Scioly.org

DarthBuilder wrote:Thanks everyone for the input! That’s very cool and kinda funny at the same time. If I actually do this method of baking a tower, how many silica gel packets do I put inside the box?

As many as you can get your hands on

dholdgreve wrote:

DarthBuilder wrote:Thanks everyone for the input! That’s very cool and kinda funny at the same time. If I actually do this method of baking a tower, how many silica gel packets do I put inside the box?

As many as you can get your hands on

And be aware it needs to dried out (to remove water it has absorbed
https://sciencing.com/dry-desiccant-5939321.html

FYI:
https://www.soinc.org/towers-div-c

As the supervisor at the MIT invitational, I nearly DQ-ed the contentious bonus-only towers but decided against it because the rules explicitly refer to a qualifying tower as holding the "Loading Block," NOT the "Loading Block Assembly." And while at first glance their tactic could've been viewed as a violation of the spirit of the rules, I concluded it was a smart interpretation given the specific and separate definitions of the above. They earned their medals fair and square.

That said, this morning, a definitive clarification was made: the tower must hold the bucket to remain tier 1, for the same reason I told that team I was hesitating at MIT: you have to at least make it look like you're trying to load sand. I believe SO made the right call (though should've more carefully written the rules).

tl;dr: Don't try building a tower that can only hold a loading block and not a bucket at qualifying tournaments, you won't get away with it again.

dragonfly wrote:FYI:
https://www.soinc.org/towers-div-c

As the supervisor at the MIT invitational, I nearly DQ-ed the contentious bonus-only towers but decided against it because the rules explicitly refer to a qualifying tower as holding the "Loading Block," NOT the "Loading Block Assembly." And while at first glance their tactic could've been viewed as a violation of the spirit of the rules, I concluded it was a smart interpretation given the specific and separate definitions of the above. They earned their medals fair and square.

That said, this morning, a definitive clarification was made: the tower must hold the bucket to remain tier 1, for the same reason I told that team I was hesitating at MIT: you have to at least make it look like you're trying to load sand. I believe SO made the right call (though should've more carefully written the rules).

tl;dr: Don't try building a tower that can only hold a loading block and not a bucket at qualifying tournaments, you won't get away with it again.

Thank you so much for telling us and for supervising at MIT- was a blast!

No, they didn't make the correct call. They covered up there lack of precise rules with a very very poor interpretation that has absolutely no basis in the original rules that students have been working on for months.

Here is the original rule text

Bonus Points (6.c.) can be obtained by designing the Tower to span a 29-cm diameter circle, centered on the 20 cm x 20 cm opening of the Test Base.

and

c. Load Scored Bonus: Towers spanning the 29 cm diameter circle receive a 5,000 g bonus. No part of the Tower may touch or be supported within the 29 cm circle throughout testing to earn the Bonus Points.

There is not even a hint at having to support the bucket in any of the bonus point language.

How do you get on the rules committee? I love science Olympiad but this stuff drives me nuts.

cool hand luke wrote:No, they didn't make the correct call. They covered up there lack of precise rules with a very very poor interpretation that has absolutely no basis in the original rules that students have been working on for months.

Here is the original rule text

Bonus Points (6.c.) can be obtained by designing the Tower to span a 29-cm diameter circle, centered on the 20 cm x 20 cm opening of the Test Base.

and

c. Load Scored Bonus: Towers spanning the 29 cm diameter circle receive a 5,000 g bonus. No part of the Tower may touch or be supported within the 29 cm circle throughout testing to earn the Bonus Points.

There is not even a hint at having to support the bucket in any of the bonus point language.

How do you get on the rules committee? I love science Olympiad but this stuff drives me nuts.

I agree that this was definitely more something that should have been a rules clarification rather than a FAQ, since you're right that it changes the wording of the rules. I don't know how important of a change it is though.

cool hand luke wrote:No, they didn't make the correct call. They covered up there lack of precise rules with a very very poor interpretation that has absolutely no basis in the original rules that students have been working on for months.

Here is the original rule text

Bonus Points (6.c.) can be obtained by designing the Tower to span a 29-cm diameter circle, centered on the 20 cm x 20 cm opening of the Test Base.

and

c. Load Scored Bonus: Towers spanning the 29 cm diameter circle receive a 5,000 g bonus. No part of the Tower may touch or be supported within the 29 cm circle throughout testing to earn the Bonus Points.

There is not even a hint at having to support the bucket in any of the bonus point language.

How do you get on the rules committee? I love science Olympiad but this stuff drives me nuts.

Yes, they definitely wrote the rules sloppily (and do far too often), but the above is the incorrect excerpt. They're referring to 6.d.iv. "Tier 4: unable to be loaded for any reason (e.g., cannot accommodate Loading Block, [...])."

Either way, for future reference for this and all events: if any of you have questions or think you might have what could even remotely be considered a rule-bending strategy, submit clarifications AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. I was surprised to have been the first to do so in January, but then again, that might've been because not many people planned on building a tower from which they didn't intend to hang a bucket.

dragonfly wrote:

cool hand luke wrote:No, they didn't make the correct call. They covered up there lack of precise rules with a very very poor interpretation that has absolutely no basis in the original rules that students have been working on for months.

Here is the original rule text

Bonus Points (6.c.) can be obtained by designing the Tower to span a 29-cm diameter circle, centered on the 20 cm x 20 cm opening of the Test Base.

and

c. Load Scored Bonus: Towers spanning the 29 cm diameter circle receive a 5,000 g bonus. No part of the Tower may touch or be supported within the 29 cm circle throughout testing to earn the Bonus Points.

There is not even a hint at having to support the bucket in any of the bonus point language.

How do you get on the rules committee? I love science Olympiad but this stuff drives me nuts.

Yes, they definitely wrote the rules sloppily (and do far too often), but the above is the incorrect excerpt. They're referring to 6.d.iv. "Tier 4: unable to be loaded for any reason (e.g., cannot accommodate Loading Block, [...])."

The rule you stated doesn’t say anything about having to support the bucket which is what they just (incorrectly) ruled on.

SO is governed by a rules committee, which is a lot like herding cats.. a whole herd of type A cats... a camel is a horse designed by committee... everyone wants to get their 2 cents in, and in the end, the rules can become "nonhomogenous" for lack of a better term. The rules committee has been stewing and debating over this clarification for months... sincevthe first of October... im just thrilled that they finally reached some sort of consensus and addressed it before most regionals... imagine for a moment where 1 regional allows the bonus for an ultra light, while the regional adjacent to it rules that it violates the spirit of the competition and tiers the tower, and yet another region says that this tower is ok because it was just built poorly and didn't carry the bucket, but this tower is tiered because he willfully intended to not carry the bucket... Now all these teams end up at state competition... what a mess!

The rules are not written by students... they are written for students. If you choose to interpret vague rules in a certain way that merits a clarification that directs you differently, that does not mean it was wrong, it might be your original interpretation.

The clarification is what it is... rather than bashing, I'd suggest we get busy designing 2.5 gram towers that carry the loading block assembly, bucket, and a minimal amount of sand, and collect the bonus... and before anyone says that's not possible, remember Orville and Wilbur!

so how do you get on this rules committee?