It is down to the event organiser to ensure that rules and safety guidelines are undertaken in a manner that promotes a safe environment for all involved.
I rarely see a need at events for organisers to raise this with roboteers as it is already part of the tech check and roboteers have so far policed this themselves.
just had a thought actually.
kan-opener has a locking bar on his claws right. Razer does not.
I am building at the moment both types, a vertical and horizontal crusher. so do i need it on one, both or neither?
they are featherweights.
I would say both, if I was the rule maker, but Im not, so please rule on this for me oh FRA master, and let me know if i need to make locking devices for them. Best practice says do it anyway, but id like a firm rule please.
Again, if I were the rule maker id say all active weapons must be physically locked in place, (so as to limit movement sufficiently so that it cannot move a distance likely to injure, pinch, or damage others (persons or property) under any circumstances) and unable to move, even under full power, when out of the safe arena but then I will simply follow what im told here.
(please note, this rule clarification may effect current robots aswell, so if you have an active weapon and no locking pin, pay attention)
1.5.5. All Robots not in an arena or official testing area should have secure safety covers over any sharp edges and restraints on any active weapons or pinch hazards
you said it yourself in your above post james. all active weaponary needs restraints. but is it completely neccicary though thinking about it? if its electric then once the link is out then it cant operate even on accident. and when the link is in, you put your hands in the dangerous areas at your own risk and only when you absolutly have to. you should be aware of the risks of handleing their own machine?
With Venom when the link is out the arm cant possibley move. in the pits when the link is in its only during the tech check where i need to operate the weapon to show it failsafes so i cant have the restraint on then? I think this only applys to slow moveing weaponary though?
That is quite an interesting point as the rule that this thread refers to does not specify a physical restraint. So technically a complete lack of power to the weapon is a restraint although not physical.
Perhaps some clarification or rewording of the rule is required?
Below is a proposed wording for rule 1.5.5....
I think it leaves no doubt as to the intent of this rule.. Please feel free to comment.
1.5.5
When any robot is not in compertition any sharp or pointed edges must be coverd to prevent injury.
In addition, any moving, swinging, rotating or actuating arm, lever or mechanism must be fitted with a visible locking device that clearly shows that the arm/lever/mechanism is securely locked into place and incapable of accidental movement.
The only exception to this would be a mechanism that by its design is incapable of movement without electrical supply I.E. a mechanism powered by a lead screw or similar. In which case the removable link would be regarded as the locking device
sounds good but I still think that everyone should be encouraged to have the visible locking pins even if their weapon is able to be disabled by the removable link. It doesnt take much more than a hole and a metal pin.
just out of interest, how do we stand legally if faulty wiring results in an accident where a lead screw mechanism activates due to sustained battle damage?
my example being, if i made something similar to big nipper, and fought kan opener. i sustain damage, and a power line is crushed to the chassis. the robot remains fully powered with the link out (can happen) and as i put it on the table, without a locking device, it cuts someones bits off.
my point being, for the sake of exempting lead screws, are is it worth risking a freak, but feasable accident.
I suggest taking the wording as is, but removing the lead screw exemption, as if this is kept in we should also exempt hydraulic robots, as they have no acumulators and so cannot operate without electric power.
any thoughts?
I agree with Gary.
A locking pin is a great device to use while dis-arming the robot... The weapon can be locked when it is not possible to get to the link.
The new wording would leave a lot of room for abuse... I dont know of any robot that could have its weapon activated without power... Everyones radio gear is electrically powered.
1.5.5
All weapons much incorporate a manual locking device to prevent movement when the robot is not in the arena.
and possibly
Event organisers may request a demonstration of the safety device in a controlled situation.
Or should it perhaps be down to the organiser of the event to say if they require physically removable pins or other physical devices to ensure that a weapon is disabled?
Valid point about hydraulic robots there James, must admit, that one got past me!
Yours, Garys & Kanes other comments are duly noted and equaly valid. (Kanes wording is nice, short and to the point)
Im wondering if this debate really belongs in Safety Discussions rather than here?
(Message edited by scorpion on May 13, 2006)
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks