Date: 17 Jan 2002 18:40:29 -0000
From: FRCtech2002@yahoogroups.com
To: FRCtech2002@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [FRCtech2002] Digest Number 16

------------------------------------------------------------------------

There are 25 messages in this issue.

Topics in this digest:

      1. Pinning
           From: "digitalmatrix111" <Digitalsaiyan@hotmail.com>
      2. Re: Pinning
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      3. Re: Number & Availability of Pneumatic cylinders
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      4. Re: Splitting hairs...
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      5. coating material
           From: "Kristin Pugh" <pugh@syrres.com>
      6. Re: Coating material
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      7. Re: Virtual Kit of Parts
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      8. Re: Scoring Balls, Goals in +1 Zone
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
      9. Re: Goals overlap
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     10. Re: Zone borders
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     11. Re: Microsoft Project Timeline
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     12. Read the Manual and Team Updates
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     13. Does Casters of Goal Extend Beyond Edge of Deck?
           From: "darrellnjanette" <dwjiles@earthlink.net>
     14. Re: Contacting the Lower Field Barrier
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     15. Re: Does Casters of Goal Extend Beyond Edge of Deck?
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     16. Re: backboard height
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     17. Re: Carpet Damage Ruling
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     18. Missing Parts
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     19. How Many and What Can I Use on My Robot?
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     20. Pneumatics
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     21. Skyway Wheels
           From: "fs_2002" <fs_2002@yahoo.com>
     22. Re: Skyway Wheels
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     23. Re: Electronics, pneumatics, and entaglement
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
     24. Re: Re: Are Game Pads Allowed
           From: Matthew M <whereditgo@klepto.com>
     25. Re: Are Game Pads Allowed
           From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>


________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 1
   Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 04:37:05 -0000
   From: "digitalmatrix111" <Digitalsaiyan@hotmail.com>
Subject: Pinning

Is lifting another robot off the ground considered pinning? Does that 
apply to the 10 secound rule in regards to pinning?




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 2
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:08:10 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Pinning

> Is lifting another robot off the ground considered pinning?  Does 
that apply to the 10 second rule in regards to pinning?
A) No and no.  FIRSTsnow




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 3
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 14:58:35 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Number & Availability of Pneumatic cylinders

> The Pneumatics appendix states that one cylinder comes as part of
> the Kit 
> of parts.  Additionally, it states that teams may be limited to 
> approximately 4 custom cylinders.
> What is the exact maximum number of pneumatic cylinders permitted
> on a robot?  We would like to use more then 5.

A) You may use up to 5 cylinders on the robot.  Please ignore the
work 
"approximately" in the last sentence of page 7 of the Pneumatics 
manual.  Also, please note that this answer corrects messages 106, 
113, and 131, which incorrectly stated that 7 cylinders could be used 
on the robot.

> Additionally, if we order our four custom cylinders and discover 
> that we 
> need to make a design change requiring additional cylinders to 
> replace 
> some we already acquired, what source is available for a team to 
> acquire 
> additional cylinders?

You may send email to the address listed on the custom cylinder order 
form, explain your situation, and hope that they will be able and 
willing to accommodate your situation.  It is possible that, near the 
end of the 6 week build phase, they will be more receptive to such 
requests if they have not yet exhausted the commitment from Bimba to 
donate cylinders.  Alternately, you could attempt to swap cylinders 
with another team.

> Is it acceptable to use Bimba cylinders that meet the
> specifications of 
> the available sizes and strokes provided by a supplier other then 
> though FIRST?

Yes, you may use Bimba or Parker cylinders that are equivalent to 
those provided in the pneumatics kit or on the custom cylinder order 
form as long as the part numbers are the same.  The part number for 
the Bimba cylinder provided in the kit is listed in the BOM on page
14 
of the pneumatics manual.  We will post part numbers for the
cylinders 
listed on the custom cylinder order form in a future Team Update on 
the FIRST web site.

> Are all the custom order cylinders manufactured by Bimba?

No.  Cylinders ordered from the custom cylinder order form may be 
manufacuted by Bimba or Parker.

