Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Field

Drawn wrongly

The mechanisms that are illustrated confidently and incorrectly, the ratios quoted from the wrong formula, and the pictures that would not move if they were built.
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

The velocity ratio of a linkage measured through a full turn against a gear pair's constant ratio, and why the two cases are different in kind.

 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

The toggle position against the worst transmission angle, why they are different configurations, and what each one is good and bad for.

 Of 1176 exactly correct syntheses, 176 could be built. Every pair of points on a 7×7 grid over the moving body, each pair synthesised into a four-bar and each four-bar verified by the forward solver as reaching all three prescribed poses. 1176 of them do, exactly. Then each is swept from the first pose in both directions, carrying the branch the way a built mechanism must: 810 cannot reach all three without being taken apart and reassembled, and 190 reach them in the wrong order. 176 — 15% — are mechanisms rather than theorems. Nothing in the construction distinguishes them.

Exactly right, and unbuildable

Branch, circuit and order defects in kinematic synthesis, measured over a grid of coupler-pin choices, with every solution verified exact by the forward solver before it is disqualified.

 A defect that draws nothing wrong. The same four-bar swept 360 times with the pre-correction Jacobian and with the corrected one, at eight coupler-point offsets. Corrected, every position is reached at every offset. Uncorrected: 5 of the offsets lose nothing at all, and then it loses 58, 159, 267 of 360. The picture was never wrong — a refused position is simply not drawn — so the only symptom was a sweep with fewer frames in it than it asked for.

The solver was refusing a quarter of the sweep

A sign error in an analytic Jacobian that never drew a wrong picture, refused up to a quarter of every sweep, and changed a published number by two thirds.

 30 teeth and two pallets. An escape wheel of 30 teeth and a pair of pallets spanning 4 tooth pitches. The heavier line at each pallet is the locking face, here an arc about the arbor; the lighter one is the impulse face the tooth slides along once it is let go. The wheel is drawn where the contact puts it, not where it looks well: at this pallet angle the tooth in play sits on the lock face and the wheel is -0.0323° from it. Dragging the pallet through its whole engagement moves the wheel by 0.107° of recoil. Of the 6.0° the wheel turns each beat, -37.3% is drop and does nothing.

The escapement that could not alternate

Four confidently drawn intermittent mechanisms measured against the computations that would have refused them.

 Six gearsets, three conditions. Every one of these can be drawn, and five of the six are drawn in some textbook or other. The columns are the three conditions a planetary has to satisfy: that a whole planet fits between the sun and the ring, that the sun and ring teeth add to a multiple of the planet count, and that the planets clear each other. The last column is how far out of mesh the worst planet station is, in teeth — a quantity that is zero or is not, and that no drawing shows, because a drawing of a planetary at this scale draws circles.

The gearset that could not be assembled

The three conditions a planetary gearset must satisfy, six drawn gearsets put through them, and why the decisive one is a divisibility that no picture can show.

 What each of them can reach. Nine hundred control histories of four legs each, from the same starting configuration, with the resulting position plotted. The wheel's cloud is two-dimensional and fills the region; the trolley's is one-dimensional and lies exactly on its rail — the same number of coordinates, the same number of constraints, the same count of freedoms, and a reachable set of a different dimension. Nothing here is a matter of degree.

Not unreachable, only expensive

Four confident claims about constrained mechanisms, each true of something and applied to something else, with the measurement that separates them.

 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

Six common claims about the instantaneous centre of a moving plane, each measured — the acceleration pole, the centrode, the pivot substitution, the fixed point, the mechanical advantage claim and the centre of curvature.

 The rotor is not a Reuleaux triangle. The generated rotor, with the Reuleaux triangle through the same three apexes drawn over it — three circular arcs, each centred on the opposite corner. They part company by 1.21 mm on a rotor of generating radius 100, and the flank is the one that is right: it is the envelope of the housing, and a Reuleaux flank would foul the wall. The measurement that cannot be argued with is the width. A Reuleaux triangle has the same width in every direction — that is what it is for — and this rotor's runs from 150.0 to 174.1, a spread of 16 per cent. positioned by solving, not by drawing.

