Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Concept

Overconstraint — where it appears

The condition of a mechanism whose constraints repeat one another, so that a count of them removes more freedoms than the geometry does. It is what makes a mechanism stiff and what makes it demand accurate parts, and the site measures it as the difference between a count of constraints and their rank.

Named by 43 essays across 13 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

Kutzbach's count against the measured mobility. Five closed loops of revolute joints. The count is 6(L − 1) − 5j, a statement about how many links and joints there are; the measurement is the number of joints minus the rank of the loop's screw system, which knows only where the axes point. They disagree for four of the five, and the one they agree on is the generic seven-joint loop — so the formula is not broken, it is blind to the special geometry that makes the other four work. The universal joint is counted at -2 degrees of freedom and is in every car built.

Six freedoms, not three

Every mechanism in these essays so far has been flat, and flatness is not a simplification made for teaching — it is a special case that hides the most interesting thing constraint counting does, which is get the answer wrong about mechanisms that are in daily use.

spatial · Spatial A 3-stage stack at 35°. Every bar is the same length and every stage is at the same angle, which is a consequence of the solve rather than an assumption in the drawing: the pins at the crossings and the roller on the ground leave one freedom, and it has been used. The platform is at 1547 mm and the ram — the heavy line from the ground pin — is 428 mm long. Moving the ram one millimetre from here raises the platform 5.0 mm; at the bottom of the travel the same millimetre is worth 17.6 mm.

A roller is not a slider

A scissor lift has one degree of freedom, at every height and for any number of stages. Grübler's criterion agrees — if the rollers under it are counted as pins in slots. Count them as slider blocks, which is how every textbook draws a slider, and the same formula declares a machine holding a car in the air to be a structure with minus one.

applied · Mobility The Sarrus linkage at 0°. Two three-joint chains in perpendicular planes, joining a fixed plate to a moving one. The left chain's three axes are all parallel, so it allows the plate to move in its plane; the right chain's are parallel to a perpendicular direction and allow the plate to move in that one. What both permit is a straight line, and only a straight line. Six revolute joints in a single loop: Kutzbach says 0 degrees of freedom, the screw system has rank 5 and says 1, and the plate rises. Measured over 24 positions, its tilt never exceeds 2.5e-14 radians and it never leaves the axis by more than 6.8e-14 — exact, from pin joints, with no approximation anywhere in it.

Sarrus, and the straight line that is exact

The planar answer to the straight-line problem took two hundred years and arrived as an inversion cell with eight bars. There is a six-bar answer that is also exact, that was published eleven years before Peaucellier's, and that works for a reason with nothing to do with inversion — it leaves the plane.

spatial · Spatial Three parallel bars, and a formula that says this cannot move. Five links and six pin joints, so Grübler's criterion gives 3(5−1) − 2(6) = 0 and calls it a structure. The Jacobian has rank 5 against 6 free coordinates, so it measures one degree of freedom — and the sweep assembles 59 of 60 positions, which settles the matter. The third bar removes no freedom because its constraint is already implied by the other two, and a formula that counts joints cannot notice that they happen to be parallel. Mechanisms of exactly this kind carry drafting machines, anglepoise lamps and locomotive coupling rods, where the redundant bar is there for load sharing and for keeping the linkage out of its change point.

The mechanism Grübler says cannot move

Three parallel bars between two frames. Five links, six pins, and the criterion every engineering course teaches gives zero degrees of freedom — a structure. It is a mechanism, it is in drafting machines and locomotive coupling rods, and the formula cannot see why.

constraint · Mobility Three verdicts, and only one instrument can give all three. Every 10-link graph that satisfies Grübler's count, split by what is actually true of it. 230 are mechanisms with 10 links. 1,165 carry a subchain whose own count is exactly nought — and neither of the two standing routes can see them: the count returns one and the rank returns one, and both are right, because a rigid subchain removes exactly the freedoms it is supposed to. What is false is the description. 483 carry a subchain whose count is below nought, and those the rank does catch: the surplus pins repeat a constraint already imposed, the Jacobian loses rank, and the measured mobility comes out above the count. The third instrument — a count run over every subset of the links — is the only one that answers the question at all.

What a count cannot see

At ten links, 1,878 graphs satisfy Grübler's rule and 230 are mechanisms. The other 1,648 contain a subchain that is already a structure — and on 1,165 of them the count says one degree of freedom, the rank of the constraint Jacobian says one degree of freedom, and both are right about a mechanism that does not have ten links.

topology · Topology Bennett's four-bar at 40°. Four bars, four revolute joints, and axes that are not parallel — a spatial four-bar, which Kutzbach counts at -2 degrees of freedom. Bennett's condition, sin α / a = sin β / b, makes the screw system rank 3 instead of 4, so the mechanism has 1. Driving the first joint through a full turn, 48 of 48 positions assemble. Orthographic projection, viewed from 40° azimuth and 24° elevation; dashed stubs mark the joint axes.

