Bridge Building 2016

noobforce
Member
Member
Posts: 70
Joined: March 14th, 2012, 3:13 pm
Division: C
State: NJ
Location: Somerset, New Jersey
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by noobforce » January 12th, 2016, 7:36 am

Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody ;) tells me the Union efficiencies....

JonB
Coach
Coach
Posts: 322
Joined: March 11th, 2014, 12:00 pm
Division: C
State: FL
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 11 times

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by JonB » January 12th, 2016, 8:12 am

noobforce wrote:Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody ;) tells me the Union efficiencies....

I think that is fair...

VansBuilders
Member
Member
Posts: 32
Joined: November 30th, 2015, 9:41 am
Division: C
State: CA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by VansBuilders » January 12th, 2016, 1:46 pm

Can someone provide the link to the checklist for Bridge event? I remember seeing one (on this website) where it had info on how each tier will be decided on a pdf document few months back. I can't locate it now.
If anyone has access to the official checklist that would be used, pl provide. Thanks.

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4269
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by Unome » January 12th, 2016, 1:54 pm

VansBuilders wrote:Can someone provide the link to the checklist for Bridge event? I remember seeing one (on this website) where it had info on how each tier will be decided on a pdf document few months back. I can't locate it now.
If anyone has access to the official checklist that would be used, pl provide. Thanks.
It's on soinc.org (here it is)
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

nxtscholar
Member
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 14th, 2013, 6:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: NJ
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by nxtscholar » January 12th, 2016, 1:59 pm

noobforce wrote:Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody ;) tells me the Union efficiencies....
I already sent you a message which you've never responded to. At any rate, my high school alma mater got first and second too AND beat out like WWPHSN and South Brunswick in the event. So I'm pretty confident without even sharing scores.

FrankHerman
Member
Member
Posts: 1
Joined: January 13th, 2016, 4:14 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by FrankHerman » January 13th, 2016, 4:23 pm

Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank

DoctaDave
Member
Member
Posts: 167
Joined: December 28th, 2013, 10:59 pm
Division: Grad
State: CA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by DoctaDave » January 13th, 2016, 4:41 pm

FrankHerman wrote:Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank

Read through the entire Bridge building forum this year and last year, which seems like a daunting task, but you can probably tell which posts to thoroughly read and which ones to skip over. There is a lot of good information in those posts right at your fingertips. The wiki page on this site is also a good place to start if you are just beginning. It's hard to give you tips if you don't have a specific problem.

Good luck and have fun!

User avatar
Unome
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 4269
Joined: January 26th, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: Grad
State: GA
Location: somewhere in the sciolyverse
Has thanked: 149 times
Been thanked: 50 times

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by Unome » January 13th, 2016, 6:09 pm

FrankHerman wrote:Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank
Threads from previous years about this event rotation (Boomilever, Towers or Tower Building, & Elevated Bridge) are also helpful, especially in more general matters like gluing effectively.
Userpage
Chattahoochee High School Class of 2018
Georgia Tech Class of 2022

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.

nxtscholar
Member
Member
Posts: 261
Joined: November 14th, 2013, 6:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: NJ
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by nxtscholar » January 15th, 2016, 7:37 am

So someone correct me if I'm wrong (I'm a biomathematics major, although one with a strong interest in engineering), but I had a sudden pop into my mind that I'm rather curious about.

Does this year's rules with regards to the test support actually affect division B more and thus pose a bigger challenge to them than division C? Like, by nature of the rules, division C bridges are longer than division B bridges because of a longer mandated span. Consequently, the test support creates a larger angle of inclination for division B bridges than division C bridges. I'm going along the lines of simple geometry. For division C, it's a "rise" of 5 cm to a "run" of 45 cm. For division B, it's about a rise of 5 cm to run of 35 cm.

Thus, doesn't this create a larger change in the direction of forces and stress for division B than division C compared to last year? In other words, don't division B teams have more to change in their designs than division C with regards to changing truss designs, thickness of members, etc.?

I emphasize, however, that regardless of division, the test support doesn't seem to be changing the problem that much. But the question I ask is does division B technically have more to deal with than division C in terms of change?

User avatar
bernard
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 2222
Joined: January 5th, 2014, 3:12 pm
Division: Grad
State: WA
Pronouns: He/Him/His
Location: Seattle, WA
Has thanked: 127 times
Been thanked: 395 times
Contact:

Re: Bridge Building 2016

Post by bernard » January 15th, 2016, 8:15 am

nxtscholar wrote:So someone correct me if I'm wrong (I'm a biomathematics major, although one with a strong interest in engineering), but I had a sudden pop into my mind that I'm rather curious about.

Does this year's rules with regards to the test support actually affect division B more and thus pose a bigger challenge to them than division C? Like, by nature of the rules, division C bridges are longer than division B bridges because of a longer mandated span. Consequently, the test support creates a larger angle of inclination for division B bridges than division C bridges. I'm going along the lines of simple geometry. For division C, it's a "rise" of 5 cm to a "run" of 45 cm. For division B, it's about a rise of 5 cm to run of 35 cm.

Thus, doesn't this create a larger change in the direction of forces and stress for division B than division C compared to last year? In other words, don't division B teams have more to change in their designs than division C with regards to changing truss designs, thickness of members, etc.?

I emphasize, however, that regardless of division, the test support doesn't seem to be changing the problem that much. But the question I ask is does division B technically have more to deal with than division C in terms of change?
I don't have an answer at this hour but the different spans brings up another question: does the "tilt" have more of an effect for a large angle change involving a short span or a smaller angle involving a longer span? Does span or angle affect the challenge more? I would guess the span's added challenge dramatically increases with greater spans, with greater angles adding more challenge but with less of a magnitude. Just a guess coming from a sleepy person though.
"One of the ways that I believe people express their appreciation to the rest of humanity is to make something wonderful and put it out there."

Locked

Return to “Bridge Building B/C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest