Mission Possible C

Locked
olympiaddict
Member
Member
Posts: 175
Joined: August 11th, 2012, 5:17 pm
Division: C
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by olympiaddict »

No problem, we all get pretty intense about this stuff ;)

He said:
Regarding the match I would suggest the actions are Mechanical to chemical to thermal to mechanical providing there is a time interval for the burning match to heat up the [bimetallic] strip.
But he also said:
For the light bulb I would agree with the later of Electrical to EMS to electrical
These two views seem to me to be inconsistent, hence my stance to avoid even the "safe" interpretation for these kinds of transfers.
rforthoffer1023
Member
Member
Posts: 1
Joined: February 14th, 2014, 7:39 am
Division: C
State: MI
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

start task and energy transfer clarification

Post by rforthoffer1023 »

Hi!!!
I have 2 questions:
1) I judged Mission at an invitational and there was dispute in the interpretation of the start task. Does the event supervisor provide the paper clips, marbles, and golf tees for the start task or are teams to bring their own?

2) Would making a salt solution (for example) and using a conductivity tester to light the light be considered electrical energy or chemical energy? We would like to have solid salt dissolve in water (which is a grey area chemical change).

Thanks
iwonder
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 1115
Joined: May 10th, 2011, 8:25 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by iwonder »

1) there's an FAQ on soinc about it, the students are supposed to provide the materials

2) I don't see it as a gray area change to be honest, it's dissociation, which is a chemical reaction. It's just reversible (like an equilibrium reaction).

I would think of it as chemical -> electrical -> ems, but we've had plenty of discussion on transfers and I'm sure someone else has a different opinion :P
'If you're the smartest person in the room, you're in the wrong room' - Unknown
Flavorflav
Member
Member
Posts: 1388
Joined: February 5th, 2006, 7:06 am
Division: Grad
State: NY
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by Flavorflav »

That's how I'd score it, too.
scramblingman
Member
Member
Posts: 13
Joined: January 21st, 2014, 12:48 pm
Division: C
State: PA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by scramblingman »

Has anyone had any luck with chemiluminescent reactions (i.e. glowstick) to a photocell?
Phys1cs
Member
Member
Posts: 129
Joined: November 10th, 2013, 6:53 pm
Division: Grad
State: MD
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by Phys1cs »

scramblingman wrote:Has anyone had any luck with chemiluminescent reactions (i.e. glowstick) to a photocell?
Mine haven't. The photocells weren't picking up enough of the light to do much
sjwon3789
Member
Member
Posts: 107
Joined: December 31st, 2012, 3:45 pm
Division: C
State: VA
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by sjwon3789 »

Just curious but for this event and for other building events,
at regionals if all 3 teams from one school have exactly the same structure but they each independently built them (just shared ideas), is that considered as cheating?
Since they're all the same, I would assume one person had the idea and the other 4 members from the other team just copied off him/her.
2013 Events: Boomilever, Keep the Heat, WIDI
2014 Events: Boomilever, Geologic Mapping, Mission Possible, Scrambler
2015 Events: Air Trajectory, Bridge Building, Mission Possible
chalker
Member
Member
Posts: 2107
Joined: January 9th, 2009, 7:30 pm
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 56 times

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by chalker »

sjwon3789 wrote:Just curious but for this event and for other building events,
at regionals if all 3 teams from one school have exactly the same structure but they each independently built them (just shared ideas), is that considered as cheating?
Since they're all the same, I would assume one person had the idea and the other 4 members from the other team just copied off him/her.

Check out the official SO building policy: http://www.soinc.org/building_tools_policy

Student Alumni
National Event Supervisor
National Physical Sciences Rules Committee Chair
colorado mtn science
Member
Member
Posts: 22
Joined: January 9th, 2014, 9:16 am
Division: C
State: CO
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by colorado mtn science »

iwonder wrote:1) there's an FAQ on soinc about it, the students are supposed to provide the materials

2) I don't see it as a gray area change to be honest, it's dissociation, which is a chemical reaction. It's just reversible (like an equilibrium reaction).

I would think of it as chemical -> electrical -> ems, but we've had plenty of discussion on transfers and I'm sure someone else has a different opinion :P
Although I have heard some call adding salt to water a chemical reaction, just about every chemist will call this a physical change. I wouldn't expect your supervisor to score it as chem->electric. You're safer not to use that as a transfer
PsiPhi
Member
Member
Posts: 3
Joined: February 6th, 2014, 10:26 am
Division: C
State: FL
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Mission Possible C

Post by PsiPhi »

Hey so for scoring wise, when you have
Mechanical to Chemical that is 30 points
if you have another Mechanical to Chemical is that 0 points or 20 points?
Locked

Return to “2014 Build Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests