Fletcher's Swivel

[agor95]

Hello Fletcher

This post was inspired from your 5 minute simulation.

So it's only fair it is named after yourself.

The Model zip file is available. You may be able to see in the image that the pivot points are slightly off angle.
They were following the arm axis.
The top one is titled 21.7 degrees towards the front. That is the same for the left arm.

The right and bottom pivots are titled down along the arms at 98.3 but behind the device.

The pivot points adjust during device rotation. The top changes axis to become the right pivot angle.
Also the bottom changes to become the left pivot angle.

The black marker in the Centre of Mass.

Because of these pivot alterations the pendulum sections will move to lower their CoM.
That in turn will change the main CoM.

The pendulum sections have not been altered from their initial position too allow speed of publishing this post.

Regards

[agor95]

The Model in the last post has been Down Loaded 16 Times.

For those who have done so :-

You will notice the CoM is directly below the axle pivot point.
So it will keel to this point.

I have one implementation at this time to allow the top pendulum to keel towards the right.

The main CoM in black will then move to the right. Thus causing the main wheel to rotate clockwise.

The pendulums are more agile than the wheel. So the wheel ends up following the pendulum
rather than the normal wheel moving leaving a mass in an inertially delayed position.

Have you thought on an implementation method to carry out this movement?

Note.

The right pendulum does not change it's relative wheel orientation.
It just does a quarter turn.

The bottom pendulum's main action is to hang from it's pivot point. One quarter turn.

Regards

[Tarsier79]

I feel like there would be two different keel points. One CW and the other CCW. I haven't modeled so I could be wrong.

Is it worth modelling further? Not particularly.

[agor95]

I feel like there would be two different keel points.

If you consider each secondary arm has having their own CoM.
When the arms are square beams of a chosen length. Then the CoM is in the middle of that length.

If you look at the distance from the hub of each then you can see why it is balanced.

If you look at an alternative version where the top arm has keeled to the centre line then you will note
the main wheel's CoM has moved to the right and is ready to rotate CW.

The top arm initiated this by moving CCW as you propose.

The simple modelling requires the new position of the main wheel as it keels?

Regards

[agor95]

You know you can poll multiple times as your position changes?

Even perpetually

[agor95]

We most not break the LAW for it's a crime.

Think about what we know. Two identical toy cars falling down two ramps tracks. With one lower in the middle section.
Both tracks ending at the same level next to each other.

The cars had the same mass and height and end up with the same momentum. But time is not conserved!

If one car has the mass of the wheel and the other has the mass of one pendulum. Then time is not conserved.

The pendulum can follow the conservation LAWS and arrive at it's keeling destination before the wheel reaches it's keeling point.

P.S. Can the pendulums momentum be harvested as well as driving the wheel keeling motion?

Regards