|
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh. If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?" In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires. *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub. I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack. It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion. Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...57713706613201 Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles. I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms. Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke. The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. Mark J. |
Ads |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 21:29:07 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh. If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?" In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires. *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub. I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack. It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion. Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...57713706613201 Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles. I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms. Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke. The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. Mark J. That's an interesting concept but it sure does make for a complicated mechanism. I wonder how robust it was with old-time metallurgy on those parts. Cheers |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 9:29:07 PM UTC-4, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh. If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?" In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires. *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub. I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack. It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion. Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...57713706613201 Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles. I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms. Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke. The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. By the way, the American Star "high wheeler" of the 1880s had a vaguely similar drive mechanism. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Star_Bicycle and especially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A...rain,_1884.jpg - Frank Krygowski |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On 3/31/2020 7:24 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote:
On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 21:29:07 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh. If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?" In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires. *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub. I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack. It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion. Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles. I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms. Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke. The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. Mark J. That's an interesting concept but it sure does make for a complicated mechanism. I wonder how robust it was with old-time metallurgy on those parts. My impression (and only that, no measurements taken) of the Alenax execution was that it was relatively (relatively!) high quality. The design, not so much! IIRC, the pivot pins on the shifting "rockers" were starting to wear (see below). All the rest seemed unworn, though likely the bike had seen low mileage. But the hub and crank/lever arm construction seemed relatively precise, with a nice finish. The chromed proprietary parts were nowhere near as badly rusted as the non-proprietary parts on the bike (those were pretty much crap). I assume this bears on the quality of the plating. The hub cleaned/shined up nicely, and bearings adjusted easily. The shifting mechanism was fairly precisely made, though the (off-the-shelf, I assume) internal spring was rusted nearly solid. It was not terribly hard to restore the shifting to, ummm, what I assume was its initial state - which was fully functional but not terribly pleasant to operate. The part that failed during, ummm, testing is visible upper-right he https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...7713706613201/ or especially upper-right he https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...7713706613201/ Specifically, as best I can recreate the failure, the through-pin at the far upper right in the second photo failed, and/or the drilled steel arm/band/linkage came off the pin. The linkage and chain then wrapped around the hub sprocket. The "I" or "H" shaped metal bit in the far upper right of picture #2 disappeared into the bushes. That I/H bit is what slides along the arms (see photo 1) to effect the shifting. All the cable control does is tilt the hard metal "rockers" mounted inside the arms so that the slider is free to move to the next space between an adjacent pair of rockers. It's a "four speed", i.e. there are four positions the slider operates in. When shifting, forces on the chain in different arm positions pull the slider up or down the arm. When not shifting, the "rockers" lock the slider in place. See the video, I think you can hear the shifts, and see where up- or down- shifts occur in the pedaling cycle. Shifting, even when you ease up on the pedals, impacts the slider and rockers pretty hard, which I suspect led to the failure - a design problem. Mark J. |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On 4/1/2020 8:40 AM, Frank Krygowski wrote:
On Tuesday, March 31, 2020 at 9:29:07 PM UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J. wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh. If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?" In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires. *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub. I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack. It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion. Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...57713706613201 Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LM (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles. I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms. Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke. The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. By the way, the American Star "high wheeler" of the 1880s had a vaguely similar drive mechanism. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Star_Bicycle and especially https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:A...rain,_1884.jpg - Frank Krygowski There is indeed nothing new under the sun, I'd say the Star is more than "vaguely" similar to the Alenax in its fundamental design. That it took 100 years before another "treadle" bicycle was widely produced says something about its effectiveness. I really need to get the thing operable again so I can review and more precisely describe the sensation of riding it. All I really remember now is "really weird" in sensation and "mostly awful" in its ergonomics. Obviously I need more detail to back up that assessment. Mark J. |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
ALENAX! or, Something bike-tech related for us to talk about
On 4/1/2020 6:38 PM, Mark J. wrote:
On 3/31/2020 7:24 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 21:29:07 UTC-4, Mark J.Â* wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:30 PM, Sir Ridesalot wrote: On Tuesday, 31 March 2020 20:01:42 UTC-4, Mark J.Â* wrote: On 3/31/2020 4:43 PM, Frank Krygowski wrote: On 3/31/2020 5:28 PM, Mark J. wrote: So Two puzzlers for you; you may want to examine the bike closely in the video first. 1) The puzzler above, i.e. If you *just* had two opposing freewheels on the rear hub, (see the video above to clarify) what happens when you roll the bike backward in the garage? Can it even be pushed backward? I don't think it can, unless there's something else in that hub. It seems the double ratchets would forbid backward rotation. 2) What happens if you install toeclips and pull up on the pedals? I see a horizontal cable and pulley system linking the left and right bottom ends of the two chains. Seems like if you lift up on the right, the top run of right chain goes slack, so the horizontal cable goes slack, so the other chain goes slack. Maybe the chain falls off the sprocket and jams? Heh.Â* If I wanted to be cagey, I'd respond to your question in #1 with "how far?"Â* In fact, it can be rolled backward for whatever distance one desires.Â* *IF* it just had the opposing freewheels, you could maybe back it up a foot or so, depending on how the cranks/treadles/levers were positioned. But as I said, there's some amazing Rube Goldberg stuff inside the rear hub.Â* I have the strong suspicion that the first rough prototype lacked the funky hub internals and that they are patches on the design. Honestly, it's hard to believe what I found in there. SAY, CAN ANYONE HELP ME - Since comcast quit hosting personal webpages, I need another cheap/free way to post pictures to the web. Suggestions? Then I can post pictures of the Alenax rear hub internals. To your answer #2, yes, you got it right about the chain slack.Â* It seemed fairly jam-resistant (until I broke it) due to some pretty close cog and pulley covers that act as defacto chain/cable retaining devices. Mark J. I use Flickr to host my images. This design is rther interesting in some ways. I mean alot of people riding normal bicycles basically jut push down on one crankarm and then push down on the other crankarm and never really pedal in circles as we think of it. I wonder if this design of bike was created to cater to such bicyclists? Then again, it does look like it could be of use to someone with limited knee flexation. Thanks for the flickr suggestion.Â* Here are five pictures - one of the hub internals (left side, other side's internals are a mirror image), four of the "shifting mechanism" internals. Again, for a fairly complete overview, see the youtube video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VAlFpcph1LMÂ* (not mine!) My recollection about the initial marketing was that it was "better" than those silly rotary bicycles.Â* I think you still see that in the document Jay posted; it added some comments about the rehab population, but I think that was retconning on Alenax's part, myself. My impression riding it was that it was radically different than, say, independently ratcheted rotary crank arms.Â* Note also the effective "gear" the bike is in changes over the course of the pedal stroke.Â* The sensory effect is bizarre, to say the least. Mark J. That's an interesting concept but it sure does make for a complicated mechanism. I wonder how robust it was with old-time metallurgy on those parts. My impression (and only that, no measurements taken) of the Alenax execution was that it was relatively (relatively!) high quality.Â* The design, not so much! IIRC, the pivot pins on the shifting "rockers" were starting to wear (see below).Â* All the rest seemed unworn, though likely the bike had seen low mileage. But the hub and crank/lever arm construction seemed relatively precise, with a nice finish.Â* The chromed proprietary parts were nowhere near as badly rusted as the non-proprietary parts on the bike (those were pretty much crap). I assume this bears on the quality of the plating. The hub cleaned/shined up nicely, and bearings adjusted easily. The shifting mechanism was fairly precisely made, though the (off-the-shelf, I assume) internal spring was rusted nearly solid.Â* It was not terribly hard to restore the shifting to, ummm, what I assume was its initial state - which was fully functional but not terribly pleasant to operate. The part that failed during, ummm, testing is visible upper-right he https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...7713706613201/ or especially upper-right he https://www.flickr.com/photos/187680...7713706613201/ Specifically, as best I can recreate the failure, the through-pin at the far upper right in the second photo failed, and/or the drilled steel arm/band/linkage came off the pin.Â* The linkage and chain then wrapped around the hub sprocket.Â* The "I" or "H" shaped metal bit in the far upper right of picture #2 disappeared into the bushes. That I/H bit is what slides along the arms (see photo 1) to effect the shifting.Â* All the cable control does is tilt the hard metal "rockers" mounted inside the arms so that the slider is free to move to the next space between an adjacent pair of rockers. It's a "four speed", i.e. there are four positions the slider operates in.Â* When shifting, forces on the chain in different arm positions pull the slider up or down the arm.Â* When not shifting, the "rockers" lock the slider in place.Â* See the video, I think you can hear the shifts, and see where up- or down- shifts occur in the pedaling cycle. Shifting, even when you ease up on the pedals, impacts the slider and rockers pretty hard, which I suspect led to the failure - a design problem. I didn't realize it was only a four speed! I assumed you had a near infinite number of positions for the chain attachment along those swinging arms. To make a more general comment: While I'd never try to defend the concept of this drive train, it does illustrate how difficult it is to properly execute a really new design concept. Sure, in lots of cases it's done all the time - say, industrial machinery within a plant - but it gets much trickier for bikes. Why? Because the applied forces are often not well known, the operator behavior is hard to predict, ergonomics are tricky under the best of circumstances, maintenance can be sketchy at best, the parts are subject to a sometimes harsh environment, weight is considered important so safety (or design) factors can't be huge, etc. Heck, just think about the troubles that popped up with the various "modern" bottom bracket designs. And that at least _looks_ like a relatively simple design problem. This is why most bike developments have been evolutionary, rather than revolutionary for over 100 years. And why there are retro-grouches! -- - Frank Krygowski |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Tech talk. Copenhagen wheel video. | Sir Ridesalot | Techniques | 22 | December 20th 13 05:12 AM |
Odd Lever action cranks, Ebay Alenax road bike | Dave H. | Techniques | 1 | July 21st 06 10:45 PM |
Deep dish aero wheels vs conventional racing wheels:(Tech Talk: Bontrager and the importance of being aero')...?? | [email protected] | Racing | 23 | May 6th 06 02:42 AM |
Deep dish aero wheels vs conventional racing wheels:(Tech Talk: Bontrager and the importance of being aero')...?? | [email protected] | Techniques | 23 | May 6th 06 02:42 AM |
bike trailer talk (still sort of): The face from xanth (still): bike trip | Kent Paul Dolan | General | 0 | June 17th 05 04:35 PM |