Would the bumpers be straight (parallel with back of bot) or angled (parallel with angled front sides of bot)?
I believe the intent is that bumpers must be on the bumper perimeter. You’re taking a risky move, and should probably Q&A it.
It’s not just the intent, it’s the rule:
What needs to be answered in Q&A is if every side of your robot must have bumpers in order to satisfy the requirement that corners are protected.
That’s the one that I haven’t figured out for sure yet…and we’re going to assume the answer is “yes”. Which really limits the effectiveness of end loading narrow robots like Carmen, unfortunately.
Another team member pointed this out to me today: the first thing to contact a flat vertical obstacle (aka the wall) must be your bumper. If you have one side completely uncovered, then the first thing to hit that vertical obstacle will be metal.
angled
Angled “bumpers” would not pass inspection because technically they are not bumpers at all since they do not lie on the bumper perimeter according to the current set of definitions and both sides of the corner must be protected.
Ahhh…here’s that statement that seemed to me to be missing from the rules.
"2. As indicated in Rule <R08-I>, all exterior corners of the BUMPER PERIMETER must be protected by BUMPERS. Both “sides” of the corner must be protected."
Ok Well according to Jim we are possible ok since we will have the bumpers over the corners and the first part to touch a wall will be the bumpers. Let keep or fingers crossed!
The problem is the bumpers need to be on the bumper perimeter, which is the edge around the robot, and recessed parts of the frame are not the perimeter. So it looks to me like it’s not legal. You’d have to put back the straight pieces across the front, but make them each 6" long, and cover them with 6" long bumpers. This will give a pretty small opening in the middle.
What a bummer, how vague the rules are this year on bumpers…they could have just come out and said what they wanted in the first place.
…
I still do not understand why this is not legal… If they were to put the bumpers at an angle across those pieces as long as the bumper pieces were at least six inches long, and the corner was not exposed, why isn’t this legal?
Because angled bumpers are not bumpers at all. If they are not on the bumper perimeter they are superfluous padded chassis sections. If you take a piece of string around the outside of the robot (definition of bumper perimeter) the bumpers must be attached to the chassis where the string is.
BUMPER PERIMETER – the polygon defined by the outer-most set of exterior vertices on the ROBOT
(without the BUMPERS or Trailer Hitch attached) that are within the BUMPER ZONE. To determine
the BUMPER PERIMETER, wrap a piece of string around the ROBOT at the level of the BUMPER
ZONE - the string describes this polygon. The BUMPER PERIMETER may extend up to, but cannot
exceed, the maximum ROBOT volume constraints defined in Rule <R11>.L. The BUMPERS must be fixed to the BUMPER PERIMETER.
This is not necessarily true
What I should say is that bumpers on a concave angled portion of the robot are not bumpers. Robots with angled front edges.
Bumpers like http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/30834 are legal types since the bumper perimeter is along those edges
They are bumpers, but they are not BUMPERS. They don’t qualify under the <R08> rules, and would not be exempt from weight/size in <R11>.
This is not necessarily true[/quote]
It’s important to keep in mind the difference between bumpers and BUMPERS. Some bumpers are not BUMPERS. Bumpers that are angled such that if extended infinitely would pass through the robot chassis are not BUMPERS, because they are not affixed to the BUMPER PERIMETER. As such, nothing attached to the angled pieces on Carmen’s front can ever be considered a BUMPER, so even though the corners of the frame could be protected on both sides by pool noodles and fabric, they won’t be protected by BUMPERS, and thus run afoul of <R08-I>.
I wonder if Inspectors would let this design through due to the potential to damage the field.
With the cantilevered front end, if the robot is struck and the front end dips, the metals will be in direct contact with the flooring, potentially gouging it or catching a seam …
Maybe consider placing plastic carpet skids on the under side …
what are you using pneumatics for?
I have a vested interest in finding out whether this chassis design is legal. It would seem that the bumper rules require (1) that exterior corners are protected by BUMPERS on both sides and all trailer contact is bumper to bumper, and (2) that bumpers can only be attached to the BUMPER PERIMETER.
Unless I’m missing something, both of those conditions cannot simultaneously be met for the front of this robot (Which may or may not be the GDC’s intention. Considering that this picture was posted in the Q&A and all that the GDC said was that exterior corners must be protected, it seems like this particular contradiction hasn’t occurred to them.)