Can This Create a Better Catapult Than Suspension?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 18 апр 2024
- Welcome to another episode of Trailmakers! Today I want to see if power couplers can be used to create a better catapult than the suspension catapult I built 2 years ago. Do they really have the power?
Tons More Trailmakers: • Is the World Ready for...
My Most Popular Videos (for whatever reason): • ScrapMan's Most Popular!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Want to support or interact with the channel more?
♦ Join the Discord: / discord
♦ Merch: scrapman.store
♦ Like my Tweets: / scrapmanyt
♦ My Doggos on Instagram: / scrap.dogs
♦ My RUclipsr Setup: www.amazon.com/shop/scrapman
♦ I Make Metal Music: / catarinth
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
About Trailmakers:
In the toughest motoring expedition in the universe, you and your friends will build your own vehicles to cross a dangerous wasteland. Explore, crash horribly, use your wits to build a better rig, and get as far as you can with whatever spare parts you find on your way.
Welcome to the Ultimate Expedition!
Journey over grueling mountains, hazardous swamps, and bone-dry deserts on a distant world far from civilization - it is just you, your fellow adventurers and the amazing, jet-powered hover-buggy you built yourself. Explore, crash your vehicle, build a better one, and get as far as you can with whatever spare parts you find along your way.
Trailmakers is about building very awesome vehicles and machines, but you don’t need an engineering degree to get started. The intuitive builder will get you going in no time. Everything you build is made from physical building blocks. Each block has unique features like shape, weight and functionality. They can be broken off, refitted and used to build something new. Individually the blocks are fairly simple, but combined the possibilities are endless.
Expedition Mode is the challenging campaign mode of Trailmakers. You are competing in an off-world rally expedition with only a few building blocks to get you started. You must build, tinker with and rebuild your machine to progress. Journey through a big world, overcome deep gorges, angry wildlife and dangerous weather to progress and find new parts that will juice up your machine. The world in Expedition Mode will test your survival skills and ingenuity.
Sandbox Mode is where you want to head for an unrestricted, sandbox, vehicle-building experience. Here you can build anything you can dream of, and play around with it in the world of Trailmakers. It is a great place to test out crazy machines, and experiment with the physics engine. With tons of different blocks, hinges, thrusters and interactive vehicle parts - the skybox is the limit.
Trailmakers is even more fun if you play it with other people. Build cool vehicles and compete in mini-game modes with your friends or other Trailmakers online. Build a helicopter, send it to your friend, and shoot them out of the sky. Put two seats on a tank, and let your friend control the turret. As we get further in Early Access development Expedition Mode will also be adapted to multiplayer.
Learn more about the game on www.playtrailmakers.com #scrapman #trailmakers 
Игры
You forgot a major change since making the first catapult: Aerodynamics! They completely changed air resistance behavior with the airborne update, and as a result it looks like both catapult are reaching a maximum range as the dynamite slows down from bad air resistance.
Try a javelin or spheroid launcher and see how far those streamlined projectiles can fly!
A sphere would be the best so it has okay aerodynamics no matter the direction, and a javelin would use a lot of energy correcting itself
That's not a topic you discuss everyday out of context. Imagine walking past someone in a grocery store with their friend and you hear, "So the aerodynamics of TNT really is not optimal for catapult use...."
@@steeljawX thats exactly what i talk about everyday with my friends in the grocery store. how is that not normal? My gay friend suggests a javelin or any rod, might try that.
@@scascspong5600 you sure hes talking about trailmakers😂
After thinking about it for a little bit, it actually makes sense that the shorter one would perform better in a way because the shorter one gets more tension per each individual power cupler, so you get more force out of each individual power cupler meaning that you will get more force per each individual one increasing your distance.
It makes sense. Think about the spring from a pen, Vs the floppiness of a slinky
btw u might want to correct those spelling errors (cupler) before a bunch of nerds correct you
@@lindseybergstrom found the nerd! 😅
You can even see how on the longer version, everything after the first 2 is basically resting. Maybe doubling it up and putting plates every 1-2 couplers could be powerful.
It may also be that less force is getting lost in a dampening effect from the flexing of the cupler, cant say for sure though.
With a slight tweak to the payload and a similar design. I can confirm that I was able to get a power coupler catapult that launched 9 testing area squares consistently. The couplers were in a 2longx2x4 formation, with a solid block connecting them, then another 1longx1x4 section before the payload and hook. The payload was also 4 tnt in a 2x2x2 cube, connected with 1 additional 1x2 connector. The rotating servos were also on 90% strength to prevent breaking it.
21:15 you also have to consider the power coupling is traveling sideways towards the suspensions target.
We got a yapper
Yeah, I was also noticing that, the trajectory of dynamite is going sideways making the distance a little farther, but then again the suspension will still win because of its rigidness
16:25 that reminds me of needing multi density materials, where the different materials apply varying tension to keep things bendable but elastic/ridged. Maybe different combinations of soft and stiff power couplers could manipulate the structure to stay straight as it throws.
one step further, also add in a layer of suspension.
From what I can see, it seems to be working by the same principles as a ruler on the edge of a desk. Having the ruler further off the edge of the desk makes it easier to bend and there’s less tension, due to there being more ruler available to bend, thus meaning the tension can be absorbed more effectively. If you shorten the length of the ruler, then it has much more resistance when you try to bend it, because there is less ruler to disperse all the force into. Therefore, shortening the length of the ruler would give it more tension. Less can, in fact, mean more in terms of physics.
Look up the relationships between shear, moment, angle, and deflection!
For situations like this or the ruler, you’re essentially making a cantilever beam where moment is resisted at one end and there is a force at the opposite end. To calculate deflection for that type of beam you use the equation [Force*Length^3]/[3*Elastic Modulus*Inertia].
For a ruler where the E.M. and inertia are the same, making the part hanging over the edge shorter means that it takes more force to deflect the same amount as if the amount hanging over the edge was longer. Of course, throwing an object also complicates this as you start dealing with moments because of different lengths in catapult arms, but overall we should see that the shorter arm does better when dealing with deflection-powered launches.
3:55 is when I wake up
😂
what's the stink?
😂
10:30 PUT DOWN SOME DAME DISTANCE MARKERS!!!
or a ruler
or just use the grids in the flatworld.
Ya, I was thinking, swap the TNT for a sphere of those... What are they called? Block attackers? The things that stick to the ground or other creations.
Then the projectiles would just stick where they land.
@@Nevir202 anchor blocks you mean?
One thing I wish you tried is to add a connection point between each set of power couplers. When you pull them back with the current design, they slide past each other. If you added a connection point, they would have to stretch much more and potentially yeet even farther
Hey ScrapMan, if you are interested in how projectiles fly and blowing stuff up. I recently made a mod for Scrap Mechanic that adds a block that fires explosive canisters with perfect trajectory at players. I could even include the math if you'd like.
I feel like no matter the power of the launch it will end up in same place because of drag. Maybe try launching darts
Trailmakers x Bloons collab?
I think if you adjusted the delay for the release on the power coupler slingshot it would help because from what i saw and how i processed it is like casting your line while fishing. If you release to early you get more air and less distance but if you release too late you just end up getting less distance
I commented this at 8 mins in and barely a minute later he adjusted it 😂
Have a space fight but the arena in full of dynamite
Have a fight using a cluster of dropped dynamite.
Or by chucking dynamite at each other
Sounds like trying to take off from earth because of the amount of space debris
0:59 ideally I WOAUAUAAAH!
Also I can only comment on other comments and on everey single video If I comment the comment shows for me but if I close the comments it immediately dissappears so if any tech expert k ows what's going on please help 🙏
One more improvement: have a solid arm on top of a few layers of suspensions/power couplings. Especially with the suspensions, you see that only the bottom ones really bend; the top ones stay almost straight and contribute little to the energy storage or release. Limiting the length of the suspensions/power coupler stacks allows you to get more of them in parallel with the same complexity budget, yet get the same (or even greater) overall arm length with a single column of cheap rigid pieces.
I mentioned this on your DNA video, but the modification you made at 8:29 really enforces my theory that power couplings don't compress linearly, as it looks like having them on the 'contracting' side of the catapult was causing too much resistance for the arm to fold all the way back. So, I threw together a quick hydraulic press-styled test rig to test that theory
With 12 power couplings in a circular pattern (using 4 big, rounded 2x1x2 corner pieces to make a circle and attaching a coupling to each node on one side), 4 sets of 4 pistons pressing them straight down into the ground, and about 4000 kilograms of weight weighing the base down, it seems that power couplings will compress linearly by only about 30% of their total length before hitting an invisible stopping point where they will no longer compress at all. This is harder to observe at higher stiffness values because they do have some spring-like resistance within that 30% range, but strangely, it's very obvious at 0 stiffness. At 0 stiffness, the couplings will compress to a maximum of about 30% and then basically act as solid blocks if more pressure is applied, allowing the pistons to lift the machine off the ground with ease and with no hint of instability
How much this compression factor matters for these particular catapults, I'm not sure, but it's interesting to know that the couplings do, in fact, have limited linear compression and are specifically intended bend/flex. I imagine the 30% of compressed wiggle room is just meant to prevent them from being completely rigid under tension and causing even more spaghetti that we already see
There ain't no way that this suspesion catapult was made 2 years ago. It feels like 6 months ago.
for lack of better terms, connecting springs in series lowers their force (they share the stretching distance), in parallel it adds up (they all stretch the forced distance). simple mechanical principles
It's so cool to see throwback videos with fresh perspective. You do it best SM!
Although the difference may not be much you got to consider the trajectory of the projectile traveling in a straight line, picture a big triangle, the suspension after release was launching in more or less a perpendicular line along the side of the triangle but the power couplers were launching at the diagonal or the hipotenuse of the triangle which in turn would mean that the couplers were launching further since the distance traveled was longer even though the TNT landed in the same place and another case being the aerodynamics of the TNT itself changing the trajectory.
7:00 i swear the suspension were more powerful being attached to the power couplers for some reason. Does just have power couplers on the build change suspension tension?
Nah he used the complexity mod so the game was tweaking
Practical build challenge = build instruments to measure. Examples, one to measure how far the tnt went. You can do that with a line of distance sensors pointing sideway set to max. Have them connected to a signal that shows where they land.
A huge block of different color layers, 1 behind another to show how far something penetrated.
Another but with the layer fading to a core to show how much damage a weapon did.
Cameras blocks to quickly change to a better view.
Stuff like that I believe would be very beneficial and a great viewing.
Try to put the "lasers" on the horizontal and pull them doing a 180º not a 90º, this should double the tension :D
Mechanical engineering student springs added in parallel add simply
k1+k2=keq
Where springs added in series aka in line with each other add inversly
1/k1+1/k2= 1/keq
This means stacking springs resullts in a lower spring constant or less springy
I feel your pain, sadly people don't seem actualy interested in psysics just adding springs randomly goo boom was the supposed to be the theory here.
I am an electronics engineer with experience with automations and mechanical engineering, it is just like connecting capacitors in series. when i was a student someone connected some capacitors in series for more capacitance and i was like bruhhhh... and the professor got into an existential crisis.
@@kapioskapiopoylos7338I completely understand why mechanically adding springs would result in less bending force, as more force is shared between everything.
Why would adding capacitors in a series not go up in capacitance? If you had 3 x 50uf they would all deplete at the same rate but why would they not deplete at a slower rate?
@@benclimo461 Divided voltage. same reason as the springs in a way, say you charge 2x100nF(capacity units) capactiors in series with a 12V power supply, each capacitor will be at 6V, the energy stored in a capactior is *E = ½ × C × V² , note the V² as half the voltage means a quarter of the energy, hence the 2x100nF capactitors in series = a normal 1x50nF capacitor. On parallel connection they both get the 12V so they indeed then store 2x the energy.
**U=½ × k × Δx² is the energy of the spring,
same equation really, in that case the Δx is halved for say 2 exact same springs in series
extra note inductors (coils) are the opposite, parallel means less energy as current is used to store energy there, not voltage.
*
Energy
Capacitance
Voltage
**
U energy
k spring constant
Δx (stretch or compression) of the spring
@@kapioskapiopoylos7338I wouldn't say I'm pained I really like how scrapman tests his theory and that trail makers has simulated something that replicates reality. Scrapman isn't an engineer even if he seems to think like one he hasn't taken the classes that teach the less obvious theory. I really enjoy seeing him experimentally figure out what we've been taught
I think the difference between power in the short and long power coupler catapult is partially due to them being trippled up in depth rather than width. This causes a differential in tension/compression between the forward and the rear power couplers that increases when you shorten the length.
It's completely sensible that the shorter power coupling will perform better than the longer one. In the game, power coupling with a high stiffness does not want to bend. If a strand of power coupling is longer it has more points of where it CAN bend. As each one bends, it has to try to apply its stiffness as a resistance accounting for the weight offset at the end. The further the weight, the less effective the stiffness is.
A short catapult out of power coupling has very few bend points so it wants to snap back a lot harder and is capable of doing so. Technically the suspension one would also follow suit, but you made it that long because it needed to bend without breaking and that was the limit. Also it seems backwards because of normal catapults using mechanical advantage of leverage to accelerate their payload faster due to their longer arms. The thing you have is utilizing tension over rotation. If you think of it in more tensile potential energy instead of thing being swung faster because it's further away from the pivot point, you're getting more energy effectively transferred through fewer power couplers. Energy would be lost to more couplers that have to try to offset the payload weight they have to try to hold up. Fewer connectors doing that means more of that energy is held in reserve to straighten the couplers back out.
And since the payload is the same mass for both, it doesn't matter if it's being swung on a half meter arm or a 30 meter arm, if it's moving faster, it's going to go further. The smaller arm under greater tension flings it faster than the suspension arm. That being said, the longer power coupling arm seems to kind of whip when released. I'm wondering if you can't play into that more and find the perfect balance and sequence of stiffness (lower closer to the payload and higher closer to the base) to really whip the TNT really fast. That would probably be the best result you could get out of it.
Has anyone ever made a Scrap Man out of context video? Cuz Scrap Man is a GOLD MINE!
16:24. The projectile end of the new catapult having a delayed whip forward is a result of stored energy, surging forward- to return itself and its load to resting position.
I think the shortness of the coupler version makes it way better, though a bit shorter ranged, it's still more vertically compact
GG. It's the components that bend the most give the most power. By making the arms shorter, you removed some weight, which makes it faster and able to throw farther. For maximum distance, maximize the bend.
Great video as always
It makes sense that the shorter catapults are stronger. for a longer "spring" arm, the catapult, as i'll explain below, has less energy stored in a 90 degree bend to propel the load with, thus it will be slower at the tip resulting in a shorter ballistic trajectory. This is why the sweet spot for the release delay got smaller as the catapults got shorter; the faster the tip speed, the less time there is going to be to release the payload at the perfect moment in the arc, and the smaller the physical sweet spot gets as the overall arc of the swing is shorter.
this is a pretty simple but interesting principle in physics. when you connect two "springs" end to end, otherwise known as "in series", their combined stiffness will be lowered. OTOH if you connect them side by side, or "in parallel", they will be stronger together. This is due to the amount of energy each spring absorbs when it bends.
When a spring is on its own, it absorbs all the energy imparted by a force when it bends due to that force. If another spring is attached at the base of the first spring, it will take less force to bend them to the same angle since the bottom spring will bend some too. Energy stored in a spring increases exponentially with how much it bends (until it fails, then the energy gets used up either breaking the spring or unshaping it), so there will be less energy overall for the same degree of tip displacement if applied to the parallel system as opposed to just a single spring.
In parallel, both of the springs bend the same amount and store energy proportional to their stiffness. This works the same for any number of springs attached in a similar fashion, so for the same degree of tip displacement, the system will have more energy stored for more springs attached between two objects, in this case a catapult base and a ballistic explosive.
The perfect catapult design using this principle would be as many springs in parallel as possible while still getting a decent degree of bending and a long, stiff swing arm to attach the payload at the end of. This way, you could get the stiffness of a bunch of springs in parallel and also increase the speed of the tip to optimize the ballistic trajectory.
They induce some of the momentum as they wobble. When we reduce the length the energy is distributed in a small area but also the power couplers don't wobble much. They are good for making curves but the release of potential energy is dampened by the wobbliness ( it somewhat does behave more better than a suspension as we saw in the coupling wheel video).
They are stiffer than power couplings which makes their launch a lot stronger.
The next you do something alike I would recommend to perfect the timing which was realized a lot later by you in this video.
