I feel like it's really a lost opportunity whenever you explain an element of the trebuchet but didn't actually show it on the screen, instead playing the default trebuchet shooting animation. For example: When talking about the arm length, you can lengthen or shorten the arm of the trebuchet, let it shoots, and see how the shot would be different with the change.
You are so right. I’m shocked at all the meat riding in the comments - even though I understand the elements he’s talking about quite well after this poor presentation I felt like I knew less than when I started. He makes no effort to explain anything - it reads like the worlds most useless Wikipedia article.
At 1:12 minute-mark you say that there are only four things you can vary: "Lever arm length, height, counterweight weight, and fulcrum position." You are missing half! You can vary the counterweight height, the sling length, and the angle of the pin on the tip of the throwing arm, as well as the CG of the arm. The counterweight height is how far it hangs from the counterweight axle on the arm. A counterweight height of zero would imply a fixed counterweight. Ideally, you want the counterweight to hang as far down as possible without hitting the ground, but in the case of trebuchets like the one at Warwick the box has to clear the winding axle for the treadwheels. You can also vary the CG of the throwing arm by tapering it or adding "counterpoise" weight. Some medieval drawings feature an added ring of weight on the butt end of the throwing arm (in addition to the counterweight box), which was probably meant to bring the CG of the arm closer to the main axle even before the box was attached.
Both sling variables (length and pin) are dependent on your choice of counterweights arm length, and projectile size. My point was to state the unconstrained variables you could optimize the design. Sling variables are highly dependent in the design process. Counterweight height is a variable I mentioned as well as usually being dependent on lever arm length and height in traditional trebuchet designs. The CG of arm is also a dependent variable on the variables I mentioned 🙂
My experience with the "rings", "heavy short arm" is that that mass slows the arm down. It's just more mass that has to be accelerated. I think the lighter the upper hanger arm and short arm are, the faster the throwing arm will be.
So did I get this right? The ideal payload to counter weight length is 3.75:1, 4:1, or 5:1 and the ideal projectile mass to counterweight mass is either 1:75, 1:100, or 1:133. If so I need a bit more of a clear answer from this.
Every machine is different, and those numbers mean nothing. Too many factors to say "this is the best way", or "this is optimal". These machines are purpose designed and the only thing that matters is can they forcefully hit the target repeatedly and not fall apart, from a range that the crew would not be killed by arrows. Now with Sport Catapulting and Punkin Chunkin the machines are still purpose built, and everyone is unique. No formula or equation can tell you the best way to build any of them.
3.75:1 beam ratio x PSSSHHSHHS' rule of 20 means that CW to projectile is 75:1. Just seconds prior, you say the mass ratio should be 133:1. These rules are not in agreement. So, which one is it?
@@MTEXX I think he just meant that 133:1 is the widely known or used rule jsut like the 4:1 or 5:1 lever arm ratios are the most commonly used. But the math says it isn't the best
You uploaded the exact video i was looking for! You see I juste entered a contest of catapults. I thougt of trebuchets but i didnt know how to start building it until you. Thanks good cuality video
Can I please have the counterweight be perfectly motionless after the shot thus converting all its potential energy into the kinetic energy of the projectile? Or am I asking too much
Maximizing potential energy is crucial. Construcing trebuchet so that the weight falls as vertically as possible, instead of swinging, increases efficiency. Wheeled trebuchet end up being the most efficient.
2:32 Donald B Siano is educated and ignorant. Everyone who knows anything at all about trebuchets knows that they need to have wheels!!! The wheels make it so all the kinetic energy of the counterweight can be used to move the projectile. If there are no wheels the extra kinetic energy will be absorbed by the trebuchet.
I have aquestion: How to take into account the elevation, let say that you shoot your trebuchet from an elevated site, how to calculate everything, is there some magic online to do that fast and easy?
Depending on how long this quarantine lasts, I may just have to build a trebuchet and lob a fireball at my neighbors house on Wednesday May 6th at 5:32 AM EST..
OK, Siano later came out and said that he made some invalid assumptions. Pfsshthpok's Rule is a guide based on observations of a number of trebuchets and breaks down at extremes of mass ratio or leverage ratio. Da Vinci came out with better numbers involving square roots. You could build a treb based on the info in this video and it would doubtless work well, but it wouldn't be "perfect".
What is the optimal angle of alpha? Total noob here really trying to optimise the distance using parabolic arch. 30 degrees seems to be the standard but I’m getting wild variations.
@@lordbalzamore7692 Two main reasons: 1) when it's on wheels, the trebuchet will roll back and forth such that the counterweight can fall straight down, which is more efficient since else a small part of the weight gets transferred to the throwing arm (also see ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-KpFTyE-wiNo.html) and 2) it reduces stress on various parts during the throw and doesn't kae it want to tilt over.
the only reason im watching this is bc my teacher is forcing me to do this project that im like 3 weeks behind on.....and we only have 4 weeks....-_- just typing this reminds me how screwed i actually am...
You know I'm impressed with the fact that you have a degree(s) in engineering and you can throw around all the big equations and all, but do you really think the folks, back when these were designed, used the same method, I think not. I think, if you can even do it, that you go back to basics and design one, as our ancestors had, and build one.
I have. These equations just give meaning to random guessing and checking when they were originally built. They’re the mathematical representation of all the work that was done in previous eras. As is all science and engineering.
@@dinonuggets7148 lol No! Fling at me, bro! All Throwing Machines Are Catapults! A Trebuchet is a gravity powered catapult. An Onager is a Torsion powered single armed catapult. A Ballista is a twin engine twin arm torsion powered catapult. A sling shot is a catapult. You have to be specific.
Have you watched video's from the Shadiversity RU-vid channel? There is amazing content about medieval weapons and architecture! You must watch the video about whether the castles and fortresses in the LOTR trilogy are historically accurate. In my opinion video's that are educational and entertaining at the same time makes a RU-vid Channel achieve cult status. So channels like Wendover Productions, Real Life Lore, Shadiversity, Geography Now and so on. Keep creating this amazing content as achieving this cult status is definitely possible for your channel even though difficult and takes a lot of research. But it will gain you MUCH more respect than people like Logan Paul who just simply make video's of themselves fooling around acting like idiots ( videos that do not take much thought/planning or effort). Also do not feel pressured to get a video released every Monday, it is OK to be delayed a couple of days because the content of your channel is top quality and I think your viewership will understand the effort and time required for even short videos like yours. So they will understand it. Even Real Life Lore have been delayed by a day and Wendover Productions have reduced their output from a video every 2 weeks to a video every 3 weeks! By the way these are the list of RU-vid channels that I think have attained cult status, your channel is on its way to join this list! Wendover Productions Real Life Lore Dan Lok Valuetainment Joe Scott Vsauce Tom Scott Financial Education Half as Interesting Visual Politik Shadiversity Metatron Skalligrim Lindybiege Alternate History Hub How to Make Everything Simple History The Inforgraphics Show Valuetainment Brain4 breakfast Zephereus Geography Now Braincraft 👍👍
Is Monash as bad as the rumours? Apparently it’s just foreigners now, zero Australians. My uni has gotten bad, 50%+ of their holdings were in China and they conceded they are just a people smuggling organisation in an internal memo back in 2005.
Me: *builds this* I want to destroy school Friend: lol what is the ammo? Some rock hahaha Me: I got a better idea Friend: Wot is it? Me: 10 kg of gunpowder in a burned wooden ball that was followed by throwing water ballon that was filled with gasoline
You did a shockingly poor job explaining this, you made no effort to show rather than tell, telling us the equation that governs it is one thing, showing what you mean is an entirely different thing. You are a very poor presenter. I feel bad for kids watching this or people who couldn’t follow along they’d be left utterly frustrated. Don’t do that to people, it doesn’t have to be over explainy and pandering but it doesn’t need to be whatever this is, this was terrible even for someone who knows what you’re talking about.
