Tower Failure Rule Clarification :)

[just4qs]

Okay, I'm just here for clarification...
Here is the short of it: My younger sis competed in Division B Towers today. She was within all the construction parameters, and cleared to test her tower. All the weight (15kg including sand, bucket, chain and loading block) were held, then about 2.5 seconds later, the tower snapped. (faulty balsa...air pocket burst, offsetting the base, so the tower toppled) So here is my question: Is there a time limit that the tower has to hold all the weight?

Here's why I'm asking: the judge for the competition counted the tower as failed and said that it "wouldn't be fair to the other competitors" if my sister's tower was considered as "held all weight." I think that her tower was lightest...so I'm assuming that the judge meant "wouldn't be fair if you won." So, what he did was take off an entire kilogram of their total weight. So their tower was recorded as holding "14kg." Considering that you only have to hold 15, that seems like a lot to count off. I video-taped the tower test, and he clearly had placed all the sand in the bucket BEFORE it broke. So I pulled out the rules (see "Towers" section 5. Competition: I & J) The rules state: "Loading MUST stop immediently when failure occurs....etc" (I also read the rest of it) Failure occured after the sand was all in. But he still took off a kg. Why? Is there a time that the tower has to hold the weight? If so, can it please be written on the rule page so that there is no more misunderstanding?

I am competing in Towers tomorrow, and my design is similar to my sister's, which means it make break (hopefully not) around the same point, and I want to make sure I understand the testing rules so we don't get discounted, and I don't leave frustrated and confused.

--Really nervous and wishing a "do-over"

[fleet130]

Unfortunately here is not the place to get clarifications, only opinions. Here's mine!

There are no rules other than those in the current manual (don't forget the general rules), as clarified by the national organization on soinc.org and your local tournament organizers.

Since the rules don't specify a time the load must be supported, any sand in the bucket at the instant failure occurs should be included in the load supported. Whether the sand is "in the bucket" is an event supervisor's judgement call.

The only case where the rules allow sand to be removed from the bucket is in Para. 4.i: "The event supervisor may remove any sand added after failure." Para. 4.j defines failure. It's possible for one or more of these conditions to be met without total collapse of the tower. These "failure" conditions may not be readily apparent to observers outside of the testing area.

Another factor is whether the bucket, sand and other testing equipment for loading the tower exceeded 15Kg. If the event supervisor provided 15.2Kg as permitted in the rules, the maximum 15Kg load could have been met even earlier than when all of the sand was loaded. In that case the tower may have held the required 15Kg.

Once a tower is loaded to very near its breaking point, any outside factor such as a bump, vibration or movement can cause it to fail. Whether or not this was the case was more event supervisor's judgement than an interpretation of the rules. Without being there, there is no way to determine if that judgement was correct. Cases involving supervisor's judgement calls are seldom overturned.

Depending on answers to a few questions, an appeal may have been successful!

[Balsa Man]

Wow.
A most unfortunate story.
Opinion:
Saying first, this being a volunteer organization, getting volunteers to staff events is critical, and our collective thanks goes to all who do so. Second, there are over the years, a.....fair number of stories out there of ridiculous, unbelievable judging decisions, and 'making up rules' (and imposing them) that are not in the official rules, and conflict with The Rules. On the surface, I have to put this one in that category. Third, I have to acknowledge that there may have been something, like the kinds of things fleet notes, going on/that was part of the story. If there was, the judge should have identified it as the basis. If what happened was only and exactly what you describe, a unilateral, "its just not fair":, 'cause it failed AFTER making full load, decision was just flat wrong, and grossly unfair to your sister. Sorry, I see no other way to put it.

Failure right at, immediately after reaching, full load is.....as perfect as you can get in design and building execution; that's exactly what you want to happen. If it carries full, and doesn't break (could carry more), you've overbuilt - you have extra weight in the tower you didn't need; you're giving away points. She should have gotten a gold star to go with the Gold medal she deserved. Just a few times over the years have I seen perfection like this. I can tell you, in all cases, the structure received full load scoring. Under the rules, it only has to carry full for an instant. Seen it happen less than a second after the last sand went in.

Thoughts as a coach- I have to ask, where was her coach?? It takes a very poised and mature student - in the emotion of a situation like this, to say, "excuse me, sir; I believe you are wrong; that what you are saying/doing is against the rules, is NOT fair, or correct, or consistent with the rules; here's why; this is what the rules say; what language in the rules are you basing your decision on? To see that their students are judged, consistently and fairly, under the official S-O Rules, is, in my mind, a critical part of a coach's job. In this case, coach should know the rules (and hence know the judge had gone way outside the rules), and should have been there, politely, but resolutely, explaining the rules, how the ruling was incorrect under the rules, requesting an immediate correction, and if that was not forthcoming, taking an appeal immediately to the Tournament Director. I am certain, if the story was simply as told - just a "that's not fair", off the wall decision, your sister would have had full load points restored, before medals were handed out.

Rant over.....

[just4qs]

Thanks to both of you for your thoughts...yes I realize that this isn't the place for rule clarifications...but it's all I could think of at the time.

--fleet130: Thank you for your opinion...and for trying to help clear my head. I talked to a few other coaches (from other schools who didn't understand the call) as well as my own. They were all very confused, and we all got our copies of the rules, reading to find where it said that the "tower must hold the weight for a period of time before failure." We couldn't find anything. Our problem was that place in the rules ("Towers" 5. Competition K) where it says, "Pending no arbitrations, teams may take their towers with them after testing. If a tower has been removed there can be no further challenges for scoring or ranking." So I understood that as, "game over," Tower has left the building. (Pun intended) I'd willing to answer any questions you may have regarding this. Thanks!

---Balsaman: Thank you so much for your opinion...my sister was sooo pleased to hear it. She is a first-time Olympian, and at 6th grade, a little nervous about her tower. I kept telling her that 1st times are always learning experiences, her tower looked fantastic and to just go in and do her best...if it breaks, it breaks. Build a new one. I've done towers 4 years and bridges once, so I have a special place in my heart for balsa wood. My sis was so excited when you said that the tower was "as perfect as you can get"...you made her day! It's so good to hear that we did exactly what we were supposed to do, no less, no more. As to your opinion, sounds like maybe this was a judges call. Yes I do understand that often it is hard to get volunteers, and I am grateful that we can at least have SOMEONE there...but at the same time, should we not have judges who know the rules? This specific case was a little wierd, I'll give you that, but there were many instances at the tournament where judges appeared to have no idea what was going on. It breaks my heart that I (and my sister and other fantastic teammates) have studied so hard, and prepared so well, and then go to a tournament where points are counted off for reasons we do not understand (e.g. not everyone brought an item required, so a test was skipped) or notes weren't allowed in by any team because the judge didn't know that was okay and "didn't have a copy of the rules." I just wish that these judges would put forth just a little more effort, it makes me dissapointed that they do not. I now make a resolution to personally thank those judges who put forth the extra effort.

I described it exactly as is happpened. I would also like to include that the judge SMILED in the video when the tower held, you know, like he was pleased that it held all weight? Then of course, he jumped like everyone else when the tower snapped. I mean it SNAPPED, shattered....it's in like 15 peices.

I understand your concern in my coach not being there. My mom was there and another assistant coach, and since they both knew that I know the rules on towers
better than they do, they gave me the "go-ahead" to appeal the judges decision. Our coach currently is unable to walk all over the campus (esspecially stairs)
and so she was not at the competion for the reasons that 1. she was with other students in another event 2. the building we were in was farthest away from
home-base and 3. we were on the second floor, with the elevator out of comission. She was unable to attend, and I took over since towers is one of my faves.
I mean really, the only thing I should be there for is making sure the kids are there on time, in the right room, are polite to their judges, and do what they are supposed to do. There shouldn't need to be any "Rule Appealing." Unfortunately there was. As I stated earlier, I had removed the tower from the premises, and so no appeal could be made (or maybe it could have...never needed to appeal before). We did take it to our coach as soon as possible, and she was confused as well. We were unsure as to what to do, so we just let it be. I only posted here to find out if there was a rule on timing, so I was fully prepared for my competition.