I don't know why but the word that were bold just disappeared
1) is about power coupling.
2) is about suspension
3)TIP
I think the power coupling should be the winner because you have to consider that ScrapMan added extra weight because of the blocks at the top of the power couplers connected to the dynamite. It would probably flick forwards a bit faster without that extra weight
There is a very simple reason that the shorter ones perform better, and that's because of Lever laws, the shorter your lever arm goes, the more power you need to pull it back the same amount of distance. The power couplers and suspension pieces can effectively store infinite power due to being "infinitely" rigid, not really, but they are rigid enough to always snap back. Meaning, by applying force farther down, but stretching it the same distance back, you put in more power, the ideal catapult would be the long one, but instead having the short push back system. At least in theory, the way the power coupler bend, make me think that they will still be worse, because most of the power get's lost by them flopping around, the suspension pieces however, should fly much farther.
Deflection is also a function of length and force, with a shorter length requiring more force to deflect the same amount. If this was just a straight up lever arm, the mechanical advantage would work in favor of the longer arm, but deflection is the driving factor here!
Also, equation for deflection of a cantilever beam: [Force*Length^3]/[3*Elastic Modulus*Inertia]
I think one of the reasons the shorter catapult might be better is that, as you make it shorter, the difference in length between the front and back power couplers becomes a greater percentage of their overall length. Like you mentioned, they resist compression/stretching more than bending. I think making it shorter forces the back power couplers to compress more and the front ones to stretch more, thus generating a lot more force.
It’s also the relationship between deflection, force, and length! Deflection relies heavily on the length of the member being deflected.
to make it comparable you need some stiffening plates between the power couplers. The Suspension stays rigid so when you flex it generates more tension. The Power couplers are not working together as well when you apply the tension so you get that kinda floppy lazy spring effect. Which also explains why the shorter length of power coupler works better, since you have less to wobble at the end of the arc
16:42 "longer is worse, that means shorter is better" scrapman 2024
The optimal length of the catapults has to do with harmonic resonance. Notice that the elastic components jiggle or wave with a certain frequency after releasing. For each catapult, there is a length that you could make the elastic so that it makes a standing wave when you release it. The optimal length of the elastic is a proportion of the wavelength of the standing wave of the elastic's harmonic.
The harmonic wavelength of the power couplers is much shorter than that of the suspension. This is evidenced by the slower frequency of the resonant "jiggle." It's also clear in the longest version of the power-coupler catapult, which was longer than half the wavelength of the first harmonic. It had a node in it, so it buckled and straightened when released instead of flinging forward. If you could build a much _(much)_ longer version of the suspension catapult without the physics misbehaving, you would observe the same behavior.
Sorry if that was exceptionally nerdy or jargony. I've built a nationally-ranked, award-winning catapult and I used to do this sort of math for fun. That was a while ago, though, so I might have gotten a little carried away.
There is one advantage to the power couplings that you didn't experiment with: The potential to make a reloadable catapult.
Rather than using a hook and detachable blocks, above the explosives, you could put the explosives in a basket that goes above the retention bar and put the bar on pistons. Then, when you want to fire you have the bar retract, so it passes through the energy portion of the power couplers. You could then rotate the bar back into its starting position and raise it again to reset the whole thing (though you'd still need a way to add more ammo to the basket).
Also, I'd be curious how hybrid catapults would perform, either with alternating layers of power couplings and suspension or with some of the suspension rows replaced by power couplings, since they seem to have different spring profiles and, as already mentioned, the power couplings allow for some different release techniques.
Ay ScrapMan! What video editing and video recording software do you use? I want to get into making Scrap Mechanic videos, so I would like some advice.
I've been trying to build a bow and arrow using the power couplers, it kind of works but not very well lol. I can get far better range with 2 pistons:/ You should try and build one, you may have a totally different approach that works:) Keep up the great work.
Scrapman, you could try to use powercouplers of different stiffness for different rows of these, that would probably equal the forces giving you better tension.
or like, put one row of them away from you, then bend all of them toward you, after that even though they are in different length from bending point, they should have similar tension (if you adjust stiffness correctly)
It actually makes so much sense that shorter catapults are better. First, the rotational inertia of a shorter arm is way smaller, and secondly, more flexible pieces in series actually make the arm as a whole weaker.
You should bring back the “can this break the sound barrier” but use glitches like the hover pad glitch and others. Idk how easy it would be to break the sound barrier with a single hover pad, but it might be harder with other propulsion glitches, or you could try to get the slowest speed possible with one engine or the more engines you can keep going less than 10mph the better.
you literly made the best landing and did not notice (14:49) XD
Since there is a bigger lever arm on the bottom couplers, maybe have more of them on the bottom? Like slingshots have tapered rubber bands, that are thinner near the pouch. And i think it would be more stiff if each row of couplers was attached to each other.
I have an idea for another episode. Instead of twisting it like in previous episode, try twisting some kind of wheel or half wheel, when the light beams would be curved before they start to twist. This could make some kind of coil, but would require pistons or suspension to contract.
1:48, Can we all appreciate that it landed the backflip?
You should try to make leaf spring suspension with power coupling. I think it coud be interesting to se how thewheel behaves with being able to move aide to side and how you would bend it into that slight u shape.
think about it tho, it make sense to make it smaller because tension is higher. take a bendy metal rod or wire, you try to bend the big one, easy right but when you try to bend the small one its much harder. the middle of the wire acts as a leverage point for the ends, the longer it is the less leverage you have
Hey Scrapman what if you attatched a wench of some sort to the top of the arm to assist it in being pulled back fully by having the wench behind the catapult at ground level and the catapult at either ground level or just above the ground level so it bottoms out fully? Or maybe doing a hybrid of the power couplers and shocks? Also some sort of stabilizers like nubs on the top of the arm to keep the hook from wiggling side to side to improve accuracy?Just some thoughts halfway through the video.
Hmm... So the power couplers and suspensions have differing stretch/compression capabilities. That reminds me of the way wooden bows are made. The belly of the bow (nearest the archer) is in compression, the back (furthest away from the archer) is in tension. Both act in tandem to produce the most powerful shot. Maybe use both power couplers and suspension together to mimic that?
I think the answer is weight... shorter version is lighter, so the gravity is pulling it to the ground less and the stiffnes of pc was able to defeat it more easily , which in turn increased the speed of the throw wich made the dynamite go further. Interesting results to say the least. Hope You will do more experiments like this in the future... Keep up the amazing work.
also, as another commenter pointed out, air resistance might be effecting it to
I haven't seen the original catapult video, is that one optimized for length?
Internet historian voice: It was at this point that the war between team power couplers and team suspension broke out. 🤣
You may have tested it already but how much can the power couplings be stretch (not bent)? Is a balista possible?
1:45 was waiting for an "I predict... spaghetti..."
I'd love to see some wings etc... on the projectile to really go for distance. Then maybe a multiplayer battle of catapults or something
In general the shorter your arm or the closer you are to the supporting point the more force you have to use to get the same bend and therefore more force you get when releasing.
BUT ! I got the idea of making a trebuchet with the power couplers as rope they can probably fling things pretty far and better than suspension ! 😀
Scrapman is in love with power couplers
So the reason English long bows use a specific type of tree is the core is stronger and more resistant to compression well the outside is softer and can stretch better.
With just the power couplers layers like that you might be able to adjust the stiffness independently
Ideas:
Power coupler lasso. The lasso end might need to have more solid parts at the end for collision to hit the target. Try catching a moving vehicle
Harpoon and power coupler cable to reel in a target. Try making a spool to wind up power couplers. The spool would have to catch the parts of the power couplers that have collision in order to wind it in
Trebuchet
Flying jellyfish attack vehicle
The ultimate size doesnt matter (or I guess does but inversly depending on which part is used, IDK).
Since you can twist the power couplers, could you make a torsion bow? I can think of a way you could assemble it, but not sure if it would have the necessary torque to launch a projectile.
Aren't hinges very strong? Not sure if i called it right the things often used for turning left right with wheels
I see the acting of the power couplings are kinda like a whip.. where the tension builds until it cracks
11:48 im wondering if staggering the power coupler density would change things. Example:
|
||
|||
||||
Just use one row of power thingy and extend the length by adding a solid block. I dont know how to explain it well but I think it work better
try using the power coupler like a sling shot, if the power coupler is stronger with axial tension they might make a better launcher that way
One thing not tested is to have a 180° rotation for the catapult, I don't think suspension would survive, but power coupling should...
