FRA urgent announcement

[geeza]

FRA urgent announcement

Mario, if an idiot organises an event then the chances of any or us roboteers would attend would be slim. I will only fight if I think that the arena and safety is good enough to contain my robot.

Dainel, the tether rule is there to comply with the rule you must have a tether of some kind. If you have a one piece shaft and head then I would assume that the shaft/head must be tethered to the robot chassis. This would satisfy the rule to my standards. If the rule is there you build to it, it stops arguments such as this happening at events by one competitor saying oh he hasnt got a tether for example.
As for your last statement, at the last event an tooth was ripped off but it was the bar that failed not the tooth itself so a tether wouldnt have had any effect.
THz tether is very good, if the head or shaft breaks then it is tethered at any point. I am sure that at that point John would stop firing the axe as it is more likely to damage his machine.
Sorry got carried away, nuff said.

James C I agree with your last post entirely.

[ady]

FRA urgent announcement

its ok if you dont run a spinner eh?

[maddox]

FRA urgent announcement

Ed, I guess you would be surprised who will fight what machine in a reasonable safe spot without an audience.
Nobody wants to risk innocents

If the FRA rules make it impossible for organisers to have an arena in a reasonable way, I guess it will make those organizers go seperate without the Approved by the FRA quality mark.

I dont like a split in our small group, after all were only with a few 100 over the whole world. But I see it happen.
Oh, it happened in the past already.

And the only thing the FRA can do on that is ban or ignore those organizers on this forum.


As Im not an organizer, nor member of any know organisation concerned with robot wars (No Im not a DRG member either) Im not risking much.

*************************************************
Daniel, the tether rule is not that difficult nor effective. No dimensions nor anchor points are mandated. A tether on your axe could be a badstop chain connected to a self tapping screw on a 3mm polycarb plate.

Also, if I recall correctly, it is a safety device, and not counted into the weight of the robot. So, if your drive/chassis is strong enough, why not using a anchor chain of 5 kg per link? Your 13.6kg machine with 50kg of safety device... talk about grip and pushing capability then.

[babeth]

FRA urgent announcement

Are the tethers for flippers included in the weight ?

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Lets try to recapitulate so far:

- The FRA has implemented a measure with immediate effect that has caused people to balk because it leaves organisers little time to upgrade their arenas for spinners, effectively banning spinners from events in the next few months (probably even the year).

- People are wondering whether the vote was really unanimous and it turned out some present had some reservations. It was however decided the matter was too important to let it drag on any longer and thus the measure was set into place. Note that we have been discussing arena safety seriously since the last UK Championships, so this must not really have come as a total surprise to all. And face it, safety is still our major concern.

- There has been some communication about the issue, of which I can glean ***and I stress here that this is my personal opinion, not that of any organiser nor any other member nor any other non-member*** that the FRA seems to flounder around a bit regarding this issue: years of laissez-faire and then suddenly a stringent ruling of which we still await the technical data (research, comparative tests, advice of the industry, risk assessments...) in order to justify the ruling. In other words I expect a bit more professionalism. If not, then the FRA is what I always thought it was, and to my opinion actually should be: an advisory organ that provides the people and space to develop safety measures for our sport which the organisers can then adopt, to investigate and provide a protection against lawsuits from people who might see it as a way to get filthy rich quick, and to develop a comprehensive public relations medium for non-roboteers to contact. If we really want a regulatory organ with enforcing powers then I suggest new improved procedures for the elections, stringent regulation regarding the committee members (like having no robots in combat, which I believe is utmost important in order to avoid conflict of interest) and people who are bl**dy prepared to hop in and do their part instead of moaning about the current committee who is only in place because nobody else wanted to.


Post number 903 from a non-member who used to be a member from the beginning but isnt anymore due to living too far away in order to pay her dues on a regular basis, and everytime she was in a position to pay (like being in the country) couldnt find someone to pay to.

[jamesb]

FRA urgent announcement

i have a point that id like to make, and before I make it I would like to point out that it is aimed at the person/people who conducted the research that current standards are based on. The fact that there persons are also someone i have a history of arguing with is irrelevant, and I would hope that my comments are read impartially before i get hate mail again.

in testing (i am assuming a full size sheet of 10mm polycarbonate was hung from an existing arena and not just stuck in a vice or layed on a driveway) it was found that only 10mm of material was sufficient to safely contain simulated debris from a featherweight fight.

please define fhe following.

the simulated debris, its size, shape, speed, firing method, speed measurement technique, distance from target, number of testes conducted, effects on target, acceptable results to target, unacceptable results to target, target certificates, target type, make, age and uv rating........ shall i go on?

also, am i to infer, that as 10mm is minimum thickness for the walls, and 5mm for the roof, that if I ask for the distance from arena floor to robochallenge roof, I can run 5mm screens at this distance from the arena sidewall? in which case

for 5mm polycarbonate at a distance of (x=robochallenge floor to roof height)
please define fhe following.

the simulated debris, its size, shape, speed, firing method, speed measurement technique, distance from target, number of testes conducted, effects on target, acceptable results to target, unacceptable results to target, target certificates, target type, make, age and uv rating........ shall i go on?

In short, I will accept these findings as accurate and not guessworks on the condition that they were carried in a manner that is independantly repeatable, and accurate.

