h a l f b a k e r y"Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!"
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
I am happy to say that I have a wealth of ignorance about
the soapbox derby, but I believe that it is a challenge to
produce the fastest car powered solely by gravity, running
down an incline.
So.
How about having quite large (but light) wheels, with
toothed (I may mean splined) axles.
The vehicle body has,
on its undernetherparts, four vertically mounted racks (as
in rack-and-pinion) which engage with the toothed axles.
At the beginning of the race, the body (and driver) are
raised to the maximum height permitted by the racks.
Upon being released, the weight of the body and passenger
drive the racks downward, thereby turning the wheels.
The device is still gravity powered, but the weight of the
driver falls through a greater distance, thereby giving
additional power.
Red Bull Soapbox Races
https://en.wikipedi...d_Bull_Soapbox_Race
Downhill all the way. [8th of 7, May 01 2018]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Destination URL.
E.g., https://www.coffee.com/
Description (displayed with the short name and URL.)
|
| |
Also I think you'd want to go through a whatsis
[edit: Brachistochrone] curve with the body while the wheels went with the course. |
|
| |
Like all brilliant innovations in racing, it's totally
against the rules. Soapbox cars are not allowed to
incorporate any form of propulsion device. |
|
| |
It's still a cool idea. [+] |
|
| |
//Soapbox cars are not allowed to incorporate any
form of propulsion device.// Well, that's another
world record placed on the high shelf. |
|
| |
I imagine there is a height restriction otherwise one hundred foot high contraptions would abound... eh not a bad idea as it turns out. Un croissant au naturelle. |
|
| |
Perhaps a version of a soapbox racer where the driver is flung horizontally into the car at a very high rate of speed just as the starting gun goes off. |
|
| |
I went and looked up the rules. |
|
| |
There is very little discretion in the construction. You have to use certain specific mechanical parts and no others. |
|
| |
Ironically, not with soap boxes? |
|
| |
What we need, clearly, is a HalfBakery soapbox
derby. A standard course would be provided.
Rules: |
|
| |
(1) The clock starts with the driver standing on
the ground beside their vehicle, and stops when
they cross the finish line. |
|
| |
(2) The vehicle may not contain any stored energy
in the form of previously tensioned springs;
batteries; fuels; compressed gas reservoirs;
charged capacitors; antimatter etc. |
|
| |
I think two rules is probably as many as are
needed here. Thus, a rack-and-pinion drive would
be acceptable, as long as the driver's time taken
to climb up into the cab is included (as it would
be). Equally, the driver is welcome to pedal or
row the vehicle; or to perform rapid
autoliposuction and thereby fuel a diesel engine. |
|
| |
Human muscle power is a form of stored energy. For that
matter, so is human fat. |
|
| |
And so is gravitational potential energy by virtue of
the gradient. |
|
| |
Listen pal, don't get all sciency with me. Hare-brained
clockwork mechanisms are one thing, but if you add muscle
power it's just a funny-looking pedalcar race. |
|
| |
I think you'll find it's "sciencey"... |
|
| |
Are you challenging a very-nearly-professional writer to a
quasi-spelling match? |
|
| |
If it had an engine, and an extra bulge to accommodate it, would it be a quasi-motor? |
|
| |
Because, by dint of it not being found in the OED, 'sciency'
(alt. sp. 'sciencey') is a quasi-word. |
|
| |
You could potentially fuel an engine by burning your own wooden chassis. |
|
| |
You could, but I think in that case the wooden
chassis would constitute "fuel". You'd also have to
include steaming up time. |
|
| |
And the only way to have anything left in which to cross
the finish line would be to build the chassis with more
wood than necessary, which would make the racer heavier,
requiring a larger motor to propel it, which would require
a greater volume of wood for fuel, which would make the
racer heavier... |
|
| |
I see swing-steer propulsion hasn't been ruled out, yet (the
kids toys that you steer left and right hard, and it makes
them go along). |
|
| |
May the driver contain or invoke any stored energy besides that which is biologically occuring? |
|
| |
I actually built a Soap Box Derby car once. The axles and
wheels are provided, and thus are standard for all entrants.
There is no way to do anything like what is suggested in the
main text here, or what [Ling] mentioned in an anno. |
|
| |
The Red Bull soapbox races <link> leave the details of the vehicle almost entirely to the discretion of the builders. Three and four wheel designs are permitted. The main criterion seems to be that the axles are unpowered. |
|
| |
However, additional propulsion by the "Fred Flintstone running feet" method has been observed on more than one occasion. |
|
| |
// The main criterion seems to be that the axles are
unpowered.// So, basically similar to an Airbus A380? Or,
indeed, the Valiant tank? |
|
| |
The axles are unpowered, but may I place a large magnet at the end? Or a fan at the beginning? Or on the vehicle? |
|
| |
You'll have to ask the organizers. |
|
| |
// So, basically similar to an Airbus A380? // |
|
| |
No. Soapbox racers are generally constructed in sheds by complete amateurs with only the vaguest ideas of mechanical engineering, often valuing appearance above functionality. |
|
| |
They travel relatively slowly, and rarely leave the ground for more than a few seconds, usually unintentionally. Many crash or disintegrate before reaching the finish line. |
|
| |
However, since they are almost entirely devoid of carbon fibre, die-by-wire avionics, badly tested software, flammable liquid fuels, and lithium-ion batteries, as a form of transport they are completely superior to the A380 - or any other current commercial aircraft - in every meaningful respect. |
|
| |
// Or, indeed, the Valiant tank? // |
|
| |
Good-ish idea at the time, but doomed to failure. |
|
| |