> If they are not all manufactured by Bimba:
> Do the specifications in the pneumatics appendix cover all the 
> possibilities of cylinders we may receive?
> If there are any specifications for cylinders not already
> published can you make them available?

Yes.  All allowed cylinders are documented on pages 9-11 of the 
pneumatics manual.

> Is there any possibility of a specification for a double rod end 
> cylinder?  It would be nice to have matching pressure surface areas 
> on each side of the stroke?

These types of cylinders are not allowed to be used on the robot.  
Please design accordingly.

> Are there any specifications on how or in what manner it is 
> permissible 
> to compress a tube to prevent flow of air through a tube? I ask 
> because 
> this method has the potential for serious damage or injury if a 
> pressurized tube is punctured?  For instance I assume that it would 
> not 
> be permissible to compress a tube on the high-pressure side of the 
> pneumatics system.  Truthfully I can't see the point in doing that 
> but it is possible.

There are no specifications on compressing a tube to prevent the flow 
of air.  The concept is that you could design a pinching or bending 
mechanism that would block the flow of air in a tube.  Obviously,
such 
a mechanism should not use a sharp edge to interface with the tubing. 
 
It is intended as a safe way to be able to form an additional flow 
control if needed.  A burst in an air line should be relatively safe, 
because the only thing to escape is air.  It is fluid hydraulic
leaks, 
which emit a toxic fluid at a much higher pressure, which are 
dangerous.

> Is there any possibility of adding additional plug valves to the 
> robot to 
> permit safe and controlled venting of a pneumatic system instead
> of the whole system at once?

No.  Only the valves provided in the pneumatics kit may be used.  You 
may, however, be able to construct such a pressure relief system
using 
the allowance for blocking tubing mentioned above.

-----
ER





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 4
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:19:38 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Splitting hairs...

> I would really like clear answers to the following questions:
> 
> Setup:
> 
> Suppose there is a robot that can split down the middle.  
> 
> Suppose that at the start of the match, the robot splits with only a 
> 30 ft bundle of wires connecting them.
> 
> Assume that it is a bundle of four 10 gauge wires and four 16 gauge 
> wires.  Also assume that they are strain relieved and bundled 
> appropriately.  
> 
> Question A:
> Is it legal for such a robot to drive around the entire match in 
this 
> fashion?

No, because the wires would present a risk of entanglement.
 
> Question B:
> Would the answer change if the tether was longer or shorter?

If the tether was short enough that it did not present a risk of 
becoming entangled in a robot or a goal, then it would be allowed.

> Question C:
> Would the answer change if the robots did not split until the last 
> few seconds of a match?

No.  Timing is not considered.

> Question D:
> Would the answer change if the bundle of wires was made of more 
> bigger wires, more wires, smaller wires or fewer wires?

The bundle will be evaluated by the robot inspectors at each event, 
and by the referees on the field during each match.  If at any point 
it is deemed to present a risk of entanglement, then it will be 
disallowed.

> Question E1:
> If there is some situation that such a case would be legal, would 
> such a robot be found in violation of rule that prohibits going 
under 
> the goal (GM20) if the goal was pushed up over the tether by another 
> robot?

This would not be a violation of GM20, because the robot did not 
intentionally put the tether under the goal.  However, the alliance 
pushing the goal over the robot could be penalized if damage to 
the goal was deemed likely to occur as a result of passing the goal 
over a robot.
 
> Question E2:
> If there is some situation that such a case would be legal, would 
> such a robot be found in violation of rule that prohibits going 
under 
> the goal (GM20) if one half of robot went around a goal one way and 
> the other half went around the robot the other way and the bundle 
> went under the lower plywood base?

Intentionally passing a part of the robot under the goal would be 
considered a violation of Rule GM20.

-----
ER





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 5
   Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 16:36:32 -0500
   From: "Kristin Pugh" <pugh@syrres.com>
Subject: coating material


Are we able to use some sort of coating material (such as plastic, nylon rope, belt, etc.) on the exterior (all sides) of the robot?



[This message contained attachments]



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 6
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:23:14 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Coating material

> What are the rules governing the use of the coating material or 
special material (e.g., paint, nylon ropes, belt, plastic, wood, etc.) 
for the exterior (including all sides) of the robot?

