Hey, I am pretty new to the forums but I think I have a pretty valid question.

 

I have a physics teacher and in class we are talking about simple machines. He believes that there is another simple machine besides just the main two: Lever, and Inclined Plane. There are others like pulley, wheel and axle, etc. But he thinks that there is another one that is listed with the main six. I have done some looking and the only other thing I have some up with is possibly a gear, but I think that can be classified as a wheel or better yet a lever. I would like some of your guys thoughts, I have until Friday to figure it out and help would be greatly appreciated!!!!!!

there's supposed to be six: lever, inclined plane, pully, wheel and axel, wedge, and screw.

 

pully, wheel and axil, and lever can all be classified as types of levers

wedge, screw, and inclined plane can all be classified as types of inclined planes.

yes I realize that, but my professor says that there is one other type of machine that is sposed to work

Siphon?

That was quite an impressive act of thread necromancy, Acme. I assume that after almost 10 years, the OP has probably moved on.

Acme's the name, impressing the game. My calendrical impairment notwithstanding, what did you think of my answer?

The simple machines all include solids as working parts. There should be analogs using fluids, or are machines that use solids and liquids a different set of simple machines. A nozzle increases flow rate and decreases volume; is there a solid simple machine analogue, for example a lever, or is it the nozzle another machine?

 

That was quite an impressive act of thread necromancy, Acme. I assume that after almost 10 years, the OP has probably moved on.

 

With the greatest respect, it's still more interesting to many than some of the stuff that has been posted lately.

 

I suggest a good start would be to agree what a machine is.

 

One common definition is a device for applying an output force at one point by means of an input force applied at some other point.

The forces may be the same of different in both direction and magnitude.

 

I do not know what the good professor had in mind, perhaps something based on a flexible diaphragm, such as used by American Red Indians in the past.

Edited January 17, 201412 yr by studiot

Is a chimney a simple machine? It changes the magnitude of the air flow to a firebox and combustion efficiency. Or does the fire act as a motor in this setup?
Wiki p says: "A simple machine is a non-motorized device that changes the direction or magnitude of a force"

Wikipedia has both a defintion and a list of 6 items.

 

1) Force amplification of a hydraulic system meets the definition but is not on the list. Neither are electrical amplification, an airfoil, nor a 1953 pontiac hydromatic transmission clutch. Apparently pulley ropes are floppy, but OK, but other non-rigid elements are not.

Seems arbitrary.

 

2) At one time, some people were attempting to lobby their novel 7th simple machine for inclusion. It consisted of two cylinders in a rectangular frame with an S shaped band of flexible material threaded between the cylinders

Edited January 17, 201412 yr by decraig

OT If anyone can give me some insight or direction concerning my inability to get the quotes function to work or why I can't paste, I'd be appreciative. Cursed machine! @@$%~@%!^~!!!

 

Studiot: Are you referring to a drum with the Amerindian diaphragm reference? If so, I say yay yay. One for the money, one for the funny.

 

Moth: I'd say yes, a chimney is a machine. Not only is magnitude altered but the direction of the exhaust gasses as well.

 

Much of the idea of "machine" is academic and the traditional 6 from the Renaisance mentioned in the OP are an enhancement of the 3 of antiquity. (Archimedes' lever, pulley, screw.) Add to that confusion the qualification of "machine" in some definitions that its work be 'useful'. Can we then not have a useless machine?

 

Professor be damned!! I may be a necromancer but I'm no mind-reader. As we say, so shall it be. A machine is as a machine does.

 

 

 

 

 

 

1

Edited January 17, 201412 yr by davidivad

 

Studiot: Are you referring to a drum with the Amerindian diaphragm reference?

 

No I meant an arrow launcher, as a one dimensional diaphragm.

 

 

But there are many examples of devices using a two dimensional diaphragm to exert an output force in a way that conforms to the definition I gave earlier by springing against a support reaction.