Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Concept

Ratio — where it appears

The proportion between two members' rates of rotation, positive when they turn the same way and negative when they do not. It is a number only when the mechanism was built to make it one, and this site's habit is to compute the whole function and then ask what the quoted number was.

Named by 29 essays across 8 fields — each of them below, with the objects they name alongside it.

What each machine is sold with. Every mechanism in this field arrives with a number. The middle column is that number; the right-hand column is what the mechanism was measured to have, by the library named under the row. The coloured bar and the word under each machine are the verdict: exact means the mechanism has the number at every position, mean that it is the average of something that varies within every cycle, bounded that it is false by a stated and negligible amount, point that it is the value at one position, and quoted that the mechanism has no such quantity at all. Of the 14 rows, 6 are quoted and 3 are exact.

The number on the box

Fourteen machines, fourteen quoted numbers, and five different things a quoted number can be. Six of the fourteen name a quantity the mechanism does not have at all; three are exactly right, and all three of them are counts. The field is built on the difference.

applied · Misconception A ratio that is not a number. The output-to-input angular velocity of a four-bar, computed from the velocity solution at every position. It runs from -0.398 to 0.333 — it changes sign, because the rocker turns back — with a mean of 0.000 that no instant of the cycle actually exhibits. Quoting a single figure for a linkage's ratio is quoting the average of that curve. A gear pair is the case where the same phrase is honest: its ratio is 0.5000 and stays there, which is not a coincidence but the property the involute was invented to guarantee.

The ratio that is not a number

A four-bar's output-to-input speed ratio runs from −0.29 to 0.51 through one turn and changes sign on the way. Quoting a single figure for it quotes the average of that curve, which the mechanism never exhibits. A gear pair is the case where the same phrase is honest, and it is honest by construction.

wrong · Misconception Three bars and four bars. On the left, two bars to a common point: three links, three joints, and Grübler gives 3(3−1) − 2(3) = 0. The Jacobian agrees — two free coordinates, rank 2, nothing left over — and the shape cannot change without a bar changing length. On the right, one more bar and one more joint gives mobility 1, and the whole of this site follows from that difference. The triangle is why bridges are triangulated and the quadrilateral is why machines are not.

What decides whether it moves

Before a mechanism does anything it has to be able to. Two bars pinned to a point cannot move; three can. The count that separates them is one subtraction, it is the first thing anybody computes about a machine, and it can be wrong in a way that no amount of care with the arithmetic will catch.

constraint · Mobility The involute, unwound. Hold a string taut against a circle and unwind it: the end traces this curve. Two properties follow immediately and between them they are the whole of gear geometry. The string is always tangent to the base circle, and it is always perpendicular to the curve. So the normal to an involute at any point is a tangent to its base circle — measured on the generated points here, to 2.3e-5 — and when two involutes touch, the common normal is a line tangent to both base circles, which does not move as the gears turn.

Why a tooth is an involute

A gear tooth is not a shape anybody chose for its looks. It is what one requirement forces — that the ratio of the two shafts' speeds stays exactly constant while the contact point slides along the flank. Impose that and the curve is essentially determined.

gears · Tooth Mobility, counted and measured. Grübler's criterion counts links and joints and knows nothing about the dimensions; the rank of the constraint Jacobian measures the dimensions and knows nothing about the topology. They agree for four of these five. The parallelogram with a redundant third bar is the exception: the formula declares it a structure with zero degrees of freedom, and it moves. The formula is the one that is wrong, because it cannot see that the third bar's constraint equations are already implied by the other two.

Counting and measuring mobility

Grübler's criterion counts links and joints and never asks how long anything is. The rank of the constraint Jacobian measures the lengths and never asks what a joint is. Two calculations with no inputs in common, producing one number — which is the only arrangement under which agreement is evidence.

constraint · Mobility Two things that are not the same configuration. The mechanical advantage of a four-bar, from the velocity solution: for a lossless mechanism it is the reciprocal of the output-to-input speed ratio, so wherever the output momentarily stops the force ratio diverges. It reaches 1673 at 222° — a toggle, where crank and coupler line up, and the reason a knee-joint clamp holds with almost no effort. The transmission angle is at its worst somewhere else entirely: 46.5° at 0°, 222° away, where coupler and rocker line up instead. Both get called "the mechanism jamming" and they are opposite situations — one is enormous force output, the other is force going into the bearings.

