Bumper legality

Quick questions for anyone willing to hear. We’re trying to have a one piece bumper that can intake in the front. The problem is that one of the sides we raised in order to intake but I’m not sure if we’re able to place corner bumpers in the right place to make it legal. Would anyone uave some ideas? Or should we switch to another design?

This is similar to what we did; however, we only used one noodle in that orientation rather than two. Take a look at R409 in the game manual. It has a picture of the single noodle like we used.

We did angled sides rather than a step change at the corners, but as long the bumper section looks about the same as the one in the manual, you will be fine.

1 Like

…… switch to another design

Have a look at 2767’s bumpers.

I think 2177 had bumpers made in this manner (from watching the livestream) perhaps @Jon_Stratis can comment?

Screen Shot 2024-03-12 at 9.48.04 PM

Yup, ours were very similar. We simply mitered the noodles on each corner. It means that the front corners you essentially have noodles meeting in the middle, with one above it on the front and one below it on the back.

Even with the bumper segments at different heights, you still need noodles protecting the corner!

1 Like

To me, it seems that the easiest way to make your bumpers legal as they currently are without major modifications is doing something like this, outlined in the Game Manual:

Maybe the height of the vertical pool noodle can be around the width of 3 pool noodles.


I’m not sure I’d pass that – definitely a question for my LRI.

Safest course of action, IMO, is to “swoop” the side bumpers.
Numerous robots, including ours (see pic above), have passed inspection using that style.

I think Q&A 99 is highly relevant to this thread - any of the corner methods can be used. I would say you need a minimum of 2 noodles of height in the corner, but don’t have an issue with 3 - the whole point is protection, and we want to ensure overlap on bumper to bumper impacts.


Richard made me post this.

It reminds me of when a hockey player smiles.

Sorry @Patrick3357 but i wasn’t smart enough to figure out how to cover the “bent” bumpers. I tried but failed miserably :cry:


Come on Mark, someone over there must be able to do some sheet metal modeling to work out the fabric.

Would this start to infringe on R408C, “use a stacked pair…”?

I believe the height of the bumper is determined by R408A, based on the wood backing.

Bumper zone is also another rule, which kinda goes hand in hand… When do we see HQ explicitly allowing triple noodle bumpers?

I think it’s pretty clear that the rules around bumper corners were not written with segments at different heights in mind. The reason I think 3-high is OK is because I can look at it from each side and say “those two noodles are extending into the corner”. With my team, we mitered the noodles at a 45 all the way around, so the front corners might as well be 3 high - two high on each “half” of the corner, offset by a full-ish noodle. I think doing that is a completely reasonable interpretation of the rules, and with Q&A 99 saying that any corner method is legal for bumper segments of different heights, I have to extend that same logic to the others as well.

The bumper zone was only 7" tall and bumpers 5" wide in the early tens, min overlap 3". Now the zone is 7.5" and bumpers as narrow as 4.5", for a min overlap of 1.5". That ought to be fixed.

1 Like

For this year’s game, I’m seeing bimodal bumper heights: either as high as possible for an under-bumper intake, or almost scraping the ground to prevent game piece intrusion. Notwithstanding the tolerance in R408-A, they seem to be sticking fairly close to 5".