From the diagram I think you can assume direct proportionality in this case!
From the diagram I think you can assume direct proportionality in this case!
Agreed, but until the joints do pull out it is going to do better than the unbraced ones. They didn't ask if they were sensible designs!
Your point is valid, and inablity to search text is a major nuisance even if one can see the pdf. But in this case the text consists of short, simple questions about hand-drawn sketches of mechanisms, and the text would really not help at all.
It was a while ago. I'll ask him but I suspect seeing an experiment demonstrated once is the same as having personally tried it and got it wrong many times. For instance the tent peg question.
A bit of experience with Meccano would help a great deal, to understand the importance of diagonal cross-bracing of a rectangular shape (eg the gate in one of the questions) or to understand meshing of a train of gears. Sadly modern children don't seem to "play" with Meccano any more. I use the word "play" in its widest sense to mean build things and work out by trial and error what is good and what is bad and how to improve what is bad.
The questions that I need to think about are the tension/compression forces in various struts on lattice structures, and which will be largest/smallest. I did a bit of mech eng on my elec eng course, but I don't know as much or know the rigorous analysis techniques that a civil eng would know.
The joints were clearly pins able to take compression or tension as well.
The one with the weight hanging off rope at the top of the well? There's enough information there.
Lego Technic offers the same opportunity.
Here are my answers with reasoning:
I'm open to argument/correction on some of them!
You do not need to you can see where the mark is rubbed out.
I had in mind the nautical capstan with 4 men and "Which man would have to work hardest to turn the capstan alone?" ISTM "hardest" is ambiguous between (a) the force exerted (highest for shortest lever), (b) the energy required per unit time (ditto if they walk at the same speed - linear not angular - when walking alone), and (c) the energy required per revolution (same for all).
yep. That was another one I noticed
Then there were the eccentric weights rolling down an inclined plane. Well it depends HOW eccentric the weights were and how steep the plane was.
No Bill, It does not
No, Bill. the joints are tenoned and pinned . They cant pull out.
This is utterly basic.
No, I think not the capstan.
The point of a capstan is to allow leverage and the further from the hub you are the less force is needed for a given action
A perfectly valid answer IMHO!
>
No it's fine to do it the other way if you don't mind the gate pulling apart when a child swings on it.
Granted that is the traditional way,
Because it works much better. There's a reason for most traditions.
How would you do that? Very difficult to get the same strength as doing it the correct way would.
If it relies more heavily on the fixings it's not as good a design. If extra stress can be avoided it should be.
It's the correct answer but it shows that the author has no idea about basic joinery techniques.
Bill
No, it just shows that the author was an ignoramus. I bet he didn't do woodwork at school.
Bill
Another question with no unconditionally correct answer. It would depend partly on the ground conditions, as anyone who has done a lot of tenting would know full well.
bill
Ah, right, fair enough.
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required