lmao a dvd...and 2 different sized cups XDAgreed. At Rustin, although their materials were on the simple side, they gave a very straightforward definition of an arch (no straight segments >5cm) and they were extremely consistent about measurements. Although the materials were more complicated at regionals, all of their specifications were subject to opinion (Ex. Is the structure perfectly symmetrical? How would you define a curve?). At one point, two of the supervisors were even disagreeing to each other on whether or not our build would constitute an arch.FJDKSLjkljfkldsjlefd mystery at UCC.
Materials given were just lots of tape, and useless stuff like a dvd, 3(?) or 4 index cards, a spoon and a fork, and two cups, one small one large.
The prompt was to build the tallest arch that could support a tennis ball.
At Rustin, the prompt was similar, except we didn't have to hold anything, and an arch was defined as a structure with no straight edges (they used a 5cm block to measure). Their definition was pretty clear and concise, albeit rather tedious.
However, at UCC, their definition of an arch varied a lot. They said that "the curve" had to support the load (tennis ball), yet while we implemented curves into our design, apparently it didn't count. They also wanted our structure to be perfectly symmetrical (....which it was...). If you think about it though, how the heck do you implement a single spoon or a single fork into the structure, while keeping it symmetrical?
In our block (of 7 teams), not a SINGLE team was placed into tier 1.
hehe i like to hear that our coaches (rustin proctors) did decent. they are the official state mystery arch supervisors