I appreciate your "rant."

[jander14indoor]

just4qs all I can say is you are one of the reasons I support SO. I compliment you on you preparation, writing, thinking, actions.

As to appeal, just use this as a learning situation. Removing the device is a pretty hard and fast rule. Next time, if you are acting as an assistant coach and you can't get the supervisor to change their decision, notify the supervisor there will be an appeal and leave the device there. Then act. I concur with the others in that you had a pretty good case, and one that could easily be rectified by the appeal committee if you won.

A comment on the snap and many pieces. Let your sister know to take that as a compliment too. Again, in the ideal situation, you want no weak points. Many pieces says whatever failed first, everything else was close, nothing drastically over designed or built.

On event supervision, as a state director I'll say our hardworking event supervisors doe the best they can, but... I'll ask one thing of you in addition to your much appreciated plan to thank the good ones. Someday in the future when you aren't competing, PLEASE volunteer your time and services. Some of our best event supervisors are former science olympians who truly appreciate the students efforts and make every effort to honor it by understanding and implementing the rules as best they can.

Thanks,

Jeff Anderson
Livonia, MI

[just4qs]

jander14indoor---thank you for your compliments.

I'll keep your thoughts in mind as I test my tower with a friend tomorrow. Our design is almost exactly the same as my sis's, (with adjustments for our division) so we very well could have the same issue. I also believe it is the same judge.

Yes, when I built a bridge a few years back, an engineering student that I talked to about it mentioned that a good bridge or any other building is built well and evenly if when it fails, it shatters. Whenever I test my towers, I video-tape and play in slow-motion on my computer to watch where it broke and how everything else followed. It's very enlightening!

If a regional competition comes back to my area in a few years (after I've graduated), I'll definitely invest my time. Thanks for the idea! At this point, our region didn't have enough schools to participate, so we traveled to another competition.

Thank you as well for your imput...I pray this does not happen to anyone else, it's sad.

[fishman100]

Speaking of breaking, if a small piece of the tower (a cross brace, for example) falls off during the loading, would the loading have to stop?

[Balsa Man]

just4qs all I can say is you are one of the reasons I support SO. I compliment you on you preparation, writing, thinking, actions.

Someday in the future when you aren't competing, PLEASE volunteer your time and services. Some of our best event supervisors are former science olympians who truly appreciate the students efforts and make every effort to honor it by understanding and implementing the rules as best they can.

Totally agree on both counts!

My compliments, too. Well presented. You shouldn't have a similar problem with your tower- even if your's is as perfect as hers. Best of luck.

As to coming back after graduating to supervise an event, YES. My son ran towers last year, after winning bridges 2 years in a row. He loved the experience; did it confidently and well; no complaints from the competitors on anything; and they got lots of good analysis, suggestions, tips and tricks.

[Balsa Man]

Speaking of breaking, if a small piece of the tower (a cross brace, for example) falls off during the loading, would the loading have to stop?

No. not if its still carrying load - Rule 5.j.

[AlphaTauri]

No, since loading only stops when the tower "fails" (5i). Failure is:
1. The tower not being able to support any additional weight
2. Any part of the weight being supported by something other than the tower
3. The tower getting "lateral support" from the test base

If a small piece flies off your tower, and does not affect the integrity of your tower enough to cause it to violate any of the three conditions above, then that doesn't count as failure and loading continues. In personal experience, I've seen pieces fly off Elevated Bridges at comp (different event, but similar rules), and the judges have never called any team out on that.