Sup /sci/. Me and two of my friends dragged this carstopper

>>8964337
Well you can lift it, so get some weights and just start adding weight until it feels about the same. Done. Alternatively find the density of concrete, measure its volume, then just multiply one by the other. Now, why the fuck do you care?

>>8964347
The first one isn't accurate enough and I don't have enough weights, I did the second and got too high a value.
I don't know why I care, I was bored

File: scales.jpg (748KB, 500x346px) Image search: [Google]

748KB, 500x346px

Just make scales like this, you really only need a big plank for that and something to hang it on or a rod to balance it on.

>>8964337
Use buoyancy, calculate volume, achimedes principle or something

equations

weight it under water.

this method also used to determine purity of metals.

>>8964337
Calculate volume by way of volume of cylinder. Then find the average density online if you know what that stone is. Make sure to adjust units to match the two variables. Multiply. That's the mass

>>8964574
>>8964558
The problem is I did calculate the volume and use stone density, but the answer was too high for it to be real even with the lightest stones
>>8964533
Actually yeah, that could work, I'm guessing a seesaw of sorts where I would place the pillar close to the pivot and a lighter weight further away until they balance. Thank you.

>>8964604
the idea is to find the density, using achimedes principle. if density is known then you know about hollow volume.

technically you need to weigh it both underwater, and above water and compare, so on 2nd thought maybe it doesn't work for you.

I'm sure if you get clever you can figure something out though.

>>8964653
I found out the volume, that didn't work
Ill try the seesaw method

>>8964337
just ask your friends for their scales, so that you can put it on 3 or 4 scales at the same time and just add the weight shown on each scale and get the total weight. also why would you even want to know the weight of it?

>>8965010
I dunno
And I dont think that would work, something to do with weight distribution

>>8964337
I highly doubt you could carry that by yourself unless you regularly strength train. I'm pretty strong and moving around my 50kg plates is a pain in the ass. It would require pretty much all my strength to move both of them at the same time.

Put one end on a brick, just barely, and put the other end on a small block of wood in center of scale. Make sure it's level. Read scale and multiply by two.

>>8965315
Could also rotate 180, redo and average to account for density variation.

try to measure the force of gravity on it. then, just divide by 10

>>8965234
Yeah I used to go to the gym and I am quite strong, not /fit/ tier but I beat 85% of normies
Still it was a struggle getting them up stairs and carrying in general
>>8965315
>>8965319
That could work, do I just rest half of the block on a brick and other half on scale to get half the weight?
>>8965327
How the fuck would I do that? Do I have a gravity calculator?

>>8965815
>That could work, do I just rest half of the block on a brick and other half on scale to get half the weight?

I think so. The downward force on the two ends should be about the same if it's level. There may be a difference in density from one end to the other, and that could affect things. Rotating it 180 and doing it again and averaging should compensate for that.

What I would do if I could not lift it:
1) Look carefully at what material it is made. What kind of stones, what kind of clay etc.
2) Look up the densities of said materials.
3) By looking at the structure, estimate the amount of compressed air that you have to substract from the calculation. If unsure, assume close packing of equal spheres.
4) Take into account the inside might be hallow.

If you can lift it, have a piston system and find appropriate counterweight with known mass.

>>8965010

Scales work on springs. Think of the springs as series, adding the weights actually works in this case.

Thus guys is smart

File: IMG_20170609_141632.jpg (3MB, 3968x2976px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3968x2976px

>>8965923
I tried it using a plank

File: IMG_20170609_141607.jpg (3MB, 2976x3968px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2976x3968px

>>8965923
>>8965979
It says 17.8 which isn't possible if the weight I distributed is roughly even, because it couldn't record the pillar on it's own even though it goes up to 100kg

>>8964337

>Pull-n-pay scrap yard
>spring from suspension
>use vin to find manufacturer of spring
>spring constant
>measure the displacement of the spring when car-stopper is suspended from it
>calcs

It's most likely hollow, with some inner diameter. You other option is to go to town on it with a sledge hammer and weigh the parts. That is, if all you want to do is weight it...

File: IMG_20170609_142140.jpg (3MB, 2442x2766px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 2442x2766px

>>8965981
Not hollow friend
Whats this about a spring in the scrapyard
Also I can't break it, it's meant to withstand cars and it has 4 pieces of copper inthe center of it keeping it together

>>8965979

Is it touching the wooden plank, or just the black thing and the scale. If it's just touching the black thing and the scale, it's hard to see what could be going wrong. The weight supported by the black thing and the scale should be about the same if the wooden board isn't touching.

>>8965986

Seems like a waste of material with it not being hollow!

No worries though. Go to a scrap yard and get a spring from a car, should be really cheap ($5). Springs all have a constant, generally given in kilonewton-meters and kip-ft from the manufacturer. What this tells you is that it takes x amount of kilonewtons to move the spring "n" number of meters.

What you'll want to do is measure the length of the spring at rest. Then you take the spring, tie the car-stopper to it and suspend them both from a tree or something. Measure the length of the spring again.

This displacement given in (meters), multiplied by the spring constant tells you how much force (weight) the stopper is applying to the spring.

>>8965986

Also keep in mind that stopping cars isn't neccessarily = to stopping a sledge hammer. Higher force over a smaller area provides greater pressure. Greater pressure leads to greater shear, tension etc.

>>8965990
The wooden board is touching, thats what I rested it on
Also both the plank and the black thing is slightly higher than the scale, not by much but it still may impact the results

>>8966000
That is true, but I tried punting it with a hammer for a bit and nothing happened

>>8966008

Thumbs up. All I really wanted was an attempt at destruction.

>>8966008

How about balancing a few smaller weights (<100lbs) vs the stopper on a seesaw?

As long as the seesaw is fairly close to the same length from the center to each seat. Might be able to even do this with stuff you already have.

>>8966018

>already mentioned

Lads you won't believe this
But it weighs 60kg
I decided to put it on the scale again and it worked
This pisses me off for 3 reasons
1: all of this work for fuck all
2: my guess was around 120kg
3: it shows that ever since I quit the gym I have become a weakling. It might be the fact that it's awkward to hold and my friends had a lot of trouble with it too, some couldn't even pick it up, but still to be off by double hurts. It makes no sense because I'm still in decent shape and can deadlift at least 120 despite being off for a while. How the fuck could I be so wrong?

>>8964337
Take it to a weigh station

>>8966024
HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHA

...faggot