Lever Task

ScottMaurer19
Member
Member
Posts: 592
Joined: January 5th, 2017, 9:39 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lever Task

Post by ScottMaurer19 »

andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:Gears?
I assume that you meant if gears would count as a bunch of levers around a common axis. The answer is sort of. While a gear transferring force between 2 other gears can be seen as a bunch of first class levers, a gear transferring force to its axle would transfer it about its rotational axis, meaning that the load and the fulcrum are at the same spot, making their classification not possible. And besides, good luck convincing an ES that your gears are levers in the spirit of the competition.
^ agreed.
Solon '19 Captain, CWRU '23
2017 (r/s/n):
Hydro: 3/5/18
Robot Arm: na/1/1
Rocks: 1/1/1

2018 (r/s/n):
Heli: 2/1/7 
Herp: 1/4/4
Mission: 1/1/6
Rocks: 1/1/1
Eco: 6/3/9

2019 (r/s/n):
Fossils: 1/1/1
GLM: 1/1/1
Herp: 1/1/5
Mission: 1/1/3
WS: 4/1/10

Top 3 Medals: 144
Golds: 80
DrDaveV
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: September 27th, 2017, 2:05 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Lever Task

Post by DrDaveV »

I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
nicholasmaurer
Coach
Coach
Posts: 422
Joined: May 19th, 2017, 10:55 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 22 times

Re: Lever Task

Post by nicholasmaurer »

DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
You're not wrong. But it would be prudent to submit an FAQ and get official agreement before using this in your device and trying to convince an ES at competition.
Assistant Coach and Alumnus ('14) - Solon High School Science Olympiad
Tournament Director - Northeast Ohio Regional Tournament
Tournament Director - Solon High School Science Olympiad Invitational

Opinions expressed on this site are not official; the only place for official rules changes and FAQs is soinc.org.
andrew lorino
Member
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: November 4th, 2015, 4:00 pm
Division: C
State: NY
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Lever Task

Post by andrew lorino »

DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
ScottMaurer19
Member
Member
Posts: 592
Joined: January 5th, 2017, 9:39 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lever Task

Post by ScottMaurer19 »

andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
Especially when you can make the levers extremely small without gearing
Solon '19 Captain, CWRU '23
2017 (r/s/n):
Hydro: 3/5/18
Robot Arm: na/1/1
Rocks: 1/1/1

2018 (r/s/n):
Heli: 2/1/7 
Herp: 1/4/4
Mission: 1/1/6
Rocks: 1/1/1
Eco: 6/3/9

2019 (r/s/n):
Fossils: 1/1/1
GLM: 1/1/1
Herp: 1/1/5
Mission: 1/1/3
WS: 4/1/10

Top 3 Medals: 144
Golds: 80
DrDaveV
Member
Member
Posts: 21
Joined: September 27th, 2017, 2:05 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Lever Task

Post by DrDaveV »

andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
You obviously aren't creative enough and don't quite realize the possibilites. Also, I justed asked a simple question. Gears? Contrary what you think they can act as every class of level.
ScottMaurer19
Member
Member
Posts: 592
Joined: January 5th, 2017, 9:39 am
Division: Grad
State: OH
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 1 time

Re: Lever Task

Post by ScottMaurer19 »

DrDaveV wrote:
andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
You obviously aren't creative enough and don't quite realize the possibilites. Also, I justed asked a simple question. Gears? Contrary what you think they can act as every class of level.

I don't think he was saying that they are not levers or even not all three classes. I think his point--and I would have to agree--is that without a rule clarification or an ES who has an extensive knowledge of simple machines that it would be very difficult to have a geared action count as the three levers action. That being said you are welcome to try. We were simply offering our opinions and saying where we draw the line between creativity and staying within the rules.
Solon '19 Captain, CWRU '23
2017 (r/s/n):
Hydro: 3/5/18
Robot Arm: na/1/1
Rocks: 1/1/1

2018 (r/s/n):
Heli: 2/1/7 
Herp: 1/4/4
Mission: 1/1/6
Rocks: 1/1/1
Eco: 6/3/9

2019 (r/s/n):
Fossils: 1/1/1
GLM: 1/1/1
Herp: 1/1/5
Mission: 1/1/3
WS: 4/1/10

Top 3 Medals: 144
Golds: 80
andrew lorino
Member
Member
Posts: 66
Joined: November 4th, 2015, 4:00 pm
Division: C
State: NY
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 0

Re: Lever Task

Post by andrew lorino »

DrDaveV wrote:
andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
You obviously aren't creative enough and don't quite realize the possibilites. Also, I justed asked a simple question. Gears? Contrary what you think they can act as every class of level.
I am sorry if you took offense to my statement. I am only trying to help you make the best task possible. If you disagree with my assessment of your idea, feel free to do whatever you want. Personally, I find your statement on my creativity to be somewhat rude and inappropriate. If that was not your intent, I am sorry, but I would appreciate it if you stopped making such remarks.
Flavorflav
Member
Member
Posts: 1388
Joined: February 5th, 2006, 7:06 am
Division: Grad
State: NY
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 3 times

Re: Lever Task

Post by Flavorflav »

DrDaveV wrote:
andrew lorino wrote:
DrDaveV wrote:I agree that it may be difficult to convince an ES that a gear is a level.

I disagree with your statement that a gear is not a level. A force (effort) is applied tangentially to one side of the gear, the gear rotates about a pivot (the fulcrum) and results in applying a force tangentially to the other side of the gear (the load). A very simple 1st class level albeit with a IMA of 1. A gear is a level in every way and depending on how they are meshed can act as any of the three classes of levels.

Some may argue that gears are based on "wheel and axle" but a "wheel and axle" is in fact working as a level. In fact there are really only two simple machines, levels and inclines. All the others are based on those two.
I think that your argument has the same perspective problem as I previously described. Imagine 3 gears linked together in a V shape. Looking at it so the V is upright, the force and the load on the central gear are on opposite sides of the fulcrum, making it appear as a 1st class lever. But if you look at it tilted to one side, like this: _\, either the load or the force appears farther out than the other, making it appear second or third class. Or you could view each gear as many 3rd class levers sharing a common fulcrum, which defeats the argument. While your idea is interesting, its standing in the rules is far too shaky for me to recommend. Why risk losing points on a technicality when using 3 normal levers is just as simple?
You obviously aren't creative enough and don't quite realize the possibilites. Also, I justed asked a simple question. Gears? Contrary what you think they can act as every class of level.
Andrew is right, your tone is entirely inappropriate. Also, while I recognize that you are technically correct, absent a clarification I would not accept a gear as a lever at the regional competition at which I will be ES.
Northridge
Member
Member
Posts: 46
Joined: October 5th, 2016, 1:47 pm
Has thanked: 0
Been thanked: 9 times

Re: Lever Task

Post by Northridge »

"This is not an official clarification."

As someone who has judge these at all levels for many, many years, I would encourage you to not go the gear route. Even if you are technically right, I would not put in steps that ES have to question. Many times, it would end badly for you, as most judges are simply going to see gears and not levers. The levers are simple enough to do without having to make it questionable.
Locked

Return to “Mission Possible C”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests