Bumper Backing Clearance Pocket Clarification

[2010FRC2826]

Reference:
Rule <R07-D> states:

"Small clearance pockets and/or access holes in the BUMPER backing are permitted, as long as they do not significantly affect the structural integrity of the BUMPER."

Question:
Do full span (from edge to edge on the 5" dimension) vertical dados of 1/8" depth and 1/2" width qualify as a small clearance pocket?

Background:
We have a row of hardware on the frame perimiter that the backing interferes with and a dado is a significantly easier method of creating clearance.

Supporting evidence:
We did a bending stess test on a piece of 3/4" plywood with and without the dado and both cracked within 5% of eachother, which might satisfy the rule of not impacting structural integrity.

[GDC]

Given that plywood is a non-homogeneous, non-isotropic material with the strength and bending moment determined, in large part, by the relative orientation of the surviving laminations, it is not at all clear that cutting a dado across the entire height of the material would not severely compromise the structural integrity of the material. The dado reduces the effective thickness of the material by 16.67%. To ensure that the integrity of the modified plywood backing is still sufficient to survive the expected impacts of a typical match, you will need to provide appropriate analytical results to allow us to perform a comprehensive stress-loads analysis prior to having your robot inspected at the competition. As a minimum, we will need the following materials to be submitted for review: a clear definition of the resulting neutral axis along the entire length of the modified plywood material, a Finite Element Analysis (using a NASTRAN-compliant tool or equivalent) of deformation of the plywood backing within 12 inches of the dado cut during a 40-G impact by a 150-pound robot, both analytically- and experimentally-produced predictions of the yield strength of the modified plywood, and a full analysis (using Timoshenko beam theory or equivalent) of the resulting beam stiffness at the moment of impact as compared to the theoretical yield strength. ---- Nah, just kidding. Your solution sounds fine. No problem.