Theme

The thread: The constant that is not constant

A velocity ratio quoted as a number is a claim that it does not vary through the cycle. For gears that claim is true and is the whole reason the involute exists; for most other mechanisms it is false, and the variation is measurable.
The output is a band, not an angle. The rocker's angle through one turn of the crank, for a four-bar whose four lengths are each specified to ±0.01. The line is the nominal mechanism; the band is where the output of an actual one lies, found by building all sixteen extreme combinations of the four lengths at every crank angle and solving each. The band is not a constant width: it is 0.73° at its widest, near 30°, and 0.36° at its narrowest — a factor of 2.0. Which of those a designer is told depends entirely on where the mechanism was measured. As built

A length is a range

Every figure on this site so far has been drawn from four numbers. No four numbers were ever cut. Give each of them a tolerance of ±0.01 and the rocker's output stops being an angle and becomes a band 0.73° wide at one part of the turn and 0.36° wide at another — and which of those a designer is told depends only on where somebody measured.

Every way of stopping, on the same four questions. Six mechanisms that all turn a continuous input into an output that moves and then waits. Index is how far the output steps. Moving is the fraction of the input's turn the output is actually going for; the rest is dwell. From rest says whether the output starts and stops at zero velocity, and acceleration whether its acceleration is a number at all. Every entry is computed from the mechanism's own library, which matters for two of them: a Geneva's moving fraction is (n − 2)/2n and not 1/n, and its entry rate is zero in closed form rather than to the accuracy of a sampled sweep. The three rows whose acceleration is not a number are not badly made — they are mechanisms whose output velocity has a step, and no tolerance improves that. Motion that stops

The mechanism that waits

Every mechanism in this collection so far moves whenever its input moves. A ratchet, an indexer and an escapement do not: they are still for most of a turn and moving for the rest, and what decides which is not an equation running out of answers but a tooth arriving at a face.

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. Machines you have met

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.

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. Drawn wrongly

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.

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. Teeth

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.

Which of these constraints is secretly about positions. How much of the bracket of two permitted directions lies outside the permitted directions, as a fraction of its own length. Frobenius' theorem says a distribution is the tangent field of a family of surfaces exactly when this is zero, so the test needs no integration and no recognition. The scale is logarithmic because the answers are seventeen orders apart: the rail returns nothing at all and everything else returns essentially the whole bracket. There is no mechanism in the middle. Wheels, and where they may not go

One character apart

Two mechanisms with three coordinates, one constraint row of the same shape and two controls each. In one of them the angle in the row is a coordinate; in the other it is a constant. The first can be driven anywhere and the second can never leave a line, and Frobenius' theorem decides which is which without integrating anything.

Same links, same pins, different chains. Watt chain on the left and Stephenson chain on the right. They have the same number of links, the same number of pins and the same assortment — 4×2 + 2×3 — so no count of anything can tell them apart. What differs is where the pins go: on the left the two ternary links share a pin, on the right they do not, and that single fact makes two mechanisms with different coupler curves, different numbers of inversions and different position problems. It is the smallest case in the subject of the thing this field exists to say: the arithmetic is a filter and the graph is the answer. The chain before the lengths

Same links, same pins, different machines

Watt's six-bar and Stephenson's have six links, seven pins, four binary links and two ternary ones. Every count anybody can make on them agrees. They are different chains, they give two mechanisms and three, and the difference is whether the two ternary links share a pin.

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. Out of the plane

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.

The same rise, three ways. A 20-unit rise over 120°, then a dwell. Above, the displacement — all three do the same job and are hard to tell apart. Below, the acceleration, differentiated from those same curves. Constant acceleration peaks lowest at 5.556e-3 per degree² and arrives at the dwell with a step; cycloidal peaks highest at 8.727e-3 and arrives at zero. The smoothest law has the largest peak, which is the trade the whole of cam design turns on and which the displacement plot gives no hint of. Prescribed motion

The law that costs least is not the smoothest

Constant acceleration gives the lowest peak acceleration of any motion law and an impulsive jerk. Cycloidal motion has finite jerk everywhere and a peak acceleration 57% higher. The trade is real, it is measurable, and the displacement curves that everyone plots give no hint of it.

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. Drawn wrongly

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.

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. Teeth

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.

6 contacts, and the box lifts straight off. 3-2-1, six contacts. Each pad is a contact and each arrow the direction the box is free to move there — the inward normal, and the whole of what the contact contributes. The rank is 6, which is full: these 6 contacts are 6 independent constraints and a bilateral version of them would fix the box completely. The margin is nought, so the box is free to leave, and no amount of tightening the tolerances on where the pads are would change that. Rank and hold are different questions and this is the pair of pictures that separates them. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Contacts that only push

Four in the plane and seven in space

Six independent constraints fix a body in space and six contacts fix nothing, because d vectors can span d dimensions and can never positively span them. The minimum is one more than the dimension — and it is a floor rather than an answer: six contacts on a box held it in none of four thousand random arrangements and seven held it in twenty-one.

Two surfaces in contact, sliding everywhere but one place. The sliding speed at the contact of an involute pair, formed by taking the velocity of each body's material point at the contact and subtracting. It is zero at exactly one position — the instant the contact is at the pitch point, measured here at 7.30e-15 mm per radian — and grows linearly on both sides of it, at the rate the relative angular velocity says. Gears roll at one point of the tooth and slide everywhere else, which is why a tooth wears into a shape with a band of polish across it rather than uniformly. What is not claimed is any consequence of the sliding: friction, wear and heat need forces, and there are none here. The shape is the unknown

Rolling at one point only

Two wheels in mesh are usually described as rolling. Their pitch circles are — those are centrodes, and centrodes roll — but the surfaces that are actually touching slide against each other everywhere except at one instant, and the sliding is the largest velocity in the mechanism.

kelvin: 6 contacts, 6 of the six freedoms taken. A plan view of the arrangement, with each contact drawn where it acts and an arrow along the direction of the force it can carry. A ball's contact force passes through the ball's centre whatever surface it rests on, so the whole constraint system is these points and these directions and nothing else. Written as wrenches — a force along a line, which is a screw of zero pitch — their rank is 6. Six independent wrenches leave nothing free: the part has one place to be, and putting it down twice puts it in the same place. Machines you have met

Six points and no more

A ball resting on a surface is a joint: it takes one freedom away, and the force it can carry is a line through the ball's centre. Six of them, arranged well, take all six freedoms and leave a part with one place to be. Six arranged badly take five, and the sixth freedom is a screw with an axis this site can name.

Lost motion on a 24-tooth ratchet. A pawl can only drop into a tooth, so an input that has moved by less than one tooth pitch has moved the output by nothing at all. On 24 teeth the pitch is 15.0°, and that is the worst case with one pawl. Two pawls offset by half a pitch halve it and three thirds it, because whichever pawl is over a root drops first. None of this is a manufacturing question: the numbers are the same on a perfectly made ratchet, which is what separates them from the lost motion an as-built measurement would. Motion that stops

The resolution is the pitch

A ratchet's step and a ratchet's error are the same number. Nothing about how well it is made improves that, more pawls divide it by a whole number, and the obvious remedy — cut more teeth — runs into a wall that is geometric rather than practical: at a tooth depth of 0.16 radii the construction stops at twenty-nine.

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. Teeth

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.

