Printable View
Two options in that case, pulse the weapon quickly to demonstrate that it will hold. If your electronics fail after a quick pulse then you may need to re-evaluate your design. Or have the tech checker do a sense check. Basically look at the pin, look at where it engages and determine if it is likely to hold it in place. With electrical weapons, unless they are of the order of Beta then chances are a small pin should hold an electric axe in place.
What i am about to suggest might sound totally wrong, and impractical. However, it could possibly be used to test electric weapon locking bars, without firing the weapon. According to my physics knowledge, it is correct. Real world however, it would need to be tested.
With electric weaponry you should be able to calculate the force produced by the motor.
Power = Voltage x Current
Work done = power x time
Force = Work done / distance
You can measure the distance with a ruler. Voltage and current with an ammeter. Time is a tricky one, as you will always undervalue it, unless you know the final speed, and acceleration of the weapon. But if the stop is at say 10 degrees from rest, and the weapon moves 180 degrees. Then the weapon will have an average time to the stop of 1/18th of a full fire. I would double this at least for safety, as in reality the weapon is accelerating in this phase, so takes longer. It is possible to accurately record the time, but there is no way to do it with what everyone has.
Anyway, take the force produced, and if the locking device can hold a replica of that force, then it should be safe to use.
Sorry if what i have said is really misguided in real world application. Currently doing a physics A-Level. Makes sense to me :P
All sounds good in theory, but its never that easy. The design of the locking system along with the sheer strength of the locking bar would need to be known. I.e. a data sheet for the material used for the locking bar.
Also something to note, if the locking bar is strong enough would the pivot point fail if fired during a test. There should be a tether to stop such an event but again this may depend on design.
On the electric front, I may opt to design a locking bar into Tormenta 3. Even if not in the rules, I most definitely would not want my fingers trapped by the kind of weapon. I suppose once not dealing with spinners/pneumatics it's a matter of common sense. I'd definitely give an electric axe a locking bar - it's essentially what I am saying I wouldn't want to have my fingers under but heavier, faster, and with an extremely pointy bit at one end!
Edit: also a fuse should save a motor/speedo fairly reliably. In something like an axe where stalling is common you would need to rate it carefully, granted. A mechanical alternative might be a torque limiter.
The problem with testing locking bars at events is time. Tech checking every spinner in the arena is bad enough to get done intime, let alone every robot with a locking bar. The rules are fine as they are, they just need to be used!
I have no issue with some of the lock open devices used in feathers as I can see they are very safe I case if miss fire, however I'm not sure I'd be comfortable doing it on a standard heavyweight incase something knock it and the flipper came down.
....Which is why, after I lost 20mm off my left hand ring finger, I will now be using locked down on my future heavies!
For the guys using electric discs, can't you get slip-clutches (hope they're called that) that maybe would help stop burn outs?
I'm a complete novice so feel free to ignore if that's a stupid suggestion :)
Sorry to drag up an old thread- was any official verdict reached? I notice that locking DOWN seems to be favoured in real life to locking UP. Is this a stipulation or just personal preference?
the rules now require flippers to be locked down i believe, however theres still some reservations from some in the community with some specific designs.
Cool. Do you know why locking down is preferred? I personally would feel happier locking up, but there may well be something I haven't considered!
The main argument is that when locking up you still have an unprotected moving object (the ram). Effectively the robot still moves and is considered dangerous. The opponents to this view suggest turning bottles on slowly to visualise the problem.
The alternative view which i share is that whilst locking down should be the preferred option, there are some designs where for many reasons it is unsafe to do so. For example the ram being more powerful than the chassis holding the robot together, thus any misfire could potentially rip the robot apart (i have seen this happen). Opponents to this view suggest better design.
Edit: Jamie below is also right in that people prefer to not touch the robot after the locking bar is removed. This i agree with.
I believe it's the risk of the flipper blade dropping down and injuring someone. Could be other reasons though, pneumatics isn't something I deal with.
Right oh, cheers for that. Stress testing from a distance might be key here!
Slowely pressurizing good pneumatic setups should be mandatory.
I quite agree!
Pressurizing bad pneumatic setups is rather Darwinist.