MagLev C [Trial]

[JTMess]

Haha sorry for asking without looking, I just found the times online. If anyone else is interested, here they are:
http://www.newyorkscioly.org/SOPages/cstate2012.html

[Flavorflav]

Mostly for the Chalkers, if this does indeed become a full event: IMO the "no intentional contact" rule is potentially a headache. Everybody is likely to brush the sides, and the fastest cars are also likely to contact the bottom of the track - try too hard to avoid it and the vehicle becomes airborne. The New York clarification of 1/5 addresses this pretty well by defining "intentional contact" as stationary contact. You might add the "no wheels" clause discussed earlier, but I don't see any way to reliably enforce a "no intentional contact" rule. Perhaps this?

3.l. The vehicle must be fully levitated at rest, and must not include any wheels, rollers or movable belts along either side or on the bottom of the vehicle.

The last clause could be replaced with "which could reasonably be expected to contact the sides or bottom of the track."

[chalker]

Mostly for the Chalkers, if this does indeed become a full event: IMO the "no intentional contact" rule is potentially a headache. Everybody is likely to brush the sides, and the fastest cars are also likely to contact the bottom of the track - try too hard to avoid it and the vehicle becomes airborne. The New York clarification of 1/5 addresses this pretty well by defining "intentional contact" as stationary contact. You might add the "no wheels" clause discussed earlier, but I don't see any way to reliably enforce a "no intentional contact" rule. Perhaps this?

3.l. The vehicle must be fully levitated at rest, and must not include any wheels, rollers or movable belts along either side or on the bottom of the vehicle.

The last clause could be replaced with "which could reasonably be expected to contact the sides or bottom of the track."

Thanks for the suggestions. I'll pass them along.

[Coach Marz]

Justed wanted to congratulate everyone who competed at states. It is nice to hear that you had a good time and feel that the event was run well. The website lists the top run time and top test score.

Congratulations to Fayetteville and Ward Melville for making it to Nationals. I am impressed more and more each year with your results and it pushes the rest of us to work even harder.

[slyguy26]

Hey guys, I just wanted to know if anyone knew anything about how the test will be for MagLev at nationals. Do you think that integrals would be a must know?

[twototwenty]

Has anyone found a motor/propellor type that really works well for this event?

[pjgscioisamazing]

I know there was some discussion of this earlier in the thread, and I'm assuming I'll have to send in a national clarification, but how do you think the rule will be addressed in the following NY rule clarification be addressed at Nationals?


Magnetic Levitation - C Division (1/5/12): Questions continue to be raised about rule 3.l. The National Physics Committee is currently discussing a rewording of that rule to make the intention more clear, but they have not yet made a decision on the new wording. The intent of the rule is to insure that the vehicle designed by the students is magnetically levitated and not supported by either wheels that touch the bottom of the track or devices (horizontal wheels or other devices) that support the vehicle by the tension they maintain with the sides of the track. To clarify the rules intent, all New York State competitions (Invitationals, Regionals, and the State Tournament) will use the following determination:

The student-designed vehicle must be 100% magnetically levitated. To demonstrate that this is true, the students will place their vehicle in the ready-to-run position, then push the vehicle down until it makes contact with the bottom of the track. When the student lets go of the vehicle, it will pop back up to its original position if it is magnetically levitated. Any vehicle that passes this test will have met the requirements of rule 3.l.

[chalker]

The student-designed vehicle must be 100% magnetically levitated. To demonstrate that this is true, the students will place their vehicle in the ready-to-run position, then push the vehicle down until it makes contact with the bottom of the track. When the student lets go of the vehicle, it will pop back up to its original position if it is magnetically levitated. Any vehicle that passes this test will have met the requirements of rule 3.l.

Seeing as how one of the committee members that helps draft that language will be running the event at Nationals, I think you can safely assume he'll run the event in that spirit.

[pjgscioisamazing]

The student-designed vehicle must be 100% magnetically levitated. To demonstrate that this is true, the students will place their vehicle in the ready-to-run position, then push the vehicle down until it makes contact with the bottom of the track. When the student lets go of the vehicle, it will pop back up to its original position if it is magnetically levitated. Any vehicle that passes this test will have met the requirements of rule 3.l.

Seeing as how one of the committee members that helps draft that language will be running the event at Nationals, I think you can safely assume he'll run the event in that spirit.

So the "push-down test" as we call it, will stand? I say this because, as with many other cars, parts of our car do touch the sides, but if pushed down, will come right back up.

[Jdogg]

I know this isn't a place for official rule clarifications, but would motors that have rare earth magnets be allowed? Most motors that are made have rare earth magnets in them, so it wouldn't make sense to disqualify a team based on the magnets inside of a motor. The way I interpreted the rules and the way the rules were thought to be interpreted was that no rare earth magnets were supposed to be used to levitate the car. Our team at states got DQ because of this. It is really hard to find motors today that don't use rare earth magnets, since most of the motors made today are made to be as optimum as possibly. I just want to hear what other teams think about my interpretation and whether they think this should or shouldn't be allowed.