new gear system

On 5/17/2016 7:37 PM, John B. wrote:

Somewhere I've seen a system that used balls instead of teeth to
produce a "gear system"but for the life of me I can't remember where.
Of course there are overrunning clutches that work in a similar manner
but transfer motion only one direction.

ISTR that Major Taylor, the champion track racer of the early 1900s,
used a shaft drive (or "chainless") on which the bevel gears were
replaced by roller mechanisms. But that's a dim memory.


--
- Frank Krygowski

On Wed, 18 May 2016 00:01:04 -0400, Frank Krygowski
wrote:

On 5/17/2016 7:37 PM, John B. wrote:

Somewhere I've seen a system that used balls instead of teeth to
produce a "gear system"but for the life of me I can't remember where.
Of course there are overrunning clutches that work in a similar manner
but transfer motion only one direction.

ISTR that Major Taylor, the champion track racer of the early 1900s,
used a shaft drive (or "chainless") on which the bevel gears were
replaced by roller mechanisms. But that's a dim memory.

The faint recollection was of something other than a bicycle.
--
cheers,

John B.

The Gate is between bicycles and toys

Lieb. You know the question arises after percolating ... is there..I think of Tesla...a common parallel in electronics to these imaginative dead ends at a 'better bicycle' ?

Example, think of ten still born electric motor designs producing less power/cost after years/$$ development.

On 5/17/2016 6:37 PM, John B. wrote:
On Mon, 16 May 2016 22:02:40 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Mon, 16 May 2016 17:18:25 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

http://velotegra.com/wordpress1/home/

Be sure to click the patent link and read description on
page 24.

I read some of the patent and was left wondering if it can be made to
work. It seems excessively complicated. What I noticed missing from
the web pages are photos of the completed planetary gear drive,
specifications, gear ratios, gear range, efficiency tests, test rides,
and such. In other words, all the usual stuff needed to convince
skeptics like me that the device actually exists.
"One of the most promising applications of the Sprocket Hub
design is the direct-drive recumbent bicycle (shown above but
with an earlier single-speed hub)"

More of the same (that seems to exist):
https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1941379991/kervelo-bike-and-tilting-trike
http://www.gizmag.com/kervelo-front-wheel-drive-recumbent-bike/41486/

Somewhere I've seen a system that used balls instead of teeth to
produce a "gear system"but for the life of me I can't remember where.
Of course there are overrunning clutches that work in a similar manner
but transfer motion only one direction.


http://www.cxmagazine.com/wp-content...magazine_1.jpg


--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

http://a2.files.biography.com/image/...MyNDUxNTk1.jpg

On Tue, 17 May 2016 23:44:46 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

Lieb. You know the question arises after percolating ...
is there..I think of Tesla...a common parallel in electronics
to these imaginative dead ends at a 'better bicycle' ?
Example, think of ten still born electric motor designs producing
less power/cost after years/$$ development.

Certainly. The mechanism for any speculative venture is much the
same, no matter what the technology. Find a need, throw something
together to attract investors, built it, and then everyone sues
everyone else. It doesn't matter if it's a bicycle or an electric
car. If the need is lacking, hire the government to provide a
suitable crisis and interim financing. If you can find a need for a
bigger, better, faster, cheaper, etc bicycle, you too can be as
successful at Tesla.

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Wed, 18 May 2016 07:13:50 -0500, AMuzi wrote:

On 5/17/2016 6:37 PM, John B. wrote:
Somewhere I've seen a system that used balls instead of teeth to
produce a "gear system"but for the life of me I can't remember where.
Of course there are overrunning clutches that work in a similar manner
but transfer motion only one direction.

http://www.cxmagazine.com/wp-content...magazine_1.jpg

NuVinci Continuously Variable Transmission.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NuVinci_Continuously_Variable_Transmission
http://www.fallbrooktech.com



--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

AE6KS

gnaw... with x hp transmission design ABC has A friction area giving (-.5x hp) n when all friction factors are added in the total design of all available design then produces X-1.3X

this is what these gizmos do right off the drawing board.

so why build it ?

my tentative conclusion is these builders suffer from a common irrationality, a mental dysfnction caused by disassociation from the product..

they are mechanically neurotic.

On Wed, 18 May 2016 08:52:01 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

gnaw... with x hp transmission design ABC has A friction area giving (-.5x hp) n when all friction factors are added in the total design of all available design then produces X-1.3X

this is what these gizmos do right off the drawing board.

so why build it ?

To get rid of the bicycle chain. It's an old story with bicycle
design. After 150+ years of conventional bicycle design, the machine
is quite well optimized. It's therefore impossible to improve one
part of a bicycle, without affecting other parts to compensate. It's
not difficult to see the compensating problems. Just look for what
*ELSE* has changed on the machine. For example, you noticed that
there's some side torque on the handlebars while pedaling. On flat
ground, a rider can learn to compensate for this inefficiency, but on
a hill climb, where the side torque is much greater, it can become
seriously tiring. Also, notice the rather short (crossed) spokes on
the front wheel. That's going to produce a rather rough ride and will
probably require adding a suspension. So, the designer improved the
machine by removing the chain, but compromised steering comfort and
ride.

my tentative conclusion is these builders suffer from a common irrationality, a mental dysfnction caused by disassociation from the product..

they are mechanically neurotic.

I suggest that you reserve judgment until you've seen their ideas. If
you look at the history of bicycle design, you'll probably seen many
aberrations and abominations. As a whole, they're probably
impractical and unsellable. However, there are some genuinely good
ideas among the lot worth emulating, building, and selling:
https://www.google.com/search?q=strange+bicycles&tbm=isch
Well, maybe just a few...

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558