Six things a shape is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about the shapes of meshing bodies, each answered with a measurement from a generated shape rather than an argument.

 The number on the tackle is a limit. The velocity ratio of a 4-part tackle as its blocks separate, measured by differentiating the strand's own length. It is 3.6174 at 90 mm and 3.99992 at 6898 mm, and it reaches 4 nowhere. The shortfall is geometric and has nothing to do with friction: each part of line makes an angle with the lift, and a part at angle β shortens by cos β of the movement. A tackle used at close quarters — which is when a tackle is useful — is the case furthest from its own rating.

Six things a strand is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about belts, ropes, chains and tendons, each answered with a measurement taken from the strand's own geometry.

 Six assemblies, one routine, three disagreements and one accident. Every row is the same three steps: write down the constraint Jacobian, take its rank, and subtract it from the number of unknowns. The representations differ — bars between points, bodies joined by pins, panels joined by creases, one cell of a pattern that repeats for ever — and the routine does not. The counted column is the arithmetic on the numbers of bodies and joints; the measured column is the nullity of the matrix. They agree on the lazy tong and on the kagome cell and disagree on the other four, most sharply on the deployable ring, which the count declares immobile and which is sold as a mechanism that opens. The right-hand column is the reason: constraints that repeat what another constraint has already said, which the count has no way of seeing and the rank cannot help seeing. The fourth row is worth reading twice: the count says nothing can move and nothing can, so the two agree — and they agree for the wrong reason, because that pattern's flat state shows four freedoms and not one of them is a motion.

Six things a network is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about assemblies of repeated units, each answered with a measurement taken from the assembly's own constraint matrix.

 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 things a hold is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about parts held by contact, each answered with a measurement taken from the arrangement's own contact rows.

 One, two, sixteen, two hundred and thirty. Every planar chain of mobility one, up to ten links, counted by enumeration rather than quoted. The pins column is forced: a chain of 10 links has one degree of freedom only if it has exactly (3n − 4)/2 pins, which is why no odd link count appears. Pass the count is how many graphs satisfy Grübler's rule, are connected, are simple and give every link at least two pins. Are chains is how many of those survive the fourth condition, that no proper subchain is already a structure — and the gap between the two columns is the whole of this field's first argument: at ten links 1,878 graphs pass a rule that 230 of them deserve. Mechanisms is larger again, because a chain is not a mechanism until a link is held still, and how many different mechanisms that gives is a question about the chain's own symmetry.

Six things a chain is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about kinematic chains, each answered with a measurement taken from the census itself.

 What one point can and cannot see of a group. For each of the twelve: the group's dimension, the dimension of one point's orbit under it, and the difference — the stabiliser, the motions that leave that particular point exactly where it is. The orbit is the only picture a group has, and this table is the honest caption on it. Planar motion and spherical motion are both three-dimensional and both sweep a point over a two-dimensional surface, so each leaves one motion doing nothing at all: a turn about the plane's normal in one case, a turn about the radius in the other. A point does not see the whole group, and no drawing of one trajectory can be a complete picture of what a joint permits.

Six things a joint is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about kinematic pairs, each answered with a measurement from the surface census, the closure test or the composition experiment.

 Every way the same bars can be put together. The machine compiled from a rectangular hyperbola has 4 parallelograms, and a parallelogram's four bars also close as an antiparallelogram — so there are 16 ways to assemble it. One mark per way. 4 of them put the tracing point on the curve, 4 put it somewhere else, and 8 do not close at all. The ones that are wrong are not broken: they satisfy every bar to 9.6e-15 while the polynomial at their tracing point reads 1.5e-1. This is the gap in Kempe's original argument, and no tolerance on the closure could ever have found it.

Six things a compiled linkage is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about linkages compiled from polynomials, each answered by a measurement from the branch census, the cost table or the working arc.

 What a sweep at the wrong resolution reports. One machine — a crank passing a stud a tenth of a unit across — swept at six sample counts. At eight samples the smallest gap found is 0.0809 and the machine reads as clear; at twelve it is 0.0067 and still clear; from sixteen on it is negative and the crank is inside the stud by 0.0099. Nothing about the twelve-sample answer looks wrong: the curve it draws is smooth, its minimum is interior, its margin is small and positive. A sweep cannot report what it did not look at, and the repair is not more samples but a bound on what happens between them.

