PDA

View Full Version : Bike chain alternative?



WarpedOne
01-25-2009, 09:52 AM
Chain drive is already quite old and usually very effective, efficient and elegant method of torque transfer especially in lower power applications like ordinary bikes.

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/images/lightbike/bike.jpg

In bikes such as this one chain is around one meter long and doesn't need intermediate fasteners or special guidance to stop it from vibrating or falling off.

There are some other types of bikes where chain drives starts to become a problem or at least very awkward. Now look at this marvel. Its a very nice thing but that chain has to be at least 4 meters long. Imagine the vibrations, noise, filth and inefficiencies because it has to "go around the corner". These are the biggest downsides of chain-drives.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/4a478622.jpg

Could we design a system of torque transfer that would use some principle other than rotation?
I thought about it and came out with this:

http://www.shrani.si/f/3k/8y/2meSZwQH/hydro.png

The system consists of two identical triangular modules. One on the torque input side, the other on the output side.

On the input side blue rotating shaft inputs the torque. The shaft pushes against green cylinders which are connected to cylinders on the output module with hydraulic lines filled with incompressible fluid (like one in hydraulic brakes). The cylinders on the output side push against the blue output shaft and induce circular motion. Both shafts would end turning with same speed.

Between these two modules there are only three quite flexible hydraulic lines than can be easily routed almost along any path, take very little space, can easily pass any joint in the frame (like with suspended frames), don't suffer much vibration and cannot fall off etc.

I am not a mechanical engineer so I am not sure what mechanical problems could arise in such a system. I fear the forces could be quite high. If usual front pedal is around 0,2m long and that eccentric shaft has 2cm long "arm" (if it is much longer the whole module could become to big to fit a bike) then the force with which the cylinder would push against that arm (and vice versa) would be 10x times the force with which you'd push against the pedal. Up to 1 tonne or even more.

Creating such a hydraulic module in your own garage would be a demanding job even with some advanced tools. For starters or concept prototype I adapted the design to use ordinary steel cables like in bike brakes. There are no hydraulic cylinders anymore so that eccentric arm can be quite longer with same module dimensions - up to three times as long meaning the forces would be three times smaller.

http://www.shrani.si/f/1f/Ri/1u7oJd1M/cables.png

The basic difference between both designs is that cabels would pull the arm and cylinders would push against it.
With both designs there is one cylinder or cable working at arm for half a rotation. For the other half of it there are two of them pushing/pulling it but at smaller or bigger angle.

Coupling these modules with pedals and rear wheel could be done like this:
http://www.shrani.si/f/3p/sT/3n6e8cq8/pedals.png


With such a system you could even go build an AWD bike!
I'm not sure how beneficial would it be but it might have some use where traction on the rear wheel is not very certain like with mountain biking through woods. When you are pushing hard against the hill and suddenly rear wheel looses traction and starts to turn freely you are bound to fall or at least stop.

In such moments this system on the front wheel would automatically start to pull you forward. Why? Front bicycle wheel always has to travel longer path than the rear one - so it turns faster than the rear. Bicycles don't have reverse gears so they can always go faster than you are pedaling without stealing the pedals from your feet. So the front wheel would normally just turn faster than you are pedaling - except when the rear wheel would try to spin faster then the front one because it lost traction. In those moments the front would jump in and help. Magic :)
You could also put gearing into the front wheel but I don't see the point to that. It could always just be in the lowest gear and only work when really needed.

Thoughts?

AZEqualizer
01-25-2009, 11:25 AM
Interesting concept and I think that you will find a lot of Engineer types have gone down a similar path of contemplating Hydraulic-Pneumatic drives for bicycles.

Here is a link I found to others who have came up with a similar idea:
http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Hydraulic_bicycle unfortunately not all the links are still live.
Here is another Fluid Power Bicycles (http://forums.hydraulicspneumatics.com/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/8621030121/m/3841006821)...(this contest The Chainless Challenge has been going on since 2005) And this was a cursory look ... I am sure you can Google a number of these great ideas.

http://forums.hydraulicspneumatics.com/eve/forums/a/ga/ul/1301060131/inlineimg/Y/cc1.jpg
http://forums.hydraulicspneumatics.com/eve/forums/a/ga/ul/7211060131/inlineimg/Y/cc6.jpg

http://forums.hydraulicspneumatics.com/eve/forums/a/ga/ul/9841050131/inlineimg/Y/cc2.jpg
http://forums.hydraulicspneumatics.com/eve/forums/a/ga/ul/9701060131/inlineimg/Y/cc4.jpg

http://www.mae.wmich.edu/faculty/kamman/CatrikeFinalDesign05.JPG

And there are a bunch of cool videos on YouTube for the The Chainless Challenge.

WarpedOne
01-25-2009, 12:50 PM
Thanks for the links, AZE!

If you have a good idea, you can bet someone else had it before.

