Page 17 of 19

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 21st, 2010, 4:50 am
by courage7856
maggymay wrote:We want to take a 'first-aid' kit to our competition for possible emergency repairs during set-up. In SOs already run, was your extra 'stuff' impounded along with the MP 'box'?
I did. It's a good idea to keep it with your device. Some directors will allow you to bring it later, some won't, so you have to play it safe. Make sure everything in your box complys with the rules though, and keep it labeled just in case. Our box contained an X-acto knife, so we told the proctors about it first (just in case).

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 23rd, 2010, 8:08 am
by maggymay
OK, I'm always doing research for events and was trolling through soinc.org and came upon the Powerpoint for Mission Possible on this page: http://soinc.org/mission_possible_c . Found something there that I thought I should post as an FYI to everyone here.

Take a look at Slide 11 which states:
Block a light source, so that it stops powering a photocell which is operating an electromagnet which releases a mass that activates the next step.


Say WHAT?!? This 'task' looks pretty much like a mingling of Tasks b & c (and kind of a mis-statement - there is no requirement in the Manual about blocking a light source). Luckily the Division C Rules Manual and official published National/State clarifications trump anything in an online Powerpoint, hope there isn't a team or judge out there taking the Page 11 statement about this Task as 'gospel' kwim? Maybe there was a clarification somewhere about this presentation and I missed it?

I think at this point I need to stop doing research :lol: ...

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 23rd, 2010, 9:28 am
by fleet130
This PowerPoint is most likely referring to the draft rules discussed at the Summer Institute last July. The disclaimer at the top of the page says:

"The information below should not be interpreted as an extension of the rules. The official rules in the Rules Manual take precedence. "

In the past, this disclaimer continued on to state that the information presented might apply to previous versions of the rules. I can only guess this was removed for the sake of brevity/clarity.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 23rd, 2010, 12:09 pm
by maggymay
fleet130 wrote:This PowerPoint is most likely referring to the draft rules discussed at the Summer Institute last July. The disclaimer at the top of the page says:

"The information below should not be interpreted as an extension of the rules. The official rules in the Rules Manual take precedence. "

In the past, this disclaimer continued on to state that the information presented might apply to previous versions of the rules. I can only guess this was removed for the sake of brevity/clarity.
Yeah, I know, I just kind of EEK'ed! at first, until my brain engaged & I realized nothing like the Powerpoint 'task' had been posted in the Clarifications or was in the Rules Manual.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 25th, 2010, 3:41 pm
by cypressfalls Robert
At state we saw a team getting DQ'ed for having a tank of compressed air at 160psi, the guys said it was a safety hazard and should've been at 130psi max, but nothing like that was in the rules...so

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 25th, 2010, 3:45 pm
by penclspinner
cypressfalls Robert wrote:At state we saw a team getting DQ'ed for having a tank of compressed air at 160psi, the guys said it was a safety hazard and should've been at 130psi max, but nothing like that was in the rules...so
I would beg to differ, rule 3b gives the event supervisor authority to not let a team run their device and give them only participation points. As to what constitutes a "safety hazard" that is up to each individual event supervisor.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 25th, 2010, 5:33 pm
by fleet130
Compressed gasses are especially hazardous and few recognize their dangers. In my opinion, 160psi is about 155psi over the maximum safe pressure although volume also enters into the equation.

Another safety topic is the use of protective equipment. Once the need for safety equipment (e.g. eye protection) is identified, judges cannot allow teams to participate without it. This means teams may not be assessed a penalty and allowed to compete.

Some folks ask why disallowed hazards aren't defined in the event or general rules. The problem is, If the definition misses some hazard, teams could argue that judges must allow it.

Safety is paramount and must not be overlooked or simulated at any time! This makes it a tough issue. There is no way an event supervisor can allow you to operate a device they feel is unsafe. It's not just the hazard to you, but to the judges, spectators and other teams.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 25th, 2010, 5:58 pm
by gh
fleet130 wrote:In my opinion, 160psi is about 155psi over the maximum safe pressure although volume also enters into the equation.
Wait, atmospheric pressure is about 15 psi.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 26th, 2010, 4:14 pm
by old
At our State competition 4 teams got the maximum possible points (all tasks compteted, 40 seconds of mass moving and perfect timing) so it went to tie breaker. Since the first tiebreaker is fewest penalty points, and none of these teams got any penalty points, the tiebreaker became closest to ideal time. I am concerned that if 4 teams got perfect scores at States then probably at least a dozen will do so at Nationals so the medals will be awarded based on stop watch timing to less than 1 second accuracy. Since it is very difficult for the timers to anticipate the final task it is likely that the timing accuracy will be very poor, and therefor the medals are going to more reflect the accuracy of the timers than the accuracy of the Mission possible device. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I believe that a couple of years ago the Robo Cross event had over a dozen teams that got perfect scores and the medals were determined by stopwatch timing, but in that event the times varied by tens of seconds, not hundredths of seconds.

Re: General Questions

Posted: April 26th, 2010, 4:52 pm
by penclspinner
old wrote:At our State competition 4 teams got the maximum possible points (all tasks compteted, 40 seconds of mass moving and perfect timing) so it went to tie breaker. Since the first tiebreaker is fewest penalty points, and none of these teams got any penalty points, the tiebreaker became closest to ideal time. I am concerned that if 4 teams got perfect scores at States then probably at least a dozen will do so at Nationals so the medals will be awarded based on stop watch timing to less than 1 second accuracy. Since it is very difficult for the timers to anticipate the final task it is likely that the timing accuracy will be very poor, and therefor the medals are going to more reflect the accuracy of the timers than the accuracy of the Mission possible device. Anyone have any thoughts on this?

I believe that a couple of years ago the Robo Cross event had over a dozen teams that got perfect scores and the medals were determined by stopwatch timing, but in that event the times varied by tens of seconds, not hundredths of seconds.
Yeah that sounds like it might be an issue.

To be perfectly honest, MP was way too easy this year. If you take a look back at the rules from 2005 I'd wager that there weren't quite as many tie breakers for first place, if any at all. That set of rules seemed quite daunting and a lot more interesting than what we have this year.