Machine Kinematics
solved, then drawn
Theme

The thread: Two routes to the same number, part 2 of 4

Mobility from Grübler's formula and mobility from the rank of the constraint Jacobian are computed independently and must agree. Where they disagree the formula is wrong and the mechanism is more interesting.

443 essays in 4 parts: part 1 · part 2 · part 3 · part 4

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.

 Ball's point at 66°. Two curves and one point. The circle is the locus of points whose path is momentarily straight; the cubic is the locus of points whose path curvature is momentarily not changing. A point on both has a path that is straight and staying straight — four-point contact with its own tangent line, one order better than anything else in the plane. That is Ball's point. Walking the circle and looking for a zero of κ′ turned up 1 sign changes here and 1 of them survived being checked for continuity — the others are the asymptote the pole itself produces. Its measured order of contact with the line is 3.95. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The motion, not the mechanism

The straightest point there is

Where the circle of points going straight meets the cubic of points whose curvature is standing still, there is one point whose path is straight and staying straight. Neither Watt nor Chebyshev put their tracing point there, and moving Watt's to it more than halves the error over the whole stroke.

 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.

 What every pair of groups meets in. The intersection of two subgroups is always a subgroup — that needs no computation — and which one is the useful part. This is the design rule behind every parallel machine in these essays: choose legs whose groups meet in the motion the platform is wanted to have, and it has that motion whatever the leg lengths are, with no synthesis and no tolerance. The row and column are built about different axes, at right angles, because an intersection is a statement about particular subgroups rather than about their kinds: two planar groups with the same normal meet in the whole of themselves, and two with different normals meet in a line. Several legs, one platform

Three legs and one plane

The parallel field argued that a platform stays flat from the structure of its legs, one leg at a time. The same fact is one line of linear algebra: each leg confines the platform to a group, the platform gets the intersection, and an intersection of groups is a group whatever the leg lengths are. The motion type is decided before a single dimension is chosen.

 Two circles each, so two to the power of the dyads. A dyad has two solutions, and a chain whose groups are all dyads is solved one dyad at a time, so the number of ways it can be assembled at a given input angle is 2 raised to the number of them. That is a prediction made from the graph about a count of configurations, and it is checked here against a count: the same chain solved from 240 random seeds, with the distinct converged configurations counted. The two agree in every row. Watt's did not at first — it came back at eight — and every one of the four extra answers had its ternary link mirrored: three distances fix a triangle only up to reflection, so the distance equations admit a part that has been turned inside out. A reflected link is a different part rather than a different pose, and the solver refuses those frames now. How many answers

Two to the power of the dyads

How many ways a mechanism can be assembled at a given input angle is a count of configurations, and it is predicted here by a graph: two circles per pair of links, so two to the power of the number of pairs. The prediction came back four for Watt's chain and the count came back eight, and the four extra had a link turned inside out.

 Whose constraints stay put. The largest principal angle between a mechanism's screw system at the start of its motion and at each later position. The 3 mechanisms whose motion lies in a subgroup of the rigid displacements — planar, spherical, translational — never leave the same subspace, and read between 1.9e-6 and 3.0e-6 degrees, which is the precision of an arccosine near one rather than a movement. The paradoxical ones turn through 49° and 57°. Every curve runs over its own range of motion, because Bricard's linkage assembles over 120 degrees and a shared axis would hide it. Out of the plane

Two ways to be overconstrained

A planar four-bar and Bennett's four-bar report the same redundancy, the same rank and the same wrong count. One of them is overconstrained at every set of link lengths; the other at exactly one ratio and nowhere near it. The difference is not in any of the numbers so far — but it is measurable, and the measurement is an angle.

 Three singularities, and where each one is. The elbow singularity is at the edge of the workspace, where the arm is straight and cannot reach further — nothing is lost that could have been used. The shoulder singularity is where the two ways of facing the target merge, on a cylinder of radius 0.18 m about the base axis which is also the boundary of a hole the arm cannot reach into at all. The wrist singularity is the one that stops real machines: axes four and six in line, one rotation gone, in the middle of an ordinary working volume with nothing about the tool's position to suggest it. The rank falls by exactly one in all three — and what is lost differs. The elbow and the shoulder are constrained by a pure force, along the arm and across it; the wrist is constrained by a screw of pitch −0.629, which is a force and a couple together. Those are reciprocal screws rather than singular vectors, because a singular vector's direction depends on whether the arm was written in metres or millimetres and a screw does not. One path to the tool

Where the arm loses a direction

An arm has three singularities and they are three different events. Two of them are inside an ordinary working volume, all three drop the rank by exactly one, and what each one takes away is a screw — a pure force along the arm at the elbow, a pure force across it at the shoulder, and at the wrist a screw of pitch −0.629 that is a force and a couple together.

 The error between the precision points. chebyshev: worst 0.2232°, RMS 0.1475°; uniform: worst 0.3415°, RMS 0.2296°. The error is zero at each precision point by construction and nowhere else. chebyshev has the smallest maximum here, and which curve is best depends entirely on which measure is asked for. The problem backwards

Where the precision points go

A linkage that matches a function at three points is wrong between them, and where the three points are put decides how wrong. Chebyshev spacing cuts the worst error by a third against even spacing, for free — and the reason has nothing to do with mechanisms. It is a fact about a polynomial the linkage has never heard of.

 Which of these two tracks was made by the front wheel. The rear wheel of a bicycle is towed, so it points at the front wheel at every instant: the tangent to the rear track, extended forward by the wheelbase, lands on the front track. Done that way round the tangents land a mean of 0.13 mm off; done the other way round they land 461 mm off, a factor of 3625. It is a measurement rather than an eye for tracks, and it needs neither the wheelbase nor the direction of travel to be known in advance. Wheels, and where they may not go

Which way did the bicycle go

Two tyre tracks in mud, and a question with a definite answer. The rear wheel is towed, so its tangent extended forward by the wheelbase must land on the front wheel's track — and it does, to 0.13 mm one way round and 447 mm the other. The test needs neither the wheelbase nor the direction of travel, and it returns both.

 Six words, and the shortest of them. Every path a car that may not reverse and may not turn tighter than R can take between two placements is one of six shapes: three arcs, or two arcs with a straight between. All six are drawn; the shortest is LSR at 2.2557 R and the longest is RSR at 14.788 R. A numerical shooting solve that shares no line of code with the closed forms returns 2.2557 R, which agrees to 4e-16. Wheels, and where they may not go

A circle for the first millimetre

The shortest path for a car that may not reverse, from here to a point one millimetre to the side at the same heading, is 31.417 m for a five-metre turning radius. The shortest path to a point twenty metres to the side is 31.416 m. The cost of going sideways is not monotonic in how far sideways, and below a crossover at 2.956 R it is exactly 2πR + δ.

 A rotor that was not drawn, at 52° of shaft. The housing is an epitrochoid — the only shape here that was written down — and the rotor is the envelope of it, seen from a body that turns at a third of the shaft's rate about a centre orbiting at the eccentricity. Nothing about the rotor was chosen. Its three apexes come out at radius 100.000000, which is the generating radius R exactly, at 0° and ±120°; the middle of each flank comes closest to the centre at 72.0000, which is R − 2e. The apexes are the only part of the rotor that touches the housing, which is why a rotary engine's sealing problem is three lines rather than a ring. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The shape is the unknown

A rotor nobody drew

The rotor of a rotary engine has three corners, three flanks and one job: to stay in contact with a housing while turning at a third of the shaft's speed about a centre that orbits. Given the housing and that motion, the rotor is not designed. It is computed, corners and all, by the routine that cuts a gear tooth.

 Four joints that give a group, and four that do not. Two chains of four revolute-and-slide joints, each drawn at its home position with its joint axes dashed, and each with a cloud of the tool positions it reaches. The counts are identical: four joints, four freedoms, the same Jacobian rank everywhere off a singularity. On the left the three pins are parallel and the slide is along them, and the displacement set is the Schoenflies group — every translation and one rotation direction, four dimensions, closed. On the right the axes are at random and the set is four-dimensional too, and it is inside no group smaller than all the rigid displacements. The instrument is in the caption of each panel: take the logarithms of the displacements the chain reaches and count the dimensions they occupy. Four means a group. Six means there is nothing to be inside. What a joint is

Four joints that give a group, and four that do not

Two chains of four joints. Same joint types, same count, same mobility, same Jacobian rank, same everything measured here across twenty-two fields. One of them reaches a four-dimensional set of displacements that closes under composition; the other reaches a four-dimensional set whose logarithms fill all six dimensions. The difference is six hundredths of a radian in where two axes point.

 Four positions brought together. Burmester's construction for four prescribed positions gives a curve of points that can be fixed pivots. Bring the four positions together and it has to become the cubic of stationary curvature, because a circle through four coalescing positions is a circle of four-point contact. Measured along one ray from the pole: the finite curve crosses at one radius and the cubic at another, and the gap between them falls as the square of the spread — fitted exponent 2.024, and 7.9e-5 coupler lengths at a spread of 0.01 radians. The finite construction is the same concyclic test the four-position synthesis is built on, so this compares that construction against the infinitesimal one rather than against a re-implementation of either. The motion, not the mechanism

Four positions brought together

Burmester's construction finds the points of a moving plane whose four prescribed positions lie on a circle. Bring the four positions together and the curve it draws has to become the cubic of stationary curvature — and the gap between the two closes as the square of the spread, with the exponent measured rather than assumed.

 The same error, twice, in two directions. A Sarrus linkage with one axis of one chain tilted off true, and the motion range that survives. Tilted within the plane the chain works in, it does not care: at 0.2 radians — eleven and a half degrees, which is not a manufacturing error by any standard — it still drives through a full turn. Tilted out of that plane, 0.001 radians stops it dead. Two hundred times the error, in the other direction, for no cost at all. What separates them is whether the perturbation lies in the screw system the mechanism leaves unconstrained — so "an overconstrained mechanism must be exact" is not merely crude, it is wrong about the case it is usually said of. As built

Fragility has a direction

Tilt one axis of a Sarrus linkage out of true by a thousandth of a radian and it stops dead. Tilt the same axis of the same mechanism by two hundred times as much, in the other direction, and it drives through a full turn with nothing measurably wrong. Three orders of magnitude between two errors of the same size — and the direction that matters is the one the reciprocal screw system names.

 Free in every direction, and it cannot get out. A disc of radius 1 among 3 point obstacles on a circle of radius 1.100. The shaded discs are the obstacles grown by the part's own radius, which is what the part's centre may not enter — the configuration space, and for a round part it is the plane itself. The part is caged when those grown discs overlap enough to close a ring around it, which happens below R = 1/sin(π/3) = 1.154701, and here it does. At every configuration inside the cage the part is free. The three normals all point at its centre, the rank of its rows is two, the escape cone is a whole line, and none of that has anything to do with whether it can leave. A hold is a statement about velocities at one configuration; a cage is a statement about where a finite motion can go, and the second does not follow from the first in either direction. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Contacts that only push

Free at every instant and going nowhere

Three points on a circle of 1.1 radii around a unit disc leave it free in every direction at every configuration — rank two, margin nought, the whole plane of centres shaded — and it cannot get out. The threshold is 1/sin(π/n), which is 1.154701 for three, and a flood fill of the free space agrees with the formula at every radius sampled.

 A spherical four-bar: 90°, 40°, 100°, 80°. Four revolute axes, all through one point, so the linkage lives on a sphere. Its link "lengths" are the angles between consecutive axes — 90°, 40°, 100°, 80° — and the arcs drawn between the axis directions measure 40.00°, 100.00°, 80.00°, 90.00°. The whole planar four-bar theory carries over with sines where lengths were, including Grashof's condition: sorted, the arcs give s + l = 140° against p + q = 170°, so the shortest arc does turn all the way round — and swept, the input reaches 36 of 36 positions over a driveable range of 360°. This is the mechanism a universal joint is a special case of, with two of the four arcs at 90°. Out of the plane

When the link lengths are angles

Put every axis of a four-bar through one point and the mechanism lives on a sphere. Its bars become arcs, its lengths become angles, and every planar result carries over with a sine where a length used to be — including Grashof's condition, which still predicts exactly which link goes all the way round.

 The network where counting works. 5 scissor units, each two bars pinned at their middles, with consecutive units sharing their end pins. Sixteen bodies and twenty-two pins at eight units, and Grübler's 3(n − 1) − 2j gives 4 — three rigid motions and one internal freedom — against a measured nullity of 4 and no redundant constraints at all. That holds at one unit and at sixteen. The tong is here to make the field's point in the direction nobody expects it: a network is not a place where counting fails, it is a place where counting stops being checkable by hand, and one of the two assemblies that spans this plate is counted perfectly. Span 8.1388 mm at this opening, which is 5 times one unit's 1.6278. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Many of one thing

One input at one end

A lazy tong's reach is 2nL cos θ — exactly, to a part in a million million, over eight sizes and sixty openings — so it multiplies its input by the number of units. It multiplies everything else by the same number, including the part of the drawing nobody wanted multiplied: a unit cut a hundredth of a radian out puts a tong of thirty-two units 0.374 out at the far end.

 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.

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

The angle that holds the lock

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

 The error between the precision points. chebyshev: worst 0.2232°, RMS 0.1475°; least-squares: worst 0.3900°, RMS 0.1203°; minimax: worst 0.2105°, RMS 0.1463°. The error is zero at each precision point by construction and nowhere else. minimax has the smallest maximum here, and which curve is best depends entirely on which measure is asked for. The problem backwards

The linkage that is only nearly right

Stop demanding that a linkage pass exactly through three points, and ask instead that it be close everywhere. Three linkages result, none of them passing exactly through anything, and each is the best by a different measure — the least-squares fit beats the interpolant on average error and loses to it on the worst case. An optimiser gives exactly what it was asked for and nothing else.

 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.

 The room crank rocker needs. The shaded region is every point any part of this machine occupies at some position of its drive, computed as an occupancy grid over 150 solved configurations and outlined by marching squares — so the outline drawn is the boundary of the set the area was counted from rather than a second object that agrees with it. Its area is 12.78 square units, filling 54% of the box that contains it. The dashed rectangle is the box the joints need, which is what every figure that treats links as lines could have told you; the material needs a box 20% larger in area. Links with a width

The room a machine sweeps

Every point any part of a machine occupies at some position of its drive. It is a region rather than a curve, its area is an integral computed two ways, and the one shape in the field with a closed form is what the grid is calibrated against.

 A dyad is two circles, and that is why it has two answers. The whole of what makes a dyad easy. Two links, three pins: one pin onto something already placed at each end, one pin between them. The free pin is at a fixed distance from each of the placed ones, so it lies on both circles — and two circles meet in two points, in nought, or in one. That is a quadratic with a closed form, and its two roots are the two assembly branches every four-bar has. A group of four links has no such picture: its unknowns do not separate into one circle each, the system does not factor, and what replaces the compass is Newton's method from a seed. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The chain before the lengths

What has to be solved together

Hold a link, turn a neighbour, and the rest of a mechanism comes apart into the smallest sets that can be positioned one after another. Every set of two links is two circles meeting — a quadratic, two branches, no solver. A set of four is a system, and the Newton solve stops being a convenience.

 A cycloidal cam at 60°. A 20-unit rise over 120°, a dwell, a return and a dwell. The dashed curve is the pitch curve — where the roller's centre travels — and the solid one is the surface that has to be cut, which is the pitch curve offset inward by the roller radius along its own normal. The pressure angle at this instant is 25.5°: the angle between the follower's direction of travel and the normal to the surface, and the number that decides whether the follower jams in its guide rather than sliding. Prescribed motion

A lift is a size and a law is a shape

A cam's motion law is a dimensionless function of a dimensionless argument, so everything the cam field says about laws — which has the least acceleration, which has an impulsive jerk, which one costs least — transfers between cams of any size. What does not transfer is anything with the lift or the base circle in it.

 What a platform's own sensors settle. One three-legged platform, measured at 75 poses, with three different sets of sensors on it. Reading every joint angle determines 12 of the 15 numbers that describe the machine and leaves three undetermined, and one of the three is the scaling of the whole machine — every reading is dimensionless, so multiplying every length by a constant changes nothing any sensor sees. Laying a rule across two base pivots once recovers exactly one more, and the one it recovers is the size. Legs that report their own extension need no rule: a reading with a length in it breaks the scaling direction outright, and 7 of 9 come back. What none of the three determines is where the frame's origin sits, which is a convention rather than a defect. Several legs, one platform

A platform that measures itself

A three-legged platform with every joint read can be calibrated from its own sensors with no instrument in the room. Left to itself it shrinks the machine to a fiftieth of a per cent of its size — and reports a residual five orders smaller than the right answer's for doing it.

 What another measurement is worth. The smallest singular value of the identification Jacobian — the observability of the worst-recovered parameter — against how many poses were measured. The lower curve takes poses evenly round the crank; the upper one chooses each next pose to make this number as large as it can. Both rise steeply and then flatten: the 13 evenly-spaced poses already give four fifths of what 20 give. Chosen poses reach at 4 what even spacing needs 5 to reach. The flattening is not diminishing returns on accuracy — it is the information in a pose being a direction in a three-dimensional space, which a handful of well-spread poses already spans. Everything after that is averaging noise, which is a different gain and improves as the square root. Numbers that were measured

What another measurement is worth

The observability of a four-bar's worst-recovered parameter goes 0.118, 0.162, 0.188, 0.208 — and then keeps going up by less and less until adding a pose changes the fourth decimal place. The flattening is not diminishing returns on accuracy. It is a space of fixed dimension being filled.

 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.

 What degree a coupler curve actually is. A four-bar's coupler point traced at 602 solved positions, then asked which polynomials vanish on those points. For each degree the design matrix's smallest singular direction is taken and its worst residual plotted. Degrees four and five leave nothing near zero; degree six drops by ten decades and degree seven buys nothing further. The textbook sentence — a coupler curve is a sextic — comes back as a measurement, and the decision is made by the gap between the smallest singular value and the next, which here is a factor of 2.8e+3 — at 15, 21, 28 and 36 monomials respectively. How many answers

The equation a four-bar satisfies

Every textbook says a coupler curve is a sextic. Traced at six hundred solved positions and fitted at degrees four through seven, the answer comes back as a measurement: nothing vanishes below six, degree six drops by ten decades, and degree seven buys nothing — with the decision made by a gap of 2.8 × 10³ rather than by a residual.

 404 ways to gear 60 to 1. Each dot is a pair of wheels and a pair of pinions whose ratios multiply to exactly 60, with wheels of 40 to 120 teeth and pinions of 6 to 16 leaves. The line is the hyperbola every exact answer must lie on; the dots are the ones that lie on it at whole numbers of teeth, and there are 404 of them. In a single pair there are 0 — a ratio of sixty needs a wheel of 360 teeth against a pinion of six, and nobody cuts that. Exactness is decided in integers here and never by comparing floating-point ratios, which is the one way a search like this quietly returns answers that are merely close. Teeth

A clock is a factorisation

A going train's job is a ratio and its parts are tooth counts, so whether a clock can be built is whether a number factorises inside the counts a wheel-cutting engine will cut. Sixty has 404 answers in two pairs and none at all in one. The ratio between a sidereal day and a mean one has none in any number of pairs, and the best two-pair train is out by a sixth of a second a day.

 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.

 The fork and the roller, which is a Geneva pair. A lever escapement's fork with the balance's impulse pin inside it. The pin is on a roller of 0.150 against a fork of 1.00, and the slot points at the pin — which is the entire kinematic relation and is the same one a Geneva drive's pin and slot obey. The same eight lines answer both, and the check is that they reproduce the cams field's independently written Geneva solution to fourteen figures. The pin is in the fork for 44.4° of the balance's swing out of 540°, so the balance is left alone for 91.8% of the beat. Drag the balance. Motion that stops

Detached, and safe while detached

A lever escapement touches its balance for a twelfth of each beat and leaves it alone for the rest. What connects the two is a pin entering a radial slot — the same pair a film projector's Geneva drive is made of, solved by the same eight lines — and the sine rule then fixes the balance's lift angle at 44.4°, which is the number a Swiss lever is specified at.

 The smallest mechanism that is not one. Two bars from a free joint to two pinned ones, with the three points in line. The constraint matrix has two rows and two columns, both rows are horizontal, and its rank is 1: one freedom left over, pointing straight up, and one dependency among the two bars. Move the joint up and neither bar changes length to first order, which is what the freedom says. To second order both bars get longer, by the same amount and in the same direction, and there is nothing to trade off against — which is what the dependency says. The obstruction is the dependency applied to the second-order stretch and comes to 1.414214; anything but nought there and the freedom is not the beginning of a motion. Lifted by 0.34 the bars are 0.05622 longer, which is the whole argument drawn to scale. Many of one thing

It moves to first order and not at all

Two bars from one joint to two pinned ones, all three in line: the rank leaves a freedom pointing straight up, and lifting the joint stretches both bars. The obstruction is 1.414214, the walk travels a millionth of what it is asked to, and how far it gets is a property of the tolerance rather than of the mechanism.

 What every pair of groups meets in. The intersection of two subgroups is always a subgroup — that needs no computation — and which one is the useful part. This is the design rule behind every parallel machine in these essays: choose legs whose groups meet in the motion the platform is wanted to have, and it has that motion whatever the leg lengths are, with no synthesis and no tolerance. The row and column are built about different axes, at right angles, because an intersection is a statement about particular subgroups rather than about their kinds: two planar groups with the same normal meet in the whole of themselves, and two with different normals meet in a line. What a joint is

Legs intersect

A serial chain multiplies its joints' groups and the product is almost never a group. A parallel machine's platform gets the intersection of what its legs permit — and an intersection of groups is a group, always, with no coincidence required. That is the only construction in this field that produces closure for free, and it is why a platform can be designed for a motion type instead of discovered to have one.

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

Six things a shape is not

A rotor that is not a Reuleaux triangle, teeth that are not the same shape as each other, a fillet that is not an arc, a mesh that does not roll, a conjugate pair that cannot be built and a tooth form that was not deduced. Six claims in circulation, each with the number that kills it.

 A ball that remembers the area. Roll a ball round a closed loop on the plane, without ever twisting it about the vertical, and it comes back to the same place turned. The angle is the loop's area divided by r², and the dashed line is that law with nothing fitted to it. The departure at the top is not an integration error: it grows as the square of the angle — a fitted exponent of 1.99 — which is what a leading term's first correction does. The rotation is composed from exact exponentials, so the drawing carries no drift of its own. Wheels, and where they may not go

The ball that remembers where it has been

Roll a ball round a closed loop on a table without ever twisting it, and it comes back to the same place pointing somewhere else. The angle is the loop's area divided by the square of the radius — 0.0016 radians for a 2 mm square under a 50 mm ball — and it is exact in the limit with a departure that is second order in the angle itself.

 What each instrument returns, on each kind of graph. The 8-link census, three rows, and the same three questions asked of every graph in it. Grübler returns 1 in every row — it has to, because that is what the census selected on. The rank returns 1 in the first two rows and 2 in the third. Only the third column changes across all three rows, and it is the one the earlier counts did not have before this one: a mobility computed for every subset of the links rather than for the whole. Read down the middle two columns and the site's standing pair of routes is unanimous about 62 graphs, of which only 16 are what it says they are. What can move

The count was right and the name was wrong

The constraint field has checked Grübler's count against a Jacobian rank since the foundation, and the two disagree only where the geometry is special. Here is an assembly where they agree, where both are correct, and where the mechanism does not have the number of links it is described as having.

 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.

 The box the joints need, and the box the machine needs. Every machine in the catalogue, measured twice over the same drive: the extent of its joint positions, which is what a site drawing links as lines can report, and the extent of its material, which is what has to fit in something. The ratio runs from 1.13 to 1.36 — between thirteen and 36 per cent more area than the skeleton suggests, on machines whose links are a twentieth of their length wide. The last column is how much of the material's box the swept region actually fills, and it is where the packaging argument really is: a machine at 50% is a machine with a great deal of room inside its own envelope that nothing may be put in. Links with a width

The hole the machine needs

A four-bar's joints fit in a box five units by four. Its material needs a box twenty per cent larger in area, and fills barely half of it. Both numbers are design quantities, and until a link had a width neither could be stated.

 A corner in a curve, and the reason for it. This coupler point traces a curve with a cusp — a corner, where the curve stops and reverses rather than turning. The reason is that a cusp happens where the tracing point is momentarily still, and the only point of a moving plane that is momentarily still is the pole. So the cusps of a coupler curve are the instants when the pole passes through the tracing point: they are the crossings of the tracing point by the moving centrode, which is a statement about two curves in the coupler's own plane with the fixed plane not involved at all. This point was chosen by taking the pole's body coordinate at one instant, so it is on the moving centrode by construction; at the corner its speed is 9.9e-15 against 2.87 a fifth of a radian later. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The motion, not the mechanism

Where a curve has a corner

Some coupler curves have corners in them — points where the curve stops, turns round and comes back. A corner happens where the tracing point is momentarily still, the only point of a moving plane that is momentarily still is the pole, and so the corners of a coupler curve are decided entirely inside the coupler's own plane.

 Four indices, four answers. Four of the five observability indices in use, each divided by its own value at 18 poses so their shapes can be compared: their absolute sizes differ by ten orders and a shared axis would draw three flat lines. They are five different questions about one list of singular values — the geometric mean, the smallest alone, the reciprocal condition number, and two normalisations of the smallest — and at eight poses they disagree by a factor of 1.50 about how much of the job is done. A pose set chosen to maximise one is not the set that maximises another, and the literature quotes the choice as a preference. Numbers that were measured

Four indices, four answers

Five numbers are in use for scoring how well a set of poses determines a mechanism's parameters. They are five different questions about one list of singular values, they rank pose sets differently, and the literature quotes the choice between them as a matter of preference. It is a matter of what the report has to carry.

 Grashof's classification, predicted and then swept. Four sets of link lengths. For each, Grashof's condition predicts from the lengths alone whether the input can rotate a full turn, and the solver then attempts all 180 positions and reports how many assembled. The prediction and the measurement agree in every case, which is what licenses quoting the classification for a mechanism nobody has swept. Linkages

Grashof is a shape test

The oldest classification in the subject compares sums of lengths, so it is unchanged by making the machine bigger — which means a protractor recovers it exactly without recovering a single length. What it does not recover is the margin, and the margin is what says whether the classification is safe.

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

An offset trades the rise for the return

Moving a roller follower's line of travel off the cam's centre lowers the pressure angle on one stroke by raising it on the other. When the rise and the return are mirror images the best offset is zero. When the cam rises in 90° and returns over 170°, an offset of 5.88 takes the worse stroke from 27.37° to 21.81° by handing the return 6.48° it did not need.

 20,000 four-bars, and not one with three circuits. 20,000 four-bars with the ground at one and the other three lengths drawn from 0.05 to 3, each counted exactly. crank-rocker: 3,031, of which 3,031 have two circuits, 0 have one and 0 cannot be assembled; double crank: 3,086, of which 3,086 have two circuits, 0 have one and 0 cannot be assembled; Grashof double rocker: 1,497, of which 1,497 have two circuits, 0 have one and 0 cannot be assembled; triple rocker (non-Grashof): 12,386, of which 0 have two circuits, 9,528 have one and 2,858 cannot be assembled. The most circuits any linkage has is 2. How many answers

Never three circuits

A four-bar has one circuit or two, and twenty thousand random four-bars counted exactly contain no exception. The reason is a count of four points where the two assemblies merge, which makes the configuration curve a curve of genus one, and Harnack's theorem allows a real curve of genus one two pieces and no more. A six-bar's curve has genus five or seven, and its circuits go to four and six.

 Crank angle θ and crank angle −θ, joined. The coupler curve alone, with 12 chords, each joining the point the tracing point reaches at a crank angle θ between 0° and 180° to the point it reaches at −θ on the same assembly. Every chord is square to the dashed axis, to 7.5 × 10⁻¹⁶ in the cosine, and every midpoint lies on it. Measured at 48 pairs, the reflection of one point misses the other by at most 4.2 × 10⁻¹⁵. The crank's own angle is the pairing: the two places the curve crosses its axis are crank angles 0° and 180°, the only angles equal to their own negatives. The paths points trace

A symmetric curve from a lopsided machine

A four-bar with a crank of 1, a ground of 3 and a rocker of 2.5 has no symmetry anywhere in it. Make the rocker, the coupler and the arm from the rocker pin to the tracing point one length, and the curve it draws is its own mirror image to 4 × 10⁻¹⁵, about a line through the rocker pivot turned from the ground line by exactly half the coupler's angle at that pin.

 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.

 A brace is one redundant equation, on purpose. The compiled machine, counted and measured, with and without 4 braces. The count says the braced machine has -3 degrees of freedom — it cannot move — and the rank of the constraint Jacobian says it has 1, the same as before. Every brace contributes exactly one equation the others already imply, which is what overconstraint is, and here it is being added deliberately: the redundancy is what removes the assemblies the count knows nothing about. This is Grübler being wrong for the useful reason rather than the embarrassing one. The curve as an equation

A bar between two midpoints

In a parallelogram the midpoints of two opposite sides are exactly one side apart, and in the crossed assembly they are not. One bar between them admits the first and refuses the second — and it is one redundant equation per parallelogram, added on purpose, on a site whose constraint field is otherwise about overconstraint arriving by accident.

 Eleven lobes from twelve pins, at 46° of eccentric. The pins are circles and the disc is their envelope. One turn of the eccentric moves the disc back by one lobe pitch — a reduction of 11 : 1 from a ring, a disc and an offset bearing, with no gear teeth anywhere — and the profile's 11 lobes are counted off the generated curve rather than put there. The roots sit at 50.00 mm and the tips at 60.00, which are R − r ∓ e: the eccentricity is the lobe height, twice over. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The shape is the unknown

Eleven lobes from twelve pins

A ring of round pins, a disc on an eccentric, and a reduction of eleven to one with no gear teeth anywhere. The disc's profile is not designed: one pin generates one lobe of it, the other ten lobes are the same curve, and the count that decides the ratio is a count of lobes on a shape nobody drew.

 Two circles, and an exact straight line. The moving centrode of this motion is a circle of radius 1.5 and the fixed one is a circle of radius 3.0, measured to 8.9e-16. The small circle rolls inside the large one, and a point on its rim traces a diameter of the large one — exactly, with no error term. Watt's linkage is straight to nine per cent of its span and Chebyshev's to twelve; this is straight to 0.0e+0, and the difference is not one of degree. It is the difference between a curve that approximates a line and two centrodes whose rolling produces one. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The motion, not the mechanism

Exact because two circles roll

Watt's straight line is straight to nine parts in a hundred and Chebyshev's to twelve. Here is one that is straight to nothing at all — no error term, no working range, no approximation anywhere — and the reason is that its two centrodes are circles, one rolling inside the other at exactly half its radius.

 Two ways to stop an axle moving sideways. A Panhard rod is one link from the body to the axle, so the axle's end follows an arc and the whole car shifts sideways as the suspension moves: 3.56 mm at 80 mm of travel, and always in the same direction, so it happens twice per bounce. A Watt's linkage keeps the same point on a path that is straight to 33.7 µm — 106 times better, and it is drawn on the same axis, which is why it looks like the zero line. Machines you have met

Holding an axle still

A Panhard rod moves the axle 3.56 mm sideways over 80 mm of travel and a Watt's linkage moves it 34 microns — a hundred times better, and by a higher power. The Panhard's error is quadratic in the travel and the Watt's is fifth order, which is a much stronger statement than "the Watt is better" because it says how the comparison changes with the suspension.

 How many points a linkage will take. function generation: 5 free numbers, 1 net constraint per point, 5 precision points; motion generation: 4 free numbers, 1 net constraint per point, 5 precision points; path generation: 9 free numbers, 1 net constraint per point, 9 precision points. Every count in the literature that differs from these differs about what is being counted as free, not about the geometry. The problem backwards

How many points may be prescribed

Five poses, five angle pairs, nine points — three numbers that get quoted as properties of a four-bar and are properties of what somebody decided to count as free. Derive them instead, and the fifth precision point turns a linear solve into a system with 128 paths, twelve finite solutions, four real ones, and exactly one linkage anybody could build.

 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.

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

One test, three mechanisms

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

 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.

 The search generates 3,000 candidates for 1,878 answers. How much work the enumeration does, against how much it has to show for it. The upper line is the number of complete labelled graphs the search reaches and the lower is the number of distinct graphs they turn out to be, so the vertical gap is waste — every candidate above the lower line is a graph the search had already found under a different labelling. At eight links the unpruned version of this search generated 8,494 candidates for the same 71 answers, and at ten links it did not finish at all; with the pruning it generates 3,000 for 1,878 in 469 milliseconds. The rule that does it is one line long: when two links carry the same number of pins, reject the labelling that would be lexicographically smaller if they were swapped. It cannot reject a labelling that is the largest in its class, so nothing is lost, and it is not a complete test, which is why the canonical form is still taken at the end. The chain before the lengths

The candidates a search throws away

The obvious enumeration generates every labelling of every chain and keeps one. At eight links that is 8,494 complete graphs for 71 answers; at ten it does not finish. One rule — reject the labelling that a swap of two equal links would improve — takes it to 3,000 candidates for 1,878 answers in half a second, and twelve links is still out of reach.

 Turning all the way round, against being made of something. Seven four-bars, classified by Grashof's inequality on their four lengths and then asked a question Grashof cannot answer: with a bearing pedestal at each ground pivot, how wide may the links be? The two instruments have nothing in common — one is an inequality on four numbers, the other counts sign changes of (B − A) × (G − A) over a sweep — and they agree about something Grashof was not for. Every four-bar that turns all the way round sweeps a link straight over a ground pivot, so its closest approach is exactly zero and no positive width is admissible; not one of the rockers does, and they take widths up to 0.20 of their shortest link. Links with a width

The crank that cannot turn all the way

Grashof's inequality says which four-bars turn fully. Ask instead how wide their links may be with a bearing at each ground pivot, and the same inequality answers the opposite question: every four-bar that turns all the way round sweeps a link straight over one of its own pivots.

 One tool pose, a curve of postures. 41 postures of S-R-S arm, every one of them holding the tool at the same pose. The tool moved 1.0e-13 of a metre over the whole sweep, which is the arithmetic's noise floor rather than a tolerance. The joint that moves most is the elbow, and it runs on a circle of radius 0.192 m about the line from shoulder to wrist — a curve computed here by walking the Jacobian's null space, and known independently as the intersection of two spheres. The two agree to 10⁻¹³. One path to the tool

The freedom that does nothing

Give an arm a seventh joint and one tool pose stops having eight answers and starts having infinitely many. The arm changes shape while the tool stands still — measured at 3.3 × 10⁻¹² of a metre over forty-one postures — and the elbow runs on a circle that two entirely different computations agree about to a tenth of a picometre.

 What it takes to build each of the twelve. The same twelve, read as a bill of materials. Six of them are one joint, because a lower pair permits the whole symmetry group of its surface and those six groups are exactly the symmetry groups surfaces have. The other five with a dimension take a chain: two slides for planar translation, three for Cartesian motion, a thread and two slides for the screw-in-a-plane group, and three parallel pins with a slide along them for Schoenflies motion — which is a SCARA arm, and is why a pick-and-place machine has four joints and not one. The group each chain produces is measured from four hundred sampled poses rather than declared, and every row agrees. What can move

The freedom that is a set

Grübler's rule has been in this collection since its first essay, and it adds up numbers. Each of those numbers is the dimension of a group of displacements, and the group has eleven siblings the number cannot distinguish. The count is not wrong; it is a projection, and this is what the projection discards.

 How much each set of wheels forbids. Every wheel contributes the same row, and whether it is a constraint or a drive is one factor of sin γ in it — γ being the angle the rollers make with the wheel's own axle. At γ = 0 the row says the body may not move across the wheel and the wheel's speed drops out of the statement; at γ = 45° the row says nothing about the body at all and fixes the wheel's speed instead. The whole difference between a machine that shuffles and one that slides sideways is in that factor. Wheels, and where they may not go

The wheel that forbids nothing

Every wheel contributes the same row to the same matrix, and whether that row is a constraint on the vehicle or a statement about the wheel's own speed is decided by one factor of sin γ. At γ = 0 the vehicle may not move across the wheel; at 45° the row says nothing about the vehicle at all, and sideways costs exactly what forwards costs — to the last digit, and at no other angle.

 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

Three mechanisms, one subtraction

A micrometer's differential screw, a chain hoist's differential pulley and a robot joint's compound epicyclic look nothing like each other and are the same device. Each takes two nearly equal quantities and returns their difference, each buys its enormous ratio with that difference, and each carries the same conditioning number — |a/(a−b)| — measured here by perturbing the mechanisms rather than by quoting the formula.

 The framework Maxwell's count calls a structure. Six joints and twelve bars in space. Three coordinates each gives eighteen unknowns, six rigid motions come off, and twelve bars is exactly twelve constraints — Maxwell's count is 6 against six rigid motions, which is the definition of isostatic: no mechanism, no redundancy, every bar carrying its own share and nothing spare. The rank is 11, not twelve. There is one dependency among the bars and one freedom left over, and the freedom is a genuine finite motion: walked here with every bar held to 4.4e-16 of its own length. The reason is a symmetry — three pairs of joints exchanged by a half turn about one line — and it is built into the coordinates rather than assumed of the result. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Out of the plane

Twelve bars and a symmetry

Six joints and twelve bars in space is Maxwell's count exactly: no mechanism, no redundancy, nothing spare. Place three pairs of the joints so that a half turn about one line exchanges them and it moves — a finite motion, walked with every bar held to five ten-thousand-billionths of its own length, on a framework the arithmetic calls a structure.

 Sarrus, as two planes meeting in a line. Each arm of Sarrus's linkage is three pins with parallel axes, so each arm holds the platform inside a planar group — the one whose normal is that arm's axis direction. The platform has to satisfy both, so what it may do is the intersection, and the intersection of two planar groups whose normals are not parallel is the one-dimensional group of translations along their common perpendicular. The platform goes up and down and does nothing else, and that is the exact straight line the spatial field measured to 10⁻¹⁶ of its span — arrived at here with no mechanism solved and no tolerance anywhere. Drag the arms towards each other: the answer is a translation at every angle but zero, where the two groups become one group and the intersection jumps to three dimensions. That is the linkage built flat, and it is the configuration in which it stops being a straight-line mechanism. What a joint is

Two planes meeting in a line

Sarrus's linkage draws an exact straight line out of six pin joints, and the spatial field proved it by solving the mechanism sixty times and measuring a departure of 9.8 × 10⁻¹⁶. Here the same fact comes out of two planes and a cross product, with no mechanism solved anywhere — and the two routes are not redundant, because only one of them can tell you the linkage as built delivers it.

 Two branches, meeting where the sheet is flat. The same vertex's two folding modes, plotted as one crease's fold angle against another's. Both curves pass through the origin, which is the flat sheet, and they cross there and nowhere else. That crossing is what a rank cannot see: at the origin the tangent directions of both branches are available to the constraint matrix at once, so the nullity there counts them all and the mechanism has only one of them once it has left. Every branch argument made in these essays — a four-bar's assembly configurations, an arm's eight postures, the components a solve's paths turned out to run between — is this picture with different axes. Many of one thing

Where the branches meet

A flat sheet is the one configuration every folding of a pattern passes through, and it is the one configuration where the rank is wrong about all of them. Three of a three-by-three Miura sheet's four apparent freedoms are not motions — and a grid that folds to no angle at all reports exactly the same four.

 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.

 How much of Bennett's turn survives a bar being wrong. The same four bars and the same four twists, with one bar's length changed by the amount on the left and nothing else touched. The bar shows the fraction of 48 sampled positions of the first joint at which the loop closes to within 10⁻⁹. Two parts in a thousand already costs most of the travel. This is what it means for a mechanism to work only on a condition rather than approximately near one — and it is why Bennett's linkage was a curiosity for eighty years before anyone could machine to it. Out of the plane

Bennett's condition is a ratio

A spatial loop's parameters are lengths and angles together, so a scaling touches only half of them. Bennett's condition — a over sine alpha equals b over sine beta — is a relation between the two halves, and what it demands of a machine is a relation between its lengths and its twists rather than a property of either.

 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

The module is a size, the ratio is a shape

A spur pair has exactly one length in it. Every quantity it produces is either proportional to that length or completely independent of it — centre distance, base pitch and contact length scale exactly; ratio and contact ratio do not move at all, not even by a part in ten to the fifteen.

 A flat face on a base circle of 30, where the profile bends tightest. The cycloidal programme — rise 10 over 120°, return over 120° — cut for a flat-faced follower on a base circle of 30, turned to 212.4°, where the profile's radius of curvature is smallest. The contact sits −5.37 from the follower's axis, which is ds/dθ, and the dashed circle is the one that fits the profile there: R₀ + s + s″ = 24.668, and 24.668 fitted through the drawn curve. The face's pressure angle is zero at every angle. What it needs instead is for that radius to stay positive, and it does so on every base circle above 5.332. Prescribed motion

A flat face asks for a convex cam

A flat-faced follower is pushed at right angles to its face, so its pressure angle is zero at every angle and the constraint that sizes a roller's cam disappears. What replaces it is convexity: the profile's radius at the contact is R₀ + s + s″, and a base circle below 5.332 leaves a cycloidal cam with a hollow the face cannot reach — held 0.446 high on a base of 2.

 A line across the four-bar's coupler curve. The curve traced by a point on the four-bar's coupler, over every real configuration, with the machine drawn faintly at one of them. A real line crosses it at 4 marked points. Written as polynomials, the machine and the line have 8 paths to track; 6 arrive, 2 leave for infinity, and the arrivals draw 6 distinct points — 4 real and 2 complex. A random complex line gives 6 as well, which is the curve's degree. How many answers

A degree counted on a line

A curve of degree six meets a general line in six points, and that sentence is a way to measure the degree with no equation in it. Written as polynomials, a four-bar and a random complex line have eight paths to track; six arrive on every line tried, the other two run off towards the circular points, and a sum of the six stays straight to fifteen figures only when none is missing.

 Eight four-bars, one from each region the three signed sums cut. One linkage from each of the eight sign patterns of T₁ = g + c − a − b, T₂ = g + b − a − c and T₃ = b + c − a − g, each solved at a crank angle in the middle of its range. The thick arc round the left pivot is where the input's pin can go and the arc round the right pivot is where the output's can: crank-rocker + + +, input 100% of a turn and output 22%; double crank − − +, input 100% of a turn and output 100%; rocker-crank − + −, input 22% of a turn and output 100%; double rocker + − −, input 23% of a turn and output 21%; 0–π rocker + + −, input 76% of a turn and output 72%; π–π rocker + − +, input 84% of a turn and output 51%; π–0 rocker − + +, input 84% of a turn and output 85%; 0–0 rocker − − −, input 67% of a turn and output 91%. Grashof's condition names four of these and calls the other four one thing; the arcs show that the four triple rockers differ in which way along the ground line each rocker swings through. Linkages

Eight kinds of four-bar

Grashof's condition gives a four-bar one of four names and calls every linkage that fails it a triple rocker. Three signed sums of the lengths give eight, and a census of four thousand random linkages finds every one moving exactly as its signs say — because the planes where those sums vanish are the only places a four-bar's motion can change its kind.

 One crank, four machines, one area. Four crank-rockers sharing only a crank of length 1, with grounds, couplers and rockers all different, each tracing the point 30% of the way from the crank pin to the rocker pin. The curves have different shapes and sizes and different places in the plane, and the area each one encloses is 2.199115 = (1 − 0.3)·π·1² — on both assemblies of every one, with a worst difference of 3.2 × 10⁻¹⁴. The paths points trace

The area a coupler point encloses

Trace a point on the line through a crank-rocker's two moving pins and the region its curve encloses has area (1 − u)πa²: the crank pin's own circle, scaled by how far along the line the point sits. No ground, coupler or rocker length appears in it. Four machines that share only a crank enclose 2.199115 each, to 3 × 10⁻¹⁴.

 A catalogue is a search space, and a requirement is a filter on it. What a census is for. Four requirements applied in turn to the 230 ten-link chains, each of them a statement about the graph alone: a link carrying four pins, a link none of whose neighbours is binary, and a way of driving it that comes apart into dyads. 26 chains survive all of them. None of this is dimensional synthesis and none of it can be — no requirement here mentions a length, an angle or a position, and every one of them can be checked before a single dimension is chosen. That is the argument for having the census at all: the design problem is a search over shapes within a topology, and knowing which topologies there are turns an open question into 26 closed ones. The problem backwards

Choosing the chain before the lengths

Every synthesis method in these essays starts by assuming a topology, and the assumption is usually a habit. What the graph fixes before any dimension is chosen is the number of free parameters — two per pin less four — and therefore how many positions can be prescribed at all.

 Four instruments, and only the last one names the group. Every instrument these essays have for an overconstrained loop, on the same six mechanisms. Kutzbach's count gives −2 for a planar four-bar and −2 for Bennett's. The rank of the constraint Jacobian gives three and three. Both are right and neither separates them. The last two columns are this field's: the span is how many dimensions the logarithms of the displacements the moving link actually reaches occupy, and closes at is the dimension after those are closed under the bracket. A planar four-bar closes at three and the three are planar motion; Sarrus closes at one, a translation, which is the exact straight line the spatial field measured by solving the mechanism sixty times. Bennett closes at six: its displacements occupy four dimensions and no group smaller than all of them contains those four. That is what "paradoxical" has meant in the earlier essays, stated as an integer. What a joint is

Compose two positions and see where you land

Take two configurations a mechanism actually reaches, compose the displacements that got it there, and ask what kind of thing the result is. A planar four-bar lands inside planar motion, to 4 × 10⁻¹⁶. Sarrus lands on its own line. Bennett's linkage lands three tenths of a radian outside the four dimensions its own displacements occupy — a one-freedom motion that generates all six.

 Every axis through one point. Four wheels on one rigid body, each rolling without sliding. Each turns about some point on its own axle line, and a rigid body has one such point, so every axle line has to pass through it. That is the whole of steering geometry, and it is a rank condition rather than a formula: here the four rows have rank 2 of 3, leaving a one-dimensional family of twists, and the centre they agree on is 12.000 m to the side. The scrub is 3.2e-17 m per metre — zero, to the last digit. Wheels, and where they may not go

Every axis through one point

Bolt several rolling wheels to one rigid body and they impose one condition between them: every axle line must pass through a single point. The familiar steering formula falls out of it as a consequence rather than being quoted — cot δₒ − cot δᵢ = 0.574074 at a turn of six metres, of eight, of twelve and of twenty, on a track of 1.55 m and a wheelbase of 2.7.

 In space the arithmetic allows almost nothing. A body in space has six freedoms and a revolute joint takes five, so a mobility of one needs (6n − 7)/5 joints — and that is an integer only when the link count leaves a remainder of two on division by five. The whole table is this: 7, 12, 17, 22 links, and nothing else. At seven links the degrees must sum to fourteen across seven links with none below two, so every link is binary and the graph is a single seven-cycle: there is exactly one spatial chain, and it is a loop. That is the census explanation for something the spatial field has lived with since it was written — every spatial mechanism in these essays is one closed loop — and it had never been stated as a count. The next admissible size is twelve links and thirteen joints, where two assortments are arithmetically possible, 157 candidates give 33 graphs, and 5 of them are chains — every one with ten binary links and two ternary, so the assortment with a quaternary link is empty exactly as four of the planar ones are. Out of the plane

In space there is one chain

A body in space has six freedoms and a revolute joint takes five, so a mobility of one needs (6n−7)/5 joints — an integer only when the link count leaves a remainder of two on division by five. At seven links every link is binary, the graph is a single seven-cycle, and there is exactly one spatial chain.

 One freedom, whatever the count says. Every one of these machines has exactly one degree of freedom, measured as the number of unknowns minus the rank of the constraint Jacobian. Unbraced, the count agrees. Braced, the count says the largest machine has -153 — that it cannot move, by a wide margin — and the rank says it still turns exactly as it did. The gap is one equation per brace and every one of those equations is implied by the others. This is the constraint field's oldest example, at a scale nobody would try by hand: a count that is wrong by a hundred and fifty-three about a mechanism that works. What can move

One freedom and four hundred links

Braced, the machine compiled from a quintic has 1,249 equations in 1,096 unknowns and a Grübler count of minus a hundred and fifty-three. It turns. The rank of its constraint Jacobian is 1,095, so its mobility is one — and every one of the hundred and fifty-four surplus equations was added deliberately.

 Arms with their tools pinned down. Pin an arm's tool to the ground and the open chain is a closed loop, which the mobility count of a planar loop already handles. Kutzbach gives 6(n − 1) − 5n = n − 6 for a loop of n revolutes, and the measurement is n minus the rank of its screw system — the columns of the arm's own Jacobian, read as constraints rather than as velocities. The two agree on every row but one, and the one is the arm at a wrist singularity: the formula says the pinned arm is a structure and the mechanism has a freedom. That is the finding this site opened with, arrived at from the far end of its subject. One path to the tool

Pin the tool and it is a loop

Hold an arm's tool still and the open chain becomes a closed one, which these essays have known how to count since their first field. Kutzbach's criterion says a pinned six-joint arm is a structure. At each of its three singularities the measurement says it can still move — the site's founding finding, arrived at from the far end of its own subject.

 Where enumerating the corners stops being affordable. The two routes to a tolerance band, costed against the number of toleranced lengths. Enumerating every extreme combination is 2ⁿ mechanisms at every crank position; differentiating the constraints is n linear solves. A four-bar is 16 corners and a Watt six-bar is 128, which is still cheap — 142 solves for one position — and the curve is the point rather than either number: at twenty parameters, which is an ordinary spatial mechanism, the corner route is a million mechanisms and the derivative route is twenty. Both are drawn because the corner route is not merely slower, it is the one that assumes nothing, and its answer is what the cheap route has to be checked against. As built

Seven lengths and a hundred corners

Nothing in a tolerance analysis is about four. A Watt six-bar has seven lengths, its corner enumeration is 128 mechanisms rather than 16, and the two routes still agree to a hundredth of a per cent — but the costs have separated — 142 solves against seven. At twenty parameters, which is an ordinary spatial mechanism, it is a million against twenty.

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

Six things a network is not

A count that is right about a difference and read as an answer, a nullity taken for a mobility, a flat state that cannot tell a mechanism from a structure, a scissor ring that closes nowhere, a vertex that folds while its sheet does not, and a null space computed with an instrument whose floor is above the answer. Six claims, each with the number that kills it.

 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.

 Two Burmester points, or none, depending where the crank is. A Burmester point's path stays on one circle to fifth order. A planar motion has at most four of them; two of this mechanism's are always its own moving pins, whose paths are exact circles and satisfy every order at once. The other two are real for 67 per cent of the turn and complex for the rest, and the count changes without anything about the mechanism changing. The window matters and is stated: points beyond a hundred coupler lengths from the pole are not counted, and widening the window from six to four hundred moves the count of positions-with-two from 191 to 245 out of 360. A silent cap here would read as an absence. The motion, not the mechanism

The circle a point stays on longest

One condition further on are the points whose path holds a circle to fifth order. A planar motion has at most four; two of them are always the mechanism's own pins, and the other two are real for two thirds of a turn and complex for the rest — a count that changes while nothing about the mechanism does.

 What is left of a 12-tooth flank. The flank the rack generated on a 12-tooth wheel, with every point tested against the cutter at every other position of the cut. The pale dots survive; the dark ones are inside the cutter at some later instant and are not on the finished tooth — 39 of 203 of them, the deepest by 5.19e-2 mm. Undercutting is not a shape, it is a removal: the same corner that leaves the fillet comes back for flank the straight edge had already generated, and what is lost is the part of the involute nearest the base circle, which is exactly the part the mating wheel's tip needs. Drag to change the tooth count. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The shape is the unknown

The cutter takes back the tooth

Undercutting is usually explained as a shape: a tooth with a waist in it. It is better understood as an event — the corner that leaves the fillet comes back through flank the straight edge has already generated — and seen that way the threshold at seventeen teeth is a comparison of two measured points that passes through zero.

 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.

 What the repeated constraints cost the drawing. Move an interior vertex of the flat pattern and the folded state generally stops existing. It survives if the change to the vertex closures can be absorbed by a change in the fold angles — and the part that cannot be absorbed is exactly the part that lies along a dependency, because a dependency is a direction in residual space the fold angles cannot reach. So the number of conditions a pattern's shape has to satisfy is at most the number of dependencies among its constraints, and on the Miura family it is exactly that: one at three by three, four at four, nine at five, measured by taking the rank of the obstruction. A twelve-by-twelve sheet has a hundred conditions on where its vertices may be. That is why a grid whose vertices are anywhere at all does not fold, and it is the same number, read the other way round, as the amount by which the count is wrong. Many of one thing

What a pattern has to satisfy

Move an interior vertex of a crease pattern and the folded state generally stops existing. How many conditions the drawing has to meet is not a matter of taste: it is exactly the number of dependencies among the constraints, measured at one, four and nine on three sizes of sheet, and a hundred on a sheet of a hundred and forty-four panels.

 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.

 Two routes to the same derivative. How much the output angle moves when the coupler length moves, through one turn, computed twice. One route rebuilds the mechanism at b ± 10⁻⁶ and solves both from scratch; the other differentiates the constraint equations and solves one linear system against the analytic Jacobian. They lie on top of each other — the strip beneath plots the difference on a four-decade log scale, and its largest value anywhere in the turn is 2.9e-10 against a sensitivity of order 0.41. That is the only independent check there is of the Jacobian itself, whose coupler rows carried four wrong signs from the foundation phase to 2026-08-12 without ever drawing anything wrong. As built

A band with a direction in it

One whole direction of a four-bar's tolerance box does nothing. A machine made a quarter of a per cent too big all over has an output error of exactly zero — and an aluminium four-bar heated by a hundred degrees has an output error of exactly zero, while one with a steel frame has 0.076°.

 The circle of points going straight, at 66°. Every point on this circle is, at this instant, travelling in a straight line: its path has zero curvature there. The circle passes through the pole — where the point is not moving at all — and its diameter is 47.64, which is the pole's own speed divided by the plane's angular rate. Nothing here was assumed to be a circle. The locus is the zero set of a quadratic whose |w|² coefficient is φ′³, a real number with no cross term and no difference between its two square terms, and a general conic fitted to the sampled locus returns those coefficients at 8.1e-15 and 6.4e-15. At this position the coupler is close to translating, the pole has run off the canvas and the circle with it — the figure is the size of the mechanism, and δ here is 13.6 coupler lengths. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The motion, not the mechanism

A curvature is a size with a minus sign

Everything in the curvature field is a similarity invariant in shape and a reciprocal length in value. Scale a moving plane and its inflection circle scales, its cubic of stationary curvature scales, and every curvature it computes is divided by the factor — so a bigger machine traces gentler paths than its drawing suggests.

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

The transmission angle has no size

The geometric half of force transmission is an angle in a triangle whose three sides scale together, so it is the same at every size — 54.31° at its worst on this machine, whatever units the drawing is in. Which means a measurement that cannot recover a single length recovers the whole of what this field computes.

 Every body of the Stephenson six-bar, sliced by one line. One random complex line, and a point on each body of the Stephenson six-bar required to lie on it. Every system has Bézout number 32. crank: 8 configurations drawing 2 distinct points, each 4 times, so degree 2; ternary coupler: 12 configurations drawing 6 distinct points, each 2 times, so degree 6; rocker: 8 configurations drawing 2 distinct points, each 4 times, so degree 2; arm: 18 configurations drawing 18 distinct points, each 1 time, so degree 18; output: 12 configurations drawing 2 distinct points, each 6 times, so degree 2. The configurations are what the tracker counts; the points are what the curve has. How many answers

The curve nobody eliminates

A point on the arm of the site's dwell six-bar draws a curve whose equation nobody writes down and no fit can find: at degree eighteen a fit needs a hundred and ninety coefficients, and its singular values have no gap to decide by. Sliced by a random line, the same machine has thirty-two paths to track and eighteen arrive, on every line tried, all eighteen distinct and all on one curve.

 Three legs and four, at 0°. The same slice of positions at a platform angle of 0°, shaded by how well the platform is held — pale is near singular. Left, three legs: 3,312 reachable samples and a singular curve through them in 102 segments. Right, the same three legs and a fourth: 3,198 reachable, because the fourth leg must reach too, and no curve. What is left of the singular set in this slice is 1 isolated point, at (-1.449, -0.811), where all four lines meet. Positions held above 0.1 go from 2,989 to 3,178, and at no sampled position is the four-legged platform held less well than the three-legged one. Several legs, one platform

What a fourth leg buys

Three leg lines fail to hold a platform when they meet at a point, which is one condition, so in every slice of the workspace the failures form a curve. Four lines fail only when all four meet at a point, which is two conditions, so the curve becomes isolated points. The fourth leg buys that and more, and it costs a machine that can no longer be assembled from any four motor angles.

 A yoke 70 wide on a constant-breadth cam, at 60°. The cycloidal programme — rise 10 over 120°, return over 120° — cut for flat faces on a base circle of 30 and held between two parallel faces 70 apart, turned to 60.0°. The upper face rests at 5.000 above the base circle, which is the programme's lift there. The lower face touches the cam too: the distance across the cam along the follower's line is 70.000 at this angle and at every other, so the follower is driven up by one face and down by the other with no spring and nothing to spare. Prescribed motion

A cam that holds its follower both ways

Two parallel faces joined into a yoke can drive a follower out and back with no spring, but only if the cam's breadth along the follower's line is the same at every angle — s(θ) + s(θ + 180°) constant. That makes the second half-turn the first one reflected. The cam field's standing programme misses by 9.502, and a second disc that frees the programme needs a yoke at least 60.66 wide.

 Every pivot on these arcs gives a 60° swing at a time ratio of 1.2. The rocker's pivot O₄ is fixed and its two limit positions B₁ and B₂ are 60° apart. At a limit the crank and coupler are in line, so the crank pivot sees the chord B₁B₂ at the angle δ = 180°(Q − 1)/(Q + 1) = 16.36°, and the points that see a chord at a fixed angle are arcs of two circles. The thick stretches are the 828 sampled pivots that give a crank-rocker with exactly this swing and ratio; the rest of each circle gives a linkage of another kind. The linkage drawn is the member whose worst transmission angle is largest, at both limits: ground 1.222, crank 0.478, coupler 1.130 and rocker 1, with its worst transmission angle 40.32°. Linkages

A swing and a time ratio

A shaper's specification gives the rocker's swing and how much quicker the return must be than the cut, and those two numbers do not fix a linkage. They leave a one-parameter family of crank-rockers on the arcs of two circles, every member exactly right, and the transmission angle chooses between them — which is also what decides that a 60° swing cannot return more than 1.207 times as fast and keep 40°.

 Three machines drawing one oval, and where each keeps its area. The crank-rocker with ground 4, crank 1, coupler 3.5 and rocker 3, its tracing point at (0.45, 0.5) of the coupler, and the two other four-bars Roberts's construction gives for the same curve, each drawn holding the same point of one oval and each with its input pin's path dashed in the input colour and its output pin's in the output colour. The shaded oval encloses 2.116354 for all three. In the crank-rocker the crank pin goes round and carries 1.727876 of it; in the double rocker neither pin goes round and the coupler's turn carries 1.727876; in the rocker-crank the output pin goes round and carries 1.727876. The remaining 0.388478 is the same in all three. The paths points trace

Where three machines keep one area

Roberts's theorem gives every four-bar two others that draw the same coupler curve, and so enclose the same areas. Measured, they do, to 10⁻¹² — but each keeps the area in a different place: the crank-rocker in its crank pin's circle, the double rocker in its coupler's turn, the third machine in its output pin's circle. What is left over has no closed form, and it is one number in all three.

 Four instruments, and only the last one names the group. Every instrument these essays have for an overconstrained loop, on the same six mechanisms. Kutzbach's count gives −2 for a planar four-bar and −2 for Bennett's. The rank of the constraint Jacobian gives three and three. Both are right and neither separates them. The last two columns are this field's: the span is how many dimensions the logarithms of the displacements the moving link actually reaches occupy, and closes at is the dimension after those are closed under the bracket. A planar four-bar closes at three and the three are planar motion; Sarrus closes at one, a translation, which is the exact straight line the spatial field measured by solving the mechanism sixty times. Bennett closes at six: its displacements occupy four dimensions and no group smaller than all of them contains those four. That is what "paradoxical" has meant in the earlier essays, stated as an integer. Out of the plane

A name for each overconstraint

The spatial field separated subgroup overconstraint from paradoxical by measuring how far a mechanism's screw system turns: 2 × 10⁻⁶ degrees against 89. That is a verdict without a name. Closing the logarithms of the reached displacements under the bracket gives the same verdict and says which group — planar, spherical, a translation — and for Bennett's linkage it says six.

 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.

 The pose set is finite exactly when the part is held. Two arrangements, both with 0.06 of clearance on every contact, with the set of positions the part's centre may occupy drawn to scale. The one on the left holds: its pose set is a small bounded polyhedron, and every dimension of it is proportional to the clearance. The one on the right does not: its pose set runs off the page in the direction the part slides out of the vee, and giving the contacts a tighter tolerance narrows the box without ever closing that direction. A tolerance cannot buy a hold. The clearance decides how big a finite pose set is and the arrangement decides whether it is finite, and the second question has to be settled first because no amount of the first will settle it. Contacts that only push

Held is not located

Back every obstacle off by a clearance and the permitted poses become a polyhedron — bounded exactly when the arrangement is a hold, since an unbounded direction of it would be a ray of the escape cone. So whether a part is held is whether its pose set is finite, the clearance is what gives that set a size, and the two questions have to be settled in that order because no tolerance settles the first.

 Three points, three orders of contact. Replace the coupler point by a crank pivoting at the centre of its path's osculating circle, drive the linkage away from the instant, and measure how far the point gets from that circle. The distance grows like a power of the step, and the power is the number of derivatives that agreed. An ordinary point gives 3.00; a point of the cubic of stationary curvature gives 3.94; a Burmester point, where the curvature is stationary and its rate of change is too, gives 4.97. Nothing in the measurement knows which kind of point it was handed. This is what the two special curves are for: they are where a single pivot can replace a whole linkage for longest. positioned by solving, not by drawing. The motion, not the mechanism

How long a pivot stands in for a linkage

Throw the four-bar away and replace a coupler point by a crank pivoting at the centre of its path's curvature. The two separate like the cube of the crank step for an ordinary point, the fourth power on the cubic, and the fifth at a Burmester point — three exponents that are the whole field, measured with no derivative anywhere in the measurement.

 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.

 One cutter, five wheels. The same rack — one module, one pressure angle, one straight flank — rolled on five different pitch circles. Each wheel gets a different involute, of its own base circle, and the worst departure anywhere is 4.26e-14 mm. This is why gears are interchangeable: the tool defines the tooth, so any two wheels cut by the same rack mesh with each other whatever their tooth counts, and a workshop needs one cutter per module rather than one per pair. It is also why the standard is written as a rack — the rack is the definition and the wheels are consequences of it. Teeth

One rack and every wheel

Two gears mesh if they were cut by the same tool. That is not a manufacturing convenience laid on top of the geometry — it is the geometry, and it is why a gear standard is written as a description of a cutter rather than as a family of tooth curves.

 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. Drawn wrongly

Six things a hold is not

A rank read as a restraint, a count read as an answer, four contacts placed the wrong way round, a nullity taken for a spin, a part free in every direction and unable to leave, and a tolerance offered as a cure for an arrangement that was never a hold. Six claims, each with the number that kills it.

 Forwards it settles, backwards it runs away. A trailer starting a hundredth of a radian out of line, with the steering held straight. Driving forwards the angle decays as e^(−s/d); reversing, the same equation runs the other way and it doubles every 4.16 m. Nothing about forces is involved and nothing about the driver: it is the sign of one exponent, and the length scale is the trailer's own length. The curve flattens at the top because the sine that generates it saturates — the runaway is exponential only while the angle is small. Wheels, and where they may not go

The angle that doubles

A trailer a hundredth of a radian out of line decays back into line as e^(−s/d) driving forwards and grows as e^(+s/d) reversing — doubling every 4.16 m for a six-metre trailer. And a jackknifed rig is not a rig that has lost anything: its growth vector is 2·3·4·5 at a hitch angle of zero, of ninety degrees and of a hundred and eighty.

 A network with no boundary at all. The kagome lattice, drawn out to 5 cells across and continuing for ever. The measurement is made on one cell: 3 joints, 6 bars, and a bar that leaves the cell comes back into it, written against the far end's position in the neighbouring cell. There is no boundary anywhere in the arithmetic, and the size of the network has gone from being a parameter to not existing. The highlighted triangle is the cell; every other line on the page is a copy of one of its six bars. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Many of one thing

The cell that repeats for ever

Take the size of a network to infinity and it stops being a parameter. What is left is one cell, six bars, and a question nobody has to ask about a finite assembly: does the pattern's period count as a body? A square grid is rigid if it does not and shears if it does, and so does the kagome.

 Why this measurement is not a derivative. The honest failure mode of the field's instrument, drawn rather than hidden. Every set looks like its own tangent space near the identity — that is what a tangent space is — so a chain sampled over a thousandth of a radian reports the dimension of its velocities, which is the number the screw system already gives. Four pins at random has four joints, and sampled over 10⁻⁹ radians its displacements occupy four dimensions; sampled over two radians they occupy six. The step is at 10⁻⁶, which is where the departure from the tangent space falls below the rank tolerance — so the position of the step is a fact about arithmetic and the two plateaux are facts about the mechanism. A group is a statement about displacements you could compose, and no derivative can make it. What a joint is

The instrument that is not a derivative

Sample a chain of four random pins over a millionth of a radian and its displacements occupy four dimensions, exactly as a SCARA arm's do. Sample the same chain over two radians and they occupy six. The step is at 10⁻⁶, and where it sits is a fact about arithmetic while the two plateaux are facts about the mechanism.

 Reverted trains of 12 : 1. A reverted train has its input and output shafts in line, which means the two stages share one centre distance — so the tooth counts must satisfy z₁ + z₂ = z₃ + z₄ and give the ratio asked for. Two equations in four integers, and there is no reason for a solution to exist. For 12 : 1 there is none at all until the wheels are allowed to reach 63 teeth; below that the coaxial condition and the ratio simply cannot both be met. This is the same kind of arithmetic as the clock trains of the timing field, with one extra equation, and the extra equation is what a shaft position costs. More than one input

Two shafts that must be in line

Asking a two-stage gear train for a ratio is easy. Asking it for a ratio and for its input and output shafts to be coaxial is asking for a solution of two equations in four integers, and there is no reason for one to exist. A twelve-to-one reverted train needs a sixty-three-tooth wheel before it has any solution at all — while sixteen to one, a larger ratio, manages with fifty-six.

 Every joint's lever arm. The thin lines run from the tool to each joint's axis, meeting it square. Their lengths are what a radian of error at each joint costs the tool in metres — not a rule of thumb but the Jacobian column, which is ω × r and therefore that perpendicular exactly. The shortest of them belongs to the joint nearest the work and the longest to the joint furthest from it, which is why an arm's accuracy is decided at the shoulder and its resolution at the wrist. One path to the tool

Where an error at the shoulder ends up

The same angular error at every joint of an arm, and the tool is out by 0.156 mm because of the shoulder, 0.017 mm because of the wrist roll and exactly nothing because of the last joint. The numbers are not properties of the joints. Each one is the distance from the tool to that joint's axis, measurable off the drawing with a ruler.

 What a tensioner can take up, and where it stops being one. The run's length as the arm swings, over the whole interval in which the idler is actually touching the strand: 4.123 to 4.774 radians, and 1013.37 to 1030.99 mm — a range of 17.62 mm on a strand of a metre. Outside that interval the geometry still returns tangent lines and a length; what it returns is not a strand, because the path it describes cuts through the pulleys. The curve is flat at the left-hand end and steep at the right, which is the whole of a tensioner's design problem: its authority is proportional to the sine of half its own wrap, so an idler set near the edge of contact travels a long way and takes up nothing. Members that pull

Where a strand stops touching

A body joining a run costs length as the square of how far it intrudes — exponent 2.0000, measured over four decades — so at the moment contact begins the strand's length is stationary. That is why a tensioner set at the edge of its own contact takes up 0.000245 mm of belt per millimetre it travels.

 The ratio survives; the continuity does not. An involute pair holds its ratio at any centre distance, and that is not the same as working at any centre distance. The contact ratio — the length of the contact path divided by the base pitch, which counts how many pairs of teeth are engaged at once — starts at 1.647 for this 24 : 36 pair and falls as the shafts move apart, because the useful part of the line of action is bounded by the two tip circles. It reaches one at 2.82 mm, and below one a pair of teeth lets go before the next has picked up: the drive stops being continuous and becomes a series of arrivals. That is the real limit on the involute's indifference, and it is a limit on the teeth rather than on the tooth form. The shape is the unknown

Where two shapes stop touching

A conjugate pair is exact at every instant it has a contact. It does not have one for ever: a profile is an arc rather than a curve, and both ends of that arc are somebody's decision — which is why the useful question about a pair of shapes is not whether they mesh but for how long.

 A joint with no way out in the plane it is drawn in. A dovetail. The tail is wider at its far end than at the mouth it went in through, so every direction out of the mouth is blocked by a slanted face and every direction further in is blocked by the floor. In the plane of this drawing the joint cannot be taken apart at all, and the direction it does come apart in is the one the drawing does not show. The moving part touches the rest at 3 faces, each contributing one inequality on the direction it may be translated in — the direction must not have a negative component along that face's inward normal — and the set of directions that satisfy all of them is a cone in two dimensions rather than three, because a translation has no moment term. That is why a removal cone can be drawn as an angle where a mobility cone cannot. Here it is empty: every direction is refused by one face or another, so the part cannot be taken out by any translation and cannot have been put in by one either. That is a statement about the assembly and not about the part, and the direction the joint does come apart in is perpendicular to this drawing. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Contacts that only push

A cone has no size

What a set of contacts permits is a cone of twists, and a cone is closed under positive scaling by definition — so nothing about it changes when the part it holds is made bigger. Except that a twist is a screw, a screw has a pitch, and a pitch is a length.

 The instrument's error, multiplied. The error in the recovered shape against the error in each reading, over four decades, each point the mean of six independent calibrations and the open marks the worst of the six. The slope is 0.9994 — the error is linear in the noise, with no threshold and no saturation — and the constant is 1.90. So a protractor good to a milliradian gives a shape good to about 1.9 milliradians' worth, and the factor belongs to the mechanism and the poses rather than to the instrument. The bound from the smallest singular value is 2.16, which the measurement sits under, as it must. Numbers that were measured

The instrument's error, multiplied

Repeat a whole calibration on independently noised readings at four levels three decades apart and the error in the recovered shape is linear in the noise, with a fitted slope of 0.9994 and a constant of 1.90. That constant belongs to the mechanism and the poses, not to the instrument — and it is bounded by one over the smallest singular value.

 Three prescribed positions of a rigid body. The whole of the design problem, before any mechanism exists. A body has to occupy these three positions — each one a place and an angle, three numbers — and what carries it between them is not yet decided. A forward analysis starts from link lengths and finds the motion. This starts from the motion, and the lengths are what has to be found. The marked points are the poles: any planar displacement is a rotation about one point, so each pair of poses has one, and the arcs show the turn each represents through the body's own origin. A pole is a property of the displacement and not a mechanism — nothing has been chosen yet. 1 of the 3 poles lies outside this frame and is not drawn; near-parallel displacements push their pole a long way off. The problem backwards

What a synthesis assumes it knows

Every construction in this field is handed a demand in absolute coordinates — three positions of a coupler plane, at stated places — and returns a linkage in the same coordinates. Scale the demand and the answer scales, which means the construction's whole content is about shape and its answer carries a size it was given.

 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

Where the boundary moved again

The practice field's inventory ended by naming what the work after it should do first: take the feature positions as the variables and derive the lengths. That is done, and it turned out not to be an extension of the tolerance field but half of a different one — because where a length comes from and what a measurement determines are the same question.

 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.

 Every position loses its hold at -150° and 30°. The smallest singular value of the six leg lines of the Gough–Stewart platform, held level, as it is turned through a whole revolution at 4 positions: (0, 0, 2.4), (0.4, -0.3, 2.4), (0, 0, 3.2), (-0.5, 0.2, 1.8). At -150° and 30° all 4 curves reach zero together — the largest of them is 9.7e-9 — and 1° either side the least is 1.28e-3. Nowhere else does any of them touch zero. Several legs, one platform

A yaw that is singular everywhere

Turn the standard hexapod platform 30° about the vertical, hold it level, and it is singular: not at one pose, but at every position it can be put in, with one screw motion that none of its six locked legs can resist. The angle is not a property of the dimensions. It comes out of one line of trigonometry that no spread of the anchor points can change.

 A roller on an arm of 50 pivoted on the left, at 35.8° of the rise. The cycloidal programme — rise 20 over 90°, return over 170° — on a prime circle of 40 with a roller of 10, followed by a roller on an arm of 50 whose pivot is on the left of the cam, at (−49.92, 42.79). The pivot angle balances the two strokes, and the cam is turned anticlockwise to 35.8°. The faint arc is the path the roller's centre swings through. The contact normal leans 23.48° from the roller's direction of motion, which is the pressure angle, and off the drawn pitch curve it is 23.48°. At this instant the roller's line of motion passes 2.98 from the cam's centre. Balanced, the arm peaks at 23.48° on both strokes; a sliding follower at its best offset of 5.88 peaks at 21.81°. Prescribed motion

An arm is an offset that grows with the lift

Carry a cam's roller on a swinging arm instead of a slide and its pressure angle obeys the offset follower's formula exactly, with the offset replaced by the distance of the roller's line of motion from the cam's centre. That distance turns with the arm. On a cam whose strokes are mirror images the best arm is worse than a centred slide by about 5,000/L² degrees and leans the follower by its own tilt on the dwells. On a quick-rise cam the pivot's angle rebalances either side of the cam for under a degree, where a sliding offset moved to the wrong side costs eleven.

 Four offset slider-cranks, one from each region the limit leaves. One slider-crank from each region of T₂ = b − a + e and T₃ = b − a − e, with the slide the dashed vertical line a distance e from the crank's pivot and the ground line dashed across. The thick arc round the pivot is where the crank's pin can go and the thick stretch of the slide is where the slider can: crank-rocker + +, crank 1, rod 3.5, offset 0.8, the crank reaching 100% of a turn and the slider between 2.37 and 4.43 on each side of it; double rocker − −, crank 3.5, rod 1.2, offset 0.6, the crank reaching 22% of a turn and the slider between 2.22 and 4.66 on each side of it; 0–π rocker + −, crank 2, rod 2.5, offset 1.6, the crank reaching 65% of a turn and the slider running from −4.21 to 4.21 through the ground line; π–π rocker − +, crank 2, rod 2.5, offset −1.6, the crank reaching 65% of a turn and the slider running from −4.21 to 4.21 through the ground line. These are the four of the eight four-bar kinds in which T₁ is positive. Linkages

Four kinds of slider-crank

An offset slider-crank is a four-bar whose output bar and ground have grown without bound, and in that limit the three signed sums that sort four-bars into eight kinds lose one of their signs. Four kinds survive. A census of four thousand finds every slider-crank moving as its region predicts, the textbook condition for a full crank turn turns out to be one region exactly, and each of the four kinds that vanish is carried, at a length that can be written down, into the survivor that shares its other two signs.

 How many times each curve passes through the circular points. For each body of five machines, the degree of the curve a point on it draws, from a random complex line, and the number of finite points where that curve meets a line through the circular point I, x + iy = c, and one through J, x − iy = c. The difference is how many times the curve passes through that circular point. Four-bar, crank: degree 2, 1 and 1 finite, circularity 1; four-bar, coupler: degree 6, 3 and 3 finite, circularity 3; four-bar, rocker: degree 2, 1 and 1 finite, circularity 1; Watt six-bar, coupler: degree 6, 3 and 3 finite, circularity 3; Watt six-bar, second coupler: degree 6, 3 and 3 finite, circularity 3; Watt six-bar, output: degree 2, 1 and 1 finite, circularity 1; Stephenson six-bar, coupler: degree 6, 3 and 3 finite, circularity 3; Stephenson six-bar, arm: degree 18, 9 and 9 finite, circularity 9; Stephenson six-bar, output: degree 2, 1 and 1 finite, circularity 1; slider-crank, crank: degree 2, 1 and 1 finite, circularity 1; slider-crank, coupler: degree 4, 3 and 3 finite, circularity 1; elliptic trammel, rod: degree 2, 2 and 2 finite, circularity 0. Every body of the three machines built from pins alone has circularity exactly half its degree; the slider-crank's coupler curve and the trammel's ellipse do not. How many answers

Nine times through each circular point

A line through a circular point meets a curve at that point once for every time the curve passes through it, so counting its finite meetings measures how often, with no equation. The Stephenson six-bar's arm curve, degree eighteen, meets such lines in nine finite points: it passes nine times through each circular point. Every curve drawn by a body of a machine built from pins alone does this at exactly half its degree; a slide breaks it.

 A rolling wheel, where it was driven to. The mechanism at a configuration nothing wrote down: it was reached by integrating permitted velocities from the start of the trail, and there is no equation here whose root it is. The barred line at each wheel is the direction that wheel forbids — the subject of the whole field, and the one thing a photograph of a car cannot show. The constraint residual along the drawn history is 0.0e+0. Wheels, and where they may not go

A wheel that cannot report its radius

Rolling relates a wheel's turning to a vehicle's travelling, and the relation has a length in it. So a rolling constraint is the one place in these essays where an angle measurement does carry a size — and the size it carries is the one thing a vehicle's own odometry can never separate from its wheelbase.

 A 4-stage scissor, open and as flat as it goes. On paper a scissor stack's height is n·L·sin φ and goes to nothing as the bars lie down. The bars are made of something: the two colours are the two planes the stack needs — two, at any number of stages, which is why a scissor folds at all — and the bars that share a plane are the ones two stages apart. They meet at φ = 0.0951, leaving each stage 0.0949 high, which is exactly the two bosses that touch: 2 × 0.0473. The stowed height of the whole stack is 0.380 rather than zero, and it grows with the stage count in the way a stowed lift's does. Many of one thing

A stack that has to fit

A scissor stack's height is n·L·sin φ and goes to nothing as the bars lie down — on paper. The bars are made of something, and what stops the fold is two bosses meeting: every stage keeps 0.0949 whatever the stack does, which is exactly twice the boss radius.

 A tooth flank is the end of an unwound strand. A strand wrapped on a circle of radius 45.105 mm, unwound while kept taut. Its free end traces the involute — the same curve the gears field builds from its own parameterisation, agreeing to 1.5e-14 mm over the whole flank. The strand is the important part of that sentence and not the curve: the taut portion is a tangent to the base circle, its length is the arc it has left, and both of those are statements about a strand rather than about a tooth. At this position the free length is 27.965 mm. positioned by solving, not by drawing. Teeth

A tooth flank is an unwound strand

Unwind a taut string from a circle and its free end traces the involute, to 1.5·10⁻¹⁴ mm of the curve the gears field draws. That is not a curiosity: the line of action of an involute pair is a crossed strand on the two base circles, so the property the involute is chosen for — a ratio that does not care where the shafts are — is a belt's property rather than a curve's.

 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 in these essays — 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.

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

Six things a chain is not

A count read as a verdict, a rank trusted where it is blind, a fingerprint used as a proof, a list of five taken for a complete one, a solver treated as a convenience, and a census read as a catalogue of machines. Six claims, each with the number that kills it.

 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.

443 essays in 4 parts: part 1 · part 2 · part 3 · part 4

All themes