Designs

[Balsa Man]

Yup, you got it.
Good luck.

[thsom]

I can't tell from the description & diagrams exactly what's going on in the 2 scenarios, but going back to basics:

The legs work as "stacked columns", braced intervals between bracing points (where the bracing locks that point of the leg in space) where the buckling strength in each interval depends on the length of the braced interval. If all braced intervals are the same, the overall leg will have the buckling strength of each of the braced intervals. If there's one or more braced intervals that are longer, they will have lower buckling strength, and the buckling strength of the overall leg will be that of the longer interval(s). Column strength vs length is an inverse square relationship. So, if a leg will hold 4.31kg at a braced interval of 3cm, it would only hold 3.17kg at a 3.5 cm interval

Does this same thing apply to a base? Say I had a base braced every 4, 4.5, 4.5, and then 5 cm with x's (order is bottom to top).

It would be better to have it braced every 4.5, 4.5, 4.5, and 4.5 cm, right?

[Balsa Man]

Correct.

[flyingwatermelon]

Anyone have any tips with how to deal with "cracked balsa". I bought some wood only to find out that some sections of the wood were diseased? or fractured and literally had a huge gash through it.

[Balsa Man]

Anyone have any tips with how to deal with "cracked balsa". I bought some wood only to find out that some sections of the wood were diseased? or fractured and literally had a huge gash through it.

Refund?

[flyingwatermelon]

Anyone have any tips with how to deal with "cracked balsa". I bought some wood only to find out that some sections of the wood were diseased? or fractured and literally had a huge gash through it.

Refund?

Is there a way to like patch it up though? It's already been integrated into my tower...luckily this isn't going to be the competition one but just curious.

[hpfananu]

So a few weeks ago I was watching that old Towers video that's in the SOINC store. There's one section where someone analyzes some of the first towers at the ?1994 competition. What was kind of interesting was that this person said that you should have bracings all meet at one point, similar to this.
(Mind the awful image but I think you can understand the idea)
Wouldn't this leave a lot of the section of the other legs unbraced? If this was done all around.
Instead, would

be beneficial instead? It doesn't leave more of the leg unbraced but they don't all meet at one point. Thoughts?

[flyingwatermelon]

So a few weeks ago I was watching that old Towers video that's in the SOINC store. There's one section where someone analyzes some of the first towers at the ?1994 competition. What was kind of interesting was that this person said that you should have bracings all meet at one point, similar to this.
(Mind the awful image but I think you can understand the idea)
Wouldn't this leave a lot of the section of the other legs unbraced? If this was done all around.
Instead, would

be beneficial instead? It doesn't leave more of the leg unbraced but they don't all meet at one point. Thoughts?

Yes. Technically having all the braces meet at one point is stronger but that doesn't mean its more efficient.

If I think about it conceptually, the one with all around braces is likely to be more efficient because although it has lower strength, it can be braced at shorter intervals without increasing the weight by a great deal.

If you really want to have the bracings all meet at one point and have superior strength, just go with X's.

[noobforce]

So a few weeks ago I was watching that old Towers video that's in the SOINC store. There's one section where someone analyzes some of the first towers at the ?1994 competition. What was kind of interesting was that this person said that you should have bracings all meet at one point, similar to this.
(Mind the awful image but I think you can understand the idea)
Wouldn't this leave a lot of the section of the other legs unbraced? If this was done all around.
Instead, would

be beneficial instead? It doesn't leave more of the leg unbraced but they don't all meet at one point. Thoughts?

Yes. Technically having all the braces meet at one point is stronger but that doesn't mean its more efficient.

If I think about it conceptually, the one with all around braces is likely to be more efficient because although it has lower strength, it can be braced at shorter intervals without increasing the weight by a great deal.

If you really want to have the bracings all meet at one point and have superior strength, just go with X's.

Yeah, wouldn't the second one have more torsion, similar to Z Bracings since they're only going in one direction?

[SLM]

So a few weeks ago I was watching that old Towers video that's in the SOINC store. There's one section where someone analyzes some of the first towers at the ?1994 competition. What was kind of interesting was that this person said that you should have bracings all meet at one point, similar to this.
(Mind the awful image but I think you can understand the idea)
Wouldn't this leave a lot of the section of the other legs unbraced? If this was done all around.
Instead, would

be beneficial instead? It doesn't leave more of the leg unbraced but they don't all meet at one point. Thoughts?

In terms of material usage, both patterns seem to use the same amount. In terms of strength, however, there are differences. Here is a simple analysis showing which pattern works better for the chimney and why.

A Comparison Between two Bracing Patterns