Subject:
|
Re: rtlToronto19: Balance of Power and other upcoming events
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 Mar 2005 19:57:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
870 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto, Rob Antonishen wrote:
> B has the advantage if and only if the assumption that the robots move
> at the same rate holds true.
Right. I made that assumption to prove that even if both robots are the same
distance from the fulcrum, they are no longer in balance (a neutral win state).
> Assuming that the two robots are are
> similar in terms of battery and motor configurations, i.e. can deliver
> the same power, robot A in the example would accelerate at 1.4 times
> the rate of robot B, and should be able to shift it's moment that much
> faster.
I think you missed my point entirely. You were saying that by adding a mass to
one side, we could level the playing feild by making both sides equal. My point
is, that technique will only work in one state (say, the resting/starting
state). If both robots are equidistant from the fulcrum, varying the distance
*will* modify the centre of mass - by definition that is not a system in
balance. Adding mass to a fixed point on the beam will not make the challenge
equal for both robots.
I *really* think we need a weight restriction. :/
Iain
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
61 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
