Scioly.org

How strict are they on the entire stack causing the next action? If I have the blocks fall and stack on top of a string to cause the next action, is that following what they want us to do?

ksmolen wrote:How strict are they on the entire stack causing the next action? If I have the blocks fall and stack on top of a string to cause the next action, is that following what they want us to do?

Yea, would it be ok if the first block or second or third or fourth block cause the action or do we need it to be the fifth and final block, it never really specifies which block, but I may be mistaken.

I think it does actual specify. By the word of the rules, the "stack of 5 blocks causes the next action." Not a stack of 1, 2, 3, or 4 blocks. If the next action triggers after the first (or 2nd, 3rd, or 4th) block falls, but before the whole stack is present, then you have not completed the task by the time the machine moves to the next action.

I would make sure that it takes the whole weight of the 5 blocks to trigger the next action. That's my take on it anyway.

Primate wrote:Ah, okay. I wouldn't have considered the string part of the block, since it's not attached.

I don't think it matters whether the string is part of the block or not, myself. The point is that every bit of weight from the upper blocks is passed through to the lower blocks, even if it goes through the string to get there.

Do all the blocks have to be the same? (Sorry, I don't have my rules nearby at the moment.) If they don't, then you could make the last block extra heavy, and therefore ensure that the next task won't trigger until that last block falls.

AlphaTauri wrote:Do all the blocks have to be the same? (Sorry, I don't have my rules nearby at the moment.) If they don't, then you could make the last block extra heavy, and therefore ensure that the next task won't trigger until that last block falls.

Only lists a minimum size and that they must be wooden. Nothing says that they must be identical. Good idea, haha

Yeah, I'm using a cage sort of thing with blocks on the inside, and pulling it up with a geared motor and string with pulley. I strategically placed some copper tape to connect them all together when the cage falls into upright position. The tricky part was getting the blocks to not entirely stack until they were self-supporting. That's a trade secret.

On the TSL sample list it states, "Switch turns on motor, pulling pins from beneath stack of wood blocks". Does that mean, that we can have the stack of blocks together and just elevated and then drop them onto something? I submitted a clarification and am still waiting for a response.

questionguy wrote:On the TSL sample list it states, "Switch turns on motor, pulling pins from beneath stack of wood blocks". Does that mean, that we can have the stack of blocks together and just elevated and then drop them onto something? I submitted a clarification and am still waiting for a response.

Note that the sample TSL you quoted states that there are "pins" within the stack. The blocks cannot be touching each other at all--the rules clearly state this--so no, you can't simply drop a prestacked blocks. If you had pins between each block, however, that would be perfectly legal.

So just to confirm we are allowed to have string in between the blocks so long as each block supports the blocks above it?

sj wrote:So just to confirm we are allowed to have string in between the blocks so long as each block supports the blocks above it?

I think so, if you can have "holes drilled in them or have other, non wooden, materials fixed onto them", you should be able to put a string through all of them.