Scioly.org

For our shielding, it's quarter inch so if you try really hard to shove the dowel in and Bend the metal a little it will go in. Is this ok? Has anyone experienced any problems with similar shielding? I think the point of it is safety, so I'd imagine it's ok...

Ashernoel wrote:For our shielding, it's quarter inch so if you try really hard to shove the dowel in and Bend the metal a little it will go in. Is this ok? Has anyone experienced any problems with similar shielding? I think the point of it is safety, so I'd imagine it's ok...

You might want to get some smaller shielding just to be safe (door screens work well), but as long as you can't stick your pinky into the propeller, it should be ok.

Regarding longer run times, the biggest problem with Hovercraft as compared to MagLev is that the Hovercraft track is unpredictable. With a rough enough track, the force of static friction could be too large to allow the Hovercraft to go slowly enough. Of course, this would affect all teams, but it is still annoying. MagLev didn't really have that problem.

MIScioly wrote:Regarding longer run times, the biggest problem with Hovercraft as compared to MagLev is that the Hovercraft track is unpredictable. With a rough enough track, the force of static friction could be too large to allow the Hovercraft to go slowly enough. Of course, this would affect all teams, but it is still annoying. MagLev didn't really have that problem.

"Technically" the surface shouldn't matter because with a skirt design with little to no friction, the surface shouldn't matter, as long as it is flat. That is what real world hovercrafts are made to do, go on many different surfaces easily. But as for many of our applications, you're right, there is a bit of unpredictability. That's the fun of science olympiad.

cheese wrote:

MIScioly wrote:Regarding longer run times, the biggest problem with Hovercraft as compared to MagLev is that the Hovercraft track is unpredictable. With a rough enough track, the force of static friction could be too large to allow the Hovercraft to go slowly enough. Of course, this would affect all teams, but it is still annoying. MagLev didn't really have that problem.

"Technically" the surface shouldn't matter because with a skirt design with little to no friction, the surface shouldn't matter, as long as it is flat. That is what real world hovercrafts are made to do, go on many different surfaces easily. But as for many of our applications, you're right, there is a bit of unpredictability. That's the fun of science olympiad.

It also makes tournaments much more nerve-racking! The good thing about Hovercraft compared to MagLev is that the tracks don't cost excessive amounts of money, which was a pain for the ESs, as well as competitors. I personally doubt that the Nats supervisor would build a track with that high a mu, because, at least from my experience at MIT for Div C, he really knew what he was doing.

antoine_ego wrote:

cheese wrote:

MIScioly wrote:Regarding longer run times, the biggest problem with Hovercraft as compared to MagLev is that the Hovercraft track is unpredictable. With a rough enough track, the force of static friction could be too large to allow the Hovercraft to go slowly enough. Of course, this would affect all teams, but it is still annoying. MagLev didn't really have that problem.

"Technically" the surface shouldn't matter because with a skirt design with little to no friction, the surface shouldn't matter, as long as it is flat. That is what real world hovercrafts are made to do, go on many different surfaces easily. But as for many of our applications, you're right, there is a bit of unpredictability. That's the fun of science olympiad.

It also makes tournaments much more nerve-racking! The good thing about Hovercraft compared to MagLev is that the tracks don't cost excessive amounts of money, which was a pain for the ESs, as well as competitors. I personally doubt that the Nats supervisor would build a track with that high a mu, because, at least from my experience at MIT for Div C, he really knew what he was doing.

I think I read somewhere on here that the Nats supervisor will bring his own tracks that he used at MIT, but I could be wrong.

I have a question. Does anyone know how to tell the difference between a brushed vs brushless motor? Also, are most small 3-9v hobby motors brushed? I am trying this hobby motor for thrust and it doesn't say whether it is brushed or brushless.


Here are the only specs:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4WYI3 ... sp=sharing

cheese wrote:I have a question. Does anyone know how to tell the difference between a brushed vs brushless motor? Also, are most small 3-9v hobby motors brushed? I am trying this hobby motor for thrust and it doesn't say whether it is brushed or brushless.


Here are the only specs:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4WYI3 ... sp=sharing

Thats brushed

windu34 wrote:

cheese wrote:I have a question. Does anyone know how to tell the difference between a brushed vs brushless motor? Also, are most small 3-9v hobby motors brushed? I am trying this hobby motor for thrust and it doesn't say whether it is brushed or brushless.


Here are the only specs:https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B4WYI3 ... sp=sharing

Thats brushed

thanks, btw it's actually a very powerful motor if you mount a 5 inch 3 propeller blade to it.

(Deleted)