Scioly.org

Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody tells me the Union efficiencies....

noobforce wrote:Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody tells me the Union efficiencies....

I think that is fair...

Can someone provide the link to the checklist for Bridge event? I remember seeing one (on this website) where it had info on how each tier will be decided on a pdf document few months back. I can't locate it now.
If anyone has access to the official checklist that would be used, pl provide. Thanks.

VansBuilders wrote:Can someone provide the link to the checklist for Bridge event? I remember seeing one (on this website) where it had info on how each tier will be decided on a pdf document few months back. I can't locate it now.
If anyone has access to the official checklist that would be used, pl provide. Thanks.

It's on soinc.org (here it is)

noobforce wrote:Both bridges I tested were low mass and they got 1st and 2nd. The scores will remain a mystery until somebody tells me the Union efficiencies....

I already sent you a message which you've never responded to. At any rate, my high school alma mater got first and second too AND beat out like WWPHSN and South Brunswick in the event. So I'm pretty confident without even sharing scores.

Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank

FrankHerman wrote:Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank

Read through the entire Bridge building forum this year and last year, which seems like a daunting task, but you can probably tell which posts to thoroughly read and which ones to skip over. There is a lot of good information in those posts right at your fingertips. The wiki page on this site is also a good place to start if you are just beginning. It's hard to give you tips if you don't have a specific problem.

Good luck and have fun!

FrankHerman wrote:Hi my name is Frank Herman and I am competing in Science Olympiad Bridge building. I am having a hard time building bridges. If you guys have any useful tips or tricks, and or bridge designs, It would be much appreciated if you would share them.

Thanks,
Frank

Threads from previous years about this event rotation (Boomilever, Towers or Tower Building, & Elevated Bridge) are also helpful, especially in more general matters like gluing effectively.

So someone correct me if I'm wrong (I'm a biomathematics major, although one with a strong interest in engineering), but I had a sudden pop into my mind that I'm rather curious about.

Does this year's rules with regards to the test support actually affect division B more and thus pose a bigger challenge to them than division C? Like, by nature of the rules, division C bridges are longer than division B bridges because of a longer mandated span. Consequently, the test support creates a larger angle of inclination for division B bridges than division C bridges. I'm going along the lines of simple geometry. For division C, it's a "rise" of 5 cm to a "run" of 45 cm. For division B, it's about a rise of 5 cm to run of 35 cm.

Thus, doesn't this create a larger change in the direction of forces and stress for division B than division C compared to last year? In other words, don't division B teams have more to change in their designs than division C with regards to changing truss designs, thickness of members, etc.?

I emphasize, however, that regardless of division, the test support doesn't seem to be changing the problem that much. But the question I ask is does division B technically have more to deal with than division C in terms of change?

nxtscholar wrote:So someone correct me if I'm wrong (I'm a biomathematics major, although one with a strong interest in engineering), but I had a sudden pop into my mind that I'm rather curious about.

Does this year's rules with regards to the test support actually affect division B more and thus pose a bigger challenge to them than division C? Like, by nature of the rules, division C bridges are longer than division B bridges because of a longer mandated span. Consequently, the test support creates a larger angle of inclination for division B bridges than division C bridges. I'm going along the lines of simple geometry. For division C, it's a "rise" of 5 cm to a "run" of 45 cm. For division B, it's about a rise of 5 cm to run of 35 cm.

Thus, doesn't this create a larger change in the direction of forces and stress for division B than division C compared to last year? In other words, don't division B teams have more to change in their designs than division C with regards to changing truss designs, thickness of members, etc.?

I emphasize, however, that regardless of division, the test support doesn't seem to be changing the problem that much. But the question I ask is does division B technically have more to deal with than division C in terms of change?

I don't have an answer at this hour but the different spans brings up another question: does the "tilt" have more of an effect for a large angle change involving a short span or a smaller angle involving a longer span? Does span or angle affect the challenge more? I would guess the span's added challenge dramatically increases with greater spans, with greater angles adding more challenge but with less of a magnitude. Just a guess coming from a sleepy person though.