PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Rossyspsce
Member
Member
Posts: 180
Joined: June 3rd, 2018, 5:32 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Rossyspsce » April 15th, 2019, 7:53 pm

AlexDeKuang wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
MadCow2357 wrote:Wait how was first place 1200, and 20th and 21st both higher at around 1700.


Bolt for the block was too short so they were tiered for it, even after they were told it was ok


So if 1200 was the score after the tier, how did they still get first?


the two camas teams got tiered

AlexDeKuang
Member
Member
Posts: 10
Joined: January 25th, 2019, 11:00 am

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby AlexDeKuang » April 15th, 2019, 9:09 pm

Rossyspsce wrote:
AlexDeKuang wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
Bolt for the block was too short so they were tiered for it, even after they were told it was ok


So if 1200 was the score after the tier, how did they still get first?


the two camas teams got tiered


Oh so 1700 was what they would have gotten?

RobertYL
Member
Member
Posts: 9
Joined: May 26th, 2018, 9:53 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby RobertYL » April 15th, 2019, 10:21 pm

AlexDeKuang wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
AlexDeKuang wrote:
So if 1200 was the score after the tier, how did they still get first?


the two camas teams got tiered


Oh so 1700 was what they would have gotten?


1700 was what they did get. Because they were tiered down, they were ranked lower than all teams who were not tiered down, irregardless of score.

scioly2345
Member
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: April 23rd, 2017, 7:20 pm
Division: C
State: NY

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby scioly2345 » April 18th, 2019, 6:46 pm

RobertYL wrote:
AlexDeKuang wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
the two camas teams got tiered


Oh so 1700 was what they would have gotten?


1700 was what they did get. Because they were tiered down, they were ranked lower than all teams who were not tiered down, irregardless of score.


Did they get tiered due to the 40-45cm loading point rule?
Also huge sorry to Camas cause those are some good effs.
If they can see this just extend your base! The MIDDLE of the loading block needs to be from 40-45cm from the wall!
2016-2019 Brother Joseph Fox
2020-2022 Kellenberg
2019 - Boomilever, Disease Detectives, Herpetology, Potions and Poisons, Write It Do It
God Bless and Rest In Peace Len Joeris (Balsa Man)
“for the betterment of science”

User avatar
MadCow2357
Member
Member
Posts: 582
Joined: November 19th, 2017, 9:09 am
Division: C
State: RI
Location: Stark Industries Internship
Contact:

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby MadCow2357 » April 18th, 2019, 8:39 pm

scioly2345 wrote:Did they get tiered due to the 40-45cm loading point rule?
Also huge sorry to Camas cause those are some good effs.
If they can see this just extend your base! The MIDDLE of the loading block needs to be from 40-45cm from the wall!

Um they didn't answer you question on why Camas got tiered in boomi? (Also most teams know that the center has to be between 40-45)
MadCow2357's Userpage
Projected 2020 Events: Boomilever, Gravity Vehicle
Considering: Fossils, Machines, Sounds of Music, Wright Stuff
Builder Cult - builders rise up! :)
Dank Memes Area Homeschool
234.36
#BalsaManForever

Rossyspsce
Member
Member
Posts: 180
Joined: June 3rd, 2018, 5:32 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Rossyspsce » April 18th, 2019, 8:56 pm

scioly2345 wrote:
RobertYL wrote:
AlexDeKuang wrote:
Oh so 1700 was what they would have gotten?


1700 was what they did get. Because they were tiered down, they were ranked lower than all teams who were not tiered down, irregardless of score.


Did they get tiered due to the 40-45cm loading point rule?
Also huge sorry to Camas cause those are some good effs.
If they can see this just extend your base! The MIDDLE of the loading block needs to be from 40-45cm from the wall!


I'm not from camas but talking to both their team members, they were told that they would be able to run without the block without getting tiered, but I was there when the es told them that. Talking with their boom builders last night, they said that the proctor doesn't remember saying anything along those lines, so ig they're screwed. Yeah I feel really bad bc they had a lot of hours of hard work put in but to lose by 1 point after getting last in boom, since they got put in tier 3, it just sucks to see a team lose like that

scioly2345
Member
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: April 23rd, 2017, 7:20 pm
Division: C
State: NY

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby scioly2345 » May 1st, 2019, 6:21 am

Rossyspsce wrote:
scioly2345 wrote:
RobertYL wrote:
1700 was what they did get. Because they were tiered down, they were ranked lower than all teams who were not tiered down, irregardless of score.


