Hi, I am currently doing a project to design a lamp and am really

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on designing a lamp with a balanced structure using physics principles. Key points include the importance of maintaining the correct weight ratios and pivot points for balance, as well as measuring to the center of mass of the weights. Adjustments may be necessary for stability, particularly regarding the center of gravity in relation to the pivot points. The material of the arms should be lightweight compared to the weights, and sourcing low-friction joints is also a priority. Overall, careful consideration of weight distribution and measurements is crucial for achieving a stable design.
Jamesbenham
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Hi, I am currently doing a project to design a lamp and am really interested in using physics to gain a perfectly balanced design. I have come across this diagram...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a7/Lamp_2_counter_weight.PNG

I just want to clarify a couple of things before I go ahead and produce it! Apologies if these are stupid questions but it is a while since I did any physics.

1. I can turn these into any numbers as long as the ratio says the same right? E.g. Half the weights.

2. The the pivot points need to remain exactly there in order to balance or does another option exist? By this I mean the lamp head is moveable in almost any direction, but with the layout of the arms in a different way?

3. The measurements on the diagram (10,20 etc.) seem to show the measurement to the centre point of the weights... Is this what I need to measure to (the centre of mass of the weight?) or can the weights differ in dimension as long as the mass remains the same?

4. Imagine a curtain pole (the arm) with a screw (the weight) half screwed into the end... Where would I measure 10,20 lengths to? The end of the pole or up to the start of the screw?

Thank you so much for this.

James.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org


The design assumes the weight of the arms is negligible compared to the weights.

The 200 and 100 lamp works like this : 200 x 10 = 20 x 100 , for it to balance at the pivot. You may want to have a way to move the 200 weight on the arm a bit in or out to get a horizontal balance.

Same thing for the 600 weight, so that when the top arm is pointing into/outof the page the second arm will balance horizontally. ie 300 x 20 = 600 x 10

So
question 1 - as long as the weight of the arm is much lighter than the weights, so choose appropriate material for the arms.

question 2 - not really sure what you are asking

question 3 - center of mass of the weight to the pivot

Question 4 - a heavy screw, much heavier than the curtain pole, measure to the centre of mass of the screw.

You will have to make some small adjustments, as I said previously, to the lengths or weights for the thing to operate as in the picture.
 


Thank you so much that is brilliant. Thank you also to to the other replier who doesn't appear to be showing up. I really appreciate it.
 


Hopefully it works out and the thing is stable, as the centre of gravity is not being below the pivot points .
 


256- will a heavy base just sort this issue?

If the lengths of rod were made from different materials and therefore had a different mass would this be an issue or is it just the distance between the weights that matters?

just need to source a place to buy joints with as little friction as possible!
 
Hi all, I have a question. So from the derivation of the Isentropic process relationship PV^gamma = constant, there is a step dW = PdV, which can only be said for quasi-equilibrium (or reversible) processes. As such I believe PV^gamma = constant (and the family of equations) should not be applicable to just adiabatic processes? Ie, it should be applicable only for adiabatic + reversible = isentropic processes? However, I've seen couple of online notes/books, and...
I have an engine that uses a dry sump oiling system. The oil collection pan has three AN fittings to use for scavenging. Two of the fittings are approximately on the same level, the third is about 1/2 to 3/4 inch higher than the other two. The system ran for years with no problem using a three stage pump (one pressure and two scavenge stages). The two scavenge stages were connected at times to any two of the three AN fittings on the tank. Recently I tried an upgrade to a four stage pump...
Back
Top