Mission Possible C

[Unome]

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops.

How much resistance counts as "not using electrical power"?

[dmis]

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops.

How much resistance counts as "not using electrical power"?

Along Unome's line of thinking, what if the sensor was wired to a mosfet so negligible current flowed?

The photocell point is actually a good one, as my logic would seem to bar the use of photoresistors.

Why would your previous logic bar photoresistors? I could see it baring phototransistors that activate in more than 10s to activate, which would be unlikely in a circuit.

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops. This is also true of a thermistor used to measure increasing temperature, which should therefore be legal. It would not be true of a thermistor used to measure decreasing temperature or of any other type of temperature sensor.

Electrical power can definitely be used by a photoresistor when it is off. It seems to be a bit of a reach to say that decreasing resistance is allowed but increasing it is not, when electrical power is used either way. (I could see that argument, though, on the extremes, by claiming that completing a circuit is allowed but breaking one is not)

For example, what if the electrical "sensor" was a temperature switch that did not conduct at all until a certain temperature is reached? Would you still consider that using power as an electrical timer? I, based on my interpretation, would not.

Finally, why is this a discussion about tiering? I only see this as an issue for a possible deduction for 150 pts as an electrical timer. The spreadsheet does not tier a team if the number of electrical timers is greater than 0.

[ScottMaurer19]

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops.

How much resistance counts as "not using electrical power"?

Along Unome's line of thinking, what if the sensor was wired to a mosfet so negligible current flowed?

The photocell point is actually a good one, as my logic would seem to bar the use of photoresistors.

Why would your previous logic bar photoresistors? I could see it baring phototransistors that activate in more than 10s to activate, which would be unlikely in a circuit.

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops. This is also true of a thermistor used to measure increasing temperature, which should therefore be legal. It would not be true of a thermistor used to measure decreasing temperature or of any other type of temperature sensor.

Electrical power can definitely be used by a photoresistor when it is off. It seems to be a bit of a reach to say that decreasing resistance is allowed but increasing it is not, when electrical power is used either way. (I could see that argument, though, on the extremes, by claiming that completing a circuit is allowed but breaking one is not)

For example, what if the electrical "sensor" was a temperature switch that did not conduct at all until a certain temperature is reached? Would you still consider that using power as an electrical timer? I, based on my interpretation, would not.

Finally, why is this a discussion about tiering? I only see this as an issue for a possible deduction for 150 pts as an electrical timer. The spreadsheet does not tier a team if the number of electrical timers is greater than 0.

I agree with all you statements.

The tiering is because, althougb it is subtly hidden and I almost made this mistake, it is a construction parameter that there are no spring/electrical timers. Students who violate construction parameters receive tier 2. And apparently a 150 point penalty. As written it has both but the tiering SHOULD (in my opinion) be replaced by the penalty.

[dmis]

The tiering is because, althougb it is subtly hidden and I almost made this mistake, it is a construction parameter that there are no spring/electrical timers. Students who violate construction parameters receive tier 2. And apparently a 150 point penalty. As written it has both but the tiering SHOULD (in my opinion) be replaced by the penalty.

The scoring spreadsheet does not place devices that have values greater than 0 in the number of electrical or spring timers in tier 2, but it does score devices in tier 3 if they have impound or eye protection violations. Based on that, I think it is possible that the intent of that rule is that tiering was in fact replaced by the penalty. Otherwise, the spreadsheet is wrong again.

[ScottMaurer19]

The tiering is because, althougb it is subtly hidden and I almost made this mistake, it is a construction parameter that there are no spring/electrical timers. Students who violate construction parameters receive tier 2. And apparently a 150 point penalty. As written it has both but the tiering SHOULD (in my opinion) be replaced by the penalty.

The scoring spreadsheet does not place devices that have values greater than 0 in the number of electrical or spring timers in tier 2, but it does score devices in tier 3 if they have impound or eye protection violations. Based on that, I think it is possible that the intent of that rule is that tiering was in fact replaced by the penalty. Otherwise, the spreadsheet is wrong again.

I agree that the penalt should replace it but it may be hard to persuade some event supervisors otherwise

[Flavorflav]

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops.

How much resistance counts as "not using electrical power"?

Along Unome's line of thinking, what if the sensor was wired to a mosfet so negligible current flowed?

The photocell point is actually a good one, as my logic would seem to bar the use of photoresistors.

