Use “armed” flags/indicators. For example, install warning lights on the Robot to indicate when the launching mechanism is “armed.”
This is what appeared in Team Update #5. It was a “suggestion” for teams. I think it is necessary for the safety of others. Please comment and vote in the poll.
I voted for “think it is needed for safety”, but I’d like to qualify that to “in some instances.” Some teams have created fail-safe mechanisms so that their launcher cannot release the stored energy accidentally. They wouldn’t necessarily need an “armed and dangerous” signal.
A team that added a failsafe to thier launcher, more than likely will have an armed indicator. While unlikely, even failsafes can fail.
Our “failsafe” is that the ball has to be in the robot to hold the launcher down…and also to activate the switch that will allow the launcher to fire…and both operators have to each hold down a button on their controller.
SOP is to raise the launcher at the end of the match and secure it (after releasing air pressure from the rear of the robot), and let it back down when setting up the robot to compete.
If there’s a ball in the robot, then it is possible that the launcher is armed. If there’s no ball in it, then it can’t be armed.
What do you suggest we do as far as making an “armed” indicator?
We’re launching, and while I will say that our launcher is dangerous to stand near, I don’t think it needs an armed light. It’s quite obvious when it’s fully armed, and we did so much engineering on the launching winch that we’re pretty confident it’s fail-proof. The only real flaw right now (which we are fixing) is that the rip-stop nylon straps used to wind it down tend to get ripped by the bolts that hold it in place.
So, I think that if you’re safe around launchers, such as using proper safety measures when testing and keeping all participants away from any moving parts, you should be fine and a light won’t be necessary.
I previously posted something similar to this in another thread.
Why not allow launchers to add a second backup battery, pressure switch and a flashing red light, strobes, LEDS or whatever on a completely independent circut? The current rules do not allow this. Is there any chance the GDC would consider permitting this? This way there will be an obvious warning that the launcher is armed regardless of the state of the robot controller. It will be hard to place a warning flag or whatever on a robot immediately after a match during field reset. While we plan to release the energy before the end of a match, I am certain that there will be times when we or another launcher do not. It would also be good for testing and for the teams that need to preload their launchers prior to the begining of a match.
How about an option for “Safe when power is removed”, rather than assuming all launchers are dangerous? Some launchers don’t use stored energy (like ours) so there is no “armed” state; also other designs unwind slowly when power is killed, so there isn’t anything that can cause harm.
I said “Launcher - doesn’t need it for safety” because our launcher does not use stored energy. So, effectively, our “armed signal” its our diagnostic LED - if its on, we’re armed. Well, not really. Because of how our software controls it, it will only throw from certain positions; so, if the arm is cocked and the robot is turned on, it is armed.
Everyone… keep in mind the “user” or “bystander” this is to protect may know nothing about the robot, or mechanical devices in general.
What this means;
There is no “It is obviously armed”
Requiring a ball to arm it doesn’t make it any move obvious
etc…
We should be trying to emulate a real world engineering experience as close as possible, and an armed indicator is definitely something that would be required in the real world.
as one of my engineering teachers told me, “Joe Idiot is allways trying to find a way to hurt himself with your product; make it as hard as possibe”
I chose “Robot launches - don’t think it’s needed for safety” simply because, with our design, it is quite difficult to not know when our robot is armed. It cannot hold a trackball without being armed, and it changes shape significantly to be armed. It simply LOOKS like a catapult.
Plus, it is rather impractical to attempt to add an indicator, considering our design. If we are asked to add one, we certainly will comply, but until then we have not seen the necessity. We have found that other precautions - such as having a knowledgable team member next to the robot at all times, especially when we could be loading the catapult - are much more practical and effective in our situation.
We added a warning light to indicate when our shooter is armed before ship.
we have a “kill switch” with a red led on it on our oi just so we know when our launch is enabled so that if something goes wrong we can immediately shut it off with the flick of a switch
I agree. I see no correlation between holding a trackball and the ability to shoot that ball 6 feet in the air.
I also have no idea what an “obviously armed launcher” looks like, so how could I possibly know whether any launcher I see is armed or not.
I came up with an idea for signaling to the robocoach when IR commands were received that would work fine for showing the state of the launcher.
Attach a disc to a servo, code the RC such that whenever the launcher is armed, the servo rotates the disc and the text (written such that it can be seen from a distance) “Launcher armed” is visible. When the launcher is safe, it rotates to “launcher safe”. No lights to interfere with vision systems or distract other teams, no dealing with custom circuits and drawing power from the RC to power LEDs, etc.
For added safety, attach a spring or something to the assembly that will make the disc default to a third position, “SIGNAL LOST, STAND CLEAR”, if power to the servo is lost or if it becomes disconnected.
Now that’s a really good idea. The disk could also be color coded green/red to make it even more obvious and universal.
I voted “Robot does not launch, think it is necessary.” We chose to abandon our launcher design early on primarily because of safety concerns. As a relatively inexperienced team, we did not feel we could make a launcher safely enough to avoid danger to ourselves in testing, let alone at the competition. Although I’m certain that all of the launching teams have throughly thought through their designs to minimize risk [absolutely not sarcastic], others won’t know about their robots and Murphy’s Law will always apply. With most robots, you are safe from danger if you don’t get close to it. With a launcher, the robot could be dangerous to your well being from a distance. As a member of a drive crew that has to interact with other robots, I personally think a warning of “hey, this trackball could potentially fly towards you at dangerous speeds” would be a nice courtesy, stored energy or not.
Lastly…
Giving the trackball the same respect as a nuclear weapon. I like it.