Two things called jamming

A four-bar's mechanical advantage peaks at 1,673 in one configuration and its transmission angle collapses in another, 222° away. Both get described as the mechanism jamming. One is enormous force output and the other is force disappearing into the bearings, and they are opposite situations.

wrong · Misconception 20 teeth driving 32. Both flanks generated from the involute, not approximated, at a pressure angle of 20°. The orange line is the line of action — tangent to both base circles, and the only place contact happens. Its length between the two tip circles divided by the base pitch is the contact ratio, 1.612 here, which means that for 61% of the cycle two tooth pairs are carrying the load and for the rest just one. The velocity ratio is 0.6250, and it is constant because the common normal never moves. The dashed extension runs between the two base tangency points, which are 8.89 mm apart; the heavy part is where contact actually happens.

What happens in a mesh

Contact between two gear teeth happens only along one straight line, and only over part of it. How much of that line lies between the two tip circles, divided by the base pitch, is the contact ratio — and if it drops below one the drive periodically stops being driven.

gears · Tooth A universal joint at 40° input, shafts 25° apart. Two shafts meeting at 25°, joined by a cross whose two pins are at right angles to each other and each at right angles to the shaft it carries. That is the whole geometry, and everything else follows from it. This is a four-joint spatial loop with all four axes through one point: Kutzbach counts −2 and the screw system has rank 3, so it has one degree of freedom and turns. At this instant the output shaft is at 42.79° while the input is at 40°, and the output is turning 1.0124 times as fast — which is not 1, and never is except at the four points of each turn where the curves cross.

The joint that is not constant velocity

A universal joint is the spatial mechanism everybody has met and almost nobody has been told the truth about. Its output shaft runs fast, then slow, twice per revolution, and the amount depends only on the angle between the shafts — which is why cars have two of them and why the second one has to be fitted the right way round.

spatial · Spatial The transmission angle through one turn. μ is the angle at B between coupler and rocker, computed from each solved position rather than from a formula. It runs from 54.3° to 100.3° for these lengths. The shaded band is the usual design rule — keep μ between 40° and 140° — and this linkage stays inside it throughout. The rule is about geometry alone: nothing here knows about friction, and a mechanism with a comfortable μ can still be a poor machine.

The transmission angle

The angle at which the coupler meets the rocker decides how much of an applied force becomes useful output torque and how much goes into the bearings. It is pure geometry, it is computed here from every solved position rather than from a formula, and it is the number a linkage is judged by after Grashof has said it turns.

linkages · Fourbar Undercutting, either side of 17.10 teeth. Five gears, drawn whole and scaled to a common pitch circle so the tooth counts can be compared by counting them. The dedendum sits a fixed 1.25 modules below the pitch circle and the base circle sits at r·cos α, so as the tooth count falls the base circle rises relative to the root. Below N = 2/sin²α = 17.097 it rises above it, and the part of the flank between them lies where no involute exists — the cutter removes it. The familiar rule says seventeen; the exact figure is 17.10, so seventeen undercuts slightly and eighteen is the smallest count that does not. The teeth are not to a common scale, because at a common module the small gears would be unreadable.

Undercutting, and the seventeen-tooth rule

Below a certain tooth count a standard cutter eats into the flank it is supposed to be forming. The count is quoted as seventeen. The formula gives 17.097, which means seventeen undercuts slightly and eighteen is the smallest that does not — the rounding went the convenient way.

gears · Tooth Sun 24, ring 72, planet 24. An epicyclic train has three shafts and one equation relating them, so fixing any one gives a different ratio from the same gears. With the ring held, a sun input turns the carrier at 1 + 72/24 = 4.000 to one. Willis's equation and the tabular superposition method are independent derivations and both are computed here; the site requires them to agree, because planetary ratios are the most commonly mis-stated numbers in mechanism work and the sign errors are notorious.

Epicyclic ratios, two ways

An epicyclic train has three shafts and one equation relating them, so fixing any one gives a different ratio from the same gears. The sign errors are notorious, so every ratio here is computed by Willis's equation and by the tabular method, and the two are required to agree.

gears · Tooth Slider-crank at 50°. Crank 1, connecting rod 3. The slider's travel is 2.0000 — exactly twice the crank throw, which is the one thing about this mechanism that does not depend on the rod length. Everything else does: the rod length decides how far the piston's motion departs from a sine wave, and that departure is the second harmonic every engine balancer has to deal with.

The slider-crank

Replace one pin of a four-bar with a slide and you get the mechanism in every reciprocating engine ever built. Its stroke is exactly twice the crank throw and does not depend on the connecting rod at all. Everything else about the motion depends on the rod, including the part that is always described as a sine wave and is not.

linkages · Fourbar Where the coupler is pivoting, at 70°. At any instant the coupler is turning about one point — not a pin, and usually not on the mechanism at all. Kennedy's theorem finds it: the crank and coupler share the pin at A, the coupler and rocker share B, so the coupler's centre relative to the frame must lie on both O₂A extended and O₄B extended, and it is where they cross. The dashed lines are that construction. The cross is a completely different route to the same point — the place where the coupler's solved velocity field is zero, computed from the Jacobian and knowing nothing about Kennedy. Across 119 positions the two agree to 2.7e-15. At this instant the centre lies outside the frame — the two construction lines are nearly parallel, the coupler is close to translating, and the pivot has run off rather than gone missing.

Where the coupler is turning

At every instant the coupler of a four-bar is rotating about a single point — not a pin, and usually not on the mechanism at all. Track that point in two different frames and you get two curves which, rolled on each other without slipping, reproduce the coupler's motion exactly. The bars are one way of producing it and not the motion itself.

curves · Coupler 11 teeth, cut with three different shifts. A 11-tooth gear cannot be cut with a standard rack without the cutter eating into the flank near the root — the tooth is undercut, and what it loses is exactly the part that does the work. The fix is to hold the cutter further out by a fraction x of the module. Here the threshold is x = 1 − z sin²α / 2 = 0.3566, measured rather than quoted: at 0.347 the gear still undercuts and at 0.3566 it does not. What the shift costs is at the other end of the tooth. The tip thickness falls from 0.606 to 0.240 of a module, and a tooth shifted far enough comes to a point and breaks — so the technique has a ceiling as well as a floor.

Moving the cutter out

A gear with too few teeth is undercut by the tool that generates it, and the fix is to hold the tool further out. What that does to the tooth is easy to say. What it does to the pair is not what most readers expect — the two gears no longer mesh at the centre distance the sum of their radii would give, and the pressure angle they run at is no longer the one they were cut with.

gears · Tooth Where the output stops, and why the return is quicker. A crank-rocker's output reaches an extreme exactly when the crank and coupler line up — stretched out, so O₂ to B is 4.50, or folded back, so it is 2.50. Nothing about the rocker enters the condition, which is why the limits can be written down rather than searched for. Those two crank angles are 40.8° and 228.5°, so the crank spends 187.7° going one way and 172.3° coming back while the rocker covers the same 40.0° both times. The ratio is 1.0894 predicted and 1.0894 measured over 7200 swept positions — a shaper cuts on the slow stroke and returns on the fast one, and this number is what the proportions are chosen to get.

The return stroke is quicker

A crank-rocker's output stops at two definite places, and the crank angles at which it does are calculable without touching a solver. The interesting number is not where they are but how far apart — because the crank turns at a constant speed and the output covers the same swing twice in unequal times.

linkages · Fourbar One chain, four mechanisms. The same four bars and the same four pins in every panel. What changes is which link is bolted to the bench, and that is not a property of the chain — it is a decision about where the bench is. The four mechanisms are crank rocker, double crank, crank rocker, double rocker: one input turns fully in some and rocks in others, and what each one is for is different. What cannot change is the shape of the closed loop, and the two diagonals measure that without reference to which link is held still: swept independently, all four visit the same locus of diagonal pairs to within 2.9e-3, half the sampling resolution. This is why the Whitworth quick-return and the oscillating-cylinder engine are not merely similar to a slider-crank; they are one.

One chain, four mechanisms

Which link of a four-bar is bolted to the bench is not a property of the chain. It is a decision about where the bench is, and making a different one gives a mechanism that looks and behaves completely differently while being, as a chain, the same object — which is why the Whitworth quick-return and the oscillating-cylinder engine are both a slider-crank.

linkages · Fourbar 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 53/11, instant by instant. The ratio a 53-tooth sprocket and a 11-tooth sprocket actually deliver, against the driver's rotation. The quoted 4.818 is the flat line, and it is exactly right as an average — the mean over a turn comes out at 4.8182, which the computation is never told. Within every tooth the ratio swings from 4.756 to 4.948, a fluctuation of 3.99%. The sharp corners are pins seating: the identity of the pin the strand runs from changes 53 times a turn on one sprocket and 11 times on the other, and the two do not coincide.

