| |
In lugnet.technic, Mark Tarrabain wrote:
> Brian H. Nielsen wrote:
> > I've tested it, and it does work. I don't know how many switches the
> > compressing piston can switch, but the force exerted seems capable enough.
>
> I wasn't trying to imply that you hadn't actually tried it... I was only
> suggesting that I didn't think that pistons being driven solely by the
> compression of air created by the expanding of other pistons would be
> strong enough to compress multiple others when there was a load on them
> (you gave no mention of load testing). As both yourself and another
> respondent pointed out, I see now that the only piston that actually
> *needs* to get compressed is the one that was formerly expanded, so I
> can see now that as long as the loads aren't too heavy, it shouldn't
> matter. I was originally misunderstanding the idea you were getting at,
> and I'm sorry if my questioning it caused any offense.
No offense was taken. My appologies if I gave that impression.
I just completed some load testing on the compressing piston. It easily
switched 2 switches, was just barely able to switch 3 switches, and clearly
couldn't do 4 switches.
Since some switches work more easily than others it would seem prudent to
choose those that work most easily when this technic is used. My test used the
only spare switches I had and the 3rd and fourth were noticably stiffer than the
first 2.
> What I do find interesting is that the pressure produced by the
> expansion of one piston probably would not normally be sufficient to
> compress another piston where the combined load of both pistons is too
> great to have otherwise been driven by a single piston. Your idea of
> connecting them while they are all retracted to create a slight bias to
> that end is ingenious, IMO, and may go some lengths to overcoming that
> limitation. I'd be curious to know by how much.
The work load done by the expanding piston is independent of the work load
done by the compressing piston. As long as the expanding piston expands fully
the air pressure in the compression loop will exert its maximum force on the
piston being compressed. If the expanding piston does not expand fully then
there is insufficient air pressure driving the expansion.
Brian
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: A better full adder!
|
| (...) As a follow-up, over time the air pressure in the closed compression loop drops due to slow leakages, so it requires periodic recharging. One way is to remove and reseat the tubing, but a beter way is to add another T and a hand pump to the (...) (21 years ago, 2-Jul-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: A better full adder!
|
| (...) I wasn't trying to imply that you hadn't actually tried it... I was only suggesting that I didn't think that pistons being driven solely by the compression of air created by the expanding of other pistons would be strong enough to compress (...) (21 years ago, 1-Jul-03, to lugnet.technic, lugnet.robotics)
|
27 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
|
|
|
|
Active threads in Robotics
|
|
|
|
|
|