Reachable, and dexterous. A 3-link planar arm with links 1.6, 1.2, 0.7. The outer region is everywhere the tool can be put: an annulus from 0.00 to 3.50. The inner region is everywhere it can be put at every tool angle — from 1.10 to 2.10, which is 26% of the area. Both are measured by counting cells on a 300 × 300 grid and both agree with the area computed from the radii to 0.09%, which is what makes the picture a measurement. One path to the tool

Where the hand can go

A robot is sold on its reach, which is one number and describes a sphere the arm touches at one posture. The set the tool can actually be put in is an annulus with a hole; the set it can be put in at every orientation is a quarter of that; and reordering the same three links leaves the first unchanged and destroys the second.

A tackle's ratio, differentiated rather than counted. Four parts of line between two blocks 260 mm apart, drawn as one strand over real sheaves. The ratio a tackle is sold with is the number of parts supporting the moving block, and it is the limit of the true velocity ratio rather than its value: the parts are not parallel, so each of them shortens by less than the lift. Differentiating the run's own length gives 3.9471 here, 1.32% short of 4, and the gap closes as the blocks separate. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

A ratio that is a derivative of a length

A tackle is sold by counting the parts of line holding the moving block: four parts, four to one. Differentiate the strand's own length instead and a four-part tackle gives 3.927 with its blocks 220 mm apart and 3.617 at 90 mm — and the integer it is named for is a limit it reaches nowhere.

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. Teeth

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.

Different numbers of ternary links, and the same spectrum. Two of the 230 ten-link chains whose adjacency matrices have identical characteristic polynomials — identical in every one of the eleven coefficients — and which are not the same chain. They do not even share their assortment — 6×2 + 2×3 + 2×4 on the left and 4×2 + 6×3 on the right. Counting the ternary links tells them apart and the spectrum does not. That is worth pausing on: the spectrum is the more sophisticated invariant, it is the one that got written into the literature as a test, and here it is beaten by the first thing anybody would try. The polynomial both of them have is λ^10 − 13λ^8 + 52λ^6 − 4λ^5 − 76λ^4 + 8λ^3 + 32λ^2. The chain before the lengths

Right until the size nobody checked

The characteristic polynomial of a chain's adjacency matrix is a fingerprint that costs nothing and separates every six-link chain and every eight-link one. At ten links it fails on two pairs — and on one of them, counting the ternary links tells the two chains apart while the polynomial does not.

The count that moves, and the one that does not. 676 sets of leg lengths for one 3-RPR platform, the third leg held at 2.2. Every one of them has exactly 6 complex solutions. The number that is real runs 0, 2 — 141 cells at 0, 535 cells at 2 — and that number is what a machine shop would call the assembly modes. How many answers

The count that does not move

A mechanism does not have a number of assembly modes. Its family has a complex solution count that never changes, and each member has a real count that does — 676 sets of leg lengths for one platform, all with six complex solutions, and nought, two or four of them real. The number a machine shop cares about is the one that is not a property of the machine.

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. The motion, not the mechanism

The other pole

The instantaneous centre is the point of a moving plane that is not moving. There is a second point that is not accelerating, it is somewhere else entirely, and over a full turn of one four-bar the two are never closer than one and a half coupler lengths and get as far apart as twenty-two.

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. Machines you have met

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.

Two ways of adding four tolerances. The output band from ±0.01 on each of four lengths, combined two ways. The upper curve is worst case — every error at its extreme and conspiring — and the lower is root-sum-square, which treats the four as independent random errors. RSS is smaller everywhere, by between 1.42 and 1.95, and with four contributions the most it can ever be is √4 = 2. That factor is not a saving found in the geometry; it is bought with the assumption that the four errors are independent, and one fixture that locates two of the holes takes it straight back. As built

Worst case and the square root

Four tolerances can be added as a straight sum or as a root-sum-square, and the second is smaller by between 1.42 and 1.96 through this linkage's cycle. The ceiling is √4 = 2 and no geometry can beat it. That factor is not found in the mechanism — it is bought entirely with an assumption of independence, and one fixture that locates two holes takes it straight back.

A vertex is a spherical linkage, and the sectors are its link lengths. The four creases of one folded vertex, drawn as directions from the vertex itself, with the great-circle arcs between consecutive ones. Those arcs are the sector angles of the flat pattern — 80°, 60°, 100°, 120° — and they are those angles at every fold, to 8.9e-16 radians. That is the whole of the claim in the title: four axes through a point at fixed arcs from each other is a spherical four-bar, the object this site's spatial field built two phases ago, and a crease pattern's vertex is one of them with the arcs printed on the paper. The dihedral angle of the sheet at each crease is a half turn less that crease's fold angle, which here run 68.8°, 14.4°, 68.8°, 14.4°. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Many of one thing

Every vertex is a spherical linkage

Four creases through a point at fixed arcs from one another is a spherical four-bar — the object the spatial field is built on — with its link lengths printed on the paper as sector angles. The arcs hold to four parts in ten thousand million million at every fold, and on a flat-foldable vertex the half-angle tangents keep a ratio constant to nine figures.

What a Ravigneaux gearset can be made to do. Every distinct ratio the gearset offers, as a reduction. Each one is the same mechanism with one more constraint imposed — a brake holding a member to the case or a clutch locking two members together — and the input is a choice as well, which is why a four-speed needs an input clutch rather than four brakes. The shaded rows are the 5 a real transmission on this gearset is sold with; the rest are ratios the mechanism has and the gearbox does not buy the elements to reach. Every value is exact: the reductions are ratios of integers and are printed as such. More than one input

Four speeds from two numbers

A Ravigneaux gearset has five tooth counts and gives seven exact ratios. Two of the counts do not appear in any of them — the short planet is an idler and its size is free — and the remaining three enter only through two dimensionless numbers, so the whole shift ladder of a four-speed automatic is a function of ring-over-sun and ring-over-the-other-sun. A Simpson three-speed is a function of one number.

The wheel is the coupler — double wishbone. The suspension solved at 0 mm of bump, with the whole travel ghosted behind it. The two arms are the cranks and the upright between them is the coupler; the wheel is bolted to that coupler, so camber is the coupler's rotation and nothing else. Camber here is 0.00° and the contact patch has moved 0.0 mm across the road. The cross is the instantaneous centre of the upright, found from the solved velocity field; the roll centre is where the line from it to the contact patch crosses the car's centreline, and it is at 73 mm here. Machines you have met

The wheel is the coupler

A double wishbone is a four-bar standing on end whose coupler carries a wheel, so camber is coupler rotation and scrub is a coupler point's path. Both are computable, and the second one comes out with the opposite sign from the model every suspension book uses — by more than the whole scrub.

Two ellipses on their foci, at a ratio of 0.603. Each wheel is an ellipse turning about one of its own foci, with the centres a major axis apart. The focal property does the work: the two radii from the two foci add to the major axis, so the contact stays on the line of centres by construction, and the rolled arc lengths agree to 2.5e-8 of their length. The ratio at this instant is 0.6033; over a turn it runs from 0.538 to 1.857, a range of 3.4490 against the ((1+e)/(1−e))² = 3.4490 the eccentricity predicts. And one turn of one wheel is exactly one turn of the other, which is the condition that makes it a pair of wheels rather than a pair of curves. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The shape is the unknown

A ratio that is a function of the angle

A gear pair is usually two circles rolling. Ask instead for an output that runs forty per cent fast for half a turn and forty per cent slow for the other half, and the two shapes that deliver it are not a design decision — the demand fixes both pitch curves completely, and the only question left is whether they close.

The roll centre through the travel — double wishbone. The roll centre is a construction: the instantaneous centre of the upright, joined to the contact patch, extended to the car's centreline. It is quoted as a height. Over 160 mm of travel it moves 54 mm — 52 mm to 106 mm — The number in a specification is the value at one position of a curve, and the curve is steeper than the thing it is a property of. Machines you have met

A roll centre is not a point

The roll centre is a construction on the instantaneous centre of the wheel's upright, and every step of it is exact. What it is not is a height: over eighty millimetres of bump and droop it moves 54 mm on a wishbone and 131 mm on a strut, and on the strut it goes below the road.