Did they get tiered due to the 40-45cm loading point rule?
Also huge sorry to Camas cause those are some good effs.
If they can see this just extend your base! The MIDDLE of the loading block needs to be from 40-45cm from the wall!


I'm not from camas but talking to both their team members, they were told that they would be able to run without the block without getting tiered, but I was there when the es told them that. Talking with their boom builders last night, they said that the proctor doesn't remember saying anything along those lines, so ig they're screwed. Yeah I feel really bad bc they had a lot of hours of hard work put in but to lose by 1 point after getting last in boom, since they got put in tier 3, it just sucks to see a team lose like that


Why did they get tiered for the bolt, doesn’t the ES provide the entire load set up ?
2016-2019 Brother Joseph Fox
2020-2022 Kellenberg
2019 - Boomilever, Disease Detectives, Herpetology, Potions and Poisons, Write It Do It
God Bless and Rest In Peace Len Joeris (Balsa Man)
“for the betterment of science”

Rossyspsce
Member
Member
Posts: 180
Joined: June 3rd, 2018, 5:32 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Rossyspsce » May 1st, 2019, 6:59 am

scioly2345 wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
scioly2345 wrote:
Did they get tiered due to the 40-45cm loading point rule?
Also huge sorry to Camas cause those are some good effs.
If they can see this just extend your base! The MIDDLE of the loading block needs to be from 40-45cm from the wall!


I'm not from camas but talking to both their team members, they were told that they would be able to run without the block without getting tiered, but I was there when the es told them that. Talking with their boom builders last night, they said that the proctor doesn't remember saying anything along those lines, so ig they're screwed. Yeah I feel really bad bc they had a lot of hours of hard work put in but to lose by 1 point after getting last in boom, since they got put in tier 3, it just sucks to see a team lose like that


Why did they get tiered for the bolt, doesn’t the ES provide the entire load set up ?


The bolt was 2.5in, but they had accounted for a 3in bolt which was used at every competition, as far as I could tell, so they could not load block, and wingnut in the bolt

knightmoves
Member
Member
Posts: 99
Joined: April 26th, 2018, 6:40 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby knightmoves » May 1st, 2019, 1:36 pm

Rossyspsce wrote:
scioly2345 wrote:Why did they get tiered for the bolt, doesn’t the ES provide the entire load set up ?

The bolt was 2.5in, but they had accounted for a 3in bolt which was used at every competition, as far as I could tell, so they could not load block, and wingnut in the bolt


This year's rules do not specify a minimum length for the eyebolt, which means that building a design where you thread the shaft of the eyebolt through a hole in your boomilever runs the risk of having this happen - you encounter a legal test setup that doesn't leave space for you to insert your device between the loading block and the eye of the bolt.

I'm sure I've seen at least one setup this year with no spare space at all - the eye of the bolt was right up against the loading block, and there was maybe one thread protruding from the top of the wingnut.

I may as well note that I've seen some pretty chunky S-hooks in use - I've seen a few devices where the 1" eyebolt fit comfortably, but teams were struggling to get the S-hook in place. A maximum dimension is not specified for the S-hook and chain, and probably should be.

scioly2345
Member
Member
Posts: 41
Joined: April 23rd, 2017, 7:20 pm
Division: C
State: NY

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby scioly2345 » May 2nd, 2019, 10:40 am

knightmoves wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:
scioly2345 wrote:Why did they get tiered for the bolt, doesn’t the ES provide the entire load set up ?

The bolt was 2.5in, but they had accounted for a 3in bolt which was used at every competition, as far as I could tell, so they could not load block, and wingnut in the bolt


This year's rules do not specify a minimum length for the eyebolt, which means that building a design where you thread the shaft of the eyebolt through a hole in your boomilever runs the risk of having this happen - you encounter a legal test setup that doesn't leave space for you to insert your device between the loading block and the eye of the bolt.

