Printable View
I didnt realise Kan Opener was testing them too. When were they added. I wouldnt want Andy to have an advantage over thor and put some extra armour on. Andy can you confirm that you wont be running them at the champs, or youll be carrying ballast to make up any weight advantage ?
why would this matter?? some teams have bot packs rather than SLAs so there lighter and can fit more in the robot i dont see it has a unfair advantage
Because we are allowed to use botpacks. The use of A123 in heavies is not allowed for everyone yet.
In such a high profile competition with such a high prize fund at stake I dont believe that A123s should be used at all. If they aint in the rules then they shouldnt be used and everyone should play to the same ruleset, favouritism in a full combat competition should not be tolerated.
If they were available for general use they would be in Hive.
Not happy.
i argee with gary now has i hadnt understood the points being made till the last few posts
how bout whiteboard fights ok, but comp not?
These points have been discussed.
The bottom line is the cells MUST be tested in a full combat competition the preparation of which has been over 10 months and involved a lot of time and effort behind the scenes.
The fact that these cells are not available for general use is the specific reason that they need to be thoroughly tested for both safety and performance. Furthermore, the advantages these cells offer are easily countered to ensure a level playing field for competition.
While these cells offer a potential benefit to the community in general, this can only be seen with the ongoing commitment from a few individuals. And the patience of several others.
The generalised use of these cells can only been seen after they have been tested extensively in full combat competition. Of which I am sure, we will all be keeping a close eye on.
The fact that these cells are not available for general use is the specific reason that they need to be thoroughly tested for both safety and performance
Your above statement is incorrect ..... they are available and in general use.
37 pages of posts on this forum starting Sept 06
http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=573927http://www.rcgroups.com/forums/showthread.php?t=573927
Suppliers of A123 packs..... There are more.
http://www.first-products.de/katalogenglisch.htmhttp://www.first-products.de/katalogenglisch.htm
http://bigerc.com/index.php?cPath=21_39&osCsid=6193ce799a989c68edad5 b1728b5a53ahttp://bigerc.com/index.php?cPath=21...ad5b1728b5a53a
I totally understand that a Fighting Robot isnt an aeroplane but there appears to be NO bad press on the safety issue and safety is the ONLY issue ...suitability ....as far as performance goes ...isnt an FRA concern.
Looking forward to their ratification.
Woody
(Message edited by woody on August 14, 2007)
Woody, that quote needs to be taken in context to Garys post. For clarification, general use refers to their general use in fighting robots and not general availability.
Pff.. what the people testing the new battery packs should do is paint an extra sign on their robots: 4 the sake of science hit me Xtra hard plz !
We all strive to incorporate nifty innovations into our robots in order to get the upper hand on our opponents. This is just one of them. The fact that these battery packs are as yet not available for all of us is just temporarily. It sucks if it helps a few privileged win the big game but then, you know the proverb: if you cant take the joke you shouldnt have signed up.
Lets just test those packs in the most maximized maximum endurance test we have. But I expect a final report right after this event and a definite yay/nay for the use of those packs.
I stand corrected on taking the general use out of context.
But my last statement is still valid.
I totally understand that a Fighting Robot isnt an aeroplane but there appears to be NO bad press on the safety issue and safety is the ONLY issue ...suitability ....as far as performance goes ...isnt an FRA concern
i am not happy with my last post on this thread and will be writing a mail to the fighting robots association
Edit ......isnt an aeroplane should really read... a RC Aeroplane or Car ....Reference the RC Groups link of my post.
Apologies, I did mean general use meaning to the general robot population.
Is it possible to put together some formal guidelines for the testing and introduction of new technologies to the sport?
Gary, what do you call new technology?
When hypnodisk shattered Stealth in series 3, the disk weapon was new technology
Antrax/Raven and Behemoth were among the first to use NiCd 7000 mAh cells. Equally new.
When Hardox was introduced in RW, it was new technology.
When Gravity started flipping in Heat D series 7, it was new technology and dangerous too boot.
When is something new technology? Or when is it just cunning use of existing possibilities?
When it isnt included in the current rule set
I would class the A123 cells as new technology as it is a completely new cell unlike any before
2.4ghz radio is another example
(Message edited by typhoon_driver on August 14, 2007)
Just to put things in context,
Terrohurtz hits you with an axe not batteries
But it pushes and drives with more batteries, and leaves weight for a heavier axe head.
The terrohurtz team are not changing anything but batteries.
And therefore will be weighing lighter than it usually does.
To keep bringing the integrity of this honorable team in to question is surprising to all who know them.
John is doing this testing on behalf of us all.
One of the main areas of benefit is going to be the featherweight folk.
Just to put things back into context.
Kan Opener squeezes you with battery power.
Both the above statements .....mine and Andys are really irrelevant to the original concern about weight.
All A123 battery testing Robots should.. IMO .. weigh in at the Championships UNDERWEIGHT by some 2 or 3 kgs ...thus proving that they have ONLY replaced their original batteries with a like for like Amp/Hr rating ....thus gaining NO appreciable power advantage and also showing that extras havent been added due to having a couple of extra kilos spare.
Alternatively ....If they really want to be top limit on weight ......A couple of housebricks tapped inside should be OK for ballast:)
One of the main areas of benefit is going to be the featherweight folk.
I thought that the A123 Batteries were legal in Feathers?
Until further notice, Lithium rechargeable batteries may only be used in robots in the Featherweight class and below
The testing and results supplied by John are of course extremely welcome.