Six things a body is not

Six confident and incorrect statements about links with a width, each answered by a measurement from the gap curve, the layer census or the width search.

 A four-bar at 1°, solved. Ground 4, crank 1, coupler 3.5, rocker 3. Every joint position here is the output of a Newton–Raphson solve on the loop-closure equations, converged to 3.3e-14 — not a placement that looked right. Grashof's condition classifies these lengths as a crank rocker, and sweeping the crank through 360° confirms it: 120 of 120 positions assemble. The transmission angle at this instant is 54.3°.

Six things a measurement cannot tell you

Six confident and incorrect statements about what measuring a mechanism establishes, each answered with a measurement from the mechanism's own identification Jacobian.

 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

Six confident statements about power-split transmissions, each answered by measurement: the span a split reaches without circulation, the neutral set by the planetary's tooth ratio, the sensitivity and tolerance near that neutral, the variator's share overtaking the engine halfway to the pole, the attachment that does not appear in the identity, and the compound split that beats one planetary only at small shares on real gearsets.

 A roller offset by 5.88, at 42.3° of the rise. The cycloidal programme — rise 20 over 90°, return over 170° — on a prime circle of 40 with a roller of 10, drawn with the follower fixed above and the cam turned anticlockwise to 42.3°. The follower's line of travel is 5.88 to the right of the cam's centre. The contact normal leans 21.81° from that line, which is the pressure angle, and measured off the drawn pitch curve it is 21.81°. At this offset the peak on the rise is 21.81° and on the return 21.81°; centred, they are 27.37° and 15.33°.

Six things a cam drive is not

Six confident statements about cam drives, each answered by measurement: the pressure angle through a turn at three offsets; the smallest convex base circle for a flat face and the lift it delivers below it; the smallest convex base against the pivot's distance for a flat face on an arm; a grooved cam's crossovers against speed; three laws' accelerations for the same rise; and the step a chain drive puts in every law at every tooth.

 The disc, the wheel, and what has to be cut out of it. A 6-slot Geneva at -40° of driver, with the driver's locking disc of radius 13.5 drawn about its axis and the wheel drawn as the material it actually has — inside its rim, short of the 6 flat chords cut across it, one between each pair of slots, and clear of the 6 slots. The disc and the wheel share the region near the line of centres, so the disc has to be cut away wherever the wheel is ever there while the pin is driving. Swept over the whole index that cut-away spans 126.8°, against an index sweep of 120° — it is wider, because the rim is still swinging through the disc's circle after the pin has left the slot.

Six things an indexer is not

Six confident statements about intermittent mechanisms, each answered by measurement: a Geneva's locking disc with its cut-away; what extra pins buy and cost at a fixed indexing rate; the pin count the slots and the disc each allow; a ratchet's lost motion against its pitch; the rock of a wheel locked on an arc and on a flat against the running clearance; the steps of a curved slot against its bend; a steered pin's peak against the crank pin's across slot counts; and the states a one-way ratchet can reach.

 The smallest springs that balance the lamp, and the one that is not needed. The tilting-head desk lamp with one parallelogram, its springs of no free length placed to make the total of their peak pulls over the working range least, inside an outline of brackets 0.15 m high, attachment points 0.08 m past the wrist and along the head's 0.15 m. Peak pulls 22.7, 0.0, 23.2, 17.5 N (lower arm, upper arm, elbow bracket to head, wrist), 63.4 N in all and 23.2 at most. The head spring meets the head at 0.0615 m, the threshold, and the upper arm's spring has no stiffness at all: it is left out.

Six things a balancing spring is not

Six confident statements about balancing springs, each answered by measurement: the lamp with its springs; the least total of peak pulls with three springs and with six; the upper arm's spring's stiffness against the head spring's attachment; the least worst moment against the springs' total pull, with the attachment points held and free; each spring's swing in length at two designs; each joint's leftover moment by least squares; and the tension each pose of the rocking slide needs against what a spring of no free length and a constant pull give.

All essays