Concept

the Sarrus linkage — where it appears

A six-bar spatial loop whose output translates in a straight line with no sliding joint anywhere in it. Every mobility formula declares it immobile, and the rank of its screw system says otherwise.

Named by 4 essays across 2 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 on this site 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
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
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
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 this site called unbuildable are built every day, and the thing that builds them is the clearance that was already there.

practice · Overconstraint

Named alongside it

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

ConstraintOverconstraintScrew systemKutzbach's criterionMobilityBennett's linkageClearanceRedundant constraintToleranceDegrees of freedomExactnessInversion

All concepts