Bennett, and the condition that moves it

A spatial four-bar is immobile by every count there is, and generically it cannot even be assembled at more than isolated configurations. Bennett found the one relation between four lengths and two twists that makes it turn through a full revolution — and break the relation by two parts in a thousand and most of the travel is gone.

spatial · Spatial The contacts that fight each other — four-legs. With more contacts than freedoms, some weighted sum of the contact forces is zero: those contacts push against each other and not against the part. The weights are the left null space of the wrench matrix and they are drawn here. For four legs on a floor they come out as +−+− — the alternating sum — which is why a table rocks about a diagonal and never sideways, and why the gap under the fourth leg is δ₁ − δ₂ + δ₃ − δ₄ exactly.

The seventh contact

Add a contact to a part that is already exactly constrained and it adds no rank, so it constrains nothing — and it is the only contact in the set that can fail to touch. For four legs on a floor the combination that constrains nothing is the alternating sum of the four, which is why a table rocks about a diagonal and never sideways.

applied · Mobility How often a set of screws is a group. Take a subspace of the twists at random and ask whether it is closed under the Lie bracket — whether doing two of its motions in one order and undoing them in the other leaves you inside it. Every one-dimensional subspace is, trivially and importantly: a single screw always generates a one-parameter subgroup, which is the same statement as every screw is a joint somebody could build. Above one dimension, not one of eighty thousand is a group, and every one of them generates the whole of the rigid displacements at the first bracket. So a mechanism whose motion lies inside a proper subgroup is not merely unusual; it is a coincidence of measure zero — and it is the coincidence every planar mechanism, every spherical one and every Sarrus linkage on this site is built on.

Almost nothing is a group

Eighty thousand subspaces of the twists were drawn at random and closed under the Lie bracket. Above one dimension, not one of them was already closed, and every single one generated the whole of the rigid displacements at the first bracket. Two pins with parallel axes close at three; move one axis a hair and they close at six.

pairs · Pair How much of a compiled machine is computing anything. Each machine's bars split two ways: the ones that build an angle — reflectors, means, rigid offsets, the arm — and the ones that carry a direction from where it was computed to where it is needed. On the smallest machines the arithmetic is nearly all of it. By the quintic the carrying is 80 per cent, and it goes on rising, because the arithmetic grows with the number of terms and the carrying grows with the number of pairs of them. That is the answer to why a universality construction is enormous, and it is not about the algebra being hard.

A parallelogram carries an angle, and only so far

A direction computed at the frame is no use where it is needed. A parallelogram carries one from point to point — but only between two points a fixed distance apart, and that single proviso is what makes a compiled machine quadratic in the number of terms and turns most of it into transport.

computing · Compute What the count is right about. Freedoms minus dependencies, against what the count predicts, on seven assemblies from three different representations. The difference is exact every time and it is exact for a reason that has nothing to do with mechanisms: the count is unknowns minus constraints, the rank is a number no larger than either, and the two nullities are what each of them has left over. So a count is not wrong in the way a mismeasurement is wrong. It is a statement about a difference being read as a statement about one of the terms — and on four of these seven rows both terms are large and the difference is nearly meaningless.

A constraint that has been said already

Every constraint matrix leaves two null spaces, and a mechanism only lives in one of them. The other is the set of combinations of constraints that come to nothing — and its dimension is exactly the amount by which the count is wrong, on a deployable ring, a Miura sheet and a framework with twelve bars and six joints.

networks · Network A bevel differential, turning. cage in, hold left, with every member's speed taken from the train's null space and every angular position that speed integrated. The teeth are marked at the pitch points rather than cut as involutes — the flank is the teeth field's subject — but the count is the tooth count and the positions are the solved ones, so what turns and how fast is real. Drag it and watch which way each member goes: left 0.000 · right 2.000 · cage 1.000.

One wheel on ice

A differential with one wheel stopped turns the other at exactly twice the cage, and the relation it imposes is satisfied the whole time — nothing has failed, nothing is confused, and the reason the car does not move is not in the kinematics. What is here is the other half: a locked axle is an overconstrained mechanism, and the sliding it produces is 2π times the track per circle driven, whatever the radius.

transmission · Transmission 5 contacts, and 1 of them free not to touch. A hexagon on five contacts. Each contact is removed in turn and the hold recomputed; the ones drawn in the warning colour are those whose removal leaves the part still held, which is to say the ones that are constraining nothing the others were not already constraining. There is one here, and the margin without it is 0.091 — unchanged, to every figure. That is the unilateral form of what a redundant constraint costs, and it costs something different from the bilateral form: a redundant bilateral constraint has to be satisfied and cannot be, so it leaves a gap somewhere; a redundant contact is simply free not to touch, and whether it does is decided by errors nobody controls. positioned by solving, not by drawing.

The contact that is free not to touch

A hexagon on five contacts holds, and taking one of the five away leaves the margin at 0.0914 — unchanged, to every figure. That contact constrains nothing the others were not already constraining, and what it actually does is become the one member of the set that is free not to touch, with the decision made by errors nobody controls.

holding · Restraint Kutzbach, plus the constraints counted twice. Each row is 6(n − j − 1) + Σf, then the redundant constraints ν measured from the two legs' constraint systems, then the mobility measured from the rank of the whole loop's screw system. The first column is wrong for 5 of 6 of these mechanisms; adding ν repairs every one. The catch is that ν is not a property of the joint graph — Bennett's linkage and a spatial four-bar with one twist changed have the same graph and different ν — so the corrected formula needs the measurement it was supposed to replace.

The formula is repaired by the thing it replaced

Kutzbach's count is wrong about most of the mechanisms worth building, and every textbook gives the same repair — add back the constraints that were imposed twice. The repair works on every loop in these essays. It is also not a formula, because the number it adds cannot be read off the joint graph.

constraint · Spatial Whose constraints stay put. The largest principal angle between a mechanism's screw system at the start of its motion and at each later position. The 3 mechanisms whose motion lies in a subgroup of the rigid displacements — planar, spherical, translational — never leave the same subspace, and read between 1.9e-6 and 3.0e-6 degrees, which is the precision of an arccosine near one rather than a movement. The paradoxical ones turn through 49° and 57°. Every curve runs over its own range of motion, because Bricard's linkage assembles over 120 degrees and a shared axis would hide it.

Two ways to be overconstrained

A planar four-bar and Bennett's four-bar report the same redundancy, the same rank and the same wrong count. One of them is overconstrained at every set of link lengths; the other at exactly one ratio and nowhere near it. The difference is not in any of the numbers so far — but it is measurable, and the measurement is an angle.

spatial · Spatial The same error, twice, in two directions. A Sarrus linkage with one axis of one chain tilted off true, and the motion range that survives. Tilted within the plane the chain works in, it does not care: at 0.2 radians — eleven and a half degrees, which is not a manufacturing error by any standard — it still drives through a full turn. Tilted out of that plane, 0.001 radians stops it dead. Two hundred times the error, in the other direction, for no cost at all. What separates them is whether the perturbation lies in the screw system the mechanism leaves unconstrained — so "an overconstrained mechanism must be exact" is not merely crude, it is wrong about the case it is usually said of.

Fragility has a direction

Tilt one axis of a Sarrus linkage out of true by a thousandth of a radian and it stops dead. Tilt the same axis of the same mechanism by two hundred times as much, in the other direction, and it drives through a full turn with nothing measurably wrong. Three orders of magnitude between two errors of the same size — and the direction that matters is the one the reciprocal screw system names.

practice · Overconstraint A spherical four-bar: 90°, 40°, 100°, 80°. Four revolute axes, all through one point, so the linkage lives on a sphere. Its link "lengths" are the angles between consecutive axes — 90°, 40°, 100°, 80° — and the arcs drawn between the axis directions measure 40.00°, 100.00°, 80.00°, 90.00°. The whole planar four-bar theory carries over with sines where lengths were, including Grashof's condition: sorted, the arcs give s + l = 140° against p + q = 170°, so the shortest arc does turn all the way round — and swept, the input reaches 36 of 36 positions over a driveable range of 360°. This is the mechanism a universal joint is a special case of, with two of the four arcs at 90°.

When the link lengths are angles

Put every axis of a four-bar through one point and the mechanism lives on a sphere. Its bars become arcs, its lengths become angles, and every planar result carries over with a sine where a length used to be — including Grashof's condition, which still predicts exactly which link goes all the way round.

spatial · Spatial What each instrument returns, on each kind of graph. The 8-link census, three rows, and the same three questions asked of every graph in it. Grübler returns 1 in every row — it has to, because that is what the census selected on. The rank returns 1 in the first two rows and 2 in the third. Only the third column changes across all three rows, and it is the one the earlier counts did not have before this one: a mobility computed for every subset of the links rather than for the whole. Read down the middle two columns and the site's standing pair of routes is unanimous about 62 graphs, of which only 16 are what it says they are.

The count was right and the name was wrong

The constraint field has checked Grübler's count against a Jacobian rank since the foundation, and the two disagree only where the geometry is special. Here is an assembly where they agree, where both are correct, and where the mechanism does not have the number of links it is described as having.

constraint · Mobility What the clearance has to swallow. Bennett's linkage with its second length multiplied by 1 + δ, and the closure error the solver drives down to and then cannot improve on. The loop does not close at any δ tried, including one part in a million. But the gap is exactly proportional to δ — the ratio varies by 0.07% across four decades — with a measured constant of 0.507. Shared over 4 joints that is 0.127 δ of play per pin, so a linkage machined to one part in a thousand needs about 0.20 mm of clearance in a link of 1.6 m, or a hundredth of a millimetre in a link of 1.6 cm. That is an ordinary running fit, and it is why a mechanism that cannot be built is in every folding table.

Why a hinge works

A door hinge with three knuckles is overconstrained — three axes imposed where one would do, and exactly parallel is a condition no bored hole has ever met. It works because the misfit is 0.507 times the error and the play in each knuckle is larger than that. The mechanisms these essays called unbuildable are built every day, and the thing that builds them is the clearance that was already there.

practice · Overconstraint A brace is one redundant equation, on purpose. The compiled machine, counted and measured, with and without 4 braces. The count says the braced machine has -3 degrees of freedom — it cannot move — and the rank of the constraint Jacobian says it has 1, the same as before. Every brace contributes exactly one equation the others already imply, which is what overconstraint is, and here it is being added deliberately: the redundancy is what removes the assemblies the count knows nothing about. This is Grübler being wrong for the useful reason rather than the embarrassing one.

A bar between two midpoints

In a parallelogram the midpoints of two opposite sides are exactly one side apart, and in the crossed assembly they are not. One bar between them admits the first and refuses the second — and it is one redundant equation per parallelogram, added on purpose, on a site whose constraint field is otherwise about overconstraint arriving by accident.

computing · Compute The framework Maxwell's count calls a structure. Six joints and twelve bars in space. Three coordinates each gives eighteen unknowns, six rigid motions come off, and twelve bars is exactly twelve constraints — Maxwell's count is 6 against six rigid motions, which is the definition of isostatic: no mechanism, no redundancy, every bar carrying its own share and nothing spare. The rank is 11, not twelve. There is one dependency among the bars and one freedom left over, and the freedom is a genuine finite motion: walked here with every bar held to 4.4e-16 of its own length. The reason is a symmetry — three pairs of joints exchanged by a half turn about one line — and it is built into the coordinates rather than assumed of the result. positioned by solving, not by drawing.

Twelve bars and a symmetry

Six joints and twelve bars in space is Maxwell's count exactly: no mechanism, no redundancy, nothing spare. Place three pairs of the joints so that a half turn about one line exchanges them and it moves — a finite motion, walked with every bar held to five ten-thousand-billionths of its own length, on a framework the arithmetic calls a structure.

spatial · Spatial Sarrus, as two planes meeting in a line. Each arm of Sarrus's linkage is three pins with parallel axes, so each arm holds the platform inside a planar group — the one whose normal is that arm's axis direction. The platform has to satisfy both, so what it may do is the intersection, and the intersection of two planar groups whose normals are not parallel is the one-dimensional group of translations along their common perpendicular. The platform goes up and down and does nothing else, and that is the exact straight line the spatial field measured to 10⁻¹⁶ of its span — arrived at here with no mechanism solved and no tolerance anywhere. Drag the arms towards each other: the answer is a translation at every angle but zero, where the two groups become one group and the intersection jumps to three dimensions. That is the linkage built flat, and it is the configuration in which it stops being a straight-line mechanism.

Two planes meeting in a line

Sarrus's linkage draws an exact straight line out of six pin joints, and the spatial field proved it by solving the mechanism sixty times and measuring a departure of 9.8 × 10⁻¹⁶. Here the same fact comes out of two planes and a cross product, with no mechanism solved anywhere — and the two routes are not redundant, because only one of them can tell you the linkage as built delivers it.

pairs · Pair How much of Bennett's turn survives a bar being wrong. The same four bars and the same four twists, with one bar's length changed by the amount on the left and nothing else touched. The bar shows the fraction of 48 sampled positions of the first joint at which the loop closes to within 10⁻⁹. Two parts in a thousand already costs most of the travel. This is what it means for a mechanism to work only on a condition rather than approximately near one — and it is why Bennett's linkage was a curiosity for eighty years before anyone could machine to it.

Bennett's condition is a ratio

A spatial loop's parameters are lengths and angles together, so a scaling touches only half of them. Bennett's condition — a over sine alpha equals b over sine beta — is a relation between the two halves, and what it demands of a machine is a relation between its lengths and its twists rather than a property of either.

spatial · Spatial Four instruments, and only the last one names the group. Every instrument these essays have for an overconstrained loop, on the same six mechanisms. Kutzbach's count gives −2 for a planar four-bar and −2 for Bennett's. The rank of the constraint Jacobian gives three and three. Both are right and neither separates them. The last two columns are this field's: the span is how many dimensions the logarithms of the displacements the moving link actually reaches occupy, and closes at is the dimension after those are closed under the bracket. A planar four-bar closes at three and the three are planar motion; Sarrus closes at one, a translation, which is the exact straight line the spatial field measured by solving the mechanism sixty times. Bennett closes at six: its displacements occupy four dimensions and no group smaller than all of them contains those four. That is what "paradoxical" has meant in the earlier essays, stated as an integer.

Compose two positions and see where you land

Take two configurations a mechanism actually reaches, compose the displacements that got it there, and ask what kind of thing the result is. A planar four-bar lands inside planar motion, to 4 × 10⁻¹⁶. Sarrus lands on its own line. Bennett's linkage lands three tenths of a radian outside the four dimensions its own displacements occupy — a one-freedom motion that generates all six.

pairs · Pair Every axis through one point. Four wheels on one rigid body, each rolling without sliding. Each turns about some point on its own axle line, and a rigid body has one such point, so every axle line has to pass through it. That is the whole of steering geometry, and it is a rank condition rather than a formula: here the four rows have rank 2 of 3, leaving a one-dimensional family of twists, and the centre they agree on is 12.000 m to the side. The scrub is 3.2e-17 m per metre — zero, to the last digit.

Every axis through one point

Bolt several rolling wheels to one rigid body and they impose one condition between them: every axle line must pass through a single point. The familiar steering formula falls out of it as a consequence rather than being quoted — cot δₒ − cot δᵢ = 0.574074 at a turn of six metres, of eight, of twelve and of twenty, on a track of 1.55 m and a wheelbase of 2.7.

rolling · Rolling In space the arithmetic allows almost nothing. A body in space has six freedoms and a revolute joint takes five, so a mobility of one needs (6n − 7)/5 joints — and that is an integer only when the link count leaves a remainder of two on division by five. The whole table is this: 7, 12, 17, 22 links, and nothing else. At seven links the degrees must sum to fourteen across seven links with none below two, so every link is binary and the graph is a single seven-cycle: there is exactly one spatial chain, and it is a loop. That is the census explanation for something the spatial field has lived with since it was written — every spatial mechanism in these essays is one closed loop — and it had never been stated as a count. The next admissible size is twelve links and thirteen joints, where two assortments are arithmetically possible, 157 candidates give 33 graphs, and 5 of them are chains — every one with ten binary links and two ternary, so the assortment with a quaternary link is empty exactly as four of the planar ones are.

In space there is one chain

A body in space has six freedoms and a revolute joint takes five, so a mobility of one needs (6n−7)/5 joints — an integer only when the link count leaves a remainder of two on division by five. At seven links every link is binary, the graph is a single seven-cycle, and there is exactly one spatial chain.

spatial · Spatial One freedom, whatever the count says. Every one of these machines has exactly one degree of freedom, measured as the number of unknowns minus the rank of the constraint Jacobian. Unbraced, the count agrees. Braced, the count says the largest machine has -153 — that it cannot move, by a wide margin — and the rank says it still turns exactly as it did. The gap is one equation per brace and every one of those equations is implied by the others. This is the constraint field's oldest example, at a scale nobody would try by hand: a count that is wrong by a hundred and fifty-three about a mechanism that works.

One freedom and four hundred links

Braced, the machine compiled from a quintic has 1,249 equations in 1,096 unknowns and a Grübler count of minus a hundred and fifty-three. It turns. The rank of its constraint Jacobian is 1,095, so its mobility is one — and every one of the hundred and fifty-four surplus equations was added deliberately.

constraint · Mobility Three legs and four, at 0°. The same slice of positions at a platform angle of 0°, shaded by how well the platform is held — pale is near singular. Left, three legs: 3,312 reachable samples and a singular curve through them in 102 segments. Right, the same three legs and a fourth: 3,198 reachable, because the fourth leg must reach too, and no curve. What is left of the singular set in this slice is 1 isolated point, at (-1.449, -0.811), where all four lines meet. Positions held above 0.1 go from 2,989 to 3,178, and at no sampled position is the four-legged platform held less well than the three-legged one.

What a fourth leg buys

Three leg lines fail to hold a platform when they meet at a point, which is one condition, so in every slice of the workspace the failures form a curve. Four lines fail only when all four meet at a point, which is two conditions, so the curve becomes isolated points. The fourth leg buys that and more, and it costs a machine that can no longer be assembled from any four motor angles.

parallel · Parallel A yoke 70 wide on a constant-breadth cam, at 60°. The cycloidal programme — rise 10 over 120°, return over 120° — cut for flat faces on a base circle of 30 and held between two parallel faces 70 apart, turned to 60.0°. The upper face rests at 5.000 above the base circle, which is the programme's lift there. The lower face touches the cam too: the distance across the cam along the follower's line is 70.000 at this angle and at every other, so the follower is driven up by one face and down by the other with no spring and nothing to spare.

A cam that holds its follower both ways

Two parallel faces joined into a yoke can drive a follower out and back with no spring, but only if the cam's breadth along the follower's line is the same at every angle — s(θ) + s(θ + 180°) constant. That makes the second half-turn the first one reflected. The cam field's standing programme misses by 9.502, and a second disc that frees the programme needs a yoke at least 60.66 wide.

cams · Cam Four instruments, and only the last one names the group. Every instrument these essays have for an overconstrained loop, on the same six mechanisms. Kutzbach's count gives −2 for a planar four-bar and −2 for Bennett's. The rank of the constraint Jacobian gives three and three. Both are right and neither separates them. The last two columns are this field's: the span is how many dimensions the logarithms of the displacements the moving link actually reaches occupy, and closes at is the dimension after those are closed under the bracket. A planar four-bar closes at three and the three are planar motion; Sarrus closes at one, a translation, which is the exact straight line the spatial field measured by solving the mechanism sixty times. Bennett closes at six: its displacements occupy four dimensions and no group smaller than all of them contains those four. That is what "paradoxical" has meant in the earlier essays, stated as an integer.

A name for each overconstraint

The spatial field separated subgroup overconstraint from paradoxical by measuring how far a mechanism's screw system turns: 2 × 10⁻⁶ degrees against 89. That is a verdict without a name. Closing the logarithms of the reached displacements under the bracket gives the same verdict and says which group — planar, spherical, a translation — and for Bennett's linkage it says six.

spatial · Spatial Seven arrangements, one routine, and the two that hold. Every row is the same three steps: write down one row per contact — the moment of its normal about the origin, then the normal itself — take the convex hull of those rows, and ask whether the origin is inside it. The parts differ, the numbers of contacts differ, and the routine does not. Two of the seven hold. The other five leave the part something, and the interesting column is what: four rays of rotation for the pinwheel, a translation straight out of the vee, and for the last two a whole line rather than any number of rays, which is what a rank below three means and is the case a reader has to be warned about. Note that the four contacts of the second row are the four of the first row, on the same four edges of the same square, at the same distance along each. positioned by solving, not by drawing.

Six hold nothing

Every exact-constraint coupling in these essays — Kelvin, Maxwell, three-two-one, and a Kelvin clamp with a seventh pad added — has rank six and holds the part not at all. The escape a Maxwell coupling leaves is a pure vertical translation with nothing else in it, which is not a defect: it is what a coupling is, and gravity is the seventh contact nobody draws.

holding · Mobility Nine bars joining two sets of three joints, at three placements of one motion. Joints B₁, B₂ and B₃ lie on the horizontal line at -2, 1, 3, joints W₁, W₂ and W₃ on the vertical line through the same point at -1.5, 1, 2.5, and every joint of one set is barred to every joint of the other. Counted, nine bars on six joints leave no freedom. Drawn here at three placements, the joints have slid along their lines — B₂ at 0.632 and W₂ at 1.265; B₂ at 1.000 and W₂ at 1.000; B₂ at 1.265 and W₂ at 0.632 — and every one of the nine bars has the same length in all three, to 4.4e-16.

Nine bars that ought to be rigid

Join each of three joints to each of three others and the nine bars leave no freedom, by the count and by the rank, wherever the joints are. Put one set on a line and the other on a line at right angles and the framework moves, all the way round a loop, with no bar repeating any other: take away any one of the nine and the motion is unchanged, take away any two and it gains a freedom. Tilt the lines by a degree and it still has a freedom by rank and cannot move at all.

constraint · Mobility A framework built off square, and the play it asks for to move at all. The nine bars with their two lines 4° from perpendicular, as built and after the first joint has been pushed 0.2 along its line. The framework has a freedom by rank and no motion, so the push cannot be taken with the bars at their lengths. With every bar allowed to be wrong by 1.509e-4 — which is a radial clearance of 7.547e-5 at each end — a placement exists, and the worst bar in it is out by 1.509e-4. The same push on the perpendicular framework needs no allowance at all, because there it is a motion.

The right angle as a tolerance

Dixon's nine bars move only when their two lines are exactly perpendicular, and a framework built a degree off square has a freedom by rank and no motion at all. Give its joints clearance and it moves a bounded distance: the play each bar needs is proportional to the tilt and to the square of the travel, one constant serves every tilt, and all nine bars end up at that play exactly. Then it reaches its first crossing, where the push is as large as the motion ever makes it, and a hundredth of a push further costs fifty-eight times the law — square or not.

constraint · Mobility Dixon's nine bars with every joint somewhere inside its clearance. Dixon's framework — joints at -2, 1, 3 on one line and -1.5, 1, 2.5 on a line square to it, every joint of one set barred to every joint of the other — with each joint moved to a seeded point inside a disc about its nominal place. The discs are drawn with a radius of 0.12 so that they can be seen; the framework measured has joint errors about a hundred times smaller. The nominal joints lie on two lines, which is one conic, and that is what lets nine bars on six joints flex. The joints as built lie on no conic: at an error of ρ, seed 2's smallest singular value is 0.1746ρ where the nominal framework's is nought, so by rank it is a structure.

The clearance that makes the framework generic

A clearance lets Dixon's nine bars move, and it also moves their joints off the two lines that let them move at all. Six joints off a conic make the framework rigid by rank, with a smallest singular value proportional to its distance from a conic. The same clearance that did the damage pays for it fourteen times over: a framework built anywhere inside its clearance discs is pushed to its first crossing using at most 7% of the allowance those discs give. The tilt of the lines decides how far it goes; its own joint errors change that by about 1%.

constraint · Mobility A slide spends one ball of every pair. A 6-ball Rzeppa joint bent 20°, at the symmetric position, with its cage slid along its own normal by 0 of the window clearance c and then tilted to allow the largest lag. Each column is one ball's window, from −c to +c, and the dot is where the ball sits in it at that lag: −1.00, 1.00, −1.00, 1.00, −1.00, 1.00 c. The lag is 0.3500 c. Opposite balls lie on one line through the joint's centre, so a lag or a tilt moves them opposite ways and a slide moves them the same way: whatever the slide gives one ball of a pair it takes from the other, and the lag falls as 1 − s/c.

A floating cage frees three balls and not six

A Rzeppa cage that may slide along its own normal as well as tilt has a third freedom, and counting constraints against freedoms says a six-ball joint should then lose its hold on the lag altogether. It loses nothing: a slide moves both balls of an opposite pair the same way, so it spends one ball's clearance for every one it frees, and the six-ball lag stays at 0.350 c. A three-ball joint, whose balls have no opposites, loses its bound outright, because three ball centres always lie in some plane. Offset grooves then add a second limit, set by the worst ball alone, which takes over from the cage only past an offset of about 0.35 times the tracks' play over the windows'.

pairs · Pair Every surface tried, and the group it permits. The census the six lower pairs come out of. Each row is a surface, sampled at 240 points; the freedoms column is six minus the rank of a matrix with one row per point, saying that the velocity a twist gives that point is tangent to the surface. Nothing is fitted and no shape is recognised — the surface's own normals write the matrix down. Three different surfaces of revolution give the same group, which is the content of the classification; two surfaces give nothing, which is what almost every surface gives. Eleven surfaces, six groups. The last column is the ratio of the smallest singular value kept to the largest discarded, so a row reading 10¹⁵ is not near being reclassified by anybody's tolerance.

The pair a catalogue sells

A plain bearing is a cylindrical pair and a catalogue calls it a bearing. Add two thrust faces and it is a revolute pair, which is a different joint and changes every mobility count downstream. The kinematic identity of a bought part is decided by which surfaces touch, and the catalogue's word for it is not the same information.

practice · Clearance Past the crossing, one push names two placements, one in each family. Dixon's framework, joints at −2, 1, 3 on one line and −1.5, 1, 2.5 on a line square to it, held by B₁ and the direction of B₁W₁, with B₂ pushed 0.5 along its line. Solid: the placement on the family the framework starts in (++), reached before the crossing. Dashed: the placement at the same push on the family beyond it (+−), reached after W₂ has passed the other line at a push of 0.591 — the faint framework — and the push has begun to fall again. Every bar has its drawn length in both. A framework with no errors moves from one to the other through the crossing; a framework as built has no motion and must be carried there by its play.

The price of the other family

At its crossing, Dixon's framework passes from one family of placements to another, and past it every push names two placements, one in each. A framework built with its joints anywhere inside a clearance ρ has no motion to follow, so its play has to carry it. The price of going on is proportional to ρ, from 0.002ρ to 0.20ρ across ten frameworks, exactly as a parallelogram's change point is — and reversing every joint error leaves it unchanged. Eight of the ten find the far family dearer than their own and two find it cheaper, and all of them find it far inside the 2ρ their clearance gives.

constraint · Mobility Past the play, a caged joint shares its load and a grooved one leans on one ball. Two six-ball Rzeppa joints bent 20°, at an input angle of 15°, each twisted 0.03 of a window clearance past its free lag, with every contact a spring of the same stiffness and the cage and balls settled where the stored energy is least. Bars: each ball's share of the total contact load. Left, grooves offset 0.1, where the cage sets the play: 0.17, 0.20, 0.19, 0.16, 0.14, 0.15, 5.91 balls' worth. Right, grooves offset 0.7, where the grooves do: 0.00, 1.00, 0.00, 0.00, 0.00, 0.00, 1.00 balls' worth. Dotted: an even sixth.

A tight groove leans on one ball

A six-ball Rzeppa joint's free play is set by the tighter of its cage and its offset grooves, and the two limits look alike from outside. They are not alike once the play is taken up. With every contact made a spring of the same stiffness and the joint twisted past its free lag, a joint whose cage binds spreads the first load across four to six balls' worth and, a third of a window clearance on, gives every ball between 0.17 and 0.19 of it. A joint whose grooves bind puts the first load on one ball alone over most of a ball pitch, and two clearances on it still spreads it over fewer than six. At the same torque its hardest-pressed ball carries 1.5 to 3.0 times the caged joint's. Tightening the tracks to cut the play buys the play with uneven loading.

pairs · Pair Each family carries one self-stress, and the price is how hard the errors load it. Dixon's framework pushed 0.5 along B₂'s line, on the family it starts in. Pinned and pushed it has eight free coordinates against nine bars, so it carries exactly one self-stress: bar forces that balance at every joint. Each bar is drawn with a width in proportion to its share of that stress, tension solid and compression dashed: B₁W₁ -0.126, B₁W₂ 0.210, B₁W₃ -0.140, B₂W₁ 0.270, B₂W₂ -0.395, B₂W₃ 0.350, B₃W₁ -0.333, B₃W₂ 0.587, B₃W₃ -0.337. A framework as built with joint errors d pays, per unit ρ, |ω·e| / Σ|ωᵢ|, where e is the bar-length error its joints make. Framework 4 pays 0.0293 on the near family and 0.0267 on the far one; framework 7 pays 0.0131 and 0.0023.

The price is one self-stress

A Dixon framework built with its joints a little out of place has to be carried past its crossing by play, and the play it needs was measured by bisection, framework by framework. It has a closed form. Pinned and pushed, the framework carries exactly one self-stress on each family, and the least play is the errors' bar misfits weighted by that stress, over the stress's size. The formula matches every measured price to 0.6%, says why two frameworks of ten prefer the far family, and finds that one in twelve does.

constraint · Mobility Tighten the windows and the cage's limit drops below the grooves'. The six-ball Rzeppa joint bent 20° with its grooves offset 0.7 and a track play of one: across a ball pitch, the free lag the grooves alone allow (solid) and the cage alone allows with windows of clearance 0.5 (dashed). The joint's play is the smaller of the two. The cage is the limit wherever its curve is the lower, here at every input angle; it becomes the limit everywhere once the windows' clearance is below 0.559 of the track play. The largest play over the pitch is 0.163.

