Chemical Clocks

[ScottMaurer19]

I have coached and judged enough years to know potential problem steps in terms of how judges judge things. I am simply giving advice.

I acknowledge that. I am simply providing how I would justify it to an ES if asked.

[PM2017]

I was thinking about using an electrochemical reaction for my chemical clock, but there are two potential problems with this:
1) Rule 3.j. states that only commercial batteries can be used. WIll an electrochemical reaction violate this rule?
2) Rule 3.i. says that not electrical timer may be used. Is an electrochemical clock in violation of this rule?

Thanks!

[nicholasmaurer]

I was thinking about using an electrochemical reaction for my chemical clock, but there are two potential problems with this:
1) Rule 3.j. states that only commercial batteries can be used. WIll an electrochemical reaction violate this rule?
2) Rule 3.i. says that not electrical timer may be used. Is an electrochemical clock in violation of this rule?

Thanks!

I don't think an electrochemical reaction is, by default, a battery. If you are using the reaction to power other components, then it would clearly violate 3j. Similarly, I don't think an electrochemical reaction necessarily qualifies as an electrical timer. If the timing is controlled by the reaction chemistry (e.g. the concentration of reactants), this would seem to follow the spirit of 3.i.

However, I agree that both seem ambiguous enough to be unwise without clarification. I'd submit separate FAQs for those two questions.

[scioly2012]

Regarding 4gii and 6a, has anyone submitted a question and received an answer as to whether a chemical timer running past the target time will receive 1 net point (+2 bonus points for chemical timer, -1 penalty)? It seems like this is unintentional as it would enable teams to ignore the target time in favor of receiving more points, but no clarifications have been published yet. I've submitted an FAQ, but have not received an answer so far.

[nicholasmaurer]

Regarding 4gii and 6a, has anyone submitted a question and received an answer as to whether a chemical timer running past the target time will receive 1 net point (+2 bonus points for chemical timer, -1 penalty)? It seems like this is unintentional as it would enable teams to ignore the target time in favor of receiving more points, but no clarifications have been published yet. I've submitted an FAQ, but have not received an answer so far.

I think the rules as stated are fairly clear - you would receive a one net point if using a chemical timer past the target time. It's possible they will alter this, and it does seem unintentional/odd, but the text is fairly clear as currently written.

[Iwilsonp]

The new rules clarification https://www.soinc.org/could-timer-have- ... -ending-it for Mission Possible renders this task next to impossible - how are we supposed to detect the end of a chemical timer without an electric sensor? Even something as simple as a weight-sensitive switch could be interpreted as an electric sensor.

It also contradicts this one: https://www.soinc.org/may-next-task-sta ... -action-4c. Clearly, the final action must be electronic, and therefore must be triggered by electrical means, yet the previous clarification forbade timers ending in electrical sensors.

Care to comment chalker?

[Unome]

The only thing I can think of is an expanding gaseous chemical reaction that triggers a mechanical action.

[ScottMaurer19]

The new rules clarification https://www.soinc.org/could-timer-have- ... -ending-it for Mission Possible renders this task next to impossible - how are we supposed to detect the end of a chemical timer without an electric sensor? Even something as simple as a weight-sensitive switch could be interpreted as an electric sensor.

It also contradicts this one: https://www.soinc.org/may-next-task-sta ... -action-4c. Clearly, the final action must be electronic, and therefore must be triggered by electrical means, yet the previous clarification forbade timers ending in electrical sensors.

Care to comment chalker?

I'm not Chalker but I'm going to comment anyways. Technically a limit switch wouldn't be an electronic sensor provided you have the lever attachment on it. If it is a chemical reaction that creates an expanding gas which then would mechanically hit the lever on the switch and THEN trip the switch I would consider that the same as hitting a marble and having that roll into a button. Needless to say I submitted an FAQ asking for clarification on this issue.

[SluffAndRuff]

An expanding gas... it will be very difficult to come up with a reaction that can a) last nearly 3 minutes and b) be consistent.

It occurred to me - if you used a funnel to gradually add a reactant to a mixture, would that still be considered chemical?

[ScottMaurer19]

An expanding gas... it will be very difficult to come up with a reaction that can a) last nearly 3 minutes and b) be consistent.

It occurred to me - if you used a funnel to gradually add a reactant to a mixture, would that still be considered chemical?

No. See note sent on an FAQ I submitted below. I would qualify the funnel as mechanical.

The original question:
What is the definition of a chemical vs. a mechanical task (as a timer for
bonus points)?

Notes:
What differentiates a chemical from a mechanical timer? Is any task involving
a chemical reaction acceptable or must the timer be adjusted by changing the
rate of reaction through non-mechanical means?
Mission Possible

(section: 4 / paragraph: g / sub-paragraph: ii / line: 1)

The answer is in your question. The chemical timer must be adjusted by
changing the
rate of reaction through non-mechanical means.
See posted FAQ