A) The rules for the exterior of the robot are the same as for 
constructing the rest of the robot.  Please read Rules K1, M9, and 
M18.

-----
ER




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 7
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:22:13 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Virtual Kit of Parts

Q: >>Followup question: For the last week I've been trying to get 
access 
to the VKOP without any luck. I followed instructions given and sent 
e-mail to autodesk 
requesting access to streamline. No reply, so I went to 
streamline and set up my own "e-room" but I can't search the site for 
VKOP. So 
I sent a inquiry e-mail to support@a... and the reply states 
they don't have access to streamline site info either, and I should 
talk to the 
dealer who is assisting me to set up my streamline account for help.
As this seemed like a dead end, I sent another e-mail access request 
to autodesk and still no reply. Can FIRST help to 
clairify this so we can get to the VKOP As Soon As 
Possible? Are other teams also having this problem ? <<

A: The direct contact for the Streamline and VKOP is 
first.entries@autodesk.com. Please put your team number and 
Streamline-Virtual Kit of Parts question in the subject area.

-M4




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 8
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 00:45:14 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Scoring Balls, Goals in +1 Zone

Q: >>If balls are in a goal, which straddles both Zones 1 & 2, are 
they counted as scoring for only one of the Zones, or are they 
counted 
as scoring in both Zones? << 

A: Both. Please refer to rules SC4 and SC3.

-M4




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 9
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:10:02 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Goals overlap

Q: >>If our robot could grab a bar and tip the goal slightly, could 
it be 
placed on top of the other goal so as to have an overlap of a few 
inches? <<

A: Yes, but if this is part of your strategy, don't violate the DQ 
rules on damaging the playing field, or the DA rules on disabling 
violations.




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 10
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:19:57 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Zone borders

Q:>> In reference to rule SC3, please clarify the zone borders. The 5 
zones are marked on the playing field using duct tape. Duct tape is 2 
inches wide. Two vertical planes can be imagined on each edge of the 
tape, two inches apart. Which vertical plane defines each zone. In 
other words, is the tape "in" the zone or "out"?

Thanks,
Curt Oldford
Team 121 <<

A: Rule SC3 is clear on this. The (tape that defines the ) lines that 
define the Scoring Zone borders are part of both adjacent scoring 
zones.




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 11
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 01:43:22 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Microsoft Project Timeline

Q: >>I was wondering if you had noticed a problem with opening the 
sample 
timeline FIRST provided for MS Project.  I was not able to open it.  
And obviously the learning curve of the program defeats the purpose 
of organizing your time. 
I was able to open one by Chris Mikus that was posted on a web site 
but not the one from FIRST.
Thanks. <<

A: Sorry, the original file was "incompatible". It's since been 
replaced on our site, same location. 

M4




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 12
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:33:11 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Read the Manual and Team Updates

FIRST requests that you please read your 2002 FRC Manual, Team 
Updates, and all other literature provided.  Many of the questions 
submitted to this board are spelled out so it is critical that 
someone from each team be very familiar with the information.  There 
is a lot of information so it may take more than 1 reading to really 
comprehend all of it.

The number of questions submitted is significant and the FIRST staff 
is doing their best to answer them in a timely fashion but it is very 
difficult.

WATCH THE BOARD FOR ANSWERS TO OFTEN ASKED QUESTIONS RATHER THAN 
FIRST TRYING TO ANSWER EACH ONE INDIVIDUALLY.




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 13
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 07:07:52 -0000
   From: "darrellnjanette" <dwjiles@earthlink.net>
Subject: Does Casters of Goal Extend Beyond Edge of Deck?

We are assembling a practice goal, and according to the lower goal 
deck dimensions for the caster radius and the part purchased from 
Home Depot it appears that as the caster rotates it can extend beyond 
the edge of the deck up to 1/2".

We are using the caster in the Home Depot parts list 9394H.  The 
radius dimension according to the goal drawing to the center of the 
caster mounting bracket is 21.69".  This would then put the center of 
the caster bracket 2.31" from the edge of the plywod.  If the 
1x1x1/8" angle is mounted flush with the plywood we think the caster 
can still extend beyond the edge of the bottom goal deck.

