Scioly.org

See rule 4.b.xii

Similar to last year's Start Task.

If our magnet drops onto a mouse trap, would it be legal if technically the magnet initiates the next action by activating a mouse trap which activates a lever system? Can we use a mouse trap to activate a lever system?

Nagooyen wrote:If our magnet drops onto a mouse trap, would it be legal if technically the magnet initiates the next action by activating a mouse trap which activates a lever system? Can we use a mouse trap to activate a lever system?

I would recommend you word your ASL something like this:

- ... causes magnet to fall
- Falling magnet activates a mousetrap. (this would be a non-scorable action)
- Mousetrap activates a 1st class lever, which activates a 2nd class level...

Alternatively, a mousetrap is a lever, so you could skip the extra step entirely.

When it says that the magnetic object must initiate the next task, do you think it counts if I have a little container of baking soda with a magnet embedded in it, such that the whole container falls when the other magnet is removed?

I'm not sure that the rules would count this as a successful task, since it is not necessarily the magnetic object that is triggering the next task.

PM2017 wrote:When it says that the magnetic object must initiate the next task, do you think it counts if I have a little container of baking soda with a magnet embedded in it, such that the whole container falls when the other magnet is removed?

I'm not sure that the rules would count this as a successful task, since it is not necessarily the magnetic object that is triggering the next task.

I think this is very borderline. I would recommend against it.

nicholasmaurer wrote:

PM2017 wrote:When it says that the magnetic object must initiate the next task, do you think it counts if I have a little container of baking soda with a magnet embedded in it, such that the whole container falls when the other magnet is removed?

I'm not sure that the rules would count this as a successful task, since it is not necessarily the magnetic object that is triggering the next task.

I think this is very borderline. I would recommend against it.

i dont see whats wrong with doing this. Can you explain how this could be not allowed in the rules

terence.tan wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:

PM2017 wrote:When it says that the magnetic object must initiate the next task, do you think it counts if I have a little container of baking soda with a magnet embedded in it, such that the whole container falls when the other magnet is removed?

I'm not sure that the rules would count this as a successful task, since it is not necessarily the magnetic object that is triggering the next task.

I think this is very borderline. I would recommend against it.

i dont see whats wrong with doing this. Can you explain how this could be not allowed in the rules

4.b.xii states the falling magnetic object must initiate the next action. It sounds to me as if the baking soda is being used to start the next action via a chemical reaction. Since the baking soda isn’t the magnetic object, I think it’s likely to be questioned by supervisors. It would depend partially on the exact design and the wording of the ASL.

In contrast, if the weight of the container triggered the next action, I think this would be legal.

nicholasmaurer wrote:

terence.tan wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:
I think this is very borderline. I would recommend against it.

i dont see whats wrong with doing this. Can you explain how this could be not allowed in the rules

4.b.xii states the falling magnetic object must initiate the next action. It sounds to me as if the baking soda is being used to start the next action via a chemical reaction. Since the baking soda isn’t the magnetic object, I think it’s likely to be questioned by supervisors. It would depend partially on the exact design and the wording of the ASL.

In contrast, if the weight of the container triggered the next action, I think this would be legal.

Would you not argue that the magnet falling is initiating the next action by providing the gravitational force to combine the compounds to start the chemical reaction, which is the next task?

windu34 wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:

terence.tan wrote: i dont see whats wrong with doing this. Can you explain how this could be not allowed in the rules

4.b.xii states the falling magnetic object must initiate the next action. It sounds to me as if the baking soda is being used to start the next action via a chemical reaction. Since the baking soda isn’t the magnetic object, I think it’s likely to be questioned by supervisors. It would depend partially on the exact design and the wording of the ASL.

In contrast, if the weight of the container triggered the next action, I think this would be legal.

Would you not argue that the magnet falling is initiating the next action by providing the gravitational force to combine the compounds to start the chemical reaction, which is the next task?

That's likely what I would have argued, but it's still rather iffy.

PM2017 wrote:

windu34 wrote:

nicholasmaurer wrote:
4.b.xii states the falling magnetic object must initiate the next action. It sounds to me as if the baking soda is being used to start the next action via a chemical reaction. Since the baking soda isn’t the magnetic object, I think it’s likely to be questioned by supervisors. It would depend partially on the exact design and the wording of the ASL.

In contrast, if the weight of the container triggered the next action, I think this would be legal.

Would you not argue that the magnet falling is initiating the next action by providing the gravitational force to combine the compounds to start the chemical reaction, which is the next task?

That's likely what I would have argued, but it's still rather iffy.

Again, it depends on the exact execution and the wording of the ASL. But it would make me nervous as a coach based on the information I have available.