Scioly.org

ScottMaurer19 wrote:

scioly2012 wrote:

ScottMaurer19 wrote: Hence why there are issuing a rule clarification to both clarify the transfer and make it easier.

Easier, how? Also, any idea when that rule clarification is coming out?

Not sure when the clarification will be posted but I was told that it was already made and approved. Just not posted.

It is supposed to make the rules state photo(chemical?) action as opposed to a reaction. This would allow for things like fluorescent objects to be used in conjunction with UV light to create a color change.

This is the rule change:
4.b.vi. Use light to initiate the next action.
https://www.soinc.org/events/rules-clarifications

So if we hypothetically used a photocell and an arduino, could the arduino activate the next action? I thought micro controllers have to be unique to one action only.

Ash123 wrote:So if we hypothetically used a photocell and an arduino, could the arduino activate the next action? I thought micro controllers have to be unique to one action only.

That is unique to one. Arduino reads photocell, triggers next action. Very similar to hitting a lever. Ball falls on lever, lever initiates next action.

So now that its just use light to continue an action, can we use the "absence of light" to do that? I just want to buy one of those dawn-dusk photocell switches so I dont have to do something else with my Arduino

I have not yet run the invitational, and I am wondering how I should show event supervisors the action if the event is covered to prevent ambient light? Are signal lights recommended? Showing it to the event supervisor before? What's the general course of action?

Ashernoel wrote:I have not yet run the invitational, and I am wondering how I should show event supervisors the action if the event is covered to prevent ambient light? Are signal lights recommended? Showing it to the event supervisor before? What's the general course of action?

I don't know about that, but for ambient light I'm hooking my thing up to an Arduino, and recording some sort of data values (no idea what I'm doing, just following tutorials and making use of output numbers), recording original value (based on ambient light, then using that to compare. If it changes drastically, it begins the next action.

I'm also conducting my "photochemical" as it used to be called task, by turning on an led inside a piece of a straw. Almost touching it form the other side of the straw is my photocell. The straw does a good job of blocking some of the ambient light, while also showing that the led is on when it is.

Escuse my slightly awkward wording as I am quite tired after a long day of MisPos today

PM2017 wrote:

Ashernoel wrote:I have not yet run the invitational, and I am wondering how I should show event supervisors the action if the event is covered to prevent ambient light? Are signal lights recommended? Showing it to the event supervisor before? What's the general course of action?

I don't know about that, but for ambient light I'm hooking my thing up to an Arduino, and recording some sort of data values (no idea what I'm doing, just following tutorials and making use of output numbers), recording original value (based on ambient light, then using that to compare. If it changes drastically, it begins the next action.

I'm also conducting my "photochemical" as it used to be called task, by turning on an led inside a piece of a straw. Almost touching it form the other side of the straw is my photocell. The straw does a good job of blocking some of the ambient light, while also showing that the led is on when it is.

Escuse my slightly awkward wording as I am quite tired after a long day of MisPos today

Like PM said, having something that blocks ambient light but still allows enough light from inside to show that the LED is turning on is the best course of action.

Concerning the "signal light" idea, I appreciate it from the perspective that it does inform the judge that the action is taking place.

But the strict interpretation of the rules is that the "scoring" part of the action (per 3.d.) isn't visible, just an arbitrary signal light.
I would recommend the semi-opaque shield + bright light kind of methodology that others are advocating.

Dark Sabre wrote:Concerning the "signal light" idea, I appreciate it from the perspective that it does inform the judge that the action is taking place.

But the strict interpretation of the rules is that the "scoring" part of the action (per 3.d.) isn't visible, just an arbitrary signal light.
I would recommend the semi-opaque shield + bright light kind of methodology that others are advocating.

Also, assuming the LED you're using doesn't have some sort of covering on the bottom, you should be able to see it lighting up through the open end of the straw, making it obvious that the task is being completed.

Would one be able to use something like an LED and photocell and argue that it’s unique because it’s not an exothermic action?