So I have an idea, do this again, make it longer but treat it like a winch when you reel it in, and it will spin all the way around while under tension and release the bombs, just an idea that sounds cool
Day 4 of asking scrapman to do a multiplayer battle with train-planes in trailmakers (a train with wings on all of the cars) My suggestions: (don't read If you want to make up your own rules) - I would suggest using a canard layout for the engine car so it can get off of the ground and no control surfaces or propellers/thrusters on the trailing cars as they will be lost in battle. I think a good complexity limit would be 75 blocks for the engine car and 50 for all trailing cars. Vertical stabilization would be tricky because a traditional rudder would probably only work on the final car but the final car could get shot off so you might have to resort to a gyro for vertical/yaw stabilization in the engine car.
Now you need to make a tribushe!!!!!! 🙏🏻
Interconnect front to back lines, because there is a difference in there circumfrence of the lines they have greater tension, because they are not connected they try to do there best at being on the same line. This way the front line will pull to get its original length and the back will try to push aswell as the base tension set like the suspension.
Try making a trebuchet with power couplers at 0 stiffness as the rope. It works on a completely different principle, no tension required...
Scrappy you should have made a hybrid where you put 1 or 2 power couplers at the top of the catapult, it might actually help the release
Would it maybe work if you add pistons to the top and bottom of the power couplers to create more tension and maybe it’ll launch further
Now you should make a trebuchet out of the power couplings!
now we need to experiment on making a trebuchet with the power couppling
would it be possible to make a trebuchet with zero stiffness power couplers?
We had gods arm (Trebuchet) We had the Onager (Catapult). Now get ready for the Lethargic Lob.
Now you need to test a slingshot or Ballista suspension vs power coupling
you can make a 2vs2 with that thing.... 2 shoots and 2 try to escape a maze ...ore something like that
there are so many bugs with servo controls and springs and pistons and bunches of other things. troubleshooting builds drives me crazy but the game is still pretty fun.
How about a Trebuchet with Power coupling. Could be more powerfull than the suspension catapult
Video idea: spaghetti missile
Make a large missile (maybe use it as a weapon for a plane), that on the outside looks normal, but on the inside, somehow triggers tthe spaghettification glitch on some power couplers on a timer that basically makes it explode into a giant ball of destruction (maybe add some dynamite for added effetc in the moment of explosion)
You could make the catapult start bent forward 90 degrees, then pull it back 180 degrees so it has even more tension
Two years ago?? It feels like yesterday!! 😮
Now there is evidence that power couplers could be perfect for a realistic trebuchet.
It be interesting to see both power cuplers mixed with the suspension (example 4 suspension high and 1 or 2 power cuplers) attached to the launching platform to get that snap for speed and the suspension for the support ?
Anyone else travelling this idea 😅
What about a combination of suspension and power couplers? Alternating between the two? Would that make it go further?
Also, you completely forgot to check the aero-dynamics of both catapults, so perhaps that's a factor to consider as well?
@ScrapMan, you made a grave oversight, you forgot one of the power couplers main features! You forgot the spagehtification, you have to arness the power of the spaghetti, I'm sure if you could trigger the spaghettification with the release of the dynamite you could have had a massive launch
I know it’d be laggy and glitchy as heck, but what if,
Energy connector cable crane that actually rolls up the cables
1:00 æææÆÆ
3:54 awawaweweaaeewa
20:24 BOININING
"If longer is worse,it stands to reason that shorter is better"
- Scrapman 2024
I was hoping scrapman would try a combination of power couplers and suspension
I think the power cuppler has more weight on top with all the pipe pieces, It could be a factor.
I was hoping you would shorten the suspension catapult also.
SCRAPMAN YOU SHOULD USE IT LIKE ROPE AND MAKE A TREBUCHET
To be fair the suspension uses about 200 suspension parts and the power couplers use about 50 so maybe make the power couplers 1 wider...also the power coupler one the projectile has less travel time so "easier" to shoot moving target with
You should make a catapult when your pull on the power couplers and use a canter lever design