We have a dumper robot that has a square hopper on the top. The hopper is a frame-like skeleton with mesh that is zip-tied to the skeleton. This mesh keeps the balls in. We also have mesh on the inside of this structure that funnels the balls towards our two side-by-side wheels that spit the balls out. We have 3 types of mesh that we have available. One is mediocre, one is really light, and one is heavier. In an effort to loose weight, we switched to the lighter mesh, but then remembered that there was a rule about entanglement. Rule <R07> It basically says in a big paragraph that if the judges think that someting poses as an entanglement risk, they will ask you to remedy the situation.
We compiled a list of stuff that this rule says would invite closer inspection by the judges:
-the judges think it poses a risk
-easy penetration by object less than 4 sq. in.
-nets, loose rope/wire, lots of fabric, etc.
-not mesh with 1/8 in. X 1/8 holes
-not firmly mounted
-performance on playing field shows evidence
Dementions of our mesh:
light, black mesh: rectangular holes, 1" by 3/4"
green, middle weight mesh: hexagonal holes, side-to-side measurment: 3/4", corner-to-corner measurement: 7/8"
heavy, black mesh: square holes, 3/8" by 3/8"
Because it is of the opinion of the judges, we would like to hear other people’s opinion. Do you think our mesh is violating any of these rules? What do you suggest we do?
Please post a picture. Based on your description, I think the light stuff would invite detailed review, but any of them could. Pictures help.
Also, the rule does NOT say that 1/8"x1/8" mesh is not allowed; it merely uses it as an example of something that could be seen either way, depending on a number of factors.
The other thing to consider is that this year, other robots are not supposed to be sticking things outside their bumper perimeter. How could anything on your robot be construed to be an entanglement hazard if the other robot has to violate a rule to become entangled?
This is true in most cases but, I saw many robots drive into the opening of a ball feeded mechanism device on another robot with their corners.
My question to everyone would then be:
If Redabot drives into Blueabot’s Bumper Perimeter because of a void in Blueabot’s bumpers where a ground feeder device is located, & something on Redabot which is within Redabot’s own Bumper Perimeter gets entangled on Blueabot because each robot’s Bumper Perimeters now overlap each other, then who is to blame??
Yes, even though you can go out of the set robot dimentions, a rule is a rule is rule and the judges are judges are judges. That’s what I’ve been telling other of my team members, even though it’s at the discretion of the judges.
The other thing you could consider is real thin polycarbonate. Check McMaster P/N 85585K73. A 24x48 sheet of this only weighs around half a pound (if my math is correct…check that yourself). Plus, it gives you a great place to mount team numbers and sponsor stickers…
