device.

But then, we thought of THE GUMBALL CHANNEL... <grin> What the hey... It's a channel that comes on at powerup, and stays on in one direction throughout the round. It was PERFECT for using for deployment! <grin>

The only problem was that we had to have some way for the devices to sequence or stop themselves at EOT (End Of Travel), or else they'd pop breakers, drain power from other things, or simply run our batteries down.

That's why we needed a way to shut them down or sequence them when they reached their final position, and hoped we could attach a power wire to a metal & plastic piece of the mechanism.

When the power comes on, the mechanism would then sequence or simply run out, and automatically stop when it reached end of travel when the mechanics broke the power circuit.

It was a VERY simple way to guarantee the machine's transformation devices would deploy INSTANTLY upon startup AND maintain it, without operator action. If it was ever "pushed in" during the round, it would simply automatically power itself up again and restore it's deployed position. (Neat! :-) The "automatic powerdown" aspect of breaking a circuit insured it wouldn't drain the batteries or pop a circuit breaker.

But best of all, it would have saved us a Spike channel. Too bad it's illegal!! <darn>

Another use we were considering would be for one Spike channel to run a pair of motors in a sequenced mechanism. For example an arm can then reach "up", AND "out" in sequence to drop a jug into the goal with only a single channel of Spike by overlapping their control zones by making a pair of primitive conductive cams and brushes with some plastic sheeting, conductive metal, and a wire or conductive metal "brush" on the elbow and shoulder joints. Squeeze the trigger, and the thing rises up and out in one motion, on one Spike.

If we stick with that concept, we'll have to do it with multiple Spike channels now. But thanks for considering it, and being so prompt with a reply! We're freezing our design soon, and do appreciate your quick responses!

- Keith McClary, Huron High Team 830