Paradox Engine Airship

#1
Note 2: I probably should've just waited until now to post about this. Anyways I'm adding version #5 of this airship. I rebuilt it from scratch and tried to keep it as small as possible, without leaving it to the torque of a single engine (Things flip without a second engine to counter the torque) AND without sacrificing the silky smooth control of 4 propellers. It also doesn't require a manual startup although it can be a bit stubborn sometimes. Version 6 will most likely be adding some form of jury rigged throttle control to be developed on.

Note: I've added a second version of the airship that's been slightly optimized compared to the original in terms of size. I plan to rebuild from scratch and go for an even smaller size.



What's a paradox engine? Some spinny thing invented by this dude:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e0-k...ature=youtu.be



This is how I used the invention to power an airship:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e4J...ature=youtu.be



Video for version 5 (The bsg on here doesn't include the bombs for handling purposes):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sx3r...ature=youtu.be



Controls -

TIP: The controls work very much like a standard WASD format, just shifted over as to not interfere with the camera controls.

Hold the Down Arrow to power up the engines

; decouples the engine starter thing

I - Pitch down

K - Pitch up

J - Turn left

L - Turn right

O - Roll right

U - Roll left

Holding down I+K will make you gain altitude faster. Version V can do this with I+K+U+O for faster climbing

Due to the nature of the engines there's no way to control the throttle. I made a brake for the engines before by having a piston jam into each one but it was a very clunky mechanic.

Attached Files
Paradox Airship.bsg
Paradox Airship II.bsg
Paradox Airship V.bsg
 
#2
hm have you experimented on how much power these engines can create? because i think i would need at least 20 ofthem to power the airship in my thread
 

Deptune

New Member
#3
Mumon said:
hm have you experimented on how much power these engines can create? because i think i would need at least 20 ofthem to power the airship in my thread
Seriously...? How big the machine you are gonna make 0.0?
 
#4
Mumon said:
hm have you experimented on how much power these engines can create? because i think i would need at least 20 ofthem to power the airship in my thread
I optimized the design by quite a lot and added 2 more engines. My conclusion is that they're pretty damn powerful, at the expense of being bulky
 
#5
Mumon said:
hm have you experimented on how much power these engines can create? because i think i would need at least 20 ofthem to power the airship in my thread
Heres the design I'm talking about. It's not very stable and has an issue with turning on its own, it's also too powerful for not having throttle control.

Attached Files
Paradox Airship III.bsg
 
#9
Unless there is something very wrong with Besiege physics in this regard, I can't see how adding gears is going to increase the power of anything.
 
#10
(1)
Let’s talk about motor wheels. Build a small cube and a large cube, attach 4 motor wheels to them respectively (like a vehicle). Since they have different weight/mass, they should have different speed right? The answer is No. They have exactly same speed. Motor wheels (and some other parts) have infinite “strength”, they will spin/work at your chosen setting (e.g. 1.0 speed) regardless of burden. This is what I found out during v0.0.3.

(2)
http://besiege.freeforums.net/thread...nt-sizes-gears
This link shows a mechanism that applies gear reduction, which increases the spinning speed(output) of motor wheels to 2x, 4x and more. If the propeller spin faster, there will be more lifting right?

…. Wait a minute.
I remembered that all parts will disconnect/break when the speed/force applied to them is too high. Well, gear mechanism does increase output/speed of “engine” (force generator) but it might not help lifting a heavy flying machine.
 
#11
ManaSeed, take a look at this (speedtest.bsg below) - the speed of rotation clearly varies with load.

Edit: Another test reveals more - see 2car.bsg. The lighter car accelerates to top speed more quickly, but both have the same final speed. Interesting.

Regarding using gears for 'more power', it is probably worth remembering that even if it works, it is simpler to just stack wheels /paradox engines together, and lighter too.

Attached Files
Speedtest.bsg
2car.bsg
 
#12
Wait a minute, you've said what I wanted to say. But it doesn't solve the discrepancy/question between the first test and second test.

EDIT
AJW said:
Regarding using gears for 'more power', it is probably worth remembering that even if it works, it is simpler to just stack wheels /paradox engines together, and lighter too.
(´∀`) this is probably right. Now this leads a question... Why not use ONLY paradox engine or stacking wheels? Which one is better? What is the advantage of blending them together?

orz... I know I've been asking question without answering anything. Please don't hate me.

2nd EDIT
Okay... I think I see it. Stacking wheel easily have more power than Paradox engine and it's also adjustable, but has no toggle mode. So we can use Paradox engine as passive lifting power and stacking wheels as active lifting power. Hmm... but stacking wheels seems quite fragile.... arghhhh I dunno anything anymore~~~ (´□`;)
 
#13
I think the discrepancy between the first and second tests can be explained fairly simply: the wheels have limits on both torque available, and on maximum speed (or some sort of 'power curve' that reduces torque to zero as the speed approaches the limit). The first test imposes sufficient load that at least the slower one never reaches the rev limit. In the second one, in both cases the load isn't sufficient to prevent them reaching the rev limit. Remember that once the car is rolling at a steady speed, the only loads are rolling resistance, friction in the bearings, and air resistance. It is quite possible the first two aren't affected by the weight of the car (I'm not sure whether they should be, but in any case we are dealing with a simplified physics model) and if air resistance is modelled, it clearly isn't enough of a factor to prevent the heavier car reaching the rev limit.
 
#14
AJW said:
the wheels have limits on both torque available, and on maximum speed (or some sort of 'power curve' that reduces torque to zero as the speed approaches the limit).
How did you find out about that? If it’s not troublesome, can you show this in a simple framework/structure?
AJW said:
In the second one, in both cases the load isn't sufficient to prevent them reaching the rev limit. Remember that once the car is rolling at a steady speed, the only loads are rolling resistance, friction in the bearings, and air resistance. It is quite possible the first two aren't affected by the weight of the car (I'm not sure whether they should be, but in any case we are dealing with a simplified physics model) and if air resistance is modelled, it clearly isn't enough of a factor to prevent the heavier car reaching the rev limit.
I added 150(15x5x2.0) extra mass and both vehicles still have same speed. Even if it’s simplified physic, it's hard to believe 150 extra mass doesn’t slow down the car a tiny bit nor prevent it from reaching the rev limit Σ('◉⌓◉') The phenomena is like there are two cars, one is empty and the other is filled with 75 balloons. Or, the wheels are so powerful but they became extremely air resistant when propellers are attached ヾ(´・ ・`。)ノ” I dunno.


 
#15
Extra mass wouldn't in of itself reduce the top speed of a car, even in real life. It would reduce the acceleration, obviously. A car accelerates until the rolling resistance and aerodynamic drag equals the power transmitted to the wheels.

Aerodynamic drag certainly can have an effect on top speed though. Compare these two vehicles - the one with the side-on wings never reaches the speed of the one with them end-on.

Attached Files
2car-drag.bsg
 
#16
Thanks a bunch <(_ _)>
I think I have better understanding now. I used to think both tests are similar as they both spins thus I failed to see the difference in their nature.
 
Top