Bumpers and acute corners

[FRC1270]

In update #2 the robot is a rectangle with the front of the robot allowing for a 26” opening in the center. The two 6” front sections are perpendicular to the side rails and on opposite sides of each other. Would it be a violation of rule <R08-A> if the two side sections were angled 45 degrees towards the center of the robot – still covered with a bumper. Would the bumpers attached to the 6” angled section be considered enough protection to the corners and not in violation of rule <R08-C>?

[FRC341]

We have a question about exterior corners of the robot that are less
than 90 degrees. For clarification, this is one specific illustration
of this design, but our question refers to these sorts of corners in
general: http://www.chiefdelphi.com/media/photos/32317?

It seems that there are four possible ways to interpret the rules about
such corners:

1. Bumpers must be present on either side of the corner (per this Q&A
response: http://forums.usfirst.org/showthread.php?t=11159). Thus, the
interior angled sections of the robot must have bumpers.

2. Bumpers must be located on the BUMPER PERIMETER (<R08>). Thus,
bumpers cannot be present on the interior angled section, as they are
not part of the convex hull of the robot polygon.

3. These sorts of exterior corners are not permitted because (1) and (2)
cannot simultaneously be satisfied.

4. The interior angled sections of the robot must be padded so as not to
damage the trailer (preserving the intent of the bumpers in the first
place), but since they are "bumpers" rather than "BUMPERS", they are not
exempt from weight and size withholdings.

Which is the correct interpretation? Thanks.

[GDC]

Based on previously provided information, you have correctly concluded that all exterior corners must be protected by BUMPER segments (Rule <R08-I>). Each BUMPER segment must be a minimum of six inches in length (Rule <R08-A), and must be attached to the BUMPER PERIMETER (Rule <R08-L>). Effectively, this means that an exterior corner of the ROBOT can not be at an angle that is more acute than the coincident corner of the BUMPER PERIMETER. It follows that the example configuration you cited would not be permitted.