Mission Possible C

[GreatMindsThinkALot]

Do you think the use of certain numbers of batteries in an intention to make certain reactions faster/slower than it would be if a lesser/greater number of batteries was used could be considered as a violation?
Rule states that "All transfers take time, but any continuous action designed to take up time must not be electrical. In addition, at State & National adjusting a transfer that utilizes electricity in any way (either at the beginning, middle, or end of operation) intended to accomplish the ideal time is a violation" (3j.).
But in every situation where electricity is used, there must be some control over the amount of voltage, therefore current, and therefore the amount of time something takes place because the rules don't specify the number of certain types of batteries, or the amount of voltage that can be put into a circuit, besides that it has to be under 10V. This means I have the choice of using 1, 2, 3, or up to 6 1.5V batteries.
　
Any ideas? Has this been a problem in this event before? Thanks a lot

[Olstenhousen]

Remember, you can claim each type of transfer ONCE. At the most, it's 20 points. Then it drops to 10 and finally 5, if other (chem, in this case) transfers occur prior. Post after post after post and no real resolution, all for what's possibly as little as 5 points. Rate of Return is a bit low, don't you think? MOVE ON.

As per the original readings of the rules, I interpreted it as if I cannot score mech->elec back to back with elec -> mech. Up to this point my design is based off of this rule, so I wanted to confirm that each transfer can only be completed once ie(1st mech to elec = 30 2nd mech to elec = 0, but a elec to mech = 20) Thanks

[Bro]

Black Box Rule?

So black box rule is an official rule? If so, how can any factory-sealed battery (3.m) be justified as a transfer (3.e)? This is really confusing to me.

the chemical reaction in batteries is always happening; that's why you want to always buy the freshest batteries, so the least amount of reacting has occurred. Completing the circuit is not starting the chemical reaction, just giving the separated ions a place to go.

Oh gosh, my understanding is completely off then. See, I thought that the continuous reactions were in the anode (which creates the electrical difference between the cathode and anode), and when the circuit is completed the ions can get to the cathode, which completes the reaction in the cathode (so the circuit has to be complete for the cathode reaction to occur). Clearly this was a great misunderstanding on my part––this is why self-studying is so difficult, you never know if what you learn is a misunderstanding on your part or not!

I'm very sorry that I'm pressing this issue so much, I just really feel like I should have a complete understanding of the rules. I absolutely agree that transfers (or building anything really) should be straightforward so it isn't even an issue with the event supervisor. I just feel like there are so many ways to interpret so many parts of the rules that it would be impossible to find any one way to complete a transfer that some event supervisor wouldn't take issue with. A switch, for example, a event supervisor may not count because the mechanical energy is not actually transferred to electrical (or chemical? Can you really just ignore the fact that the battery is what is supplying the electrical energy?) energy, it is just the use of mechanical energy moving something so that electrical energy can be used. And to me, batteries don't even seem like an issue (in my mind it is undeniable that the chemical energy is transferred to electrical energy), but clearly it is more in the gray zone than I figured. It makes me wonder, how many of my transfers are secretly iffier than I thought...

[wlsguy]

There is no black box rule. If you can find it, send it to me.

The rules do say all transfers must be visible (3G). The easiet way to envision this is the concept of the black box. What happens in the box does not count, what happens outside the box does. This is probably where the black box rule came from.

Returning to the battery. The chemical reaction is not visible. The resultant electrical energy has always been considered allowable. Someone might argue you can't see electrical energy but instead the resultant conversion of the energy to something else.

Anyway enough of my ramblings. I'm sure others will have other viewpoints but only those of the event supervisor actually count. As stated before, do the easy stuff and follow the KISS principal.

[olympiaddict]

I agree about the black box being related to the "visible" rule. However I wanted to point out that for example an incandescent light bulb shouldn't in my opinion count for electrical -> ems because it converts energy to heat and then to light, instead i believe it should be elec -> therm -> ems. I say this by the rule about transferring "directly".

[SWAnG]

Isn't there a rule clarification submitted/answered? http://www.soinc.org/node/297

[olympiaddict]

which clarification are you referring to?

[FawnOnyx]

which clarification are you referring to?

I think he's referring to the clarification posted today that rules out homemade batteries.

The other one posted today about electrically powered mechanical timers sorta bums us out since we were using a string reel timer before. I always thought the original intent of rule 3.j was to prohibit certain delay timer circuits that would switch something on after an adjustable amount of time. Turns out it applies farther than that :/

[A Person]

I agree about the black box being related to the "visible" rule. However I wanted to point out that for example an incandescent light bulb shouldn't in my opinion count for electrical -> ems because it converts energy to heat and then to light, instead i believe it should be elec -> therm -> ems. I say this by the rule about transferring "directly".

I'm not sure if that's true. As electricity runs through the wire, it produces both EMS and thermal at the same time. The rule that states a action can only be counted for one transfer makes it so that you can only count for EMS. I'm not sure at all, but that's my thoughts about it.

[torqueburner]

I agree about the black box being related to the "visible" rule. However I wanted to point out that for example an incandescent light bulb shouldn't in my opinion count for electrical -> ems because it converts energy to heat and then to light, instead i believe it should be elec -> therm -> ems. I say this by the rule about transferring "directly".

I'm not sure if that's true. As electricity runs through the wire, it produces both EMS and thermal at the same time. The rule that states a action can only be counted for one transfer makes it so that you can only count for EMS. I'm not sure at all, but that's my thoughts about it.

If what you said were true, that the EMS and thermal are two unrelated results of the current through the filament, then you could count either EMS or thermal, but not both. However, incandescence is the emission of EM radiation from a hot body as a result of its temperature, so I'd say that the transfers actually happening in the bulb are electrical>thermal>EM spectrum. But the question olympiaddict asked is, "can I count the transfer to and from thermal?" The answer depends on which side of the "black box" fence you happen to occupy. As wisguy so aptly observed, it is the opinion of the event supervisor that really counts, and event supervisors come in both flavors - for and against.

Here is an interesting observation that relates to this topic: Look at step 2 on the sample ETL posted on the national SO website.

http://www.soinc.org/sites/default/file ... mplate.pdf

Notice that a match is lit by friction. The ETL does not claim a mechanical>chemical transfer, what is actually happening, but instead claims mechanical>thermal. I see this as an application of the "black box" principle - what happens "inside" something you didn't make cannot be counted as a transfer. The match has an input (friction - mechanical) and an output (heat - thermal) or (light - EM spectrum). Note that this is not conveniently covered by the rule 3g, as it is visible, in contrast with the chemical transfer in the battery. Likewise, the thermal step inside the light bulb is visible, due to the transparent envelope, but it is still inside the "black box".

In the absence of a definitive clarification by SO national, this question is still up for grabs. But once again, it is wisguy who makes the point here, the supervisor's opinion is the one that counts. Contact your supervisor and ask about their stand on this controversy, or risk disappointment on the day of the competition!