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.
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by 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: 2104
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by chalker » September 15th, 2015, 11:22 am

SPP SciO wrote: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: 2104
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 40 times

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by chalker » September 15th, 2015, 11:23 am

asthedeer wrote: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: 268
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by 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
Staff Emeritus
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 1364
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 22 times

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by windu34 » September 15th, 2015, 2:31 pm

SPP SciO wrote:
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 Science Olympiad Board of Directors
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

User avatar
bearasauras
Member
Member
Posts: 388
Joined: March 4th, 2003, 8:33 pm
State: CA
Location: Los Angeles, California
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 24 times
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by 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.
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0
Contact:

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by asthedeer » September 16th, 2015, 7:03 am

chalker wrote:
asthedeer wrote: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
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by daycd » September 22nd, 2015, 2:34 pm

windu34 wrote: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
Staff Emeritus
Staff Emeritus
Posts: 1364
Joined: April 19th, 2015, 6:37 pm
Division: Grad
State: FL
Location: Gainesville, Florida
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 22 times

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

Post by windu34 » September 22nd, 2015, 8:14 pm

daycd wrote:
windu34 wrote: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 Science Olympiad Board of Directors
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Member
kevin@floridascienceolympiad.org || windu34's Userpage

SPP SciO
Member
Member
Posts: 268
Joined: March 24th, 2015, 8:21 am
Division: B
State: NY
Location: Brooklyn
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Air Trajectory B/C

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

windu34 wrote: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

Locked

Return to “Air Trajectory B/C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest