I realized that my second requirement for a light rule was not sufficient to define things fully.
I propose the following rule for comments:
The light must be oriented in such a manner that it is expected to have its base pointing downward the majority of the match (more than 60 seconds).
For any horizontal plane higher than 2 ft, draw a circle 20 feet in diameter and centered about the point where a vertical line through the center of the bulb intersects the plane. The light must be clearly visible from at least at least 300 degrees around the circle and it must have no single “blind spot” larger than 45 degrees.
For brief periods of time (for example going under the bar, moving an elevator mechanism to lift a crate, etc.), the light may be partial obscured without violiating the spirit or letter of this rule – which is to ensure that the audience can easily (and at almost every instant) determine the color designation of each and every robot on the field.
hmm, what if the light, for the first 3 seconds(and in the “measuring box”, were sideways but remained upright for the remaining portion of the match(1:57), would this be legal or would the light HAVE to be able to swivel to pass inspection…it doesnt seem that this has been looked at by first, but getting it under the bar has
I like your wording Dr Joe. It is probably too late this year to enforce it, though I believe our robot complies. It even has a measurable criteria to make it easier to enforce.
In an earlier post I said the Light had to be “exposed”. It was rightly pointed out that that word is not used in the rules. It was however, used in some of the responses from FIRST on the FRC group. I have been given to understand that these responses are to be regarded as “official” interpretations of the rule and that unlike last year (when if it wasn’t in the Rules it was ignored) they are to be taken seriously.
In my question, which they declined to post, I pointedly asked that some codification be incorporated into the Rules through an official update. They basically said the “interpretations” on the FRC group ARE official and there was no need to do so. I hope they change their minds on that, the no need part that is.
*Originally posted by ChrisH *
**They basically said the “interpretations” on the FRC group ARE official and there was no need to do so. I hope they change their minds on that, the no need part that is. **
Let me echo what you have said, Chris. The team updates have in the past been the final word on substantial additions, changes or clarifications to the original rules. The forum in the past has been the place where Q&A happens, and seems to generate material for the updates. In my observations, in the forum sometimes questions are misunderstood and answered one way, then reasked and answered the opposite way. Knowing this, it makes it difficult to proceed with, say, a major design or manufacturing plan on the basis of an answer given in the forum. When the update comes out, one would hope to be able to have a greater level of confidence in the permanence of the ruling. If what you are saying is true, we will all need to sit by our computers watching the forum responses as they come out (and there is no particular schedule for this as there is for the updates), making sure we don’t miss some important point. I don’t know about you, but we’re pretty busy here trying to build a robot.
*Originally posted by pauluffel *
**Another important thing to note, you can"t have the light come into contact with the bar. It has to move down before it touches the bar (so you can"t have it on a spring hinge where it will be pushed down by the bar). **
Just wondering. Where you read this??? Was our slight plan
I asked first on the jive site about light visibility and light touching the bar. The response was that the light cannot touch the bar, but it can be flipped, turned, shoot into space for all they care as long it is back ontop of the robot after the bar is cleared and does not touch the bottom bar.
In our design, we stuck the light on the top of an arm mechanism that uses a pivot action to move up and down. This means the light will vary between ± 30 degrees depending on the position of this arm. This is actually the most visible spot for it, because you can see the entire light from 360 degrees around…From what I read and what I want to understand, this is legal becuase the light is pointing downward to most of an extent (I consider it to move past downward at 45 degrees) and there is an unobstructed view of it.
Which brings to mind…we tested the light and does it seem weak to anyone else? Last years was a lot brighter compared to this years…