The chain is a polygon

A chain's pins sit on a polygon, so the radius that matters swings by 1 − cos(π/n) within every tooth: four per cent on an eleven-tooth sprocket. The quoted 53/11 is the mean of that, exactly — and how much of the fluctuation reaches the back wheel is decided by the fractional number of pitches in the taut strand, which nobody adjusts and which can take the drive from perfectly uniform to two per cent.

applied · Tooth A reduction made out of a difference. A compound epicyclic's reduction is 1/(1 − z₁z₄/z₂z₃) — a ratio of two integers, so it is exactly what a catalogue says, at every position, forever. It is the only number in this field that survives being measured, and the reason is that it is a count. What it is not is insensitive: each row's denominator is a difference of two nearly equal products, and the last two rows differ by one tooth on one ring.

A ratio that is a count

A compound epicyclic's reduction is a ratio of two integers, because it is a ratio of tooth counts — 2176/106 for the drive here, exact at every position and on every unit ever made. It is the only quoted number in this field that survives being measured, and it is fragile in a way exactness does not protect against: one tooth on one ring moves it by forty per cent.

applied · Tooth A variator that spans under four to one, driving a machine that spans everything. The whole machine's ratio against the variator's own, for an engine split between a variator and a straight path and summed by a planetary with 50 sun teeth and 70 ring teeth. The variator's travel runs from 0.544 to 2.045, a span of 3.76 to one, and the output's ratio is (1 + K) / (K − v) with K = 1.4: a hyperbola with a pole at v = 1.4. Left of the pole the output turns one way, right of it the other, and the vertical scale is cut at ±12 because nothing else would fit. The measured extremes over the travel are 2.80 and -3.72, and between them the ratio passes through every value there is.

A bounded ratio made unbounded

Split an engine between a variator and a straight path and add the two with a planetary, and a variator that spans 3.76 to one becomes a machine whose ratio passes through infinity. The setting at which the output stands still is the planetary's own tooth ratio and nothing the belt does moves it. The price is a sensitivity that grows as the reciprocal square of the distance to that setting, and the variator's one and a half per cent becomes a hundred and ten before the setting is reached.

transmission · Transmission What each machine is sold with. Every mechanism in this field arrives with a number. The middle column is that number; the right-hand column is what the mechanism was measured to have, by the library named under the row. The coloured bar and the word under each machine are the verdict: exact means the mechanism has the number at every position, mean that it is the average of something that varies within every cycle, bounded that it is false by a stated and negligible amount, point that it is the value at one position, and quoted that the mechanism has no such quantity at all. The lit row is the one this essay is about. Of the 14 rows, 6 are quoted and 3 are exact.

Which numbers survived

Fourteen machines were measured against the numbers they are sold with. Three survived exactly, and all three are counts. One is false by a stated bound, two are exact means of things that vary, three are honest values at a stated position, and six name quantities their mechanisms do not have. The pattern is not about honesty; it is about what kind of thing a number is.

applied · Misconception Sliding the variator's travel across the pole. The variator of the power split — travel 0.544 to 2.045 — geared by a fixed ratio k ahead of a planetary with K = 1.4, so the planetary sees k times the variator's ratio. At each k the travel is trimmed wherever the output's ratio is uncertain by more than 10%, and what is left gives a forward span and a reverse span. Solid lines use the variator's own tolerance, which grows from 0.98% at one end of its travel to 2.24% at the other; dashed lines use one tolerance of 1.6% everywhere. With one tolerance the forward span peaks sharply, at 5.59 where the travel's top meets the trim, and falls as the pole moves into the travel. With the variator's own it peaks at 4.81 at k = 1.00 and stays within a tenth of that from k = 0.6 to 1.2, while the reverse span climbs from one, meeting the forward span at k = 1.26.