The steps, against the ones the rule asks for. The design rule everybody quotes is that the steps between gears should be equal in ratio, so that the engine returns to the same speed after every shift. That makes the sequence geometric, and the ideal step for this spread over this many gears is 1.5324, marked. The steps a gearset actually gives are not free: the whole sequence is a function of the tooth counts, so once the top and bottom are chosen there is nothing left to spend on the middle. The worst step here is off the ideal by 10.8%. More than one input

The steps are not free

A gearbox is supposed to have equal steps between its gears, so that the engine returns to the same speed after every shift. A gearset has one or two numbers to spend on three or four gears, so from the third one the steps are a consequence rather than a choice — and asking for them to be equal turns out to be a quadratic whose root is the golden ratio, realised in tooth counts by consecutive Fibonacci numbers.

Four pulleys, one idler, and one equation. A closed strand over four fixed pulleys and an idler carried on an arm. The idler sits outside the loop the other four make and bulges the strand out to reach it, so its wrap is signed the other way — -25.34° against the four positive ones — and the five still add to exactly one turn. The arm angle is not a free choice: the strand has a length, and matching it is one scalar equation, whatever the number of pulleys. At this position the run is 1018.046 mm and the idler takes up 0.4387 mm of strand for every millimetre it moves along the bisector of its two spans. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

The tensioner is the unknown

A linkage closes when a vector comes back to where it started: two equations, two unknowns. A strand closes when a number does — its length — however many bodies it runs over. So a run with one free body is determined, a run with two is not, and the arm angle that takes up 1,020 mm of belt is the root of one scalar equation solved to 1·10⁻¹³ mm.

30 teeth and two pallets. An escape wheel of 30 teeth and a pair of pallets spanning 4 and a half 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 -0.0320° from it. Dragging the pallet through its whole engagement moves the wheel by 0.106° of recoil. Of the 6.0° the wheel turns each beat, 65.9% is drop and does nothing. Motion that stops

Where the tooth lets go

A pair of pallets spanning a whole number of tooth pitches and a half advances the escape wheel exactly half a pitch every beat, and that half pitch divides into the impulse and the drop with nothing left over. Drop is not chosen. It is whatever the impulse leaves, and on a thirty-tooth wheel it is two thirds.

How far the crank turns before the rocker does. With a clearance of 0.01 at each pin, the crank must be turned this far on reversal before the rocker moves at all. Through most of the cycle it is about 2.8°, and at its best 1.44°. At the two positions where the rocker reverses — marked — it is unbounded: the output velocity passes through zero there, so no amount of crank rotation moves the rocker out of its clearance band. The peak in a plot like this is therefore a property of the sampling and not of the mechanism; it reads 402° at 96 samples and grows without limit as the sampling is refined. The number worth quoting is the plateau. As built

How far the crank turns first

Reverse the input of a four-bar with a hundredth of clearance at each pin and the output does not move for about 2.8° of crank rotation. At the two positions where the rocker reverses it does not move at all, however far the crank is turned — the lost motion is unbounded there, and the peak in any plot of it is a property of the sampling rather than of the mechanism.

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. Contacts that only push

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.

The shape is what the demanded arm implies. A strand leaving a convex body runs along a tangent, so the only thing about the body the strand can feel is the perpendicular distance from the axis to that tangent — the shape's support function h(ψ). Ask for a rate and you have asked for h, because turning the body by dψ pays out h dψ; the shape then comes back from h with no solve at all, as h(ψ)û + h′(ψ)û⊥. This one was asked for h₀(1 + 0.3 cos 2ψ) with h₀ = 34 mm. The strand drawn here leaves the axis at a perpendicular distance of 24.1286 mm, which is what the demand asks for at this angle. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

The drum that is not round

The only thing about a body a strand can feel is the perpendicular distance from the axis to the tangent it leaves along. Ask for a rate and you have asked for that distance at every angle — and the shape comes back from it with no solve at all, unless the demand exceeds 1/(n²−1), at which point there is no shape.

The ring a count says cannot move. 8 pairs of angulated elements, each pair two mirror-image bent bars pinned at their kinks, with each pair joined to the next at two pins on a common radius. 16 bodies and 24 pins give Grübler's 3(n − 1) − 2j = 0: no freedom at all, a structure. The rank of the constraint Jacobian is 44 of 48, which leaves 4 — the three rigid motions of the whole ring and one deployment — and 4 constraints that repeat what the others have already said. The kink angle is not a style: it is 135.0000°, a half turn less the 45.0000° the ring subtends per pair, and any other value gives a ring that will not deploy. Inner radius 0.6876, outer 2.2688. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Many of one thing

The ring that closes at every size

Two bent bars pinned at their kinks hold the angle between their connection lines at 135.000000° whatever you do to them, and two straight ones hold it at nothing. That is the whole difference between a scissor chain that grows in a line and a ring of eight that opens and shuts — and the count says the ring cannot move.

How wrong the trapezoid is, arm angle 15.6°. The difference between the outer wheel's angle and the angle that would put all four wheels on one circle. It is zero at straight ahead by construction — both wheels point forwards — and it reaches 2.06° at 35° of lock. "One hundred per cent Ackermann" names a condition this linkage meets at 1 angle and nowhere else, and no four-bar can do better than a handful: the condition is not a rational function of the crank angle, and the linkage is. Machines you have met

The steering that is never right

For four wheels to roll without scrubbing, the two front wheels must point at different angles, and the relation between them is a cotangent condition no four-bar can satisfy. The trapezoid under every car meets it at straight ahead and, if the arm angle is chosen well, at exactly one other angle — 0.34° out at worst instead of 2.06°.

How far back the wheel is pushed. Recoil against the part of the pendulum's swing that happens after the tooth has landed. The arc cut concentric with the pallet arbor is the flat line on zero, and it is zero as a matter of arithmetic rather than of smallness: rotation about the arbor carries that arc into itself, so the tooth's resting place does not move and every sampled value is the same double. Every other face rises. The flat face with no draw at all is the interesting one — it starts at zero and curves, because it agrees with the arc to first order and not to second, which is precisely the amplitude sensitivity a deadbeat exists to remove. Motion that stops

The wheel that goes backwards

While a pendulum finishes its swing the escape wheel is doing something, and what it does is decided entirely by the shape of the face the tooth is resting on. An arc about the pallet arbor sends it nowhere — not nearly nowhere, the same double at every sample. A flat cut tangent to that arc is dead at exactly one point of itself, and it is the one point the tooth never rests on.

A ratio with no steps in it. Two pulleys whose sheaves slide on their shafts, and one belt. Pushing the primary's sheaves together makes the belt ride further out; the secondary's radius is then not a choice, because the belt is a fixed length and its length over two pulleys at a fixed centre distance is a function of both radii. So the secondary's radius here is the root of that equation, solved rather than assumed, and the drawn belt is the length it is supposed to be to 0.0e+0 mm. Ratio 1.000, with the two radii adding to 110.00 — a number the received rule of thumb says should not change and which changes by 2.6% across the travel. More than one input

A ratio with no steps in it

Push a variable pulley's sheaves together and the belt rides further out. The other pulley's radius is then not a choice — the belt has a fixed length — so it is the root of an equation, solved rather than set. The rule of thumb that says the two radii add to a constant is true to first order and wrong by 7.4% of the ratio at full shift, and the departure has a closed form.

