Shock Value B/Circuit Lab C

[iwonder]

The weirdest thing I've seen on a test was norton and thevenin equivalents, other than that they've been very straightforward.

Also, I haven't seen any diode analysis on a test(one circuit with an idea diode), but it's highly unlikely in my mind that you'd see non-idea components on tests, most of this stuff is in the >1v and >1kohm stuff(from tests I've seen) so non-idea components don't really effect much. Also being DC it's simplified compared to AC or RF.

[tangentline]

...Regionals rant~most upsetting test ever-4th and we're not going to states.

So all our test was was a 10 V battery connected in parallel to a branch of a (2 1k Ohm resistors in series) and another branch with a 1k ohm resistor and a .5k ohm resistor in series.
We were asked to find the current in the branches, the voltage between the different parts of the circuit and the power dissipation.
40 minutes for that.

And then you have 5 minutes to multimeter the real circuit for only voltage.

I finished in 12 minutes because I had to wait to use the lab, but I think they broke ties based off of time... I like checking work and taking my time if I can and wasn't warned about it in the first place.

So yes, nowhere on the test was there RC, mesh/node analysis, thevenin/norton (love this trick that shortcuts tons of things), diodes, wheatstone bridges (could've at least added one more resistor to make it more fun, I'd love that), or any of that stuff. It is probably easier than a shock value test because it didn't have magnetism...

[Unbihexium]

Yeah I also had an easy experience with regionals/invites/states, with tests significantly simpler than I expected/wanted, most of them were designed for time pressure, however, I'm expecting a more difficult test next year, with hopefully more advanced concepts. That said, for the diode models, they are still ideal, just to a different extent, ideality is relative... an ideal diode perhaps simply lacks parasitic resistance, but has saturation current... an ideal capacitor might have leakage current but not parasitic inductance, or it could have ONLY capacitance. See my point? Its all relative.

[Skink]

So yes, nowhere on the test was there RC, mesh/node analysis, thevenin/norton (love this trick that shortcuts tons of things), diodes, wheatstone bridges (could've at least added one more resistor to make it more fun, I'd love that), or any of that stuff. It is probably easier than a shock value test because it didn't have magnetism...

I don't believe in lowballing SO events (hard events stick to the rules, spread out scores, and encourage additional studying afterwardss), but there is a contingency of high school teachers in my experience who like 'dumbing it down' to see better scores. They as 'Would people really know that?'. It's a legitimate question. There are a ton of teams who don't 'know that'. Unfortunately, that kind of practice sells folks like you short who did (try to) come adequately prepared. I spoke to a gentleman at a competition yesterday who ran both sides of this event and wrote an easy C event--easier than a Regional tournament should have--intentionally to see higher scores. It happens. It goes without saying I've seen and heard of the hands-on work destroying both B and C teams at three Regionals this season. This is a difficult event, and some folks probably do not want to put in the time for questions that nobody will be able to answer correctly.

[Unbihexium]

So yes, nowhere on the test was there RC, mesh/node analysis, thevenin/norton (love this trick that shortcuts tons of things), diodes, wheatstone bridges (could've at least added one more resistor to make it more fun, I'd love that), or any of that stuff. It is probably easier than a shock value test because it didn't have magnetism...

I don't believe in lowballing SO events (hard events stick to the rules, spread out scores, and encourage additional studying afterwardss), but there is a contingency of high school teachers in my experience who like 'dumbing it down' to see better scores. They as 'Would people really know that?'. It's a legitimate question. There are a ton of teams who don't 'know that'. Unfortunately, that kind of practice sells folks like you short who did (try to) come adequately prepared. I spoke to a gentleman at a competition yesterday who ran both sides of this event and wrote an easy C event--easier than a Regional tournament should have--intentionally to see higher scores. It happens. It goes without saying I've seen and heard of the hands-on work destroying both B and C teams at three Regionals this season. This is a difficult event, and some folks probably do not want to put in the time for questions that nobody will be able to answer correctly.

Wow thats a horrible thing for an event writer to do... We work so hard to be prepped for this, and there are of course other events where people have impossible tests, but its simply painful when you come into a circuits test and its hardly past AP Physics B level if not below it.... Why would they do that?!

[Bozongle]

So yes, nowhere on the test was there RC, mesh/node analysis, thevenin/norton (love this trick that shortcuts tons of things), diodes, wheatstone bridges (could've at least added one more resistor to make it more fun, I'd love that), or any of that stuff. It is probably easier than a shock value test because it didn't have magnetism...

I don't believe in lowballing SO events (hard events stick to the rules, spread out scores, and encourage additional studying afterwardss), but there is a contingency of high school teachers in my experience who like 'dumbing it down' to see better scores. They as 'Would people really know that?'. It's a legitimate question. There are a ton of teams who don't 'know that'. Unfortunately, that kind of practice sells folks like you short who did (try to) come adequately prepared. I spoke to a gentleman at a competition yesterday who ran both sides of this event and wrote an easy C event--easier than a Regional tournament should have--intentionally to see higher scores. It happens. It goes without saying I've seen and heard of the hands-on work destroying both B and C teams at three Regionals this season. This is a difficult event, and some folks probably do not want to put in the time for questions that nobody will be able to answer correctly.

As for me, I believe Shock Value tests for the competitions I'm at are adequately challenging, ut I already studid all the topics included in tests so I do very well on the test portion. But, as you said, hands-on always kills me, netting me 2nd place at my regional and at State.

[Unbihexium]

So yes, nowhere on the test was there RC, mesh/node analysis, thevenin/norton (love this trick that shortcuts tons of things), diodes, wheatstone bridges (could've at least added one more resistor to make it more fun, I'd love that), or any of that stuff. It is probably easier than a shock value test because it didn't have magnetism...

I don't believe in lowballing SO events (hard events stick to the rules, spread out scores, and encourage additional studying afterwardss), but there is a contingency of high school teachers in my experience who like 'dumbing it down' to see better scores. They as 'Would people really know that?'. It's a legitimate question. There are a ton of teams who don't 'know that'. Unfortunately, that kind of practice sells folks like you short who did (try to) come adequately prepared. I spoke to a gentleman at a competition yesterday who ran both sides of this event and wrote an easy C event--easier than a Regional tournament should have--intentionally to see higher scores. It happens. It goes without saying I've seen and heard of the hands-on work destroying both B and C teams at three Regionals this season. This is a difficult event, and some folks probably do not want to put in the time for questions that nobody will be able to answer correctly.

As for me, I believe Shock Value tests for the competitions I'm at are adequately challenging, ut I already studid all the topics included in tests so I do very well on the test portion. But, as you said, hands-on always kills me, netting me 2nd place at my regional and at State.

Its seems that the lab portion hurts more people that it helps, but it usually helps me more, just because I know how to do everything they could ask us to do, I actually sit down and try to think of a way they could make a lab and then prep for it sometimes...

[tangentline]

Its seems that the lab portion hurts more people that it helps, but it usually helps me more, just because I know how to do everything they could ask us to do, I actually sit down and try to think of a way they could make a lab and then prep for it sometimes...

Haha, all of those things that hurt people more than it helps that could be on a test, I wanted a gold medal on this so badly that I knew a little over a month ago that I would need to borrow a multimeter from the school and get a bunch of resistors, capacitors, LEDs, a breadboard or else I'd probably be screwed on the lab part, but we just measured voltages on a prebuilt circuit. I was standing outside of the room begging for a killer hard test jynxing myself--while I listen to people reviewing V=IR and I^2R and was laughing with my partner (well meanly). Not getting Kirchhoff's laws (as well as anything past Physics B) is a huge one that I've seen even on High School teams, but we didn't really need any of it unfortunately (I'm raging that a school that only did Physics B gets 2nd at a different regionals).

[Unbihexium]

Its seems that the lab portion hurts more people that it helps, but it usually helps me more, just because I know how to do everything they could ask us to do, I actually sit down and try to think of a way they could make a lab and then prep for it sometimes...

Haha, all of those things that hurt people more than it helps that could be on a test, I wanted a gold medal on this so badly that I knew a little over a month ago that I would need to borrow a multimeter from the school and get a bunch of resistors, capacitors, LEDs, a breadboard or else I'd probably be screwed on the lab part, but we just measured voltages on a prebuilt circuit. I was standing outside of the room begging for a killer hard test jynxing myself--while I listen to people reviewing V=IR and I^2R and was laughing with my partner (well meanly). Not getting Kirchhoff's laws (as well as anything past Physics B) is a huge one that I've seen even on High School teams, but we didn't really need any of it unfortunately (I'm raging that a school that only did Physics B gets 2nd at a different regionals).

Same story for me. My regionals and states were conceptually a joke... Almost all physics B, when the rules could have allowed for stuff thats past Physics C easily... When I say past I mean stuff which would require differential equations... And I was prepared for all that, and then, again and again, Invites, Regionals, States, the test is just incredibly long and the questions are a joke... Also, who needs Kirchhoff's laws when you have node voltage analysis?

[cyanophycean314]

At Indiana, our State test made each team split into two parts, a lab portion consisting of five stations and a very long test. Because there were stations and the other person was in another room sometimes, it made consulting about things kinda weird.
I manned the test portion and it didn't cover too many advanced topics. It was definitely all within phys B level. They tried to squeeze you with the time limit, but I still finished with time to spare.

In the end, my partner messed up one of the labs, but that's ok because we got 1st! It was a very happy conclusion to my season.