well i got the idea after thinking about the baseball launchers.
if i got two bots and made one a launcher and the other a spike that is another bot that could be loaded in to the launcher and fired, would this be classed as a cluster bot or a projectile weapon?

i suspect that it would be a projectile weapon but i would like conformation about it.
_________________
For West ausies interested in robotics email me at: theoneshrug@hotmail.com
OR
dragoonarie@gmail.com
best quote ever:: "Those Gas-Turbine style warehouse heaters arent illegal, and neither is remote controlling one as far as I know."

All projectile's must be tethered to the Lauching Bot.

Refer to rule: -

12.3. Un-tethered Projectiles (see projectile description in Special Weapons section 13.5)

in chapter 12. 'Forbidden Weapons and Materials.'


and Refer to Rule: -

13.5. Tethered Projectiles ARE allowed at this event.

Tethered projectiles must have a securely attached tether of sufficient strength to safely stop the projectile at a distance of no more than 8 feet from the robot.

in chapter 13. 'Special weapon descriptions allowed at this event:'

Note: - The 8 Feet tethered distance may be shorter at different events due to arena size. (Up to EO)


Also if you are planning on having the projectile controlled remotely via a remot control, to reload that it will be classed as a cluster bot as both parts can be controlled seperatly, as well as being combind..
_________________
It's all about the destruction.

hmmm well personaly i think it totally depends on how the robots are made.

Say I had two robots that weigh 13.6 kilos together, one is 10kg and the other is 3.6. The 10 kg robot is a flipper, i drive the small robot onto the flipper and launch it towards the other robot. To me that is a cluster bot and no tethering is required.

I think that as long as whatver mechanism is used to launch the other part of the cluster can also be used to attack other robots then it is ok

But if you can only launch your specially desgined cluster bot then it counts as a projectile.

also if they are tethered then they are not a cluster bot, even if the they can both drive around doing seperately then as long as there is a connection between them they are not a cluster bot


For example I have always wanted to build two 6.8kg bots that have seperate controllers and drive seperately but have a chain between them. Meaning you have two operators who only control their half of the robot. But what I dont know if what happens if the chain gets broken, suddenly you have two seperate robots, but they were placed into the arena as one... do they suddenly become a cluster? or are they still counted as one robot?

Its complex, because say if one of the robots on the chain broke down, the other one could still drive, dragging the droken one. It is still one robot, just quite damaged but it still goes.


thats my thoughts anyway

Look if you can make something that can move around it self via radio and still fire it so fast as to cause damage good on ya
But it seems your looking for a loop so you don't have to teather it

Remember if the event organizer thinks that projectile could go though the wall if it's fired at a angle you would not be able to run it anyway for safety that being the resion for the rule

In the end i'll think you will find a teather is not so bad compeared to a remote control bullet lol
_________________
Team KO

I think you need to read the original question very clearly.

First.
Big AL is looking at use a scaled down version of a base ball laucher.
That is telling me that Big AL is intending to fire a projectile out of it.

Second.
A Projectile can be a solid object or another robot designed as a projectile.

Third.
There is no mention of a flipper in Big AL's original question.
A flipper throwing another Bot over it's component is not a projectile.

A projectile is something that travels at high velocity, not lobed

Fourth.
Two robots that are tethered together via a cable or chain I would class as a Cluster bot as both parts are controlled seperatly. It could be classed as one Bot, but in real terms it is a cluster.


Also Prong with your concept that would fall in to the rule

12.1.5. Weapons or defenses that stop combat completely of both (or more) robots. This includes nets, tapes, strings, and entanglement devices not specifically allowed in the Special Weapons section 13.2.

in section 12. Forbidden Weapons and Materials.


Now before every one gets into a frenzy and starts talking about tether's being a "entanglement device" and not complying with rule 12.1.5.

A tether is not there to entangle other robots. it is there so a projectile can be used safely. The design is not for entanglement.

A cable or chain between two Bots. designed to wrap around another is an entagleing device.

There for would fall into the rule 12.1.5. In other words it is forbidden..
_________________
It's all about the destruction.

Could i just ask, how would you build this seeing as you havn't even finished your first bot?
By how I understand it, your saying that the second robot is also the projectile. This conflicts with many rules already stated, and also, no flying robots are allowed in the rules. It would only be single shot anyway!
_________________
( •_•)

( •_•)>⌐■-■

(⌐■_■)

YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH

IIRC flying bots are allowed arent they? they are in the US anyway
_________________
www.demon50s.com - Minimoto parts
http://www.youtube.com/user/HyzerGlen - Videoooozzz

As long as they dont have exposed rotors

hehe I think you need to read my reply carefully
like I said, it totally depends on how the robots are made.

It is the concept of launching another robot as an offensive move that is interesting, and challenges the rules When discussing how the rules may or may not accomodate this then there is no point limiting it to certain methods etc...

The flipper is just an example,

I can think of many ways a baseball firing mechanism could work, it is never explained how it does here...

anyway, what if I had a 10kg robot with a pnematic ram designed to punch holes in other robots, then I had a 3.6kg robot designed to stop in front of the ram and be launched... The little robot would have to be very strong, but after seeing the power of Jake's ram if you could make the little bot survive it would be a high speed projectile indeed! hehe or it could launch baseballs! or punch holes in them

So is this a cluster bot or an untethered projectile?

All I am saying is there is a grey area in the rules. How do you define what is a projectile or not?

Also with the chain robot I disagree. Having a chain stretched between two robots is no more an entanglement device than a wedge. A wedge is there to basically "entangle" another robot and lift it partially off the groud, in an attaempt to move it or stop it being able to drive. Now a wedge is ok because you can attempt to back away and release the other robot. So as far as I can see an entaglement device is something designed to stop another robots movement but you cannot realistically attempt to release the other robot, EG a net.

But if you have the chain robot, it could easily drive around another bot, wedging the bot up on the chain so it is stuck. You can then drive back around the bot or away from the bot, pulling the chain free. As long as you have a method of releasing the other bot then it is not entanglement, only a long weird wedge.

Now say you dont like the idea of a chain, say I have a long section of mini triangular wedges that join the robot halves, and i can use this as a very wide wedge to wedge other robots, is this ok?


Anyway so if I had a robot that has it two halves joined by a chain, a flexible wedge, whatever, and each half has its own motors and power supply and can be controlled seperately it is not one robot? What if the robot halves are joined by a steel rod? does that chnage it? These rules are very open for interpretation...

Personally I would say if I had a robot where I could seperatelly control each half and they have some inderpendant movement (such as being joined by a chain) then they are one robot. You mentioned you would class them as a cluster because they can be controlled independantly.

Do you mean they can move independantly? or that I am using two seperate controllers? What if I used one 4 channel controller with one reciever and the half of the robot transmitted the other two channels of control to the other half of the robot wirelessly... I dont see anywhere that says you robot has to use a single controller and cannot have various bits independant in control and motion to the rest...


It seems to me that the rules are up for plenty of discussion and interpretation..., thats how interesting desgins develop!

i should have said it differently the bots are sepperat and both have seperate controllers.

one is a spike that can be driven around and the other is a carrier.

also i was just thinking about it and was wondering what your thoughts it would be

it only goes across the ground but is fired from a the first bot

also i was just planning it not actually building but might be.
(who knows)
more later
_________________
For West ausies interested in robotics email me at: theoneshrug@hotmail.com
OR
dragoonarie@gmail.com
best quote ever:: "Those Gas-Turbine style warehouse heaters arent illegal, and neither is remote controlling one as far as I know."

Personally I think it depends on how the robot is launched. If the launcher can also be used to attack another robot, ie a flipper, or spike etc then I think it is ok

But if you have a special launcher that can do nothing but launch your little robot then it counts as a projectile

my thoughts anyway

my thought's on it

i recknon it would be classed as a cluster bot due to the fact that they start as one bot

i also think that it would get passed the argument you put down as the launchers have the abillity to spin somthing fast enought

i'll try to stick some consept drawings up[/b]
_________________
For West ausies interested in robotics email me at: theoneshrug@hotmail.com
OR
dragoonarie@gmail.com
best quote ever:: "Those Gas-Turbine style warehouse heaters arent illegal, and neither is remote controlling one as far as I know."

My take on this interesting argument from the Point of View of an Event Operator...

Most of the rules about what is not allowed are there either to make things safe for the competitors and spectators, or to keep things entertaining (which is why High Voltage Weapons, etanglement and RF jamming and stuff are banned, they wouldnt make for a very exciting fight).

The "No Projectiles" rule would seem to me to be a "safety" issue. Its all about how much Kinetic energy per square inch your Arena walls can absorb and safely contain.

Throwing a 6-12Kg Bot-sized "Projectile" at the walls would be unlikely to pose much of a safety risk, since the force would be spread out over a large contact area, and hence be very unlikely to penetrate.

A bullet doesnt actually contain that much kinetic energy relatively speaking, its just the fact that its all concentrated into a point a few millimeters square that makes it dangerous.

A Bot with enough velocity and mass to equal the kientic energy of a bullet probably wouldnt go through the walls, whereas the bullet might (44 magnum anyone ?)

Event Operators basically want builders to have fun and entertain the public, which is why exemptions can be made for nearly anything if in the opinion of the EO -
1.it isnt a blatant violation of the rules
2. It is safe for the spectators
3.It is a creative engineering solution that is worth recognizing and making allowances for and
4. it doesnt offer any significant competitive advantage that would make the other competitors cry foul.

Many of the famous BattleBots and Robot-Wars robots used to operate under exemptions because in the EO's opinion, the person who was applying for the exemption was responsible and knew what they were doing enough to make it safe.

Mechadon used to operate at around 90v. Hazard may well have too.. This broke the "48v maximum" rule, but the builders of both Bots were obviously skilled and experienced enough (Mark Setrakian being a professional puppeteer and all) to play with those sort of voltages safely, so they were granted exemptions.

an inexperienced 16yo applying for an exemption to build a flame thrower bot, or some thinly disguised shotgun projectile weapon would most likely NOT be granted an exemption therefore..

So if someone comes up with a novel, interesting, well-engineered and executed, safe and entertaining design that stretches the rules a bit, talk to your friendly local EO and you never know, it might just be allowed.
_________________
Great minds discuss ideas. Average minds discuss events. Small minds discuss people

I do agree and before i (well anyone) tries anything like this better make sure they have a place to use it WITHOUT endangering someone or something.

I might make it something like it later on but not for a while and with a bit more infomation, understanding and a place to use it safetly.

Don't want the police confisating you prized machine for it was an unlicenced weapon used in the wrong place (Another point)

any way spinning weapons are dangerous enough for now
_________________
For West ausies interested in robotics email me at: theoneshrug@hotmail.com
OR
dragoonarie@gmail.com
best quote ever:: "Those Gas-Turbine style warehouse heaters arent illegal, and neither is remote controlling one as far as I know."