Wood
-
- Member
- Posts: 395
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:03 pm
- Division: C
- State: NJ
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Wood
Hey Guys,
I was wondering if you guys could share some links as to where I can buy wood skinnier than the normal 1/8"...where do you guys go to buy good wood....Do you prefer sheets or pre cut into rods?
I was wondering if you guys could share some links as to where I can buy wood skinnier than the normal 1/8"...where do you guys go to buy good wood....Do you prefer sheets or pre cut into rods?
-
- Member
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:39 am
- Division: C
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Wood
3/32 works fine.WhatScience? wrote:Hey Guys,
I was wondering if you guys could share some links as to where I can buy wood skinnier than the normal 1/8"...where do you guys go to buy good wood....Do you prefer sheets or pre cut into rods?
Go online to specialized balsa
Precut is always more precise and accurate. Cutting is a hassle, in my opinion.
Random Human - Proud (former) Science Olympian. 2015-2017
Writer of Doers
Dynamic Planet
Breaker of Towers: 16-17 Season Peak Score - 3220
Len Joeris all the way. Remember Len.
Writer of Doers
Dynamic Planet
Breaker of Towers: 16-17 Season Peak Score - 3220
Len Joeris all the way. Remember Len.
-
- Coach
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:01 am
- Division: C
- State: CO
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Wood
I'm curious; you asked essentially the same question back on September 17, in the first "wood" thread you started, and you got a number of replies; is there something particular that didn't get answered??Random Human wrote:3/32 works fine.WhatScience? wrote:Hey Guys,
I was wondering if you guys could share some links as to where I can buy wood skinnier than the normal 1/8"...where do you guys go to buy good wood....Do you prefer sheets or pre cut into rods?
Go online to specialized balsa
Precut is always more precise and accurate. Cutting is a hassle, in my opinion.
Re: Random Human's comment that 3/32 "works fine", true up to a point. But you will not be able to beat a well engineered 1/8" leg tower with 3/32" legs. 5/32" legs will actually give you a slight theoretical advantage over 1/8". The problem applying that theoretical advantage is that it takes very low density, like down close to the limits of what balsa exists in, and finding, in that density, a few sticks that are at the upper end of buckling strength that can be found at that density. Talking 0.95 gr/36", with a 36" buckling strength over 22gr.
Len Joeris
Fort Collins, CO
Fort Collins, CO
-
- Member
- Posts: 395
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:03 pm
- Division: C
- State: NJ
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Wood
@Balsa Man: My team just asked me to pose the question again because responses had died out and they wanted a little more info,
Adding on...do you think the 1/16" x 1/8" is a good option...how does it stack up against the others?
Adding on...do you think the 1/16" x 1/8" is a good option...how does it stack up against the others?
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 4318
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 220 times
- Been thanked: 77 times
Re: Wood
Typically, pieces in compression gain nothing from rectangular cross-sections since they'll usually buckle in the weakest direction.WhatScience? wrote:Adding on...do you think the 1/16" x 1/8" is a good option...how does it stack up against the others?
-
- Coach
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:01 am
- Division: C
- State: CO
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Wood
That's cool; understand. The previous replies you got pretty well covered the options out there.. The only place I know of that you can order in 1/10 gr increments is Specialized Balsa. You can go to your local hobby store - Hobbytown, Michaels, etc., with a scale and sort thru what they have, ans if you get really lucky, you might find some sticks that are light while getting you the buckling strength needed (which will depend on the bracing interval you want to use).WhatScience? wrote:@Balsa Man: My team just asked me to pose the question again because responses had died out and they wanted a little more info,
Adding on...do you think the 1/16" x 1/8" is a good option...how does it stack up against the others?
No, rectangular leg cross section is not a good idea. It is actually a very bad idea. It is not that it will "usually" buckle in the weakest direction, it is that it absolutely always will. So, on two sides of the tower, you'd need a bracing interval that would work for 1/16" cross section, and on the other two sides, bracing that would work for 1/8". Those bracing intervals would not.....line up; you'd have some segments where a leg segment would only be braced from one side/one plane, instead of 2 braces at 90 degrees, at the same point on a leg. The buckling strength across the 1/16" dimension will be only 1/16th of the buckling strength across the 1/8" dimension.
Len Joeris
Fort Collins, CO
Fort Collins, CO
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 4318
- Joined: Sun Jan 26, 2014 12:48 pm
- Division: Grad
- State: GA
- Has thanked: 220 times
- Been thanked: 77 times
Re: Wood
This was what I was trying to account for with "usually", although I didn't think about the fact that one would need varying bracing intervals.Balsa Man wrote:[So, on two sides of the tower, you'd need a bracing interval that would work for 1/16" cross section, and on the other two sides, bracing that would work for 1/8".
-
- Member
- Posts: 395
- Joined: Sun Jul 16, 2017 4:03 pm
- Division: C
- State: NJ
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Wood
makes sense....Unome wrote:This was what I was trying to account for with "usually", although I didn't think about the fact that one would need varying bracing intervals.Balsa Man wrote:[So, on two sides of the tower, you'd need a bracing interval that would work for 1/16" cross section, and on the other two sides, bracing that would work for 1/8".
What would be better, the 3/32 .6 or the 1/16 .3 (densities)
-
- Member
- Posts: 153
- Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 11:39 am
- Division: C
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 0
Re: Wood
Uh what do you mean what would be better. There's no better.WhatScience? wrote:makes sense....Unome wrote:This was what I was trying to account for with "usually", although I didn't think about the fact that one would need varying bracing intervals.Balsa Man wrote:[So, on two sides of the tower, you'd need a bracing interval that would work for 1/16" cross section, and on the other two sides, bracing that would work for 1/8".
What would be better, the 3/32 .6 or the 1/16 .3 (densities)
I mean in terms of strength, 3/32 .6
But, efficiency wise, it depends on your tower.
If your question was 1/16 .6 and 3/32 .6. The answer would be 3/32. More volume (assuming same density) > less volume
Please clarify. Read through last years forum. Bassically every question is answered there.
Random
Random Human - Proud (former) Science Olympian. 2015-2017
Writer of Doers
Dynamic Planet
Breaker of Towers: 16-17 Season Peak Score - 3220
Len Joeris all the way. Remember Len.
Writer of Doers
Dynamic Planet
Breaker of Towers: 16-17 Season Peak Score - 3220
Len Joeris all the way. Remember Len.
-
- Coach
- Posts: 1318
- Joined: Thu Nov 13, 2008 3:01 am
- Division: C
- State: CO
- Has thanked: 0
- Been thanked: 3 times
Re: Wood
What do you mean, "better"?WhatScience? wrote:makes sense....Unome wrote:This was what I was trying to account for with "usually", although I didn't think about the fact that one would need varying bracing intervals.Balsa Man wrote:[So, on two sides of the tower, you'd need a bracing interval that would work for 1/16" cross section, and on the other two sides, bracing that would work for 1/8".
What would be better, the 3/32 .6 or the 1/16 .3 (densities)
Len Joeris
Fort Collins, CO
Fort Collins, CO