My complaint is not that the new guidelines are being introduced so quickly, I applaud the FRA dilligence on closing a geninely dangerous practice. My complaint is that the new standards to solve the issue of a fabric roof, do more than that. They also increase wall thickness, and to my knowledge there has NEVER been an issue of 6mm polycarbonate not containing featherweight spinners. Please correct me if debris has ever penetrated a screen?

I will conduct my own tests as tho whether my arena is safely screened, and make my results public when I do. If they do not meet FRA minimum guidelines, but are tested as sufficient, where would the FRA stand?

By the way, if there is a grade 2 and grade 2F, does that mean the screens on a grade 2 are thickers, due to the heavyweights having more energy in spinners, and so all this testing must begin again, or is 10mm a guess, so its too much for feathers and too little for heavies, making it effectivly useless.

I hope my point has come across without sounding biased. I just want detailed descriptions of exatly how tests were conducted and documented results. If we are going to effectivle ban all spinners from all but 1 arena, at least lets do it fo the right reasons.

and yes, I do still intend to run spinners safely, unless my own, independant tests prove otherwise.

[RogueTwoRobots]

FRA urgent announcement

quote:

number of testes conducted

Now now James, family forum :wink:

[armadrillo]

FRA urgent announcement

Very interesting discussion!
James B has a very good point about the testing. This needs to be clarified.
Safety has to be paramount to everyone involved in roboteering from 14 year old newbies to experienced EOs. Lets hope this doesnt split the EOs at home and abroad.
No need for me to finish my feather spinner any time soon then (a least this year for the events i was thinking of attending).
Post No 316 from a non member.

[jamesb]

FRA urgent announcement

jamie....
after spending so long writing it
and you spending that long reading it.
THAT is what stands out to you????

awesome. love it!

[RogueTwoRobots]

FRA urgent announcement

[woody]

FRA urgent announcement

MY view.

It would appear that there is some sort of imperical evidence to support the shortcomings of some arenas.

BLINDINGLY OBVIOUS STATEMENT FOLLOWS:-
If the current arena construction is incapable of containing certain types of bot and the debris from them ....then that type of bot cannot be run.

COMMERCIAL SIDE:-
It would be commercial suicide for the E.O.s if a serious accident occurred ..... Theyd become uninsurable and no venue would have them / us.

I believe that the FRA actually backs the EOs in their approach to gaining insurance by certifying the suitability of the arena? ..... So the FRA needs to retain its credibility if we wish them to continue representing the Roboteering communities interests.

ROBOTEERING SIDE
It would also sound the Death Knell for the sport of Roboteering if such an accident occured.

So basically Im in favour of the safety measures .... The obvious solution is a better arena/s ..... The cost OUCH!

Woody .... Membership subscription posted today.

[andy_kane]

FRA urgent announcement

Well done Woody, some common sense shown.

The first the FRA cannot certify arenas. For instance we cannot control the quality of their welding hence the term Guidelines

The event organisers approved these measures themselves as they know there is a potential problem. Yes there is a cost to the event organisers. For most of them it is not unreasonable.

Arena guidelines have not changed since just after Robot Wars stopped filming.
The robots themselves have moved on considerably.

Besides the obvious problems that have been discussed fairly openly, we know of 206 more reasons why something had to give.

Featherweights are heading for the power of heavy weights.

The 206 is the miles per hour of a 500mm bar spun up on the end of a lem motor and all in 12KG

[dragonmaster_1]

FRA urgent announcement

Andy
Try 226 mph with 3hp and all in 12kg

[jamesb]

FRA urgent announcement

was done 3 years ago... wheres the problem?
not a LEM, but over 300mph, and 500mm diameter.
weight of disk? mine was 2.1kg

if anyone wants a demo ill get one done.

[geoff]

FRA urgent announcement

James,
For gods sake give it a rest will you, if you dont see the problem, then I have to seriously question if you even understand what the FRA in conjunction with the event organisers are trying to do here for all our benifit.
As a voting member of our govening body I would have expected better from you!

Geoff Smith,
Chairman, FRA.

[jamesb]

FRA urgent announcement

as a voting member of our governing body I would have hoped to have had a say in endorsing safety tests conducted on the behalf of the FRA.

If it is in any way unclear, I will make it very clear right now.

My insurance company have told me that they do not know of the FRA, and do not care what your guidelines are. I must satisfy the that I have ensured any arena I sign off as safe is suitable and sufficient for its purpose. This is a legal term.

Rather than rely on the finding of individuals without questioning their methods or reasons, I am, at my own expence, commissioning an independant ballistics test of various thicknesses of polycarbonate. If the FRA do not see my problem, then feel free not to make use of this information, that you should have got yourselves before relying on unsubstatiated guesswork.

No offense, but Ill give it a rest now, as clearly my concerns over your blind acceptance of questionable test are causing trouble again. I look forward to the minutes of the meeting and the full breakdown of testing done. Should make for a nice 2 minute read.

James Baker
someone who clearly does not understand what the FRA and the event organisers are trying to do aside from provide one organizer with a monopoly and all others with a large extra expense.

Ever heard of archery netting?

(Message edited by jamesb on January 23, 2007)