I'm sure I've seen at least one setup this year with no spare space at all - the eye of the bolt was right up against the loading block, and there was maybe one thread protruding from the top of the wingnut.

I may as well note that I've seen some pretty chunky S-hooks in use - I've seen a few devices where the 1" eyebolt fit comfortably, but teams were struggling to get the S-hook in place. A maximum dimension is not specified for the S-hook and chain, and probably should be.


How did they still test and get 1700s with this problem?
Sorry I keep asking questions on this I’m just curious lol
2016-2019 Brother Joseph Fox
2020-2022 Kellenberg
2019 - Boomilever, Disease Detectives, Herpetology, Potions and Poisons, Write It Do It
God Bless and Rest In Peace Len Joeris (Balsa Man)
“for the betterment of science”

Rossyspsce
Member
Member
Posts: 180
Joined: June 3rd, 2018, 5:32 pm
State: -

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Rossyspsce » May 2nd, 2019, 1:32 pm

scioly2345 wrote:
knightmoves wrote:
Rossyspsce wrote:The bolt was 2.5in, but they had accounted for a 3in bolt which was used at every competition, as far as I could tell, so they could not load block, and wingnut in the bolt


This year's rules do not specify a minimum length for the eyebolt, which means that building a design where you thread the shaft of the eyebolt through a hole in your boomilever runs the risk of having this happen - you encounter a legal test setup that doesn't leave space for you to insert your device between the loading block and the eye of the bolt.

I'm sure I've seen at least one setup this year with no spare space at all - the eye of the bolt was right up against the loading block, and there was maybe one thread protruding from the top of the wingnut.

I may as well note that I've seen some pretty chunky S-hooks in use - I've seen a few devices where the 1" eyebolt fit comfortably, but teams were struggling to get the S-hook in place. A maximum dimension is not specified for the S-hook and chain, and probably should be.


How did they still test and get 1700s with this problem?
Sorry I keep asking questions on this I’m just curious lol


They tested without block and were told it would be ok. Then tiere 3-ed during award ceremony

Girlpower05
Member
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: February 23rd, 2017, 5:41 pm
Division: B
State: MI

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Girlpower05 » May 7th, 2019, 7:30 pm

I was able to make a 7.3 g practice boomilever that held 17.8 kg and didn't break :). I replicated the design for my States boom, but unfortunately, unbeknownst to me, the wood was weak at one point :(, resulting in it breaking at a mere 4 kg. :cry: :cry: :cry: This was a huge disappointment, especially after figuring out a high-performing design.

Vstorm34
Member
Member
Posts: 14
Joined: July 19th, 2018, 8:25 am
Division: C
State: VA

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby Vstorm34 » May 8th, 2019, 9:59 am

Girlpower05 wrote:I was able to make a 7.3 g practice boomilever that held 17.8 kg and didn't break :). I replicated the design for my States boom, but unfortunately, unbeknownst to me, the wood was weak at one point :(, resulting in it breaking at a mere 4 kg. :cry: :cry: :cry: This was a huge disappointment, especially after figuring out a high-performing design.


Worst feeling ever. I was consistently getting 1500+ in practice with 8g booms, but only got like 600 at States :cry:

lucky
Member
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: March 18th, 2019, 3:06 pm

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby lucky » June 2nd, 2019, 5:53 pm

Not totally sure where you guys got the information from but: https://washingtonscienceolympiad.com/s ... ghline.pdf

Interlake actually got first :D and third in Boomilever, with Bothell coming in second. First place had a score of ~1360, third place around 900? I think.

Interesting note, Bothell beat Camas by 1 point, if Camas didn't get tiered then they would have gone to nats for sure.

lucky
Member
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: March 18th, 2019, 3:06 pm

Re: PICTURES, SCORES, VIDEOS!!

Postby lucky » June 2nd, 2019, 5:54 pm

Kind of a RIP though because we had 1800 scores in practice but we only got 1360.

Our design was a box design with two wide but thin compression members and some bracing.


Return to “Boomilever B/C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests