Machines C 2020-2021

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

Hello fellow competitors,

I was wondering if there is any anticipation for next year's event, since under the current statement by Scioly; the event rules will remain the same. What are your thoughts and feeling on next year's Machine tests and lab aspect with the same rules?

I personally feel that next year, this will be a very redundant event with everyone having close to perfect machine time and accuracy scores, and high test scores, and thus making this a very boring, yet competitive event.

[Unome]

Teams can already master the device section within a few months, so really I don't think there will be much of an effect from another season (scores didn't improve much between 2014 and 2015, from what I remember). The test is dependent on the event supervisor, of course - I'm sure there's plenty that can be done to make it difficult.

I'm a bit concerned about the time being weighted as heavily as it is - which sounds weird because time is already only weighted a third of the total device score, but even when it was weighted at much less in 2015 it was still easily the deciding factor.

[AlfWeg]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

[Umaroth]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

The ambiguity also means that proctors could mark you off simply because you interpret it differently than you

[Godspeed]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

This one time, we got full points on a data log (for Ping Pong Parachute) but the proctor said that there wasn't enough variety in the logs. He asked why we didn't try different pressures, and we simply replied with "We didn't want the rocket to break."

Kinda off topic, but still, we had everything that was required of the graph and the proctor was threatening to not give us data log points.

[rabbitman]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

This one time, we got full points on a data log (for Ping Pong Parachute) but the proctor said that there wasn't enough variety in the logs. He asked why we didn't try different pressures, and we simply replied with "We didn't want the rocket to break."

Kinda off topic, but still, we had everything that was required of the graph and the proctor was threatening to not give us data log points.

Bro not gonna lie the logs have always been a meme
Most people just put random fake data on it and just get full points...

[Godspeed]

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

This one time, we got full points on a data log (for Ping Pong Parachute) but the proctor said that there wasn't enough variety in the logs. He asked why we didn't try different pressures, and we simply replied with "We didn't want the rocket to break."

Kinda off topic, but still, we had everything that was required of the graph and the proctor was threatening to not give us data log points.

Bro not gonna lie the logs have always been a meme
Most people just put random fake data on it and just get full points...

This happened at our regionals.
The proctor threatened to DQ us. We went on to get first place.
Our school also got places 1-6 in the event (yes, we're allowed to have 6 teams at our regionals )

[MoMoney$$$;)0)]

This one time, we got full points on a data log (for Ping Pong Parachute) but the proctor said that there wasn't enough variety in the logs. He asked why we didn't try different pressures, and we simply replied with "We didn't want the rocket to break."

Kinda off topic, but still, we had everything that was required of the graph and the proctor was threatening to not give us data log points.

Bro not gonna lie the logs have always been a meme
Most people just put random fake data on it and just get full points...

This happened at our regionals.
The proctor threatened to DQ us. We went on to get first place.
Our school also got places 1-6 in the event (yes, we're allowed to have 6 teams at our regionals )

Never heard of that, but that's dominating at an event.

[RiverWalker88]

I hope they clarify what we were supposed to put on the graphs next yr.

Under criticism of the rules, they pretty clearly said what's required on each graph. I don't recollect on the top of my head what they are, but I remember I got full graph points every time for my machine.

The ambiguity also means that proctors could mark you off simply because you interpret it differently than you

At our regional, the proctor thought that we had to have graphs and tables, not graphs or tables.

At state, the proctor thought that spanning the mass range meant that the data had to go beyond what is allowed at competition (i.e. 19 grams to 801 grams). She also thought that 4 charts meant 4 columns.

That doesn't even go into trying to figure out what data is supposed to go on the chart. It took me forever to decide what the chart would be on because they don't tell you what your variables are supposed to be like in other events. They just say to come with charts, and outline how they want the charts done. More clear chart score guidelines next year would be nice. Although, by following the guidelines, we did manage to earn full points every time, it just took a little bit of pointing out what the rules said and explaining our interpretation.