Why would your previous logic bar photoresistors? I could see it baring phototransistors that activate in more than 10s to activate, which would be unlikely in a circuit.

My thinking was that the resistor is receiving current from the beginning of device operation, so if it were activated more than 10 seconds after start it would violate 3.i. However, if we just consider "action" as beginning when the task is activated then you are correct.

However, in the case of a photoresistor no electrical power is being used until the resistance drops. This is also true of a thermistor used to measure increasing temperature, which should therefore be legal. It would not be true of a thermistor used to measure decreasing temperature or of any other type of temperature sensor.

Electrical power can definitely be used by a photoresistor when it is off. It seems to be a bit of a reach to say that decreasing resistance is allowed but increasing it is not, when electrical power is used either way. (I could see that argument, though, on the extremes, by claiming that completing a circuit is allowed but breaking one is not)

For example, what if the electrical "sensor" was a temperature switch that did not conduct at all until a certain temperature is reached? Would you still consider that using power as an electrical timer? I, based on my interpretation, would not.

That's basically what I was thinking - treat a variable resistor as a switch with the high value considered to be the off position. This was just to reconcile the two clarifications with the printed rules, but if we adopt the understanding of "action" I just mentioned above this becomes unnecessary.

Finally, why is this a discussion about tiering? I only see this as an issue for a possible deduction for 150 pts as an electrical timer. The spreadsheet does not tier a team if the number of electrical timers is greater than 0.

That's hugely important, and I had not noticed it. It is also difficult to explain. "No electrical timers" appears under Construction, and so it would seem that having an electrical timer should be a construction violation placing the team in tier 2 per 7.b, which would mean I would have to enter "Y" for construction violations. This would imply a double penalty, though. Perhaps the rule was intended to exclude timers as well as dimensions from the tiering?

[ScottMaurer19]

I didn't explain when I thought the "action" began and ended... That is where the major difference in opinion seems to be coming from. My belief is that an action starts when the previous one ends. The sensors are essentially static until such point in times as a condition changes from the previous action. I would also treat the variable resistors as switchs where high is on, and low is off BUT, due to the FAQ, not award bonus points to teams with a chemical timer that is ended by a sensor (the reason why sensors are not permitted is ambiguous so I would wrong penalizing them atm).

Until an FAQ is published I would award the team the lesser of the 2 penalties (at an invitational, states/regionals might be different) and warn the team of the potential to be tiered. General Rule 5 would be my justification in this case as I still find it hard to believe there is a double penalty for a violation.

[Flavorflav]

That definition of action takes care of everything that lasts less than ten seconds, including photoresistors. It doesn't help the situation with sensors, which are dependent on electricity to "control part of the action," as the FAQ of 1/1 puts it. I don't see how that FAQ doesn't require me to enter "n" in column 5 of the spreadsheet for an electrical sensor, which as you point out will also have to result in a 150 point penalty in column 31.

[ScottMaurer19]

That definition of action takes care of everything that lasts less than ten seconds, including photoresistors. It doesn't help the situation with sensors, which are dependent on electricity to "control part of the action," as the FAQ of 1/1 puts it. I don't see how that FAQ doesn't require me to enter "n" in column 5 of the spreadsheet for an electrical sensor, which as you point out will also have to result in a 150 point penalty in column 31.

There is no FAQ published referring to the tiering so I'm not sure what you are pointing out....
What I was saying was that a double penalty seems to be limited by General Rule 5 which says (paraphrased) that official should try to give the least damaging penalty to rule violations. In this case, the ES should try to give the lesser of the two penalties, 150 point penalty, instead of a 2nd tier.

As you yourself are saying the FAQ nor the rules describe how to treat it. Why wouldn't you give the competitors--who (most likely) put a lot of time and effort into their devices--the benefit of the doubt when there is no clear and explicit rules violation?

[Flavorflav]

Perhaps because I myself am saying nothing of the kind. The FAQ of 1/1 is clear:
"DOES RULE 3I IMPLY THAT ANY ELECTRICAL DEVICE WHICH OPERATES FOR MORE THAN TEN SECONDS WOULD BE A CONSTRUCTION VIOLATION?
Any type of electrical or spring action that operates for more than 10 seconds and still controls part of the action would be a violation"
The temperature sensor is operating for more than ten seconds and controls the termination of the action.