|
Re: Examples of when it is not advantageous to be lightweight
Quote:
Originally Posted by EricH
[snip]
That said... maybe one of the REAL old-timers on here can give us a rundown of the classic award, "Flyweight in the Finals"!
|
Ugh, I'm not a REAL old-timer... but I do remember "Featherweight in the Finals" that our iconic robot, Grace Hopper, won in 2000. If memory serves (and it might not) Featherweight in the Finals was awarded to the lightest robot in either the final bracket or all of the eliminations.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Hill
I'm not sure I follow the logic here. I'm saying use the same shape, just a thinner material. Also, I would also say that compressive strength IS related to cross sectional area. It uses the same equations as in tension. Also, in terms of buckling, the point at which something will buckle is related to the cross-sectional area.
|
Sort of... it's related to the cross-section inertia of the beam, strictly speaking, not the area. Compressive stress IS related to the XC area, but generally speaking this is very rarely the limiting factor.
__________________
Theory is a nice place, I'd like to go there one day, I hear everything works there.
Maturity is knowing you were an idiot, common sense is trying to not be an idiot, wisdom is knowing that you will still be an idiot.
Last edited by JamesCH95 : 14-11-2014 at 15:06.
Reason: Edited because I TOTALLY misread OP.
|