Scioly.org

The idea is to make it easier for the judges to see that no "push" is given to the vehicle. A push would use energy that didn't come from the mousetrap to propel the vehicle.

On the topic of the class of vehicles. I built a version of Class 1.

The first trap was wound up, and as it traveled out, it would wind up the string on the second axle. Then the second trap would trigger and it would travel back to the starting line.

I took 3rd at states with this design.

Flavorflav wrote:In other words, you can't have the mousetrap sideways, or bypass the original trigger and replace it with a horizontal trigger. The pencil or dowel has to move down (or up, I suppose) to trip the mousetrap. At least, that's how I read it.

So the pencil is up, but the mousetrap is still flat? So this won't change most designs then?

I hope so. I don't know how to handle a vertical mousetrap

fleet130 wrote:The idea is to make it easier for the judges to see that no "push" is given to the vehicle. A push would use energy that didn't come from the mousetrap to propel the vehicle.

That's good to know other people noticed that there were teams that gave their vehicle a little boost to start their vehicle. I did see a few teams that because they hit down on the trigger so hard that it acts to push the vehicle a little [which is illegal even if a team doesn't mean to do it still happens].

Also has anyone considered having some sort of small strong spring that will only stretch a little, what I'm talking about is have the spring only stretch right as it approaches the reverse line slowing the vehicle then the stored energy will help start get the vehicle going as it reverses. Using the spring all the way back has large friction issues but what about just using energy of the spring for a short distance.

I wanted to pose that question because I know method 3 will be what a large portion of teams will use. It would be best to if a team was going to invest a large amount of time in the early part of the season to try to make a few designs to see what works and what didn’t then refine your best vehicle into the one that works the best. I don’t think too many teams design multiple vehicles [its expensive and time intensive] but with each vehicle that you make you will find something that you can improve on for the next. So if you are not satisfied with the results that you are getting and as long as it’s still early in the season don’t be afraid to make a new vehicle.

packer-backer91 wrote:

fleet130 wrote:The idea is to make it easier for the judges to see that no "push" is given to the vehicle. A push would use energy that didn't come from the mousetrap to propel the vehicle.

That's good to know other people noticed that there were teams that gave their vehicle a little boost to start their vehicle. I did see a few teams that because they hit down on the trigger so hard that it acts to push the vehicle a little [which is illegal even if a team doesn't mean to do it still happens].

Also has anyone considered having some sort of small strong spring that will only stretch a little, what I'm talking about is have the spring only stretch right as it approaches the reverse line slowing the vehicle then the stored energy will help start get the vehicle going as it reverses. Using the spring all the way back has large friction issues but what about just using energy of the spring for a short distance.

I wanted to pose that question because I know method 3 will be what a large portion of teams will use. It would be best to if a team was going to invest a large amount of time in the early part of the season to try to make a few designs to see what works and what didn’t then refine your best vehicle into the one that works the best. I don’t think too many teams design multiple vehicles [its expensive and time intensive] but with each vehicle that you make you will find something that you can improve on for the next. So if you are not satisfied with the results that you are getting and as long as it’s still early in the season don’t be afraid to make a new vehicle.

First off, this year, class 2 is even less useful, since you only have 3 m to "charge" the spring, but it still needs to go 7. I suppose a composite system could work?

winneratlife wrote:
First off, this year, class 2 is even less useful, since you only have 3 m to "charge" the spring, but it still needs to go 7. I suppose a composite system could work?

That’s my point use the short track to "charge" a spring that is only used to get vehicle going on the way back and then continue like the traditional method 3. I thought about this year with the rules being better for what I proposed to do. My point is that a vehicle will have to slow down to reverse [so what I was thinking was to "charge the spring for 1.5m to the reverse line]. So in theory this could be very beneficial thing to try, because you want to get very close to the 3m line it would be wise to go slow thus not go over any more than you have to [lower speed means less momentum that must be overcome to stop and reverse]. The point of this design is to get a little boost for the way back and doubling as a break to slow the vehicle down at the 3m line to reverse [so you get something out of having change direction].

I don’t know really how effective this will be but it's something new for people to try. Every time you have to slow down you are wasting energy maybe with this design you can recover some of this waste and use it to your advantage. Even if you get 1m of power from the spring that helps accelerate your vehicle to its top speed in a shorter distance thus decreasing the time it will take to get to the -4m line. Also doing this will have its share of disadvantages as well; like what if the spring stops the vehicle before the 3m line or how to get the pull on the spring identical for each run [something like string will need to be attached to the spring on one side and to the axel on the other thus allowing spring to power the axel some].

Hmm, a composite system would probably work nicely.

So in essence, the spring is a break that also stores a small amount of energy to assist in returning the vehicle.

This may be a stupid question, but how are you guys attaching your lever arm to your mousetraps? last year we had a really inelegant and weighty hotglue-string solution, and we can't seem to find dowels that can bridge the two lever arms to superglue without weighing the car down...

Gooblah wrote:This may be a stupid question, but how are you guys attaching your lever arm to your mousetraps? last year we had a really inelegant and weighty hotglue-string solution, and we can't seem to find dowels that can bridge the two lever arms to superglue without weighing the car down...

Zip Ties. They work well.

Gooblah wrote:This may be a stupid question, but how are you guys attaching your lever arm to your mousetraps? last year we had a really inelegant and weighty hotglue-string solution, and we can't seem to find dowels that can bridge the two lever arms to superglue without weighing the car down...

Me? I soldered it a metal bar to both traps.

Also, packer, building on the composite thing, would it really be that useful? After all, it can only yield a part of the energy you put into it, so even though it speeds you up on the way back, it also slows you down MORE on the way in, does it not?