A tight cage spreads the load until the tracks join in

A Rzeppa joint whose offset grooves set its play loads one ball first, and at equal torque its hardest-pressed ball carries up to three times a joint whose cage sets the play. Tighten the cage's windows below 0.559 of the track play and the cage becomes the limit at every input angle: the first load spreads over 3.6 balls' worth or more everywhere, the play falls, and at low torque the worst ball carries no more than a caged joint's. The cage does not stay in charge. Once the twist reaches the gap between the two limits the tracks engage, unevenly, and the worst ball climbs back towards the untightened joint's. A tighter cage widens the gap and pushes that torque up, so the windows' clearance is a choice about the torque at which even loading should end.

pairs · Pair Either side of the crossing, only W₂ is somewhere else. Dixon's framework, pinned at B₁ with the bar B₁W₁ held in direction, a distance s = 0.3 along its motion before its first crossing (solid) and the same distance beyond it (dashed, W₂'s three bars only). The motion is Dixon's closed form with t = 1 − s²: every joint but W₂ is a function of s², so it is in the same place on both sides — here to the last digit — and W₂ is at s and −s, on opposite sides of the line through the black joints. The push on B₂ is the same at s and −s and is largest at the crossing, a fold; W₂'s side of the black line passes through nought.

A push turns back at the crossing

Dixon's framework as built has play enough to go on past its first crossing onto either family, and the question left open was which one a push on B₂ chooses: the family whose self-stress is cheaper, or something else. Neither. Dixon's own formula says that near the crossing every joint but W₂ moves as the square of the distance along the motion, so the push is at a fold there on both sides, and no push can carry the framework through. Ten frameworks as built, pushed to their turning point and pulled back, all retrace, including the two that are cheaper beyond. Driven instead by W₂'s side of the black line, all ten go through, needing exactly the worst price on their path, and the price is continuous through the crossing.

constraint · Mobility B₂ and W₂ go round like the ends of a trammel bar. Dixon's framework in its own frame: the black joints on the horizontal line, the white on the vertical, nine bars joining every black to every white. Round the whole motion, all four families joined at their crossings, B₂ is at √2 cos ψ on the black line and W₂ at √2 sin ψ on the white, so the bar between them (heavy) slides with its ends on two perpendicular lines and turns once as the framework goes once round. The corner of the rectangle on B₂ and W₂ (small dot) is at angle ψ on the dotted circle of radius √2, and goes round it once. Here ψ = 60°: B₂ at 0.707, W₂ at 1.225. The arc at W₂ is the motor's angle, from the bar W₂B₂ to the bar W₂B₃, 37.2°.

A drive that goes round is an angle

Dixon's framework moves round a loop through four crossings, and a push on B₂ folds at two of them while a drive on W₂'s side folds at the other two. A lever moving both was proposed as the drive that would go all the way round. It cannot, and no drive that is one number read off the joints can: round the whole loop B₂ and W₂ sit at √2 cos ψ and √2 sin ψ on their two lines, the ends of a trammel bar, so the loop is a circle and every such number has a top and a bottom on it. A lever only moves its two folds off the crossings. What goes round is an angle. Four of the framework's eighteen joint angles turn once as it goes once round, never stopping, and a motor at W₂ takes ten frameworks as built all the way round at the worst price on the loop — 1.00 to 1.46 times their worst crossing — after which every turn repeats the first.

constraint · Mobility The bores, and the one line that has to pass through all of them. A hinge of 6 knuckles, its bores drawn at the distance each was made from the nominal axis in units of the bore tolerance. The leaf is a rigid body, so its pins are on one straight line — two parameters of position and two of direction — and it assembles when some line passes within the clearance of every bore. The line drawn is the one whose largest miss is smallest, and that miss is 0.875 of the tolerance. 2 of the 6 bores are at that distance and hold the fit; the rest are slack and could have been bored anywhere inside it without changing the answer.

A piano hinge is not forty door hinges

A three-knuckle hinge works because the misfit its bore errors create is smaller than the play already in its pins. A piano hinge has forty knuckles and thirty-nine of them are redundant, so the obvious reading is that it needs thirteen times the play. It needs two and a half times, and it can never need more than the bore tolerance itself — because a rigid leaf has one axis and a line through the middle of the errors misses every bore by at most the largest of them.

practice · Overconstraint Moved apart, the nearest joints still go round a circle. A Dixon framework with B₂ starting 1 from the crossing point on the black line and W₂ starting 1.4 on the white, every other joint where Dixon put it: blacks at −2 and 3, whites at −1.5 and 2.5. Round its whole motion B₂ and W₂ stay on a circle of radius √(1 + 1.4²) = 1.720 (dotted), because the bar between them (heavy) keeps its length. Here ψ = 250°: B₂ at −0.588, W₂ at −1.617, W₁ at −1.704. The angle at B₂ between the bars to W₂ and W₁ turns once round the loop with its speed between 0.046 and 1.954 per unit of ψ, slowest as B₂ crosses the white line.

Put the motor where the rocking bar is longest

Dixon's framework goes round its loop with its two nearest joints on the ends of a trammel bar, and a motor at a joint angle with that bar for a side carries it round with no fold. With the nearest joints starting at different distances it looked as though the loop would become an ellipse and some angle would nearly stop. The loop stays a circle at every ratio, because the bar between the two joints is a bar. Each of the four turning angles runs at one radian per unit of the loop, plus or minus the rate of its other side, which rocks fastest at a crossing and there turns at the trammel bar's length over its own. That gives each angle's speed ratio in closed form, says none of them ever stops, and puts the motor at whichever joint has the longest rocking bar.

constraint · Mobility

Named alongside it

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

MobilityRankRedundant constraintConstraintClearanceDegrees of freedomScrew systemToleranceBennett's linkageDisplacement subgroupGrübler's criterionConstraint jacobian

All concepts