Is the intention of the goal assembly to allow the caster to extend 
beyond the edge of the deck?  If so then it may become a robot design 
issue to design the robots frame edge to not contact the caster when 
trying to push the goal or grasp the goal via the steel pipes.

Thanks for your prompt reply so that we can assemble the casters on 
our practice goal in the same manner as the competition goal.




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 14
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:48:06 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Contacting the Lower Field Barrier

> > 3. Is it acceptable to design our robot to contact the lower 
> portion of the field barrier for a fixed distance (again assuming 
no 
> damage)?
> A) No. See GM18. FIRSTsnow
A) CORRECTION.  According to Robot Appendix A, M6, this is allowed.  
I had interpreted GM18 too strictly without considering M6.  Sorry 
for the curve ball.  




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 15
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:54:43 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Does Casters of Goal Extend Beyond Edge of Deck?

> We are assembling a practice goal, and according to the lower goal 
> deck dimensions for the caster radius and the part purchased from 
> Home Depot it appears that as the caster rotates it can extend 
beyond 
> the edge of the deck up to 1/2".
> 
> We are using the caster in the Home Depot parts list 9394H.  The 
> radius dimension according to the goal drawing to the center of the 
> caster mounting bracket is 21.69".  This would then put the center 
of 
> the caster bracket 2.31" from the edge of the plywod.  If the 
> 1x1x1/8" angle is mounted flush with the plywood we think the 
caster 
> can still extend beyond the edge of the bottom goal deck.
> 
> Is the intention of the goal assembly to allow the caster to extend 
> beyond the edge of the deck?  If so then it may become a robot 
design 
> issue to design the robots frame edge to not contact the caster 
when 
> trying to push the goal or grasp the goal via the steel pipes.

A) I just looked at our goal and you are correct, the caster when 
rotated can extend slightly beyond the edge.  FIRSTsnow




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 16
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 15:46:25 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: backboard height

> > And if you have a tether that you try to make non-entangling 
(small, 
> > flat, whatever), will the judges automatically disallow it if it 
is 
> > flat on the playing field?  

We wrote:
> A: Yes, See posts 114, 115 and 158 on tethers.

We apologize, but this answer was incorrect.  Devices will not be 
automatically disallowed.  They will be evaluated as described in 
message 114.

-----
ER





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 17
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:15:31 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Carpet Damage Ruling

> If a team has a robot that 'anchors' itself to the carpet  ie: some 
> sort of onboard jack system which lifts their robots wheels off the 
> playing field. Then another robot comes along and attempts to drag 
> them back into their home zone. How would it be determined who 
damaged 
> the playing surface (if any occurred). 
> 
> This may also come into play if a robot is dragged and tilited so 
> that a part of it which normally is not in contact with the playing 
> surface causes the carpet to be damaged.
> 
> Which team would be considered responsible?

Dragging of a robot, spinning of wheels during a shoving match, etc. 
is expected to be common and should be planned for when designing your 
robot.  If a robot mechanism designed for contact with the carpet (a 
jack, wheel, etc.) will damage the carpet when the mechanism is 
dragged across the carpet, then the mechanism must be modified to the 
referees satisfaction in order to continue being used.

If damage to the field occurs due to a scenario that is unlikely to 
repeat, then the mechanism causing the damage will not be disallowed.

In either case, if the field is being damaged during a match, then the 
referees may decide to disable the robots causing the damage (i.e. the 
one dragging and/or the one doing the damage) in order to prevent 
further damage during the match.

See Rules GM17, DQ4, DA1, M3, and M11.

-----
ER




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 18
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:17:02 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Missing Parts

If you have missing parts, please e-mail:

tammy@usfirst.org






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 19
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:26:00 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: How Many and What Can I Use on My Robot?

You can use the quantities in your 2002 Kit of Parts plus the 
quantities of material in the Additional Hardware List plus whatever 
you can buy from Small Parts... but you still have the 130 lb. robot 
weight limit.