How far a joint-space move bows off the line. Every joint runs from its start value to its end value at a constant rate — the simplest possible move, and the one that can never be refused, because every point along it is a set of joint values and every set of joint values is a pose. The tool does not travel in a straight line while it happens. It bows away by 402 mm over a move of 1223 mm, which is 32.9% of the distance travelled and enough to hit something that the straight line would have missed. One path to the tool

A straight line at constant speed

Run every joint from its start value to its end value and the tool bows 402 mm off the line between them. Insist on the line instead and the arm will follow it — until the path passes near a singularity, where the joint rates a metre a second demands grow as one over the distance, measured at an exponent of −1.010.

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. Drawn wrongly

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.

The radius a winch works at is not a property of the winch. A drum of core radius 30 mm filling with line 6 mm thick, one layer at a time. Line speed per turn is 2πr, and r is the radius of the layer being wound rather than anything about the machine: it runs from 207.35 mm on the first layer to 395.84 mm on the 6th, a factor of 1.909. A winch quoted at one speed is quoted at one layer, and which one is rarely said. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

The radius a winch works at

Line speed per turn is 2πr, and r is not a property of the winch. It is the radius of whichever layer is being wound, so a six-layer drum runs from 207.35 mm per turn to 395.84 — a factor of 1.909 with nothing about the machine changed, and a length that is quadratic in the turns rather than proportional to them.

Two numbers, and where they differ. Every mechanism in this field, with what its constraints leave and what its brackets fill. On every mechanism without a rolling contact the two columns are the same number, which is why nobody had to say which one mobility meant. Here only the rail agrees with itself — and the rail is the one mechanism in the table that cannot go anywhere new. What can move

The count that counts the wrong thing

Mobility has meant one number for six fields, because until a wheel appeared no mechanism could tell two questions apart. A rolling wheel has two velocity freedoms and a three-dimensional reachable set, and the formula that gives 2 is not wrong — it is answering the question about instants when the question anybody asks is about intervals.

A chain is a strand with a smallest piece. 53 teeth driving 11 at a pitch of 12.7 mm. The taut strand is drawn as this field computes it; inside each pitch circle is the polygon the pins actually sit on. The two agree on the straight spans and not on the wraps, and the gap is what the applied field's chordal action is: the effective radius swings between R cos(π/n) and R within every tooth, which is 4.05% on the small sprocket and 0.176% on the large one. A strand has no such number, because a strand has no pitch. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

A chain is not a strand

A chain has a smallest piece, and two things follow that no continuous model can have. Its pins sit on a polygon, so the radius that matters swings by 4.05% within every tooth of an eleven-tooth sprocket — and its loop must contain a whole number of pitches, so the centre distance that closes it comes in steps of 6.4834 mm.

One planet shaft, two centre distances. A compound epicyclic gets its enormous reduction from two meshes whose tooth counts are nearly in the same proportion. The two planet gears are on one shaft, so their axes are at one radius — and at a common module the two rings ask for radii that differ by 0.50 of a tooth. The exactness the reduction is famous for is bought with a pair of meshes running away from the centre distance they were cut at, and the difference is made up by profile shift — the same correction the teeth field applies for a different reason. It is not a rounding: it is the mechanism's own condition, and it is the reason a catalogue reduction of this kind comes in a short list of tooth counts rather than in any combination. More than one input

A hundred to one from a difference of one

A harmonic drive reduces by a hundred to one in a single stage with two gears in it, and the hundred is the flexspline's tooth count divided by the two teeth the circular spline has more than it. The same null space that answers a planetary answers it. What each of the three single-stage reductions pays for that arithmetic is different, and the compound epicyclic's price is a pair of meshes whose centre distances differ by half a tooth.

Three shortest paths. The tool's route between the same two poses, under three interpolations. The straight one is position interpolated along a line with the rotation carried separately, which is what most controllers do. The screw path is the single turn about a single axis that Chasles's theorem says takes any pose to any other — the only one of the three that mentions no coordinate system — and it is 18.0% longer. The joint-space path is what the arm does when nobody asks for anything in particular, and it is 26.8% longer again. The screw axis itself is drawn: pitch -0.096 m per radian. One path to the tool

The distance between two poses

Ask an arm to take the shortest route between two poses and three reasonable definitions give three different paths, of lengths 1.223, 1.443 and 1.550 metres. The disagreement is not numerical. There is no distance between two rigid poses until somebody chooses a length to measure a radian in, and on this arm the choice changes which of two poses is nearer at 74.5 millimetres.

Three chambers, 15,257 mm² between them. Each chamber is bounded by one flank of the rotor and the arc of housing between the two apexes that seal it, so its area is a polygon integral over two curves that are both known exactly. At this shaft angle they are 6309, 1147, 7801 mm². They add to 15257, and the housing's area less the rotor's is 15258 — a number that cannot depend on where the rotor is, and does not, to 9.2e-6 of itself. The engine's displacement is that constant shared out differently, and the three chambers are one chamber counted at three phases of the same cycle. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The shape is the unknown

Three chambers and a constant

A rotor with three corners divides its housing into three chambers, and as the shaft turns they trade area: one grows exactly as fast as the other two shrink. The total does not move — and the fact that it does not is a measurement of whether the corners are actually touching the wall.

One tendon over two joints. A two-link chain with a strand anchored off to the left, running over an idler at each joint and terminating on the far link. Each idler is centred on its joint's axis, which is the one arrangement that makes the strand's length a linear function of the joint angles: the coupling measured here is 14.000000 and 10.000000 mm per radian, against radii of 14 and 10. Total strand 232.845 mm. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Members that pull

One strand over many joints

Route a tendon over an idler centred on a joint's axis and the strand's length becomes an exactly linear function of the joint angle — 8·10⁻¹⁴ mm of departure over 203 degrees of travel. Move that idler 6 mm off the axis and the same drive's arm swings from 8.00 to 16.52 mm per radian.

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. Drawn wrongly

Six things a strand is not

A tackle that is not four to one, a wrap that is not a half turn, a tensioner whose travel takes up nothing, a winch speed that is not a property of the winch, a cable rig that holds nothing still, and a shaped pulley that cannot be asked for what it is usually asked for. Six claims, each with the number that kills it.

Which teeth one tooth ever meets: 20 on 40. Follow one tooth of the pinion round and mark every wheel tooth it touches. It does not touch them all. It touches 2 of 40, which is z₂ divided by the greatest common divisor of the two counts — 20 here — and it goes on touching the same ones for as long as the gears are in mesh. The pattern repeats after 2 turns of the pinion. Adding one tooth to the pinion makes the counts coprime and takes the count from 2 to 40. The marks are produced by walking the mesh, and the count they give is compared with the gcd rather than derived from it. Teeth

Which tooth meets which

A tooth on a pinion does not meet every tooth on its wheel. It meets z₂ divided by the greatest common divisor of the two counts, and it meets the same ones for the whole life of the drive. On the default planetary used throughout — sun 24, planets 24 — a planet tooth touches exactly one sun tooth and never touches another, and nothing in the drawing says so.

11 assortments are arithmetically possible and 7 contain a mechanism. The 10-link census organised the way every published table organises it: by how many links carry two pins, three, four and more. The assortments themselves are a small piece of arithmetic — the degrees must sum to twice the pin count and none may be below two — and it admits 11 of them. 4 contain no chain at all. Each of those 4 needs a link carrying six, seven or eight pins, and a link with that many pins in a chain this small always drags a structure in with it: the graphs exist, they satisfy Grübler exactly, and every one of them has a rigid subchain. That is a result the arithmetic cannot reach, because the arithmetic never looks at where a pin goes. The chain before the lengths

Eleven assortments and four that are empty

How many links carry two pins, how many carry three, how many carry four: two lines of arithmetic admit eleven answers at ten links. Seventy-eight graphs have degrees the last four of them describe, every one of those graphs satisfies Grübler's rule exactly, and not one of them is a mechanism.

