Scioly.org

Hmm if you ask me 3/16" square is sufficient. Maybe your pieces were on the weaker side. I would also try increasing the amount of bracing in your compression thingy.

OK... So... for what it is worth, it appears that we have either peaked way early this year, or the early expectations have been way understated. From what I'm hearing, we are already seeing Div C booms in the 1500, 1600, and even 1800 ranges in some of the early Invitationals! So far, the best Div B scores I've heard of have been in the 1200 to 1300 range, but I'm sure they are capable of much higher scores as well!

MadCow2357 wrote:Hmm if you ask me 3/16" square is sufficient. Maybe your pieces were on the weaker side. I would also try increasing the amount of bracing in your compression thingy.

Mad,
The size, weight, and stiffness of the compression beam will depend on how it is braced. The more bracing used from one beam to the other, the narrower, lighter, and flexible the beams can be horizontally. The more bracing used vertically the more you can reduce the height of the beams.

Look at a boomilever like you would a football team... You may have a rockstar QB, but without an offensive line, he will not succeed... Same in reverse... A great line does not make a great backfield. A great offense also needs a great defense to will... If you are not into sports metaphors, go with the weakest link thing... All parts of the boom need to function together. A really great boom goes BOOM all together at the same time!

dholdgreve wrote:

MadCow2357 wrote:Hmm if you ask me 3/16" square is sufficient. Maybe your pieces were on the weaker side. I would also try increasing the amount of bracing in your compression thingy.

Mad,
The size, weight, and stiffness of the compression beam will depend on how it is braced. The more bracing used from one beam to the other, the narrower, lighter, and flexible the beams can be horizontally. The more bracing used vertically the more you can reduce the height of the beams.

Look at a boomilever like you would a football team... You may have a rockstar QB, but without an offensive line, he will not succeed... Same in reverse... A great line does not make a great backfield. A great offense also needs a great defense to will... If you are not into sports metaphors, go with the weakest link thing... All parts of the boom need to function together. A really great boom goes BOOM all together at the same time!

Good analogy! Always knew a structure was as strong as its weakest point, but never thought of it as a football team . I was assuming based on information I gathered from watching his video, and compression parts seemed to need strengthening.

MadCow2357 wrote:

dholdgreve wrote:

MadCow2357 wrote:Hmm if you ask me 3/16" square is sufficient. Maybe your pieces were on the weaker side. I would also try increasing the amount of bracing in your compression thingy.

Mad,
The size, weight, and stiffness of the compression beam will depend on how it is braced. The more bracing used from one beam to the other, the narrower, lighter, and flexible the beams can be horizontally. The more bracing used vertically the more you can reduce the height of the beams.

Look at a boomilever like you would a football team... You may have a rockstar QB, but without an offensive line, he will not succeed... Same in reverse... A great line does not make a great backfield. A great offense also needs a great defense to will... If you are not into sports metaphors, go with the weakest link thing... All parts of the boom need to function together. A really great boom goes BOOM all together at the same time!

Good analogy! Always knew a structure was as strong as its weakest point, but never thought of it as a football team . I was assuming based on information I gathered from watching his video, and compression parts seemed to need strengthening.

It may not be a matter of strengthening the compression parts, just adding bracing a little closer together in the correct plane.

Apparently the winner at Portage Invitational had an efficiency of 1800

For "Inquiring Minds" that must know, for Div B Booms at Northmont Invitational this past Saturday
1st Place .................1,780
2nd Place.................1,515
3rd Place..................1,485
4th Place .................1,395
5th Place..................1,376
6th Place..................1,372
7th Place..................1,266
8th Place..................1,144

So... Where would you have placed, guys?
For those that were there, congrats! Well Done!
For those that were not there.... We missed you!

Oh Ya... I believe Div C Winner was about 1,356

dholdgreve wrote:For "Inquiring Minds" that must know, for Div B Booms at Northmont Invitational this past Saturday
1st Place .................1,780
2nd Place.................1,515
3rd Place..................1,485
4th Place .................1,395
5th Place..................1,376
6th Place..................1,372
7th Place..................1,266
8th Place..................1,144

So... Where would you have placed, guys?
For those that were there, congrats! Well Done!
For those that were not there.... We missed you!

Oh Ya... I believe Div C Winner was about 1,356

drcubbin wrote:

dholdgreve wrote:For "Inquiring Minds" that must know, for Div B Booms at Northmont Invitational this past Saturday
1st Place .................1,780
2nd Place.................1,515
3rd Place..................1,485
4th Place .................1,395
5th Place..................1,376
6th Place..................1,372
7th Place..................1,266
8th Place..................1,144

So... Where would you have placed, guys?
For those that were there, congrats! Well Done!
For those that were not there.... We missed you!

Oh Ya... I believe Div C Winner was about 1,356

Oof
If my team went, i could have gotten second

this is probably the last i'm gonna tell scores on the forums because I would rather keep them secret from now on. The boomilever I just test got 2083.3, it was 7.2 grams and got full hold