Thermodynamics B/C

[CookiePie1]

Just got an idea, but I don't know if it's allowed,

Are you allowed to cover the beaker and poke a hole in it after you receive hot water from the supervisor? Does it violate the rules?

[MattChina]

Just got an idea, but I don't know if it's allowed,

Are you allowed to cover the beaker and poke a hole in it after you receive hot water from the supervisor? Does it violate the rules?

As long as there is an open hole that remains throughout the testing period, I believe you should be fine.

[kinghong1970]

Rule 3e
The hole must remain open and unobstructed during the competition.

so you can not cover the hole after inserting thermometer...
but as to whether you can poke the hole there or at home, i don't see any benefits of trying to poke a hole at the tournament...

any reason why you don't want to have this done in a more "controlled" environment with access to your tool of choice?

[Yackback]

Just got an idea, but I don't know if it's allowed,

Are you allowed to cover the beaker and poke a hole in it after you receive hot water from the supervisor? Does it violate the rules?

They would take off during impound and ask you to make it then. You would probably be tier 2'd for construction violations since you have to have a 1.5 cm diameter hole

[JoeyC]

Just asking, but I don't actually see any point or strategic value in doing this; it doesn't give you an upper edge in pretty much anyway.
Cutting to the chase:

What is your cause and reason behind wishing to attempt this?

[CookiePie1]

What is your cause and reason behind wishing to attempt this?

My mom said that it might contain more heat if I cover the beaker right after they pour hot water, so I was just asking if it was against the rules.

Also, to be perfectly honest, with my design, the beaker is "covered" even if I don't add an extra layer of film. So that being said, I probably won't do it.

Thanks for asking though.

[Justin72835]

What is your cause and reason behind wishing to attempt this?

My mom said that it might contain more heat if I cover the beaker right after they pour hot water, so I was just asking if it was against the rules.

Also, to be perfectly honest, with my design, the beaker is "covered" even if I don't add an extra layer of film. So that being said, I probably won't do it.

Thanks for asking though.

To be honest, I doubt that proctors would allow you to do something like this. Most will tell you before the event starts to either make the hole larger or lose a couple points on your build score.

[kinghong1970]

your mom is right, it would help in heat retention... but the rules state that the hole must remain unobstructed during the testing... so it'll have to come off.

[bt03]

A little question on the interpretation on the rules.
Our ES was nice to give us our final actual temperature and how off we were from our prediction score.
Our team got about 2 degrees off from the actual. Another of our school's team was 0 degrees off from their actual (beyond spectacular IMO). Both of our heat retention was solid, about a 10 degrees drop on both from 65.
Another team was also spot-on on their predictions (man, is the event dumb luck?), but heat retention was slightly higher (about 15 degrees, still good).
Test was relatively easy, so no comment there. (That is something I will never find myself saying given how astronomically impossible those practice tests were for a B divisioner).
That team with the spot-on prediction and 15 degree drop ended up placing better than the team with the lesser degree drop.
So, is the event no longer a competition in insulation and rather on prediction?
I'd tried screwing with the numbers according to the score formula, but it seems in favor of the lower HRF and better PS. Quite strange.

TL;DR: How does a team with a high PS and low HRF score better than a team with a high PS and high HRF?

Side Note: Props to ES for running the event. It is in fact probably a nightmare to run the event, as the ES originally stated 75 mL at 80, but upon pouring, the temperature dropped 20 degrees in a 25 degree room (it was sweltering in there).

[chalker]

So, is the event no longer a competition in insulation and rather on prediction?
I'd tried screwing with the numbers according to the score formula, but it seems in favor of the lower HRF and better PS. Quite strange.

TL;DR: How does a team with a high PS and low HRF score better than a team with a high PS and high HRF?

From a simplistic standpoint, yes the focus is more on prediction vs. performance. Keep in mind this is a physics committee event, so we have a general philosophy of ensuring events include both theory and practice. That's why the written test is worth so many points. Note it's perfectly acceptable in our minds for a team that aces the written test and completely bombs the device testing to rank higher than a team that does mediocre on both.

If you look at the rules from past seasons, you'll note that we used to prohibit a lot of types of materials from the devices. We made the deliberate change to allow virtually any material now, but have the scoring reward prediction more than performance. This ensure that the competition doesn't end up being a race to spend more and more money on exotic materials.