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. Machines you have met

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.

Everything one planetary can do, and the gap in the middle. A single epicyclic has three shafts, so there are six ways of choosing which is held, which is driven and which comes out. Each gives a band of reductions as the tooth counts run over every design that can be cut, assembled with three planets and kept clear of undercutting. The bands above 1 are drawn; between them is a gap running from 1.6304 to 2.5862 that no single planetary reaches in any configuration — and a reduction of exactly 2, which is the most ordinary thing anybody asks a gearbox for, is inside it. The gap's width as a factor is exactly the smallest achievable ring-over-sun ratio, 1.5862, which is a statement about how small a planet may be and how large a sun may be. More than one input

The reductions a planetary cannot give

One epicyclic offers six ratios, and the formula for each of them suggests the whole positive line is available. Sweep every design that can actually be cut and assembled and the reachable set has a hole in it running from 1.630 to 2.586 — the width of which has a closed form — and a reduction of exactly 2, the most ordinary thing anybody asks a gearbox for, sits in the middle of it.

The string is the radius. An involute is generated by unwinding a taut string from the base circle, and the taut string is the flank's normal — so the point where it leaves the base circle is the centre of curvature and the string's length is the radius. At a flank radius r that length is √(r² − r_b²), and the dashed curve is that expression. The dots are the curvature of the polyline this site actually draws, measured by circumcircle through consecutive points, over 324 of them. Worst relative disagreement 1.9e-6. At the base circle the radius of curvature is zero, which is why a flank cut below it is not an involute and why undercutting removes exactly that part. Teeth

Two flanks, one law

At a gear mesh the two tooth flanks are conjugate profiles, the pitch point is the pole of their relative motion, and their radii of curvature are tied to each other rather than free. Each flank's radius varies fourfold across the mesh and the sum of the two does not vary at all.

A period, in the space the mechanism lives in. One whole period of an escapement, plotted as wheel angle against pallet angle. Give a four-bar its crank angle and its coupler is somewhere definite; give this its pallet angle and the wheel may be in any of 3 places, because what settles it is which face of which pallet a tooth is against. The path crosses itself and no amount of solving removes the crossing. The vertical jumps are the drops, drawn at the pallet angle of the release because during a drop nothing is touching anything and where the pallet is by then is a question about torque. Over the period the wheel advances 12.000000°, which is one tooth exactly. Motion that stops

Where the input stops deciding

Give a four-bar its crank angle and its coupler is somewhere definite. Give an escapement its pallet angle and the wheel may be in any of three places, because what settles it is which face of which pallet a tooth is against. The path crosses itself and no amount of solving removes the crossing — the state of these mechanisms has a discrete part, and that is what makes them a different kind of object.

A 4-sided bar, and the 13.6% it is out by. 3 flat jaws advancing together on a regular 4-sided bar of unit circumradius, with the bar turned 10.3° from square. The dashed circle is the axis the chuck is turning about and the marked point is where the bar's own centre has ended up: 0.13567 of a circumradius away. The arithmetic is one line — the jaws touch when c·u_k + h(u_k) = d, three unit vectors at 120° satisfy Σ u u ᵀ = 3/2 I, and so c = −⅔ Σ h(u_k) u_k — and it says that the offset vanishes exactly when the bar's own support function is unchanged by a 120° turn. Round, triangular, hexagonal, nine- and twelve-sided bars centre at any orientation; everything else does not, and by an amount that depends on how it happened to go in. Checked here against a linear program that closes the jaws without knowing the identity. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Contacts that only push

Where the jaws put it

Three jaws closing on a bar put its axis at −⅔ Σ h(u_k) u_k, which vanishes exactly when the section's support function is unchanged by a 120° turn. So a three-jaw chuck centres round, triangular and hexagonal stock perfectly and a square bar by up to 17.3 per cent of its own circumradius — and the workshop rule about symmetry that predicts this is wrong, because a six-jaw chuck centres a square.

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. Machines you have met

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.

One piece, and still not reachable. The state of a linear ratchet — a cable tie — is how far in it is pulled, and its free space is the whole interval: every state is connected to every other, with no barrier anywhere. What it does not have is a way back. From the marked state the reachable set is everything forward and only as far back as the tooth the pawl has already dropped into, so 52.1% of ordered pairs are reachable and 4.2% are reachable both ways. Connectivity is symmetric; reachability is an order, and a component count answers the first question and cannot be asked the second. Motion that stops

One piece, and still not reachable

The site decides whether two configurations can be joined by asking whether they are in the same connected component, and that relation is symmetric because a path run backwards is a path. A one-way mechanism breaks the symmetry and leaves the connectivity alone: its free space is a single interval with no barrier anywhere in it, and about half of the ordered pairs of states cannot be joined by any admissible motion.

Half a tooth, spent three ways. Each bar is one beat of the escape wheel: exactly half a tooth pitch, 6.0° on 30 teeth, whatever the faces are cut like. The dark part is the impulse, which is the only part that does anything to the pendulum; the pale part is the drop, in which nothing is touching anything; the short tail is the lock-in run, in which the arriving tooth drags the wheel backwards as it settles. On the arc with no draw that tail is exactly zero and the budget has two terms. On every other face it is not, and the three still sum to the half pitch to twelve figures — which is the check, since the three are computed from three different contacts. As built

What a drop cannot be smaller than

Two thirds of an escape wheel's travel is drop, and drop does nothing. The obvious economy is to cut it down, and it cannot be cut down, because every dimension it is made of has a tolerance and a drop smaller than the accumulated error is a tooth that does not clear the pallet it is leaving. The stack is 0.39°, and it barely moves when the tooth count triples.

Which pin's play costs the most. Each pin's clearance taken one at a time, at 0.01 on links of 1 to 4, with the direction swept rather than assumed. The ranking runs A 32%, B 25%, O₂ 22%, O₄ 21% — a spread of 1.52 against the 3.43 the four lengths spread over. Clearances are more evenly weighted than length tolerances because each pin joins two links and so enters two of the four sensitivities, which is why the best bearing buys less than the best-held length does — and why it still goes somewhere the load path does not suggest. As built

Which pin to buy

The four lengths of a four-bar contribute 38, 26, 25 and 11 per cent of its output error — a spread of 3.4. Its four pins contribute 32, 25, 22 and 21 — a spread of 1.5. Clearances are more evenly shared than length tolerances, because every pin joins two links and so appears in two of the four sensitivities, and that changes what a better bearing is worth.

A geared five-bar at 3 : 2, its coupler pin traced over 2 input turns. Two cranks of length 1 on pivots 3 apart, meshed through gears whose pitch circles, dashed, have radii 1.800 and 1.200, so the second crank turns 1.5000 times for every turn of the first and the other way. Coupler bars of 3 and 2.5 join them at the pin C, and the thin curve is where C goes over 2 turns of the input. The two crank pins are always between 1 and 5 apart and the bars can span 0.5 to 5.5, so the chain never meets a dead position. After 2 turns the machine is exactly where it began and the curve is closed. What can move

One freedom, and a motion that never repeats

Mesh a gear on each crank of a five-bar and the count and the rank agree that one freedom is left, at every gear ratio. Whether the machine ever comes back to where it started is a different question, and neither instrument can see it: at 3 to 2 it is home after two turns, at 37 to 23 after twenty-three, and at the golden ratio never, with its nearest returns at the Fibonacci numbers.

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. Contacts that only push

Six hold nothing

Every exact-constraint coupling on this site — 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.

What the valve does, against what the ratio promises. The solved valve lift, and the cam's lift multiplied by the nominal ratio. They are the same curve to the eye and they are not the same curve: the peak is 12.777 mm against a promised 12.842 mm, short by 0.51%. The shortfall is not an error in either number. It is what happens when a ratio measured at one position is applied across a movement, and it is why cam cards and rocker ratios are quoted together. Machines you have met

The cam is not the valve

A rocker arm's ratio is the ratio of two moment arms measured at one position, and the rocker swings twelve degrees while the valve opens. The instantaneous ratio runs 1.588 to 1.605, so the peak valve lift is 12.78 mm where the number on the box promises 12.84 — and the shortfall depends on how the rocker was set up, not on the cam.

How far the driven link turns is a fact about the lengths, not the chain. Each of the sixteen eight-link chains, given the arbitrary placement its own layout produces, driven from its first available choice of frame and input, and swept until a frame stops closing. 10 of the sixteen reach every angle and the rest rock through between 107° and 244°. Nothing in this chart is a property of the chains. Change the placement and the bars change; the census above them does not. It is here because it is the sharpest way to say what this field does and does not decide, and because the temptation to read a topology census as a catalogue of machines is exactly the mistake it prevents. The chain before the lengths

The chain has no lengths

Every number in this field survives multiplying every link by a different scale factor, because there are no lengths to scale. Which is also the statement of what a census cannot decide — and the sixteen eight-link chains, each given one arbitrary set of dimensions and driven, produce a chart in which nothing belongs to the chains.

An open belt, whose wraps make one turn. Two pulleys of radius 40 and 24 mm with their centres 160 mm apart, with the strand running the same way round both. The two tangency points on each pulley are marked; the run between them is computed from the signed radius difference and nothing else. The wrap angles are 191.48° and 168.52°, and they add to exactly one turn — the turning number of a simple loop. Length 522.6633 mm, against the textbook formula's 522.6633. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Wheels, and where they may not go

The road a wheel carries with it

A taut strand on a pulley is a rolling contact: the material at the tangency is at rest against the surface, and the ratio between two bodies on one span is the ratio of their arms. But this rolling constraint integrates, where a wheel's does not — and the difference is that a strand rolls along a line and a wheel rolls across a plane.

A roller in the groove of a quick-rise cam at 600 rpm. The cycloidal programme — rise 20 over 90°, return over 170° — cut as a groove on a prime circle of 40 for a roller of 10, driving a follower of 0.5 kg pressed toward the cam by 20 N, and turned anticlockwise to 59.9° at 600 rpm. The groove must supply m·s″·ω² + F along the follower's travel, −66.6 N at this angle, so the roller bears on the outer wall. The marks on the groove are the four places in a turn where that force changes sign and the roller changes walls: 47.87°, to the outer; 87.13°, to the inner; 151.35°, to the outer; 193.65°, to the inner. The stretches of deceleration begin to cross over at 267.6 and 505.5 rpm. Prescribed motion

A roller in a groove changes walls with the speed

A groove holds its roller between two walls and chooses between them by the sign of one force, the follower's mass times its acceleration plus the load pressing it in. Below a threshold speed that force never changes sign and the roller stays on the inner wall; each stretch of deceleration adds two crossovers above its own threshold. On a quick-rise cam at 20 N and half a kilogram the count goes from none to two at 268 rpm and to four at 506. A cycloidal law brings the roller across smoothly; a constant-acceleration law throws it across by a step of 3,200 N at 3,000 rpm.

One pin and two, on the same wheel. A 6-slot Geneva wheel at one instant of its index, driven by a crank carrying one pin and by the same crank carrying two. The wheel, the slots and the centre distance are identical; only the pin count differs. Each pin drives the wheel through one slot pitch while the driver sweeps 120°, so 1 pin gives 1 index a driver turn and leaves 67% of it at rest, 2 pins give 2 indexes a driver turn and leave 33% of it at rest. Nothing else about the mechanism changes, which is why the whole question is arithmetic. Motion that stops

Two pins and no dwell at all

Put a second pin on a Geneva's crank and the wheel indexes twice a turn instead of once, at a quarter of the acceleration for the same output rate. Put a third on a six-slot wheel and it never rests; put a third on an eight-slot wheel and two pins meet in two slots and it jams. Both of those look like separate conditions and are one, and the boundary between them is an equation in integers with exactly three solutions.

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. More than one input

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.

One tooth count, three pressure angles. A 20-tooth gear cut at 14.5°, 20°, 25°, drawn at a common pitch radius and overlaid on its own pitch and base circles. The three teeth have the same thickness at the pitch circle — that is what the standard fixes — and differ everywhere else: a coarser pressure angle puts the base circle lower and leans the flank over, so the tooth gains metal where it is held and loses it where it reaches: thicknesses at the base circle run 1.628, 1.756, 1.967 modules and at the tip 0.866, 0.695, 0.510. Those two run opposite ways, and the second of them ends at a hard stop — a tooth whose tip thickness reaches zero has come to a point and cannot be cut. Teeth

The angle the standard left free

Involute geometry fixes the tooth curve and leaves one number open. Raising it buys smaller pinions and spends contact ratio, monotonically and in opposite directions, so there is no angle that is best at both — and the familiar twenty degrees is a choice with a date on it rather than an optimum.

4 turns, and none of them in a plane. A strand wrapped 4 times round a drum of radius 50 whose barrel has room for 8, with each turn lying beside the last — so the pitch is the strand's own diameter, 10 here, and the path is a helix rather than a circle. The helix angle is 1.823°, the length per turn is 314.318 against the planar model's 314.159, and the whole run is 1257.27 long where a plane would have said 1256.64. The plan view is a planar wrap exactly: projected onto the plane perpendicular to the axis, the helix is a circle of the drum's own radius to 2.8e-14 traversed 4.000000 times. Members that pull

The wrap that walks along the axis

Every figure in this field is drawn in a plane, and a strand that goes round twice cannot be: the second turn has to lie beside the first. The plan view of the helix that results is a planar wrap exactly — so every wrap angle survives and the length does not, by five hundred parts per million on a real rope.

What a belt ratio's tolerance is made of. The three ways a variator's ratio can be wrong when the parts are wrong, at a nominal ratio of 1.848: a belt 0.3% long, a centre distance 0.2 mm out, and a sheave 0.15 mm from where it was commanded. Worst case they add to 2.98% and combined in quadrature they are 2.04% — the two conventions the practice field already argues about. The last row is a gear train's ratio under the same treatment, and it is empty: there is no length in a tooth count for a tolerance to be on. As built

The ratio that has a tolerance

Every dimension in this collection has been given a range at some point, and the ratios never were, because a gear ratio is a count and a count has no tolerance. A belt ratio is a quotient of two solved lengths, so every length in the mechanism is in it — and the amplification from belt length to ratio runs from 2.7 to 6.4 across the travel, which puts a whole per cent on a mechanism whose gearbox equivalent has none at all.

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. Machines you have met

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.

Three circles at one point, at 50°. The osculating circle of the fixed centrode at the pole, the osculating circle of the moving centrode there, and the inflection circle. All three pass through the pole and all three have their centres on the common normal — which is what makes the relation between them a relation between three numbers on a line. The two centrode radii are 16.180 and 9.730, signed along that normal, and the inflection circle's diameter is 24.398 against the 24.409 the other two give. Nothing in that arithmetic knows there is a linkage. The window is 30.25 wide and the larger osculating circle is 32.36 across, so it is cut at the edge: what is drawn is the neighbourhood of the pole, where the three curvatures are the same three numbers however far the circles carrying them reach. The motion, not the mechanism

The two numbers are the curves' own

Every essay in this field runs on the inflection circle and the pole tangent, and every one has taken them from the motion's derivatives. They are the two centrodes' radii of curvature at the pole, combined harmonically — measurable off the curves with no mechanism in the arithmetic, and carrying a sign that changes eight times in a turn.

A Geneva's acceleration against three cam laws, at the same index angle. The output's acceleration through one index, divided by the step over the square of the input angle it takes — the unit in which a cam law's acceleration coefficient is quoted — so every law is one fixed curve whatever the step. The dark curve is a Geneva of 6 slots: its step is 360°/6 and its input turns 120° while indexing, and a cam indexer is given exactly those two numbers. The Geneva's coefficient is 5.653 against cycloidal 6.283, modified sine 5.528 and simple harmonic 4.935, so at 6 slots modified sine and simple harmonic have the lower peak. The Geneva's curve starts and ends away from nought, at tan(π/6) = 0.577 in absolute terms: its acceleration steps the instant the pin enters. Dragging the slot count moves only the Geneva. Motion that stops

When the index law becomes a choice

A Geneva's motion law is forced by its slot count and a cam indexer's is chosen, so the fair comparison gives the cam the Geneva's own index angle and step. On peak acceleration the cam wins only below a slot count that depends on the law — 5.19 for cycloidal, 6.23 for modified sine, 8.06 for simple harmonic — and above it the Geneva does. What no slot count removes is the step: the pin arrives with an acceleration of exactly tan(π/n).

An inner cable in its sheath, pulled and pushed. A sheath routed through two bends — the first turning 90° on a radius of 70, the second turning back 90° on 55 — drawn with its bore exaggerated to a clearance of 7 so the inner's two positions can be seen. Pulled, the inner is taut and takes the shortest path the tube allows, hugging the inside of each bend; pushed, it is pressed against the outside. Both paths are strands over pulleys of radius R ∓ c at the bend centres. At this clearance the pulled inner is 20.53 shorter than the centreline and the pushed one 23.63 longer, against c times the total turning, 21.99. At a real clearance of 0.25 the pulled inner is short by 0.7834 against 0.7854. Dragging changes the first bend's angle. Members that pull

A strand in a tube

A Bowden cable's inner runs inside a sheath with a little clearance, and pulled it takes the shortest path the tube allows — a strand over pulleys of radius R − c at every bend. So its lost motion is the clearance times the total angle the sheath turns through: no bend radius in it, no route shape, and the S-bend that turns nowhere net loses as much as the U that turns back. Steering a handlebar changes it by exactly c times the change in angle.

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. More than one input

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.

The best four contacts on six regular polygons. The largest-margin placement of four frictionless contacts on regular polygons of 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, 12 sides, each found by exhaustive search over edge ends and refinement along the edges. 3 sides: margin 0.231 against a half-edge of 0.866; 4 sides: margin 0.333 against a half-edge of 0.707; 5 sides: margin 0.235 against a half-edge of 0.588; 6 sides: margin 0.293 against a half-edge of 0.500; 8 sides: margin 0.284 against a half-edge of 0.383; 12 sides: margin 0.223 against a half-edge of 0.259. From six sides up every contact sits at an end of its edge; on the triangle and the pentagon two of the four settle near the middles of edges instead. On the square and the even polygons the corner contacts take alternate ends of four edges a quarter-turn apart; an odd polygon has no edge exactly a quarter-turn round and holds less than either even neighbour. Contacts that only push

The hold is in the corners

A disc cannot be held by frictionless contacts and a regular polygon can, so a polygon with more and more sides has to lose its hold somewhere. Searched exhaustively, the best four contacts sit at alternate ends of four edges a quarter-turn apart, and their margin is the half-edge sin(π/n) less a correction that falls as 1/n² — 74% of it at eight sides, 99.4% at sixty-four. The hold is lost as the side shrinks, not as its square, and it is carried entirely by how far a contact sits from its edge's middle.

One shaft angle, five places along a twisted rotor. A mismatched pair — a cycloidal rotor against a circular-tipped one of the same height, which are not each other's conjugates — with the rotors twisted by 1 lobe pitch along their length. The section at a given place along the shaft is the flat pair at an input angle shifted by the twist so far, so at one instant the five sections shown are at five different phases of the same mesh: the two bodies are into each other by 2.42 at the tightest section and 2.34 apart at the widest, with a mean of -0.408 across the whole seal. All five are drawn at one scale, and nothing here is meshed twice: one planar profile is read along a window. The shape is the unknown

A twist steadies what it cannot tighten

A helical rotor's sections are at different phases of the same mesh, so the clearance a machine has at one instant is a window along its own profile rather than a point on it. A wrap of exactly one lobe pitch holds the seal's open area constant through the turn — every harmonic at once, whatever the profile — and leaves its average, its tightest place and its widest place exactly where they were.

A rectangular hyperbola, compiled from a multiple of its equation. The machine compiled from p · (1 + x² + y²) for a rectangular hyperbola, with the translators — the parallelograms that carry a direction from where it is produced to where it is needed — in their own colour. The factor 1 + x² + y² is at least one at every real point, so every equation here vanishes on exactly the same curve. The machines do not agree: 20 bars at p, 75 bars at p · (1 + x² + y²), 144 bars at p · (1 + x² + y²)². This one solves 29 positions over an arc of 0.508 radians, and at every one of them the original polynomial reads 4.93e-14. The curve as an equation

The price is on the equation

A line costs five bars. The same line, written as its own equation multiplied by a factor that is never zero, costs fifty — and the machine compiled from the longer equation draws the same line just as exactly. Every cost this field quotes belongs to a polynomial and not to a curve, and the cheapest equation of a given curve is a quantity nobody here has.

The square a robot thinks it drove, and the two it drove. A differential drive with wheels one per cent apart in radius, sent round a four-metre square twice — once clockwise and once anticlockwise. What it believes is the square; what it did closes 1.60 m out one way and 1.40 m out the other, and the errors point different ways. A wrong track width instead gives 0.177 m and 0.177 m — the same both ways round. That difference is why the test is run in both directions: one run cannot tell the two errors apart and two runs can. As built

The error that is an integral

A tolerance on a link length moves an output by a bounded amount. A tolerance on a wheel radius moves a vehicle by an amount that grows with how far it has driven: one per cent of mismatch between two wheels bends a commanded straight line onto a 30 m radius, and a four-metre square comes back 1.60 m from where the machine thinks it is.

24 teeth inside 72. An internal pair, drawn from the same involute the external pairs are drawn from. Three things are different and they are one difference. The centre distance is 24.0 — the difference of the pitch radii rather than their sum. Both base tangency points lie on the same side of the line of action, so the pitch point falls outside the segment between them rather than inside it. And the contact ratio is 1.931 against the external pair's 1.707, because the annulus's tip circle cuts the line on the far side of its own tangency and lengthens the contact path instead of shortening it. The pinion turns the same way as the annulus, which no external pair ever does. Teeth

The mesh with one curvature reversed

Turn an annulus's teeth inward and the same involute law produces a different machine: a centre distance that is a difference, two base tangencies on one side of the line of action, more contact than an external pair carries, and three separate floors on the tooth counts, all of them the same statement about where an involute stops existing.

The roller's flight across a 0.05 mm clearance at every crossover. The cycloidal quick-rise programme carrying 0.5 kg against 20 N at 600 rpm, with 0.05 mm between the roller and the wall it is not bearing on. At each sign change of the groove's force the roller leaves its wall, and each curve is the gap it opens, from nought to the far wall at the top of the plot: leaves at 47.9° and lands 6.6° later at 80 mm/s; leaves at 87.1° and lands 7.1° later at 63 mm/s; leaves at 151.4° and lands 14.6° later at 35 mm/s; leaves at 193.6° and lands 13.4° later at 42 mm/s. Dragging the speed moves the crossings, lengthens or shortens each flight, and just above a stretch's threshold shows a flight that never reaches the far wall. Prescribed motion

The time a crossover takes

A roller in a groove changes walls where the groove's force changes sign, and it gets there by flying across the clearance. How hard it lands depends on the clearance through an exponent the motion law decides — two thirds where the force passes through nought, one half where it steps — a flight that ends in a dwell lands at √(2cF/m) whatever the speed, and just above each threshold the force changes sign and the roller never arrives at all.

A ball bearing turned by its inner race. A bearing of pitch diameter 40 with 8 balls of diameter 8, its outer race held and its inner race turned 60°. Rolling without slipping at both contacts leaves the cage — the ring that keeps the balls apart, marked by the dark tick — turned 24.00°, a share of 0.4000 of the race, and each ball spun 120.0° backwards about its own centre, marked by its own tick. The share is (1 − d/D)/2, less than a half by d/2D; the gear-train solver, handed a planetary with a sun of 32 teeth and a ring of 48, returns 2/5 for its carrier. Dragging turns the inner race. Wheels, and where they may not go

A bearing is a planetary with no teeth

Roll a ball between two races and nothing but the two rolling constraints decides how fast its centre goes round. Solved, they put the cage at (1 − d/D)/2 of the inner race's speed — always less than half — and the gear field's train solver, handed a planetary with a sun of D − d teeth and a ring of D + d, returns the same fraction exactly. And a tapered roller rolls without slipping along its whole line only if its axis meets the bearing's at the apex, the wheel field's concurrency one dimension up.

Two circles, one term. The curve r² = 1.44 together with r² = 2.56, whose squared radii sum to 4.00 — four times the square of the arm's link length. Their product equation expands to 1 term, which is what either circle costs on its own, so the second circle is free. The machine compiled from it has 17 bars against 11 for the single circle, runs over 5.200 radians against 1.560, and stays on the outer component throughout: its radius varies by 4.15e-13 over 240 solved positions. A mechanism moves continuously and the two circles are disjoint, so no assembly of it reaches both. The curve as an equation

Two circles for the price of one

Search every multiple of a curve's equation by a polynomial of degree two and the cheapest is the curve's own equation, on four curves and by exhaustion. On the circle a second multiplier ties — and what it describes is two concentric circles, whose squared radii sum to four times the arm's link length squared, at exactly the cost of one.

The taut inner, and the walls it is actually held by. A sheath of two 8° bends on a radius of 40, its bore drawn at a clearance of 4, with the shortest path from ferrule to ferrule inside it. Nothing about a bend goes into that path: it is the shortest route the tube allows, found by tightening a funnel against every cross-section in turn, and the places it reaches the wall are where it is held. At this clearance the two bends hold 53% and 53% of their own turn, and the inner is short of the centreline by 0.854 against the closed form 1.117 — 76% of it. Widen the bore and the path lifts off. Members that pull

Which walls a strand is held by

A Bowden inner is short of its sheath by the clearance times the total turning — a law with no bend radius in it and no route shape. It is exact while the inner touches the inside of every bend, and a bend shallower than the turn the inner spends crossing the bore is not touched at all. Past that the law is an over-estimate, and what the inner actually loses flattens onto a ceiling that has no clearance in it.

The disc, the wheel, and what has to be cut out of it. A 6-slot Geneva at 0° of driver, with the driver's locking disc of radius 27.0 drawn about its axis and the wheel drawn as the material it actually has — inside its rim, outside the 6 concave locking arcs cut into it, 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 236.3°, 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. Motion that stops

The disc decides the pin count

A Geneva's pin count is usually bounded by the slots: p indexes must not overlap, so fewer than 2n/(n−2) pins fit. The other half of the mechanism has its own inequality and nobody had measured it. The locking disc must be cut away wherever the wheel passes through it, that cut-away is wider than the index sweep at every slot count, and it is the binding condition everywhere — one pin only, from four slots upward.

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. More than one input

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.

The field of action, straight and slanted. The rectangle a contact lives in: its width is the usable line of action, its height is the face width, and a new contact line enters every base pitch. On the left the teeth are straight, so the lines are vertical and each one arrives and leaves all at once — the total length in contact jumps by a whole face width, 40 mm, every base pitch. On the right the same pair with a 20° helix: the lines lean by the base helix angle, so a tooth enters at one end of the face before it has left at the other, and the total changes by 3.44 mm instead of 40. Nothing about the profile is different between the two panels. Teeth

Contact that runs along the tooth

A straight tooth engages along its whole face at once, so the amount of contact at a mesh is a square wave. Slant the tooth and a second contact ratio appears that has no tooth count in it and no pressure angle — bought with face width and helix angle alone, and able to reach a value at which the total length of contact stops varying at all.

Three laws in the band: a third, a sixth and a sixth. For bands from 3% to 10 ppm of the output's swing, three things measured on the symmetric six-bar itself: the longest dwell at any angle at the rocker pin, the dwell at the sixth-order angle γ = 120.8024°, and how far below γ the best angle sits. The dots are measurements and the lines are the two-term model's predictions from two coefficients read off the output's even part. Over the four tightest bands the fitted exponents are 0.173, 0.172 and 0.333, against a sixth, a sixth and a third. At 10 ppm the best angle is 0.490° below γ against a prediction of 0.488°, and the dwell at γ is 26.43° against 26.23°. The loosest bands sit above the lines, where the terms the model leaves out are no longer small. The paths points trace

The dip that buys the dwell

A symmetric coupler curve's six-bar dwells longest a little below the angle that makes its error sixth order, and three bands gave three numbers. Across three and a half decades of tolerance the best angle's distance from that angle grows as the cube root of the band, both dwells as its sixth root, and their ratio is (27/4)^(1/6) = 1.3747 at every band — because the best machine spends the whole band on one dip and ends its dwell where the output comes back.

How evenly the rocker is driven through the working stroke. The rocker's speed through the working stroke, divided by its mean over the stroke, against the fraction of the stroke's duration, for a crank-rocker with a 60° swing and a time ratio of 1.2 of its own, ground 1.2223, crank 0.4783, coupler 1.1298, output 1. Every curve must start and end at nought, because the rocker stops to reverse; what differs is the middle. The number after each name is the fastest speed over the slowest while the rocker covers the central 80% of its swing. Driven directly at constant speed the crank-rocker gives 1.91 at a time ratio of 1.20. The drag link that gives the highest time ratio, 2.71, gives 2.77: a hump in the middle of the cut. The most even design that still reaches 2, a drag link of ground 1, crank 5, coupler 4.5, output 2.25, gives 1.21 at a ratio of 2.03 — more even than the crank-rocker alone. Dragging moves that design's phase. Linkages

A quick return that cuts evenly

A drag link ahead of a crank-rocker buys a shaper its time ratio of 2 with both stages at 40°. The drag link that buys the most ratio drives the cut unevenly — its fastest speed through the middle of the stroke is 2.77 times its slowest — and a different drag link at a different phase reaches 2.03 with a ratio of 1.21, which is more even than the crank-rocker driven alone at constant speed. Up to a ratio of about 2.4 the second stage can improve both specifications at once.

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. As built

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.

All themes