Gravity Vehicle C

[haverstall]

I think they used the regionals increments, and the target distance was 7.5 m. Speaking of scores, our raw score was 208.5. Can anyone post the raw scores they've been getting in this event if possible? I want to see if that's a decent number.

[sj]

Today we tested our vehicle at 7.5 meters for a basis of comparison.

Predicted Time: 2.4 secs

Actual Time: 2.2 secs

Distance :11mm

Final Score: 126

We tested on the same floor (dusty concrete) as we had calibrated on so that probably helped our accuracy over testing on an unknown surface.

[illusionist]

Why did you guys test on dusty concrete? I mean, almost no competition is run on that kind of flooring, right?
But, that's a really impressive time. Are you using bearings?

[sj]

Why did you guys test on dusty concrete? I mean, almost no competition is run on that kind of flooring, right?
But, that's a really impressive time. Are you using bearings?

So as for the concrete, we just finished the build process and we figured that since we are off for winter break and do no have access to long stretches of any other type of floor we might as well test for the sake of getting results to improve the car and also just in case (our regional supervisors have awkward moments and most of them probably dont read the rules very carefully). Either way we are prepared if they ever run the event on dusty concrete.

As for the bearings, yes we are using bearings.

[haverstall]

Today we tested our vehicle at 7.5 meters for a basis of comparison.

Predicted Time: 2.4 secs

Actual Time: 2.2 secs

Distance :11mm

Final Score: 126

We tested on the same floor (dusty concrete) as we had calibrated on so that probably helped our accuracy over testing on an unknown surface.

2.2 seconds?!?! WOW.....

/me gets back to work on the vehicle...

[illusionist]

Today we tested our vehicle at 7.5 meters to make you guys feel bad.
Predicted Time: 2.4 secs
Actual Time: 2.2 secs
Distance :11mm
Final Score: 126
We tested on the same floor (dusty concrete) as we had calibrated on so that probably helped our accuracy over testing on an unknown surface.

Fix'd.

[sk17]

a suggestion as far as reducing recoil for the string method for breaking, its kind of tedious but it works well so far (only tested a few times though). if you put a spool on each axel and put spokes on the end of one, you can attach a two dowels connected to each other by a hinge to the chassis near the end with the spokes. the spokes wil slap one of the dowels while going forward but if it tries to go back ward it will be stopped. when i used it it had absolutely no recoil, but when it goes different distances it may have some but it would be limited. i hope this helps if more clarification is needed i can post a picture.

[fishman100]

7.5 meters
2.2 secs

2.2 seconds for 7.5 meters... O.o

a suggestion as far as reducing recoil for the string method for breaking, its kind of tedious but it works well so far (only tested a few times though). if you put a spool on each axel and put spokes on the end of one, you can attach a two dowels connected to each other by a hinge to the chassis near the end with the spokes. the spokes wil slap one of the dowels while going forward but if it tries to go back ward it will be stopped. when i used it it had absolutely no recoil, but when it goes different distances it may have some but it would be limited. i hope this helps if more clarification is needed i can post a picture.

From the description it sounds like you attach spokes (but IDK where you could buy that) to the end of the dowel. Then you attach 2 dowels on either side of the spokes to prevent the vehicle from rolling back. Is this correct?

A picture would be great if you could provide one.

[sk17]

7.5 meters
2.2 secs

2.2 seconds for 7.5 meters... O.o

a suggestion as far as reducing recoil for the string method for breaking, its kind of tedious but it works well so far (only tested a few times though). if you put a spool on each axel and put spokes on the end of one, you can attach a two dowels connected to each other by a hinge to the chassis near the end with the spokes. the spokes wil slap one of the dowels while going forward but if it tries to go back ward it will be stopped. when i used it it had absolutely no recoil, but when it goes different distances it may have some but it would be limited. i hope this helps if more clarification is needed i can post a picture.

From the description it sounds like you attach spokes (but IDK where you could buy that) to the end of the dowel. Then you attach 2 dowels on either side of the spokes to prevent the vehicle from rolling back. Is this correct?

A picture would be great if you could provide one.

i just made the spokes from dowels and the hinge form masking tape
http://i.imgur.com/HHmUh.jpg

[haverstall]

Today we tested our vehicle at 7.5 meters
Predicted Time: 2.4 secs
Actual Time: 2.2 secs
Distance :11mm
Final Score: 126

Don't want to be too nosy about your design, but I'm wondering how much weight do you have on it? Is it a light or heavy vehicle?

Still astounded by that time...