the "chain fountain" effect is quite literally just using gravity to create a "whip" effect with a longer than usual length of chain/rope. notice the height of the fountain starts out small but grows over time as more and more chain leaves the vessel and is accelerated by gravity which in turn increases the force pulling on the chain "whip" and causes it to grow higher. when your height is limited and the length of chain/rope is long enough that it can touch the floor before emptying the vessel the height of the fountain will reach a peak and remain there. it's purely based off the height of the vessel from the ground and the length of the chain to allow for the force of gravity to act on it.
Yep, agree…. As long as the end of the chain/rope does not reach the ground, the velocity should continue to accelerate, and thus add “whip force” and thus increase the height of the “fountain”. The height of the fountain must be a factor of the chain density, so a larger heavier chain should reach higher, IF the ground is far enough away/down….
@Mike ever see what happens to a whip after you start one? the energy is transferred down the line, in this case that energy was due to gravity. should go watch some videos of what happens when the breaking mechanisms on ships fail when they're trying to raise/drop anchor. similar concept same much higher destructive forces despite the friction from the water that should still be slowing everything down but thanks to gravity acting on it... yea they're all related because it's all the same effect.
This reminds me a lot of compression waves moving backwards thru traffic, which really are just waves moving thru a medium which itself is moving. Depending on where you are observing from, you might see what appears to be a standing wave, if the speed of the wave thru the medium matches the speed of the medium. Your demonstration was nicely done. But one point that I noticed when you did it with the rope from the bowl was that you gave the rope a sharp flick. This is the start of the moving wave. That flick then travels down the entire length of the rope, which happens to move at about the same rate as the rope moves thru space. If you start the rope moving very slowly, I don't think you will observe that effect. And if you start the rope moving with a faster flick, creating a larger amplitude wave, then you will see a larger effect.
The initial flick will affects the starting conditions, I'm interested in what happens later on from the weight of the falling end. Perhaps attaching a weight would help this? Just from browsing various people's experiments, I'm thinking waves moving through the chain is probably a better way to illustrate what causes a chain fountain, as opposed to the "lever" explanation from Steve's video since it doesn't rely on the concept of big chain links.
@@Connorses The big difference is that, generally speaking, waves moving through a moving medium will NOT spontaneously increase in amplitude, except perhaps as the chain or rope comes to an end, since that is comparable to a change in density. Steve has demonstrated that the wave in the bead chain rises higher and higher over time. This means either (1) energy is entering the system, or (2) the medium is changing in "density" as it drops.
The new video posted by Steve Mould ("This Drill Powered Spool Proves Me Right") has some actual science, and some simulation software to back it up! He finally has an explanation: the stiffness of the bead chain varies with tension, so as the height of the falling chain increases, the tension on the suddenly accelerating beads increases dramatically, while the rest of the chain in the beaker is as yet unaffected. As the tension increases, the range of motion is reduced, making the "bending" part of the chain suddenly much stiffer. This does provide a mechanism for "pushing" off the bottom of the beaker, which is indeed supported by the simulations.
Well you showed up on my recommended. Neat that it works with rope too. Not as pronounced but still noticeable. The Mould effect can still be applied here since weight is distributed downward against the bowl and provides the reaction force, giving a small but consistent increase in momentum. Neat stuff!
Your rope experiment has also justified my analysis about the ability of the chain to rise above its container before falling further down over the edge, my conclusion is that a centrifugal resultant force directing upward is formed acting on the small bend of the rope when it is circling around the rim of the container. Dropping the bead chain over the beaker has already formed a small bend of curve around the rim on the top and with sufficient initial speed of the inextensible cord circling around the curve, centrifugal forces acting on the chain are created inevitably on that portion of the chain and the resultant force on that part is an uplifting force only. That force is intrinsic and sufficient to withstand the weights of chain or rope hanging from both sides over the top bend, as long as the length of chain at the dropping side is more than two times of that at the lifting side, and thus a steady flow of chain fountain can be maintained. Please note, basic equilibrium equations of forces on all FBDs of either sides of the chain as well as the moment equation about the curve center of the bend section are essential to reach the above conclusion. The reasoning of the back-kick force at base using lever model by Cambridge scholars and Mould is faulty because that force will certainly close the connecting gaps of the levers and inadvertently stop the pulling actions from the string-connected levers above the resting ones on the lifting side. Their marcaroni noodle specimen can not be interpreted with the lever-model either because it also has similar inextensible property like the rope of yours！😇
@@Connorses I hope you find it interesting enough to pass on to your viewers, too. I know that altering uploaded TH-cam videos is difficult - can you at least add a caption to the video at the point where you say "he dubbed this the Mould effect"? I think it would be only fair to do so, if you can do something like that. If not, I've seen in other videos, corrections made in the text of the video description.
Your rope still has a significant minimal "comfortable" bend radius, it is not as efficient at transfering the downforce as a ball chain, which doesn't dampen it like the rope does. There's a really nice video from Preston Becker that shows the effect of the ball chain fountain, like denting tinfoil and causing ripples on water.
I suspect this will work better with a stiffer rope, but won't work at all with a very flexible one. Mould has shown that a limited angle between the links is imperative for the effect to occur. A stiff rope mimics this with infinitesimal links.
@@dangraff8467 While this does sound right, I suspect that this effect is small at these relatively low velocities. An experiment to test you hypothesis, would be to try it with an identical plastic chain.
I raised this same objection. Glad someone performed the test. I'm pretty sure I first saw this demonstrated with rope long before Mould did it with chain.
You should try it by only letting the tip fall, maybe not whipping it. I know it may get stuck due to friction, so maybe place as much outside of the bowl as necessary in order to start the reaction? Maybe adding some weight? I say this because whipping it made some more "fighting" between those two.
I believe the name Mould effect was coined by a couple of Physicists when they did a research paper. And yes this effect has been played with for a long time now.
i think its bc the rope is going to have some about of rigidity that can function the same way the beads do and give it the same effect, its just not as pronounced bc the rigidity in the bend of the rope will have a shorter length over which to have the lever effect
I would say try a longer rope with maybe Half it's weight (to make it more manageable) but definitely need a longer rope and maybe like that we can see the rope rise higher
the fountain effect can happen any where due to the speed of the rope . the inertia of each section of the rope leaving the plate very fast in the upper direction . that section of the rope causes a small amout of observqble lift to its section due its inertia which is caused by by the speed of the rope. that speed of the rope could be caused by gravity or any other source . just try to use another source of speed and the rope will overshoot
I just realized while bathing that the experiment should have been done with rope, tested it with the horizontal 2D test on my kitchen floor, saw that it occurred, and searched "mould effect rope" on TH-cam to find this video! Independent confirmation! I'll make a video soon.
At this point I'm pretty much convinced that Steve is more correct than Medhi, but his original explanation of a "lever" was so confusing that it led to this whole argument. I should really make a video purely talking about the way he conveys his argument.
put a weight on the end of the rope and it will go even higher. I noticed that the rise becomes higher as the acceleration. So try to fix a weight at the end to increase acceleration.
This would be interesting to try. It may turn out that the faster acceleration pulls the arc down tighter against the edge of the container. I think the rate of accellaration surely has to be just right for this to happen.
Adding weight does not increase acceleration. Under gravity, all objects are accelerated at the same rate. Adding weight is simply increasing the applied force, which may however increase the peak velocity of the rope...
A balloon filled with water will certainly fall faster than the same one filled only with air. If we're using a hollow link chain like the ones on a lamp (the little balls), there may be some change noted by adding a weight. So yes, if the density is the same, something heavier accelerates at the same rate as something lighter. The air resistance in this issue may be too small to matter when using any king of chain. But if we're using a light fluffy braided nylon rope I bet we can make it fall faster by tying a brick to it. Through a feather of a building and strap a brick to that same feather and see if it floats around awhile on the way down.
@@markwillride yes, a balloon filled with air will fall at a lower rate, but that's an extreme example where the weight of the balloon is negligible compared with the surface drag. In the case of a nylon rope, this is reversed. Surface drag is negligible compared with the weight force so that you would see virtually no effect to acceleration. Come on, man.
If the arch was introduced with a container then this should tell you something about where the force to make that happen is coming from... If anything, this proves that the rope leaving the bowl (and it being constricted to the volume of that bowl) is creating a downwards force with an equal and opposite reaction. If that is true then that supports the Mould hypothesis even if you're not using a ball chain.
@ No. Mehdi's explanation is better. The bowl's shape means that the easiest way for the rope to escape is by arching over the rim. Therefore initial velocity must go up. This principle explains every observation, especially when Mould attempted the experiment off a flat board. Volume restriction is irrelevant.
3 ปีที่แล้ว +1
@@MansMan42069 It only explains a minimal arch at best which wouldn’t increase in height over time. How a chains flows through its own length is already widely understood. Need to address the actual observed phenomena and avoid strawmanning it.
@ Not the point. The point is that restricted volume is irrelevant. Mehdi's hanging chain experiment shows that a free hanging chain draped over a rod still exhibits the same growth in arc height. Volume wasn't restricted there so it's not a variable.
I'm pretty sure I've seen the "mould effect" before, to me it's always been obvious that it's just cause of conservation of momentum, with a whip-like effect. To me it seems like something that SHOULD be there. I didn't give it much thought and I was 100% sure that there JUST had to be some article somewhere about it (like pretty much everything else???? Might have to research if people know about other "effects" I've seen lol).
Steve and Mehdi end up clarifying their thinking a bit over the course of their videos (fun to see). There are two effects... One is the conservation of momentum where a chain (or rope) will travel through the same path it is already following. The other is something causing the arc height to increase. That second part appears to be a lever-like force from the chain/rope bending as it initially rises off the bottom of the container (or stack of other chain/rope). Your "whip-like" idea is good, but I think it can only apply to the last bit when there is no more chain/rope resting on the bottom of the container.
I had a toy as a kid that was literally a loop of string tied together at the ends in such a way as to not have a knot. And then there was an electric motor with a wheel that would spin and launch the string straight up this would cause almost exactly the same effect but also would have the opposite of effect of the upside down fountain as the string looped back into the bottom of the wheel. This device also work in any position or angle. Though it was slightly less stable the closer you got the wheel to horizontal. As long as you kept the wheel in a vertical position you could rotate the launch angle around the wheel and achieve somewhat different effects but all of them exhibited this fountain motion
You should try this same experiment with a taller vessel. Something that starts the rope moving upward to get over the top of the vessel as the speed increases it will raise the loop higher above the top of the vessel. The higher you go with your drop the more momentum can be built and the higher the fountain will reach. Once the rope reaches the ground the height of the fountain will stop growing and maintain that height until the rope runs out
If you place the chain/stiff rope on a dampening surface or use a chain with smaller minimal bend radius/ less stiff rope, the effect IS less pronouced and eventually disappears.
This definitively proves the “ Mould Effect “ is a result of Newton’s laws of motion! All these people can prove to themselves and baffle a confound others by proving how the fountain works with their mathematics , but this video proves Newton’s laws of motion is the primary explanation for he fountain , and not some imagined force exerted by the surface the chain rests on. Medi is more correct than Steve.
The Cambridge explanation is rubbish. There is never a bonus-kick at the container. There is indeed a bonus-kick when a link hits (collides with) the floor, & this adds to the downward pull of a chain, & increases the size of the fountain etc. But that extra (bonus) force is initiated by the (colliding) link. In the container a link will indeed get a kick from the container (or from the links beneath), but, that kick is not initiated by the rising link, it is initiated by the preceding link. The preceding link has a limited amount of impulse to give. The kick from the container results in a similar (but opposite) kick being given to the preceding link. But the kick from the container is not a bonus-kick. The initiating impulse from the preceding link is not added-to by the kick from the container, it is reduced by the kick from the container. Hence, at the container, links or beads, it makes no difference. The fountain is simply due to the inertia of a chain. If a chain is forced to go up, then forced to veer to go horizontally, then forced to veer to go down, the chain will form a curve or a bend or somesuch. The change in direction will result in strong, uneven centrifugal forces, which eventually (can) result in the initially sharp curve expanding & rising to reduce the centrifugal forces & to even them out. Giving a larger softer more even curve, ie a fountain effect. It is virtually impossible to load/store a chain in a container without having loops. And loops result in jumps, koz if u have a close look u can see that chains have a lot of horizontal movement before exiting vertically, & the chain gets lots of little jumps in the container, as each leg of each loop jumps (horizontally) over its mate. Jumps magnify the fountain, kicks dont. But, in any case, we don’t need jumps nor kicks to achieve a very high fountain. All we need is lots of speed. The chain will crest at any height, depending on speed. The idea that something special (like a kick) is needed (if the chain is to rise above the edge of the jar) is silly.
This isn't the Mould effect. The Mould effect is specifically an INCREASE in the arch height. Your rope "fountain" reaches a steady state condition, whereas the chain within the Mould effect continues to rise. The physics underlying self-siphoning rope/chain is very well understood, but the nuances of the Mould effect are not as well defined yet.
The height of the arch increases as the chain/rope gets pulled faster by gravity, when the chain touches the ground it stops accelerating and the height of the arch reaches its limit, that's why Steve used a crane to get as high as he could.
The height is indeed dependent on the amount of rope that's falling, since this was inconclusive I intend to make good on my promise and try this from a tall building. If I can get a thicker rope I'll try that too.
I don't understand. There is almost no difference between ropes and chains. This 100% should be a thing. I think they are wearing blinders when they are assuming the effects are only with chains. Changing one veritable at a time is important to good science. I also would like to see the chain drop when it is close to parallel to the edge. Example, line a chain/rope up on the edge of a buildings roof, then push one end off. The rope/chain will mostly be moving horizontally then down. As the chains full length is at the same vertical starting point. The chain has no tangled mess, though turning may still happen creating some tension. But the process should reduce some of the variables.... For the rope dropping it with the reverse side could also give more information about tensions effect if dropped from an edge... Assuming the effects are present... But the more you experiment to remove variables the more information you will have for the theoretical physicist and mathematicians... I was also pretty sure physics said gravity accelerated objects. So the longer the item is dropping (till a certain point) the faster it will go. For a chain, or rope this means more rope must be provided at a faster rate. If a rope/chain is pulling out more rope faster in the up direction it will have more force... Inertia... So it will take longer for the direction to change. I expect a rope parallel to the edge the rope will start going further from the edge.
@@limsalalafells This is why I'm partial to Mehdi's explanation that the key factor is the which direction is the easiest for the rope to escape. In containers like this, it's easier for the rope to escape up and over the lip of the bowl. On a flat board, the easiest way is literally parallel to the board.
the "chain fountain" effect is quite literally just using gravity to create a "whip" effect with a longer than usual length of chain/rope. notice the height of the fountain starts out small but grows over time as more and more chain leaves the vessel and is accelerated by gravity which in turn increases the force pulling on the chain "whip" and causes it to grow higher. when your height is limited and the length of chain/rope is long enough that it can touch the floor before emptying the vessel the height of the fountain will reach a peak and remain there. it's purely based off the height of the vessel from the ground and the length of the chain to allow for the force of gravity to act on it.
That's pretty much what i was thinking this whole time, but i'm horrible at putting into words.. xd
You know i was thinking about it and couldn't wrap my brain around it cuz i knew it seemed familiar. Your completely right. Thanks
Yep, agree…. As long as the end of the chain/rope does not reach the ground, the velocity should continue to accelerate, and thus add “whip force” and thus increase the height of the “fountain”. The height of the fountain must be a factor of the chain density, so a larger heavier chain should reach higher, IF the ground is far enough away/down….
@@anpersso most definitely!
@Mike ever see what happens to a whip after you start one? the energy is transferred down the line, in this case that energy was due to gravity. should go watch some videos of what happens when the breaking mechanisms on ships fail when they're trying to raise/drop anchor. similar concept same much higher destructive forces despite the friction from the water that should still be slowing everything down but thanks to gravity acting on it... yea they're all related because it's all the same effect.
This reminds me a lot of compression waves moving backwards thru traffic, which really are just waves moving thru a medium which itself is moving. Depending on where you are observing from, you might see what appears to be a standing wave, if the speed of the wave thru the medium matches the speed of the medium.
Your demonstration was nicely done. But one point that I noticed when you did it with the rope from the bowl was that you gave the rope a sharp flick. This is the start of the moving wave. That flick then travels down the entire length of the rope, which happens to move at about the same rate as the rope moves thru space.
If you start the rope moving very slowly, I don't think you will observe that effect. And if you start the rope moving with a faster flick, creating a larger amplitude wave, then you will see a larger effect.
The initial flick will affects the starting conditions, I'm interested in what happens later on from the weight of the falling end. Perhaps attaching a weight would help this?
Just from browsing various people's experiments, I'm thinking waves moving through the chain is probably a better way to illustrate what causes a chain fountain, as opposed to the "lever" explanation from Steve's video since it doesn't rely on the concept of big chain links.
@@Connorses The big difference is that, generally speaking, waves moving through a moving medium will NOT spontaneously increase in amplitude, except perhaps as the chain or rope comes to an end, since that is comparable to a change in density. Steve has demonstrated that the wave in the bead chain rises higher and higher over time. This means either (1) energy is entering the system, or (2) the medium is changing in "density" as it drops.
@@misterspike he does the flick on both attempts
The new video posted by Steve Mould ("This Drill Powered Spool Proves Me Right") has some actual science, and some simulation software to back it up!
He finally has an explanation: the stiffness of the bead chain varies with tension, so as the height of the falling chain increases, the tension on the suddenly accelerating beads increases dramatically, while the rest of the chain in the beaker is as yet unaffected.
As the tension increases, the range of motion is reduced, making the "bending" part of the chain suddenly much stiffer. This does provide a mechanism for "pushing" off the bottom of the beaker, which is indeed supported by the simulations.
@@misterspike you do know how a whip works
Well you showed up on my recommended. Neat that it works with rope too. Not as pronounced but still noticeable. The Mould effect can still be applied here since weight is distributed downward against the bowl and provides the reaction force, giving a small but consistent increase in momentum. Neat stuff!
Your rope experiment has also justified my analysis about the ability of the chain to rise above its container before falling further down over the edge, my conclusion is that a centrifugal resultant force directing upward is formed acting on the small bend of the rope when it is circling around the rim of the container.
Dropping the bead chain over the beaker has already formed a small bend of curve around the rim on the top and with sufficient initial speed of the inextensible cord circling around the curve, centrifugal forces acting on the chain are created inevitably on that portion of the chain and the resultant force on that part is an uplifting force only.
That force is intrinsic and sufficient to withstand the weights of chain or rope hanging from both sides over the top bend, as long as the length of chain at the dropping side is more than two times of that at the lifting side, and thus a steady flow of chain fountain can be maintained.
Please note, basic equilibrium equations of forces on all FBDs of either sides of the chain as well as the moment equation about the curve center of the bend section are essential to reach the above conclusion.
The reasoning of the back-kick force at base using lever model by Cambridge scholars and Mould is faulty because that force will certainly close the connecting gaps of the levers and inadvertently stop the pulling actions from the string-connected levers above the resting ones on the lifting side. Their marcaroni noodle specimen can not be interpreted with the lever-model either because it also has similar inextensible property like the rope of yours！😇
I don't think that Steve himself named the effect after himself. That was some scientists from the Royal Society.
Oh that is very interesting!
@@Connorses th-cam.com/video/wmFi1xhz9OQ/w-d-xo.html is the speech where he mentions this.
@@Connorses I hope you find it interesting enough to pass on to your viewers, too. I know that altering uploaded TH-cam videos is difficult - can you at least add a caption to the video at the point where you say "he dubbed this the Mould effect"? I think it would be only fair to do so, if you can do something like that. If not, I've seen in other videos, corrections made in the text of the video description.
Your rope still has a significant minimal "comfortable" bend radius, it is not as efficient at transfering the downforce as a ball chain, which doesn't dampen it like the rope does.
There's a really nice video from Preston Becker that shows the effect of the ball chain fountain, like denting tinfoil and causing ripples on water.
I suspect this will work better with a stiffer rope, but won't work at all with a very flexible one.
Mould has shown that a limited angle between the links is imperative for the effect to occur. A stiff rope mimics this with infinitesimal links.
@@dangraff8467 While this does sound right, I suspect that this effect is small at these relatively low velocities.
An experiment to test you hypothesis, would be to try it with an identical plastic chain.
Steve points to stiffness as key. I agree with your thinking here
I raised this same objection. Glad someone performed the test. I'm pretty sure I first saw this demonstrated with rope long before Mould did it with chain.
You should try it by only letting the tip fall, maybe not whipping it. I know it may get stuck due to friction, so maybe place as much outside of the bowl as necessary in order to start the reaction? Maybe adding some weight? I say this because whipping it made some more "fighting" between those two.
We need to get this guys video to them!
I believe the name Mould effect was coined by a couple of Physicists when they did a research paper. And yes this effect has been played with for a long time now.
i think its bc the rope is going to have some about of rigidity that can function the same way the beads do and give it the same effect, its just not as pronounced bc the rigidity in the bend of the rope will have a shorter length over which to have the lever effect
I would say try a longer rope with maybe Half it's weight (to make it more manageable) but definitely need a longer rope and maybe like that we can see the rope rise higher
I think the rope is fine just needs to have a longer one and make sure it's in a perfect coil so it flows easily.
Good stuff man I think this is something fun to look into.
the fountain effect can happen any where due to the speed of the rope . the inertia of each section of the rope leaving the plate very fast in the upper direction . that section of the rope causes a small amout of observqble lift to its section due its inertia which is caused by by the speed of the rope. that speed of the rope could be caused by gravity or any other source . just try to use another source of speed and the rope will overshoot
I just realized while bathing that the experiment should have been done with rope, tested it with the horizontal 2D test on my kitchen floor, saw that it occurred, and searched "mould effect rope" on TH-cam to find this video! Independent confirmation! I'll make a video soon.
Did you do it ?
I don't think Steve Mould is the one that dubbed it the "Mould effect". I'm pretty sure others did that.
It's all about the centrifugal forces on the mass of the beads as they make their 180 degree turn. No?
Yes. Conservation of angular momentum and all that physics stuff. I explained this in a comment a couple of months ago, and was roundly ignored.
@@ScottGrammer Yes, I've been making these comments for many months with little to no response too.
Try it with fishing line
I suppose this supports Mehdi's concept.
At this point I'm pretty much convinced that Steve is more correct than Medhi, but his original explanation of a "lever" was so confusing that it led to this whole argument. I should really make a video purely talking about the way he conveys his argument.
put a weight on the end of the rope and it will go even higher.
I noticed that the rise becomes higher as the acceleration. So try to fix a weight at the end to increase acceleration.
This would be interesting to try. It may turn out that the faster acceleration pulls the arc down tighter against the edge of the container. I think the rate of accellaration surely has to be just right for this to happen.
Adding weight does not increase acceleration. Under gravity, all objects are accelerated at the same rate. Adding weight is simply increasing the applied force, which may however increase the peak velocity of the rope...
A balloon filled with water will certainly fall faster than the same one filled only with air. If we're using a hollow link chain like the ones on a lamp (the little balls), there may be some change noted by adding a weight.
So yes, if the density is the same, something heavier accelerates at the same rate as something lighter. The air resistance in this issue may be too small to matter when using any king of chain. But if we're using a light fluffy braided nylon rope I bet we can make it fall faster by tying a brick to it. Through a feather of a building and strap a brick to that same feather and see if it floats around awhile on the way down.
@@markwillride yes, a balloon filled with air will fall at a lower rate, but that's an extreme example where the weight of the balloon is negligible compared with the surface drag. In the case of a nylon rope, this is reversed. Surface drag is negligible compared with the weight force so that you would see virtually no effect to acceleration. Come on, man.
@@danbo50097 bro you are right if we neglect air resistance,friction etc.
Cool video! I am definitely proud to be the 69th subscriber.
Nice.
Nice video :) the main disadvantage with the rope is it's elasticity. You loose lots of energy because of that.
I suspect this is where Steve’s understanding would claim the force is coming from, to allow it to raise.
Lose*
If the arch was introduced with a container then this should tell you something about where the force to make that happen is coming from...
If anything, this proves that the rope leaving the bowl (and it being constricted to the volume of that bowl) is creating a downwards force with an equal and opposite reaction. If that is true then that supports the Mould hypothesis even if you're not using a ball chain.
There is still a downwards force on the chair
@@kyledunbar9255 The effect doesn't happen with a ball chain on a flat surface either, so it clearly needs the volume to be restricted.
@ No. Mehdi's explanation is better. The bowl's shape means that the easiest way for the rope to escape is by arching over the rim.
Therefore initial velocity must go up.
This principle explains every observation, especially when Mould attempted the experiment off a flat board. Volume restriction is irrelevant.
@@MansMan42069 It only explains a minimal arch at best which wouldn’t increase in height over time. How a chains flows through its own length is already widely understood. Need to address the actual observed phenomena and avoid strawmanning it.
@ Not the point. The point is that restricted volume is irrelevant. Mehdi's hanging chain experiment shows that a free hanging chain draped over a rod still exhibits the same growth in arc height. Volume wasn't restricted there so it's not a variable.
I'm pretty sure I've seen the "mould effect" before, to me it's always been obvious that it's just cause of conservation of momentum, with a whip-like effect. To me it seems like something that SHOULD be there. I didn't give it much thought and I was 100% sure that there JUST had to be some article somewhere about it (like pretty much everything else???? Might have to research if people know about other "effects" I've seen lol).
Steve and Mehdi end up clarifying their thinking a bit over the course of their videos (fun to see). There are two effects... One is the conservation of momentum where a chain (or rope) will travel through the same path it is already following. The other is something causing the arc height to increase. That second part appears to be a lever-like force from the chain/rope bending as it initially rises off the bottom of the container (or stack of other chain/rope).
Your "whip-like" idea is good, but I think it can only apply to the last bit when there is no more chain/rope resting on the bottom of the container.
Hmm its not leverage effect, thats acc. and momentum that cause wave upwards
GOOD WORK
I had a toy as a kid that was literally a loop of string tied together at the ends in such a way as to not have a knot. And then there was an electric motor with a wheel that would spin and launch the string straight up this would cause almost exactly the same effect but also would have the opposite of effect of the upside down fountain as the string looped back into the bottom of the wheel. This device also work in any position or angle. Though it was slightly less stable the closer you got the wheel to horizontal. As long as you kept the wheel in a vertical position you could rotate the launch angle around the wheel and achieve somewhat different effects but all of them exhibited this fountain motion
You should try this same experiment with a taller vessel. Something that starts the rope moving upward to get over the top of the vessel as the speed increases it will raise the loop higher above the top of the vessel. The higher you go with your drop the more momentum can be built and the higher the fountain will reach. Once the rope reaches the ground the height of the fountain will stop growing and maintain that height until the rope runs out
Try it using a cable
Memento Mori
Memento Mori
Cool!
Wow.
Cool
Pump
Dope
i refuse to call it the 'Mould Effect' because the hypothesis is entirely wrong
If you place the chain/stiff rope on a dampening surface or use a chain with smaller minimal bend radius/ less stiff rope, the effect IS less pronouced and eventually disappears.
This definitively proves the “ Mould Effect “ is a result of Newton’s laws of motion! All these people can prove to themselves and baffle a confound others by proving how the fountain works with their mathematics , but this video proves Newton’s laws of motion is the primary explanation for he fountain , and not some imagined force exerted by the surface the chain rests on. Medi is more correct than Steve.
steve won
The Cambridge explanation is rubbish.
There is never a bonus-kick at the container.
There is indeed a bonus-kick when a link hits (collides with) the floor, & this adds to the downward pull of a chain, & increases the size of the fountain etc.
But that extra (bonus) force is initiated by the (colliding) link.
In the container a link will indeed get a kick from the container (or from the links beneath), but, that kick is not initiated by the rising link, it is initiated by the preceding link.
The preceding link has a limited amount of impulse to give.
The kick from the container results in a similar (but opposite) kick being given to the preceding link.
But the kick from the container is not a bonus-kick.
The initiating impulse from the preceding link is not added-to by the kick from the container, it is reduced by the kick from the container.
Hence, at the container, links or beads, it makes no difference.
The fountain is simply due to the inertia of a chain.
If a chain is forced to go up, then forced to veer to go horizontally, then forced to veer to go down, the chain will form a curve or a bend or somesuch.
The change in direction will result in strong, uneven centrifugal forces, which eventually (can) result in the initially sharp curve expanding & rising to reduce the centrifugal forces & to even them out.
Giving a larger softer more even curve, ie a fountain effect.
It is virtually impossible to load/store a chain in a container without having loops. And loops result in jumps, koz if u have a close look u can see that chains have a lot of horizontal movement before exiting vertically, & the chain gets lots of little jumps in the container, as each leg of each loop jumps (horizontally) over its mate. Jumps magnify the fountain, kicks dont.
But, in any case, we don’t need jumps nor kicks to achieve a very high fountain. All we need is lots of speed. The chain will crest at any height, depending on speed. The idea that something special (like a kick) is needed (if the chain is to rise above the edge of the jar) is silly.
Lol 😆 🤣 😂
This isn't the Mould effect. The Mould effect is specifically an INCREASE in the arch height. Your rope "fountain" reaches a steady state condition, whereas the chain within the Mould effect continues to rise.
The physics underlying self-siphoning rope/chain is very well understood, but the nuances of the Mould effect are not as well defined yet.
The height of the arch increases as the chain/rope gets pulled faster by gravity, when the chain touches the ground it stops accelerating and the height of the arch reaches its limit, that's why Steve used a crane to get as high as he could.
The height is indeed dependent on the amount of rope that's falling, since this was inconclusive I intend to make good on my promise and try this from a tall building. If I can get a thicker rope I'll try that too.
I don't understand. There is almost no difference between ropes and chains. This 100% should be a thing.
I think they are wearing blinders when they are assuming the effects are only with chains. Changing one veritable at a time is important to good science.
I also would like to see the chain drop when it is close to parallel to the edge. Example, line a chain/rope up on the edge of a buildings roof, then push one end off. The rope/chain will mostly be moving horizontally then down. As the chains full length is at the same vertical starting point. The chain has no tangled mess, though turning may still happen creating some tension. But the process should reduce some of the variables.... For the rope dropping it with the reverse side could also give more information about tensions effect if dropped from an edge... Assuming the effects are present... But the more you experiment to remove variables the more information you will have for the theoretical physicist and mathematicians...
I was also pretty sure physics said gravity accelerated objects. So the longer the item is dropping (till a certain point) the faster it will go. For a chain, or rope this means more rope must be provided at a faster rate. If a rope/chain is pulling out more rope faster in the up direction it will have more force... Inertia... So it will take longer for the direction to change.
I expect a rope parallel to the edge the rope will start going further from the edge.
@@Connorses Get a long soft rope and see how it works laying it on a smooth surface like in the electro boom video maybe,
@@limsalalafells This is why I'm partial to Mehdi's explanation that the key factor is the which direction is the easiest for the rope to escape. In containers like this, it's easier for the rope to escape up and over the lip of the bowl. On a flat board, the easiest way is literally parallel to the board.
Memento Mori