Re: Fw: A question of Scale Weight vs Springs [TANKS]

[Amir Tahvildaran <adt22-at-drexel.edu>]

Ah, now I see - I wasn't sure where you were getting the 3.37
it all looks right to me.  Another way is to say 60 / (6 * 6 * 6) if 
going from full scale.

I never know what type of "ton" is being referred to (long, short, 
metric)...  anybody?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ton

-Amir

Chrysanthos Kanellopoulos wrote:
> exactly Amir, when going from 1:4 to 1:6  the scale is not doubled and 
> the volume is not multipied 8 times. The ratio of the two scales is 
> 3:2  and ratio of volumes is  3.37 :1 or in integer numbers 27:8 = 
> cube of 3 : cube of 2 = (3 x 3 x 3) : (2 x 2 x 2),  or so I think.
> I therefore, divided the .935 with 3.375, not with 8.
>  
> Chrys
>  
> > In scale 1:1 a Tiger weighs 60 tons
> > in scale 1:2 = 60 : 8 = 7.5 tons
> > in scale 1:4 = 7.5  : 8 = 0.935 tons
> > in scale 1:6 a steel Tiger SHOULD weigh 0.935 : 3.37 = 278 kgrs.
> Hang on, there's a missing step
>
> 1:1 is 60
> 1:2 is 7.5
> 1:4 is .935
> 1:6 is ____
>
> Careful, going from 2 -> 4 isn't the same as going from 4 -> 6.  The
> important concept is that
> volume is cubic (3 dimensions).