Call this update the “lets kill team creativity” update.
So I understand the idea of the update to I3, but idea of teams bringing their operator consoles to the inspection area just sound like a hassle. Just have it ready in the pits for inspection.
They ruled something similar regarding vacuums in 2009 if I recall
Being ridiculous here, but would a robot that produces downforce using a spoiler count as “using a vacuum to anchor to the FIELD carpet”?
I think this refers to the in-pit full inspection, not the quick-weigh-and-dimensions that usually happens at the inspection table and scale. (at least that’s how it goes in New England)
My personal interpretation: vacuums produce lower pressure, which simultaneously pushes the robot down and PULLS UP on the carpet.
Do we want carpets being all wrinkled and warped due to high vacuums? Will it be a real problem? So ends the vacuum wars… before they started.
I’d argue that a spoiler does the same, both functionally and intentionally. The only difference is in specific design, and therefore no division can be made
Spoilers pull up on the carpet? Spoilers push air up and the robot down.
Maybe they need to capitalize Vacuum to make it a mechanism, not a concept.
I agree. 99% of inspection happens in the pit. As I read it, this just clarifies that you can’t complete inspection without having your operator console, which has been the case for many years anyway so that software and version numbers could be checked, and the robot could be enabled for a few live tests like the RSL blinking and compressor shutoff.
Re: inspections -
Section 1.6 of the manual says:
Some sections and rules include colloquial language, also called headlines, in an effort to convey an
abbreviated intent of the rule or rule set. This language is differentiated using bold blue text. Any
disagreement between the specific language used in the rules and the colloquial language is an error,
and the specific rule language is the ultimate authority.
So although the headline says “bring it”, the text of the rule says “must be presented”. It is up to the inspectors at your event to decide what you need to do where.
What about physical inspection? Are we going to have to file down sharp corners on our operator console now?
Edit* It’s a joke about this being a slippery slope to full operator console inspection and adding another 10 pages to the rule book, I’m aware we need it to be safe.
… why are you not already doing that…I don’t know about you, but personally i like to not get cut on sharp corners
What if we’re going for a Mad Max theme?
Ok, no, we don’t have sharp corners, it just seems like 4 years from now we’ll have our operator panels inspected as intensely as the robot, and have a weight limit. All because some teams will push the bounds of what a reasonable operator console can be.
Honestly I don’t know if that’s a bad idea. I’ve seen teams (rare but a few) have absolutely enormous operator consoles that weighed so much the operator (or whoever) that was carrying it onto the field was barely able to hold it, and had to practically run from the robot cart to the field to not drop it.
R93. OPERATOR CONSOLES shall not be made using hazardous materials, be unsafe, cause an unsafe condition, or interfere with other DRIVE TEAMS or the operation of other ROBOTS.
Though, as an OPERATOR CONSOLE is not regularly moving 12-20fps (or faster) with up to ~150lbm of inertia, I am sure the criteria will be a bit more permissive than on a ROBOT. I also don’t really expect R93 to become an inspection checklist item unless we get a number of R93 violations that comply with the dimensional rules. Until teams put cameras more than 20’ above the carpet, there was no specified height limit on the OPERATOR CONSOLE.
Two hours later added:
I totally get it. The GDC would rather stand back a bit, but if/when teams force engagement, the rules get complicated and weird.
PLEASE DON"T BE ONE OF THOSE TEAMS, ESPECIALLY IF YOU DON"T HAVE A GOOD REASON TO BE!
Yes
Recommend doing a FBD of an element of carpet. For the net force on the element to be in the up direction, the pressure drop through the carpet must be greater than its weight. Seems unlikely.
I’m glad they unbanned fabric bumper numbers, but the vacuum change wasn’t necessary at all in my opinion. They could have at least waited a year or two instead of singling out a team’s design before it even takes the field.
Did you also account for the reaction force of the carpet against the wheels of a robot driving across its surface?