Scioly.org

antoine_ego wrote:To be perfectly honest, I think the mass of the vehicle in Maglev was a pretty big factor because Harriton absolutely destroyed everyone with their 7kg mass.

Not all that relevant to the discussion, but if I remember correctly you can actually see a clip of Harriton's device being tested during the video section right at the beginning of the 2013 awards ceremony video on youtube (they're the ones with the heavy mask and gloves).

windu34 wrote:

chalker wrote:

windu34 wrote: Have you asked chalker? I would think he could find out

Oh I definitely know, since I personally built the tracks for Div B and have had lots of discussions with the Div C supervisor about his tracks. But I don't think it would be fair to post the info here where only some of the competitors might see it.

Correct me if i am mistaken, but wasnt it stated that the div C supervisor would be using melamine? If div C was posted, why isnt div B?

That was mainly to correct the statement that the steel surface tracks seen earlier in the year likely weren't going to be used at Nationals. I also technically gave the answer with a caveat, primarily because there is a possibility he'll put something else on the surface.

Just wanted to chime in regarding all these comments about 'the test being the differentiating factor'. I've tried to emphasize repeatedly that the test is intentionally an EQUAL scoring component in this event. This is NOT a pure build event like many other events, and many people lose track of that. Preparation for the test is very important in this event, and woe be the competitor that blows it off in an attempt to dial in their vehicle performance a little more.

chalker wrote:Just wanted to chime in regarding all these comments about 'the test being the differentiating factor'. I've tried to emphasize repeatedly that the test is intentionally an EQUAL scoring component in this event. This is NOT a pure build event like many other events, and many people lose track of that. Preparation for the test is very important in this event, and woe be the competitor that blows it off in an attempt to dial in their vehicle performance a little more.

Probably a bit of sour grapes, but a little disappointed as to the amount of speculation / hints of the track surface and rails heading into Nationals. We had seen melamine at invitationals and regionals, but ran into a curve ball at states with a plywood track surface. As frustrating as it was, we accepted it as part of the spirit of "dealing with variables that are common issues in real life engineering that we try to instill a bit in Science Olympiad." I hope that leading into Nationals that track and rail information is truly unknown to competitors and make it as real life as possible....

That said, and to Chalker's point - the test saved us at States. We were well prepared, and basically with just the test score alone, finished in the middle of the pack of all teams that competed. It could have been a total disaster if we weren't ready for that portion. Get your binders ready....

BDake wrote:

chalker wrote:Just wanted to chime in regarding all these comments about 'the test being the differentiating factor'. I've tried to emphasize repeatedly that the test is intentionally an EQUAL scoring component in this event. This is NOT a pure build event like many other events, and many people lose track of that. Preparation for the test is very important in this event, and woe be the competitor that blows it off in an attempt to dial in their vehicle performance a little more.

Probably a bit of sour grapes, but a little disappointed as to the amount of speculation / hints of the track surface and rails heading into Nationals. We had seen melamine at invitationals and regionals, but ran into a curve ball at states with a plywood track surface. As frustrating as it was, we accepted it as part of the spirit of "dealing with variables that are common issues in real life engineering that we try to instill a bit in Science Olympiad." I hope that leading into Nationals that track and rail information is truly unknown to competitors and make it as real life as possible....

That said, and to Chalker's point - the test saved us at States. We were well prepared, and basically with just the test score alone, finished in the middle of the pack of all teams that competed. It could have been a total disaster if we weren't ready for that portion. Get your binders ready....

It is expensive to test on a wide variety of surfaces and some teams may not having certain materials available for them to test on locally at a store. I feel knowledge of the surface would make it more fair in the same way Maglev competitors knew the track or could bring their own track

windu34 wrote:

BDake wrote:

chalker wrote:Just wanted to chime in regarding all these comments about 'the test being the differentiating factor'. I've tried to emphasize repeatedly that the test is intentionally an EQUAL scoring component in this event. This is NOT a pure build event like many other events, and many people lose track of that. Preparation for the test is very important in this event, and woe be the competitor that blows it off in an attempt to dial in their vehicle performance a little more.

Probably a bit of sour grapes, but a little disappointed as to the amount of speculation / hints of the track surface and rails heading into Nationals. We had seen melamine at invitationals and regionals, but ran into a curve ball at states with a plywood track surface. As frustrating as it was, we accepted it as part of the spirit of "dealing with variables that are common issues in real life engineering that we try to instill a bit in Science Olympiad." I hope that leading into Nationals that track and rail information is truly unknown to competitors and make it as real life as possible....

That said, and to Chalker's point - the test saved us at States. We were well prepared, and basically with just the test score alone, finished in the middle of the pack of all teams that competed. It could have been a total disaster if we weren't ready for that portion. Get your binders ready....

It is expensive to test on a wide variety of surfaces and some teams may not having certain materials available for them to test on locally at a store. I feel knowledge of the surface would make it more fair in the same way Maglev competitors knew the track or could bring their own track

Yeah, maybe for future years they set a specified surface material that is easy to obtain.

So since we don't actually know its going to be melamine for sure? are you guys testing on a bunch of different surfaces? I feel like the track will be better if not the same melamine if the supervisor has considered it

windu34 wrote:So since we don't actually know its going to be melamine for sure? are you guys testing on a bunch of different surfaces? I feel like the track will be better if not the same melamine if the supervisor has considered it

We're testing only two surfaces. A high friction surface (wood) and a lower friction surface (aluminum flashing) and trying to find settings on our device so that our craft performs relatively identically. If we can do well on both of the extremes, odds are we'll be able to hit anything in between.

Hey guys,

I'm kinda new around here so please excuse me if I'm breaking some sort of rule(s) by butting in here, but I've got a question about a question I just saw on a Hovercraft test. The question reads:
"A pipe carrying water at 20°C has a diameter of 2.5 cm. Estimate the maximum flow speed if the flow must be streamline as measured in cm/sec."
Everywhere I've looked online has stated that in order to find the value of the velocity of the water in the pipe, the volume or mass flow rate is also required, but I don't see how you'd derive that from the information given. Am I missing something in this question, or is it just a bad question? Thanks!

ApprovedCargo91 wrote:Hey guys,

I'm kinda new around here so please excuse me if I'm breaking some sort of rule(s) by butting in here, but I've got a question about a question I just saw on a Hovercraft test. The question reads:
"A pipe carrying water at 20°C has a diameter of 2.5 cm. Estimate the maximum flow speed if the flow must be streamline as measured in cm/sec."
Everywhere I've looked online has stated that in order to find the value of the velocity of the water in the pipe, the volume or mass flow rate is also required, but I don't see how you'd derive that from the information given. Am I missing something in this question, or is it just a bad question? Thanks!

Is the length of pipe included? If it were, you could solve for the volume of the pipe, and find the mass using the density of water (1g/cm^3).