Air Trajectory B/C

User avatar
asthedeer
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: November 5th, 2013, 6:04 am
Division: C
State: MD
Location: On Earth.
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby asthedeer » September 15th, 2015, 11:10 am

Just received my copy of the rules yesterday.

Alright......so someone please tell me that the 0.1cm distances for Nationals is a misprint. Like seriously, how are event proctors going to measure that?
Pilgrimage Homeschool Science Olympiad 2017!!!
Anatomy, ExD, Rocks and Minerals, Helicopters.

Check out my blog!
rockandminerals4him.wordpress.com

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.
~God, Jeremiah 29:11

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby chalker » September 15th, 2015, 11:22 am

I didn't see anything in the rules prohibiting laser alignment (unlike scrambler, for instance), so I imagine it'll be a simple Pythagorean calculation, and I imagine the hope is that the graphs will actually be useful!

Speaking of graphs, rule 6.c.v seems a little weird - only one graph gets scored, but that score gets multiplied by 4? What if a team makes 3 great graphs but a mistake on the 4th one which is scored? Or vice versa? If it's just a time issue to get all graphs scored, why not require just one? Or let the students decide which of the 4 to score, not "selected by the event supervisor."
This isn't a new change this year. It's actually something we've done in several events for a while now. The bottom line is it IS a time issue, but we also want to encourage significant testing beforehand. This technique is the best compromise we can reach on that.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2089
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby chalker » September 15th, 2015, 11:23 am

Just received my copy of the rules yesterday.

Alright......so someone please tell me that the 0.1cm distances for Nationals is a misprint. Like seriously, how are event proctors going to measure that?
Darnit... good catch. It should be 0.1m (or 10cm). Just goes to show that no matter how many sets of eyes we have on the rules, simple things like this slip through the cracks. I'll get a rules clarification posted ASAP.

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair

SPP SciO
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby SPP SciO » September 15th, 2015, 11:27 am

The point of the graphs is that students are SUPPOSED to be graphing velocity by time, acceleration by time, etc. We are SUPPOSED to be using physics to calculate how to calibrate our device (of course most students don't)
I disagree with this. I would think that a more useful graph leaves the raw physics out of it. For example, a machine that adjusts the height of the mass being dropped would do well to plot height in cm, or chain link number or peg slot etc on the X axis - whatever was most relevant to the device. It's a proxy for gravitational potential energy, but so many other factors are involved that I'm not sure it's ever worth the energy to go through all the calculations - from a competitive standpoint anyway. Educationally, it's a great idea!
Coach
MS 821 Sunset Park Prep
http://www.sppscio.com

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1316
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby windu34 » September 15th, 2015, 2:31 pm

The point of the graphs is that students are SUPPOSED to be graphing velocity by time, acceleration by time, etc. We are SUPPOSED to be using physics to calculate how to calibrate our device (of course most students don't)
I disagree with this. I would think that a more useful graph leaves the raw physics out of it. For example, a machine that adjusts the height of the mass being dropped would do well to plot height in cm, or chain link number or peg slot etc on the X axis - whatever was most relevant to the device. It's a proxy for gravitational potential energy, but so many other factors are involved that I'm not sure it's ever worth the energy to go through all the calculations - from a competitive standpoint anyway. Educationally, it's a great idea!
No I agrees with you, I'm just stating the point of the graphs from the rule writers prospective; we are supposed to be using actual physics, but its easier and more practical for most teams to just use the graphs for raw specs of our device
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
Florida State Tournament Director 2020
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2020:
UT Austin - Circuit Lab B/C
Solon - Circuit Lab C
Nationals - Circuit Lab C

bearasauras
Member
Member
Posts: 373
Joined: March 4th, 2003, 8:33 pm
State: CA
Location: Los Angeles, California
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby bearasauras » September 15th, 2015, 4:18 pm

I didn't write these rules, but as an engineer, I would do exaclty what SPP SciO said and do charts of mass height vs distance instead of going through the force.

User avatar
asthedeer
Member
Member
Posts: 56
Joined: November 5th, 2013, 6:04 am
Division: C
State: MD
Location: On Earth.
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby asthedeer » September 16th, 2015, 7:03 am

Just received my copy of the rules yesterday.

Alright......so someone please tell me that the 0.1cm distances for Nationals is a misprint. Like seriously, how are event proctors going to measure that?
Darnit... good catch. It should be 0.1m (or 10cm). Just goes to show that no matter how many sets of eyes we have on the rules, simple things like this slip through the cracks. I'll get a rules clarification posted ASAP.
Thank you! My coach also submitted a question about that to the National SciOly people. Hah....I was hoping that'd be a mistake...... ;)
Pilgrimage Homeschool Science Olympiad 2017!!!
Anatomy, ExD, Rocks and Minerals, Helicopters.

Check out my blog!
rockandminerals4him.wordpress.com

For I know the plans I have for you, declares the Lord, plans for welfare and not for evil, to give you a future and a hope.
~God, Jeremiah 29:11

daycd
Member
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: March 15th, 2015, 6:51 pm
State: -

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby daycd » September 22nd, 2015, 2:34 pm

I'm just stating the point of the graphs from the rule writers prospective; we are supposed to be using actual physics
I'd actually be surprised if this was their goal. I think the reason they want multiple graphs is so that each team has to test different parameters. Changes to the angle of the barrel, the height of the barrel, the mass of the weight etc. will change the range and accuracy of the shots. So to have four graphs as a minimum means that each team has experimented with some variables. But that is quite different to making a prediction based on physics and then seeing if the prediction hold true.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1316
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby windu34 » September 22nd, 2015, 8:14 pm

I'm just stating the point of the graphs from the rule writers prospective; we are supposed to be using actual physics
I'd actually be surprised if this was their goal. I think the reason they want multiple graphs is so that each team has to test different parameters. Changes to the angle of the barrel, the height of the barrel, the mass of the weight etc. will change the range and accuracy of the shots. So to have four graphs as a minimum means that each team has experimented with some variables. But that is quite different to making a prediction based on physics and then seeing if the prediction hold true.
My Interpretation:
The job of the rules comittee isnt to "assign" work for us to do. Their job is to set the goal and we are to do whatever is neccessary to achieve that goal whether it be 100s of hours or 10 hours.
What sets scioly and school apart is responsibility: We are responsible in Scioly - we are responsible for teaching ourselves concepts, giving ourselves homework, etc
In school, the teachers are responsible for teaching us concepts and giving out homework.
Scioly's purpose is to allow students who succeed without a whole lot of effort in school to find a community that challenges them.
With this in mind, the graphs can't possibly be meant to be a "homework" assignment that makes sure students do their work - teams can just put random info in it and easily do well at competition. The purpose of the graphs is to encourage us to teach ourselves physics and learn how to plot acceleration vs time vs velocity or whatever other variables that apply to your device.
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
Florida State Tournament Director 2020
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2020:
UT Austin - Circuit Lab B/C
Solon - Circuit Lab C
Nationals - Circuit Lab C

SPP SciO
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby SPP SciO » September 23rd, 2015, 5:30 am

Any plans on how to adapt to the size restrictions? Also what kind of pvc do you use? Thin walled?
Curious about this also - our team grabbed some of these http://www.amazon.com/IZZO-Golf-C10315- ... B00BSV7QV6 for projectiles. However, they're slightly larger than ping pong balls, which fit pretty well in 1-1/2 sch 40 pvc. Maybe thin-walled 1-1/2 would accommodate golf balls better? This seems like a good resource: https://flexpvc.com/
Coach
MS 821 Sunset Park Prep
http://www.sppscio.com

laidlawe18
Member
Member
Posts: 38
Joined: September 1st, 2015, 2:03 pm
Division: C
State: RI

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby laidlawe18 » September 23rd, 2015, 5:58 am

Any plans on how to adapt to the size restrictions? Also what kind of pvc do you use? Thin walled?
Curious about this also - our team grabbed some of these http://www.amazon.com/IZZO-Golf-C10315- ... B00BSV7QV6 for projectiles. However, they're slightly larger than ping pong balls, which fit pretty well in 1-1/2 sch 40 pvc. Maybe thin-walled 1-1/2 would accommodate golf balls better? This seems like a good resource: https://flexpvc.com/
I also am looking into golf balls. Assuming you already have the golf balls, could you share a little about them? Like how much they weigh, whether they're squishy or not, etc. I think that now that foam golf balls are allowed, I'd like to find one that is relatively dense to increase consistency.

daycd
Member
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: March 15th, 2015, 6:51 pm
State: -

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby daycd » September 23rd, 2015, 12:06 pm

The purpose of the graphs is to encourage us to teach ourselves physics and learn how to plot acceleration vs time vs velocity or whatever other variables that apply to your device.
I guess we disagree here. I see the purpose of the graphs as a way to encourage us to experiment with the variables. I really don't see how they direct us down the physics route. Certainly the physics is not necessary to succeed.

We had graphs with 'height of weight vs distance' plotted. The variables between the different graphs we made were angle of the barrel, mass dropped and we used two different balls. So no velocity, time or acceleration at all.

User avatar
windu34
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1316
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby windu34 » September 23rd, 2015, 1:02 pm

The purpose of the graphs is to encourage us to teach ourselves physics and learn how to plot acceleration vs time vs velocity or whatever other variables that apply to your device.
I guess we disagree here. I see the purpose of the graphs as a way to encourage us to experiment with the variables. I really don't see how they direct us down the physics route. Certainly the physics is not necessary to succeed.

We had graphs with 'height of weight vs distance' plotted. The variables between the different graphs we made were angle of the barrel, mass dropped and we used two different balls. So no velocity, time or acceleration at all.
I know that. Most teams (likely all) wont use the graphs the way I stated. I didnt use them either. Im just stating what i believe to be the purpose. Its likely nobody at nats used the graphs the way i described
Boca Raton Community High School Alumni
Florida State Tournament Director 2020
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

Event Supervisor for 2020:
UT Austin - Circuit Lab B/C
Solon - Circuit Lab C
Nationals - Circuit Lab C

SPP SciO
Member
Member
Posts: 259
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby SPP SciO » September 23rd, 2015, 1:46 pm

...could you share a little about them? Like how much they weigh, whether they're squishy or not, etc.
They're a little more massive than a ping pong ball, but less so than a regular golf ball - maybe about 10 grams? We haven't done much experimenting with them yet. They're definitely squishy, and they rebound without any noticeable deformity, even after a strong squish. And, they bounce great off floors, walls ... If you use these, don't be surprised if your team starts playing all sorts of games with them, because they are a lot of fun. My favorite advantage over a ping pong ball though: they're super quiet!
Coach
MS 821 Sunset Park Prep
http://www.sppscio.com

daycd
Member
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: March 15th, 2015, 6:51 pm
State: -

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Postby daycd » September 24th, 2015, 8:12 am

Im just stating what i believe to be the purpose. Its likely nobody at nats used the graphs the way i described
Right, I understand. This is why I said we disagree. But that is OK :)

I just got the new rules and there is a little less room to make adjustments between shots. And less height to drop the weight. I'm pretty sure our design from last year will not work with the rule changes. I guess that is their intent.


Return to “Air Trajectory B/C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest