Page 4 of 5
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 19th, 2009, 3:18 am
by Flavorflav
adam124218 wrote:I would doubt that there would be calculus, at least on regionals tests. Many event coordinators will assume that the average person in this event isn't going to have taken calculus (even though they probably have) and will exclude it. At state when motion detectors can be used, they may have probeware that can take data for velocity and acceleration. I would only say there would be about a 10-20 percent chance of calculus.
I would say 0% - 1% that calc would be
required at NY States and at nationals. Of course, sometimes you can use calc when it isn't required, but I would give long odds that they are not going to write an event which requires calculus.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 24th, 2009, 7:15 am
by rocketchicka
We got 2nd at regionals. It was fun and I knew most of the stuff on the test. It was things like calculating trajectory and volume and things like that.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 24th, 2009, 6:19 pm
by Glacierguy1
Calculating volume of what?
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 24th, 2009, 6:59 pm
by jazzy009
at the lake conference comp for us the test was extremely filled with physics. written by a physics teacher, we later found out. Is it this "physics-filled" elsewhere or did we just get a somewhat odd test?
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 25th, 2009, 2:16 am
by Flavorflav
jazzy009 wrote:at the lake conference comp for us the test was extremely filled with physics. written by a physics teacher, we later found out. Is it this "physics-filled" elsewhere or did we just get a somewhat odd test?
Somewhat odd, I think, but it depends a lot on who writes it. It's a pretty wide-open event.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 25th, 2009, 7:09 am
by rocketchicka
Glacierguy1 wrote:Calculating volume of what?
The volume of a chunk of quartz using one method and a wooden cylinder using another.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: February 28th, 2009, 7:30 pm
by fee6
Ours was much more difficult. There was lots of pretty advanced physics, but I think we did pretty well. Results pending.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: March 1st, 2009, 7:32 am
by Flavorflav
fee6 wrote:Ours was much more difficult. There was lots of pretty advanced physics, but I think we did pretty well. Results pending.
Could you be any more specific? Like, what kind of physics? Also, what tournament was it?
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: March 2nd, 2009, 9:33 pm
by fee6
Flavorflav wrote:fee6 wrote:Ours was much more difficult. There was lots of pretty advanced physics, but I think we did pretty well. Results pending.
Could you be any more specific? Like, what kind of physics? Also, what tournament was it?
Regionals - there was an easy one about experimentally determining coefficient of kinetic friction, then a harder one about resolving a big brain hurting complex DC circuit, then finally one asking you to calculate gravitational potential using two masses with given spherical coordinates.
Looking back, it wasn't that hard, but you would have had to take Physics B or C before probably.
2nd place on the event.
Re: Technical Problem Solving
Posted: March 4th, 2009, 7:54 pm
by Valpo Towers and Trebs
So I take back what I said about probably not needing calculus in this event because on the regional test I took last saturday for a few of the problems it said specifically that you had to use calculus to solve them. We got them, but I felt bad for the younger ones in the room because that's not exactly fair to them.