Sliding the travel across the pole

A power split's ratio has a pole the variator's own tolerance makes unusable, so the question is where to put the variator's travel relative to it. With a tolerance that is one number, the best forward span comes where the travel's top just meets the trim — 1 + τ(1 − r)/p, with no gearset in it. With the variator's real tolerance, which grows along its travel, that peak flattens into a plateau: the pole can be moved well inside the travel, buying reverse, for under a tenth of the forward span.

transmission · Transmission What each branch carries, against what the engine delivers. The power in the variator's branch and in the straight path, as multiples of the engine's own, for a planetary of K = 1.40. Both are ratios of powers, so the load cancels and nothing here is a force: the split comes from requiring the gearset to be lossless at every admissible set of speeds, which fixes the torques at 1 : K : −(1+K). The variator carries v/(K − v) and the straight path K/(K − v), and both run away at the pole. The variator first carries the engine's whole power at v = 0.700, which is exactly half the way to the pole — and the straight path is already carrying more than the engine everywhere past nought, flowing the other way through the planetary. That excess is the circulation.

The power that goes round twice

Sliding a power split's travel towards its pole buys ratio span for nothing, on the kinematics. It is not for nothing. The variator's own branch carries v/(K−v) of the engine's power and overtakes it at exactly half the way to the pole, and the tolerance trim the span was computed from is not reached until the variator is rated for six times the engine — which no machine is.

transmission · Transmission Every power split, on one curve. 1,994 power splits: all six ways of putting an engine, a variator and an output on a simple planetary's three shafts, with the variator coupled at the input or at the output, turning either way, on nine gearsets, with its travel placed at eleven positions. Every variator spans 3.333, as the variator of the previous essay does. Each dot is one split: the largest share of the engine's power its variator carries anywhere on the travel, and the span its output covers. They fall on three curves and nowhere else, to 7e-16: with no circulation, span R/(R(1 − S) + S), never more than the variator's own; with the variator's branch running backwards, 1 + S(1 − 1/R); with the variator carrying more than the engine, 1 + S(R − 1). 1188, 394 and 412 splits lie on the three. Which curve a split is on is decided by where its travel sits, not by which shafts it uses: every one of the twelve attachments appears on all three.

Every power split is on one curve

There are twelve ways to attach an engine, a variator and an output to a planetary's three shafts, and asking which is best turns out to be the wrong question. On 1,994 splits across all twelve and nine gearsets, the output's span is (1 + R·a)/(1 + a) to 5 × 10⁻¹⁵, where R is the variator's own span and a is the power the variator carries over the power the gears carry. Every split lies on one of three curves of span against the variator's largest share. The previous essay's 1.70 is 2 − 1/R on the worst of them, and a split beats its variator's own span only by making the variator carry more than the engine.

transmission · Transmission A second planetary buys span at every variator share, if its lever can be built. For a variator spanning 3.333, the most output span a power split reaches when its variator carries at most a given share of the engine's power. On one planetary it is R/(R(1 − S) + S) (dashed). On a four-shaft gearset with the variator between two of its shafts — the compound split — it is the square of (√R + k)/(1 + k√R), k = (1 − S)/(1 + S) (solid): 1.124 against 1.075 at a share of 0.1, 1.802 against 1.538 at 0.5, and both reach R at 1. The dots are the best compound split on four real Simpson and Ravigneaux gearsets at each share: ahead up to 0.3 (1.320 against 1.266), behind from 0.4 (1.423 at 0.5).

A second planetary lets the variator carry a difference

On a single planetary every power split lies on one of three curves of span against the variator's share of the engine's power. Build the split on a four-shaft Simpson or Ravigneaux instead and nothing changes while the fourth shaft is free: 3,588 splits, all on the curves. The one new arrangement is the variator between two of the gearset's shafts. That compound split is an input-coupled split and an output-coupled split in series, and its variator carries only the difference of their shares — so at every share below one it can span more than any single planetary, the square of (√R + k)/(1 + k√R). It needs a lever with the variator's shafts exactly its share apart, which real gearsets do not have beyond a share of about a third.

transmission · Transmission The best split for a given variator rating. The most span a single-planetary power split can have when its variator may carry no more than the share on the axis, for variators spanning 2, 3.333 and 6. Up to a share of one the best is a split with no circulation, reaching the variator's own span exactly at one; beyond it, a split whose variator carries more than the engine, gaining R − 1 of span per unit of share. The dashed curves are the third branch, with the variator's power running backwards, which is below the best everywhere. The ring marks the previous essay's split at a unit rating: 1.700, which is 2 − 1/R. The same variator in a split with no circulation, its share never passing 0.9, spans 2.703, and it approaches 3.333 as that share approaches one.

Six things a power split is not

A multiplier of its variator's span, a machine whose neutral the belt decides, a source of any ratio near that neutral, a travel that slides towards its pole for free, a design whose attachment is the choice that matters, and a machine a second planetary always improves. Six claims about continuously variable transmissions built as power splits, each of them what a careful person would say, each answered with a measured number.

wrong · Misconception A compound split sees its gearset through one cross-ratio. The four shafts of the Ravigneaux 69/74/100, planets 13 and 13 on its lever, each at the position that makes every shaft's speed a straight-line function of it: sun2 at 0.000 (engine), carrier at 0.483 (variator), ring at 0.840 (variator), sun1 at 1.000 (output). The best compound split puts the variator between the two shafts shaded together and the engine and output on the other two. What the split can do depends only on the cross-ratio of the four positions, here 5.613, and a split with that cross-ratio beats every split on a single planetary up to a variator share of 0.542. A share of a third needs a cross-ratio of 2.52 and a half needs 4.67.

One cross-ratio decides the compound split

A compound power split, its variator between two shafts of a four-shaft gearset, can beat every split on a single planetary, but four real gearsets let it do so only up to a variator share of about a third. Whether teeth can do better turns on one number: the cross-ratio of the gearset's four shaft positions on its lever. A third needs 2.52 and a half 4.67. Every Simpson inside a ring of 100 teeth stops at 3.87, a share of 0.454. A Ravigneaux with large suns and 13-tooth planets reaches 5.61, a share of 0.542, and solved on its lever it passes a half. With planets of 17 teeth, neither family does.

transmission · Transmission Two planetaries joined at two places make one four-shaft lever. The sun–carrier, carrier–ring join: planetary 1, a sun of 26 in a ring of 52 (ratio 2.00), and planetary 2, a sun of 41 in a ring of 71 (ratio 1.73), each on its own lever with sun, carrier and ring at 0, K and K + 1, laid so that the joined members coincide. The four shafts below are the two joints and the free member of each. Their cross-ratio is 4.732, enough for a compound split to beat every split on one planetary up to a variator share of a half; its best split there spans 1.544, with the engine, output and variator where marked, and no member of either planetary carries more than 0.80 of the engine's power.

The compound split has gearsets of its own

A compound power split depends on its gearset through one number, the cross-ratio of the four shafts on its lever, and a variator share of a half needs 4.67. Simpsons stop at 3.87 inside a ring of 100 and Ravigneaux reach it only with 13-tooth planets. Two simple planetaries can be joined into four shafts in eighteen ways, twelve of them distinct gearsets, and ten of the twelve reach a half with ordinary ring-to-sun ratios. The cross-ratio is then no longer the question. Three joins reach any cross-ratio by setting two shafts nearly together and pay with 2.7 to 4.2 times the engine's power inside, and one, carrier to ring both ways, never reaches a half. A sun-to-carrier, carrier-to-ring join builds the lever with planetaries of 26/52 and 41/71, and nothing inside it carries more than 0.80 of the engine's power.

transmission · Transmission Each fixed gear is a straight speed line through a braked shaft. The sun–carrier, carrier–ring join of a 26-tooth sun in a 52-tooth ring and a 41-tooth sun in a 71-tooth ring, its four shafts at their lever positions: sun₂ at 0.000, sun₁ + carrier₂ at 0.536, carrier₁ + ring₂ at 0.845, ring₁ at 1.000. The output stays where the compound split has it, on sun₁ + carrier₂. In the gear shown the engine drives carrier₁ + ring₂ and sun₂ is braked, so the shafts' speeds lie on a straight line through nought at the brake and one at the engine; the output turns at 0.634 of the engine's speed, a ratio of 1.58.

The winning join is a gearbox too

The sun–carrier, carrier–ring join of two simple planetaries builds a compound power split's half-share lever with ordinary teeth. Locked out of the split and given clutches and brakes, the same four shafts give five forward ratios below the split's range, from 2.73 to direct drive, and an overdrive of 3 above it. The two gears that brake a variator shaft sit 1.76 and 1.74 outside the split's ends, and three gearsets with the same cross-ratio put them at the same steps. Its planets space evenly, three and four to a set, and its meshes lose 0.41% of the engine's power along the split where the Ravigneaux that builds the same lever loses 1.01%. What none of these gearsets gives, with the output where the split needs it, is a usable reverse.

transmission · Transmission

Named alongside it

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

EpicyclicDesign ruleConstraintGear trainMobilityVariatorToleranceVelocity ratioContinuously variableGrashof's conditionInvoluteMesh

All concepts