You can buy "additional" parts and material above the quantities in 
the Kit and Additional Hardware List to have as "spares" in case 
something fails on your robot.  FIRSTsnow




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 20
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:41:38 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Pneumatics

The pneumatics manual was in your Red container.  In case it didn't 
jump out at you, it is very thin (about a 1/16") and is a copy as 
opposed to a glossy document.  You can download the manual from the 
FIRST website.

Page 14 lists the 2002 Pneumatics Bill Of Materials.

You get 1 cylinder in the Kit.

You can order 4 additional custom cylinders and use them on your 
robot.  The order form is the last page (page 16) of the Pneumatics 
manual.  FIRSTsnow






________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 21
   Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 03:48:17 -0000
   From: "fs_2002" <fs_2002@yahoo.com>
Subject: Skyway Wheels

The rules say that we can buy skyway wheels, but it doesn't 
explicitly say that we have to buy skyway caster wheels, like are 
supplied to us in the kits.  Is it allowed for us to buy and used the 
other wheels listed on the skyway website?
~bobb
team 804




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 22
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 16:56:11 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Skyway Wheels

> The rules say that we can buy skyway wheels, but it doesn't 
> explicitly say that we have to buy skyway caster wheels like are 
> supplied to us in the kits.  Is it allowed for us to buy and used 
the other wheels listed on the skyway website?
A) Any Skyway wheels!  FIRSTsnow




________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 23
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 17:58:35 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Electronics, pneumatics, and entaglement

> 3 questions concerning the rules:
> 
> 1) Do all of the extra on board electronics have to be contained 
> within the provided container, or just the circuit board itself?  We 
> would like to purchase sensors from DigiKey, attach them to various 
> parts of the robot, and run wires from them back to the circut board 
> inside the box.

Please see the first part of message 143 for an answer to this 
question.

> 2) Would it be legal to remove the clear plasic cover from the 
> pneumatic pressure gauges  The reason we would want to do this is to 
> make a potentiometer rotate with the center shaft.  This would allow 
> much more detailed feedback on the status of the pneumatic systems. 
> The gauges are not explicitly forbidden in the rules and we do not 
> believe that this would pose a safety hazard.

No, the pressure gauges may not be modified.  See Rule M14.

> 3) What exactly would lead to an entaglement penalty?  Would it be 
> generaly posing a possible entaglement hazard, having  or deploying 
a 
> component that poses a clear and present hazard, or actually 
> entangling another robot?

If the referees determine that you have intentionally entangled 
another robot, then you have violated Rule DQ3 and will be 
disqualified.

If the robot inspectors or referees determine that a mechanism is 
likely to cause entanglement then they will ask you to modify or 
remove the mechanism.  In order to make this determination, it does 
not matter whether the mechanism has already caused an incident of 
entanglement or simply presents an obvious risk of entanglement.

-----
ER





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 24
   Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 20:39:02 -0800 (PST)
   From: Matthew M <whereditgo@klepto.com>
Subject: Re: Re: Are Game Pads Allowed

i'm not replying b/c i don't know, but i'm asking something relating to this. you said as long as its the 15 pin port, now, can we splice wires and what not to convert a controller to this 15 pin?

--- "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> The additional Hardware list says that we can use Joysticks, 
>Wheels, and Pedals.  Can we use PC compatible Gamepads also.
>
>A) Yes, as long as it is compatible to a 15 pin port (i.e. Not USB).
>
>---
>FIRST MRT
>
>
>
>



________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________

Message: 25
   Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2002 18:39:58 -0000
   From: "frcengineers" <frcengineers@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Are Game Pads Allowed


I'm asking something relating 
to this. you said as long as its the 15 pin port, now, can we splice 
wires and what not to convert a controller to this 15 pin?
 
A) No.
---
FIRST MRT

> --- "frcengineers" <frcengineers@y...> wrote:
> >
> >> The additional Hardware list says that we can use Joysticks, 
> >Wheels, and Pedals.  Can we use PC compatible Gamepads also.
> >
> >A) Yes, as long as it is compatible to a 15 pin port (i.e. Not 
USB).
> >
> >---
> >FIRST MRT





________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________