Subject:
|
Re: rtlToronto19: Balance of Power and other upcoming events
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.org.ca.rtltoronto
|
Date:
|
Tue, 1 Mar 2005 20:51:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
799 times
|
| |
|
|
> 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
It is entirely possible that I missed your point entirely :)
But I do realize that the balancing will only work at one state. My
thought was that if the goal is to get your side tipped down a certain
distance, than just having a large bot mass is not necessarily
advantageous, as a faster, lighter bot could move it's mass to the end
of the beam well before the larger bot could get out to it's end.
This does depend on the inertia on the beam, of course.
My suggestion of setting the balance at the start point was so neither
side starts with an unfair advantage at the get go. Mass shifting is
one of the simplest strategies, and more mass=more downward force,
obviously.
I also son't like the idea of "loading up" the lighter bot with
bricks to make the contest even, as that may work against a lighter
competitor.
BTW, I did a quick search and found that an average 2x4 weighs around
1 lb per linear foot, give or take, depending on the wood species and
moisture content.
Don't know how that helps anyone trying to come up with ideas for a
weight limit....but it might put the relative weight issue into some
perspective.
-Rob A>
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
61 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
