Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Concept

Virtual-work — where it appears

The identity that the work done on the two bodies of a frictionless contact cancels, which turns a lever arm into a transmission ratio. It is what lets a purely geometric calculation return a transmission ratio, since the ratio of the lever arms is the ratio of the motions and no force needs to be known.

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

Two poles at 66°, and only one of them is still. The stubs here are accelerations, not velocities, and they vanish at a different point from the one where the velocities vanish. The cross is the velocity pole — the point the plane is turning about — and the square is the acceleration pole, the point that is momentarily not accelerating. Over a full turn of this crank the two are never nearer than 1.49 coupler lengths and get as far apart as 22.2. The instantaneous centre is about velocities and about nothing else: the point that is not moving is being accelerated, usually hard, and a body pivoting about it in the ordinary sense would not be. positioned by solving, not by drawing.

Six things a centre is not

The instantaneous centre is the most over-read object in this subject. Six claims about it are in circulation, three are false, two are true of something else, and one is nearly right — and each of them comes with a measurement of how badly it goes wrong.

wrong · Misconception One angle, read twice. Draw against the angle the locking face is tilted by. It is not a separate design quantity from recoil: the pallet's moment per unit of wheel torque is minus the rate at which the wheel is driven backwards, which is virtual work and holds to nine figures. So an escapement cannot be made to hold its own lock without also being made to push its train back — and at δ = 0 the arc has neither, which is a lock that any disturbance opens. The flat face starts above zero because the tooth rests below the corner, where a straight face is no longer tangent to anything.

The angle that holds the lock

A locking face cut exactly concentric with the pallet arbor has no tendency to hold itself: the tooth's push aims straight at the pivot and its moment is zero, so the smallest disturbance opens the lock. Tilt the face and the moment becomes ρ sin δ — and the same tilt, by virtual work, is exactly the rate at which the wheel is driven backwards. Draw and recoil are one angle read twice.

timing · Intermittent One angle, read twice. Draw against the angle the locking face is tilted by. It is not a separate design quantity from recoil: the pallet's moment per unit of wheel torque is minus the rate at which the wheel is driven backwards, which is virtual work and holds to nine figures. So an escapement cannot be made to hold its own lock without also being made to push its train back — and at δ = 0 the arc has neither, which is a lock that any disturbance opens. The flat face starts above zero because the tooth rests below the corner, where a straight face is no longer tangent to anything.

One test, three mechanisms

Whether a pawl holds, whether an escapement's lock draws itself deeper, and how much a four-bar's coupler can do for its rocker are the same question asked three times: on which side of a pivot does a contact normal pass? All three are one cross product, none evaluates a force, and the three answers are used for completely different things.

timing · Intermittent

Named alongside it

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

Contact normalDrawEscapementLever armTransmission angleVelocity ratioAcceleration poleCentrodeContact orderDeadbeatHigher pairInstantaneous centre

All concepts