(Message edited by woody on August 14, 2007)
The statement applies to Li-Poly.
A123 were barely known of when the statement was made.
All results will be availiable to all
Excuse me? The Aussies have been using A123 for well on to a year now. The first mentioning was in June 2006, and now more and more featherweight teams are using them over there.
And why is it that a LiPo is allowed in a Feather and an A123 isnt? I read this line the same as Woody did, anything heavier than a feather and Lithium rechargeable is not allowed. To me that says ALL Lithium, not just LiPo in particular.
It sounds a bit funky to me that a battery that is inherently unstable would be allowed while a cell that is mechanicly way more stable isnt.
I give you now outward point of view. If yuo robot is so bad that it can win because other robot have better batteries perhaps you should build better robot? If safety of this lithium cell is not a problem then it should be ok?
In end batterys are only small part of robot and that it win or not. My robot was only robot with lipo battery in 12kg em compatition. dit it win picause better batteries? - no it lose because I am bad driver!
But 270g 3S 3200mah lipo VS 650g 10cell a GP3300 and lipo is at lower price! I love Finland 3
Otto, Im not saying that we should disallow the use of LiPo (yet) but not to allow a battery that is safer is really weird.
I dont remember all this fuss when people started using NiCads, like everything else in this sport, somebody has to be first!!, so I say Good luck with the testing John.
Dave Team DMac
i know nothing about these batteries etc.. but what i dont get is why more than one robot need to test these batteries to start with? or why dont these robots go through rigerous testing/whiteboards behind closed doors?, at the end of the day it seems someone has spend alot of time researching and testing these for everyone elses benefit as well as their own, but i dont believe they should be used at uk champs!! why not a less important competition? if they were in the rules then fair enough, but due to whats at stake for the winner is this really the place for tryouts? what would peoples opinion be or how would you feel going out to one of these robots in the semis? or seeing one of these win the title.what needs clarifying, is their an unfair advantage, i dont have the answer sorry! just my opinion
what needs clarifying, is their an unfair advantage
Ady ...The batteries in question are very light compared to NiCads of the same rating.
The testing Robots will have no advantage because ... I assume ...they have changed their original batteries for A123 technology on a more or less like for like basis....So theyll just be a little lighter than there original weight.
I am prepared to leave this topic alone if I hear the from the roboteers involved that they will not be using the extra weight gained from these cells to modify their machines. In other words, replacing the robots current batteries in a like for like swap.
John we have heard this from you already and I thank you.
Please dont get me wrong, I am exceptionally grateful to the teams involved in testing the new cells if they benefit the entire community but as Adrian says, what needs clarifying, is their an unfair advantage
To be honnest.
Terrorhurtz would be disadvantaged by the loss of weight. But nothing to be overcome by some ballast in non crusial places like in the center of the robot.
It becomes unfair if everybody else isnt allowed to use Lithium based batteries, and the weightgain is used to enhance offensive or defensive capacity.
***Removed for confidential reasons.***
(Message edited by maddox on August 15, 2007)
Heres an interesting video showing how much safer the A123 cells are
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ayuFBDrSghttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A9ayuFBDrSg
Ok, about time someone brought logic into the argument. If people are allowed to use these batteries in any main competition when the arent in the rules, then they should have a lower weight limit to everyone else. If a robot has the same voltage (give or take a bit) then it is a straight deduction from the 100kg with difference in th pack weight. If they are running a higher voltage, then the weight of the lightest battery setup at that voltage which is allowed in the rules is taken from the robot weight before the trial batteries are added.
So if you had 9kg of nicads say, then 100-9 is 91, and 2kg of lithiums then the robot weight limit should be 93kgs.
Personally I think these batteries do need testing under high stress conditions. Specs can tell us what a battery should do under normal circumstances, what we do with them is not anywhere near normal. I dont mind either way, wether they are allowed in the UK champs or not, but if they are then something like I have suggested should be worked out.
It is upto the FRA to make a decision on this but the outcome must be fair to all.
I for one think that is a fair way of handling it.
Pure balast would do fine according to me.
Just a block of something in the middle of the robot so it doesnt add anything to offensive or defensive capacities.
As I already stated.
Using the weight gained by the non allowed test batteries for anything else than balast is pure foul play if and possible abuse of power/influence you ask me.
Like quadrupling Ah stored.
It seems some folks are getting hot under the collar about the thought of Kan-opener useing A123 cells in the UK champs.
Our A123 system will not be ready for use in the UK Champs
A decision was made a couple of weeks ago that to use these cells in the UK champs would not be a good one.
Kan-opener is reliable with its existing batteries and reliability is a key to getting on in a competition such as the UK champs.
Our team had already tested an improvement in performance with the existing system.
Thank you for the clarification Andy.
happy biding woody (i want out bid you ;)
are these bosch batterys the same ?36v
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/36v-2ah-bosch-battery_W0QQitemZ160160277954QQihZ006QQcategoryZ12 2840QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItemhttp://cgi.ebay.co.uk/36v-2ah-bosch-...QihZ006QQcateg oryZ122840QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem
Cheers John,
I want to make a spare pack for my Feather.
I doubt if the Bosche use the SAME A123 batteries...probably similar.
Edit :- Ah! .....Some info ....
http://www.contractortoolsandsupplies.com/past/power_tools/LithiumIonLowdown.htmhttp://www.contractortoolsandsupplie...IonLowdown.htm
(Message edited by woody on September 22, 2007)
Its not clear what batteries Bosch use, but they are not A123 cells.
so are we allowed to use them now or not?