Trajectory B/C

starpug
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 932
Joined: April 5th, 2008, 6:51 pm
Division: Grad
State: ME
Location: Waterville, Maine

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by starpug » April 11th, 2009, 4:37 pm

hbk.showstopper wrote:okay.....dumbell weights
Those are stackable? and cheap? I'm sorry you can use anything you want but just a suggestion about using bricks.
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain

User avatar
hbk.showstopper
Member
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: April 14th, 2008, 5:58 pm
Division: B

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by hbk.showstopper » April 11th, 2009, 4:40 pm

yeah okay thanks and sorry about offending bricks
Definition of No Nuff
Def. #1-Not Enough
Def. #2-Too Much

starpug
Admin Emeritus
Admin Emeritus
Posts: 932
Joined: April 5th, 2008, 6:51 pm
Division: Grad
State: ME
Location: Waterville, Maine

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by starpug » April 11th, 2009, 4:46 pm

hbk.showstopper wrote:yeah okay thanks and sorry about offending bricks
You didn't offend bricks, I just thought you should give examples when you claim there to be "other materials" and not give any examples.
Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please. - Mark Twain

User avatar
Liv
Member
Member
Posts: 274
Joined: December 31st, 2008, 8:20 am
Division: C
State: NY
Location: Port Washington, NY

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by Liv » April 11th, 2009, 5:24 pm

starpug wrote:
Lily Essence wrote:You could try filling the PVC pipes with water. That way, your device could weigh more without you having to put weights on it.

If you do go with weights, go with exercise freeweights or dumbells. If you don't have those, go with sand. Water weighs too little, and it's more difficult to bring around.
What about bricks, I like them much better because they can be stacked and moved
Ya I saw one team do that, they said it was a real hassle to have to carry them around

rman
Member
Member
Posts: 59
Joined: February 6th, 2009, 2:09 am
Division: C

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by rman » April 13th, 2009, 1:04 pm

Some teams just make the trajectory device very heavy, so there is no need for ballast. It is also possible to balance the device so that a launch does not cause any movement of the device. Think of balance shafts in car engines, recoiless rifles (well the event coordinator may not like something shooting out the back of your device), and other F=MA balanced devices. Remember that you don't really care if the device moves in a predicatably way, or if it moves after the ball leaves.

User avatar
hbk.showstopper
Member
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: April 14th, 2008, 5:58 pm
Division: B

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by hbk.showstopper » April 13th, 2009, 7:56 pm

one team I saw made it heavy and it seemed easier but I'm not sure........it didn't seem like they were having a hard time though.
Definition of No Nuff
Def. #1-Not Enough
Def. #2-Too Much

cypressfalls Robert
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 499
Joined: January 6th, 2009, 7:54 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX
Location: डार्क सब्रे के पीछे O.o
Contact:

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by cypressfalls Robert » April 13th, 2009, 8:00 pm

Did they just use heavy buiding materials.....or....what?

User avatar
hbk.showstopper
Member
Member
Posts: 159
Joined: April 14th, 2008, 5:58 pm
Division: B

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by hbk.showstopper » April 13th, 2009, 8:15 pm

I'm not sure how they made it that heavy......however their catapault was one of the smallest at the comp.......I wish I asked them but I didn't know what school they were.....
Definition of No Nuff
Def. #1-Not Enough
Def. #2-Too Much

cypressfalls Robert
Exalted Member
Exalted Member
Posts: 499
Joined: January 6th, 2009, 7:54 pm
Division: Grad
State: TX
Location: डार्क सब्रे के पीछे O.o
Contact:

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by cypressfalls Robert » April 14th, 2009, 3:51 pm

Well, we just use bricks and it works fine for us.....just wanted to see what others were using thanks :)

Sunshine
Member
Member
Posts: 40
Joined: April 15th, 2009, 6:14 pm
Division: C
State: TX

Re: Trajectory B/C

Post by Sunshine » April 15th, 2009, 7:28 pm

Is there a way to keep the surgical tubing from stretching out too much? With my trajectory machine, I started by testing the 2 meters, and moved on until I reached 8. Then I took a few shots at the closer targets again just to make sure the data was correct and so I could test a few raised targets, but turns out, all the data pretty much went to waste because the surgical tubing stretched out while testing the 7 and 8 meters.

My partner and I decided to not test it in such long stretches to give the tubing some time to unstretch (not sure if that's a word), but I'm still worried that the surgical tubing'll still stretch out... so, help please?
Hi. I have a messed up sleep cycle. Thank you, scioly.

Post Reply

Return to “2009 Build Events”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest