Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Concept

Conserved quantity — where it appears

A function of a mechanism's configuration that no permitted motion changes, whose existence is what confines a mechanism to a surface. Its absence is what makes a rolling constraint non-integrable, so looking for one is the practical form of the question of whether a mechanism is confined.

Named by 3 essays across 2 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Which of these constraints is secretly about positions. How much of the bracket of two permitted directions lies outside the permitted directions, as a fraction of its own length. Frobenius' theorem says a distribution is the tangent field of a family of surfaces exactly when this is zero, so the test needs no integration and no recognition. The scale is logarithmic because the answers are seventeen orders apart: the rail returns nothing at all and everything else returns essentially the whole bracket. There is no mechanism in the middle.

One character apart

Two mechanisms with three coordinates, one constraint row of the same shape and two controls each. In one of them the angle in the row is a coordinate; in the other it is a constant. The first can be driven anywhere and the second can never leave a line, and Frobenius' theorem decides which is which without integrating anything.

rolling · Rolling The path a towed wheel takes. The front wheel is given a path; the rear one obeys a single equation — roll along your own heading, and stay attached. The rod is drawn every twelfth sample and is never imposed: the integrator carries the axle's position and heading and nothing else, and the distance from hitch to axle comes out constant to 1.4e-13 m over the whole run. The rear track cuts every corner, which is off-tracking, and it is the reason a long vehicle needs a wide turn.

The path a towed wheel takes

A towed axle obeys one line: roll along your own heading, and stay attached. Nothing tells it to keep its distance from the hitch and it keeps it to 10⁻¹³ anyway, it settles onto a circle of exactly √(R² − L²), and the residual against that is not the integrator — it is the difference between a circle and the polygon it was sampled as, and it falls by four when the sampling doubles.

rolling · Rolling a crank rocker with a post: the closest pair at one position. The same four-bar with a post bolted to the frame, just clear of the coupler's path. Every joint is where the solver put it, exactly as in the linkage field; the material is the only thing added. The heavy segment joins the two closest points over every pair of parts that is tested — which excludes pairs sharing a pin, since their material surrounds that pin by construction — and its length is the gap: 0.1809 here, between coupler · post. A negative value is a penetration depth, the distance the pair would have to be moved apart, and it is drawn in the warning colour.

Where the boundary moved

Three phases ago this site drew a line around what it computes and listed one thing on the far side as a gap rather than a boundary: interference between links, which needed no new physics, only a body and a test. Here is what that turned out to cost and what it turned out to open.

practice · Practice

Named alongside it

The objects these essays reach for when they reach for this one.

Rolling constraintClosed formConfiguration spaceDistributionFree spaceHolonomicIntegrabilityIntegration errorInterferenceInvariantLayer assignmentLie bracket

All concepts