Looking at those designs... they all use somesort of a hydraulic pump and motor. Complex and heavy.
Here is a design (http://www.mae.wmich.edu/faculty/kamman/Pictures_2008.htm) from 2008 Chainless Challenge. Still bulky :|

"My design" uses only hydraulic cylinders and three connecting lines. I draw up another variation:

http://www.shrani.si/f/2z/hj/2jy0FROz/ecc.png

This one uses fixed hydraulic cylinders and one eccentric round "member".
With this variation you could mount the pedals directly on it like this:
http://www.shrani.si/f/2R/wS/2OeCTC12/eccped.png

No itermediate chain links or gears anymore. As simple as it can only be. Problem with this design is that there would be much more friction i.e. higher losses and even bigger forces. But it can be made much smaller and simpler than the the others. With 4 cylinders the situation with forces would improve.

EdVB
01-25-2009, 01:02 PM
That is my blue trike and with the custom idlers installed it is almost silent. Weight is the big issue and so far this proves to be reliable and light.


Chain drive is already quite old and usually very effective, efficient and elegant method of torque transfer especially in lower power applications like ordinary bikes.

http://weightweenies.starbike.com/images/lightbike/bike.jpg

In bikes such as this one chain is around one meter long and doesn't need intermediate fasteners or special guidance to stop it from vibrating or falling off.

There are some other types of bikes where chain drives starts to become a problem or at least very awkward. Now look at this marvel. Its a very nice thing but that chain has to be at least 4 meters long. Imagine the vibrations, noise, filth and inefficiencies because it has to "go around the corner". These are the biggest downsides of chain-drives.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v207/evanbelkom/4a478622.jpg

Could we design a system of torque transfer that would use some principle other than rotation?
I thought about it and came out with this:

http://www.shrani.si/f/3k/8y/2meSZwQH/hydro.png

The system consists of two identical triangular modules. One on the torque input side, the other on the output side.

On the input side blue rotating shaft inputs the torque. The shaft pushes against green cylinders which are connected to cylinders on the output module with hydraulic lines filled with incompressible fluid (like one in hydraulic brakes). The cylinders on the output side push against the blue output shaft and induce circular motion. Both shafts would end turning with same speed.

Between these two modules there are only three quite flexible hydraulic lines than can be easily routed almost along any path, take very little space, can easily pass any joint in the frame (like with suspended frames), don't suffer much vibration and cannot fall off etc.

I am not a mechanical engineer so I am not sure what mechanical problems could arise in such a system. I fear the forces could be quite high. If usual front pedal is around 0,2m long and that eccentric shaft has 2cm long "arm" (if it is much longer the whole module could become to big to fit a bike) then the force with which the cylinder would push against that arm (and vice versa) would be 10x times the force with which you'd push against the pedal. Up to 1 tonne or even more.

Creating such a hydraulic module in your own garage would be a demanding job even with some advanced tools. For starters or concept prototype I adapted the design to use ordinary steel cables like in bike brakes. There are no hydraulic cylinders anymore so that eccentric arm can be quite longer with same module dimensions - up to three times as long meaning the forces would be three times smaller.

http://www.shrani.si/f/1f/Ri/1u7oJd1M/cables.png

The basic difference between both designs is that cabels would pull the arm and cylinders would push against it.
With both designs there is one cylinder or cable working at arm for half a rotation. For the other half of it there are two of them pushing/pulling it but at smaller or bigger angle.

Coupling these modules with pedals and rear wheel could be done like this:
http://www.shrani.si/f/3p/sT/3n6e8cq8/pedals.png


With such a system you could even go build an AWD bike!
I'm not sure how beneficial would it be but it might have some use where traction on the rear wheel is not very certain like with mountain biking through woods. When you are pushing hard against the hill and suddenly rear wheel looses traction and starts to turn freely you are bound to fall or at least stop.

In such moments this system on the front wheel would automatically start to pull you forward. Why? Front bicycle wheel always has to travel longer path than the rear one - so it turns faster than the rear. Bicycles don't have reverse gears so they can always go faster than you are pedaling without stealing the pedals from your feet. So the front wheel would normally just turn faster than you are pedaling - except when the rear wheel would try to spin faster then the front one because it lost traction. In those moments the front would jump in and help. Magic :)
You could also put gearing into the front wheel but I don't see the point to that. It could always just be in the lowest gear and only work when really needed.

Thoughts?

danbucks
01-25-2009, 01:29 PM
Interesting idea, but, for all the reasons listed on some of the referenced links, all designs of this nature has some serious "side effects" (I am sure speed and viscosity details were buried in there somewhere, along with weight). In the evolution of the bicycle, the tried and true chain has lasted this long because: well, it just works, it is dead simple.

The simplest evolution in replacement - which may solve some of your problems - is to replace it with a belt. Several motorcycles have this, and now Trek is finally selling one or two bicycles with a belt drive : doesn't gunk up, is lighter weight, etc. (but in theory doesn't stand up to strain/efficiency pros would put or demand on it - they are staying with chains)

BTW, I don't think a AWD bike would be very useful - wheel slippage usually requires all of the rider's weight sitting on that wheel to correct (i.e. the rear wheel) - in which case the front wheel is almost guaranteed to slip. That, in addition to a very short wheel base and control issues, sets this concept off on the wrong foot. Change the bike into something which is really more like a human-powered ATV ... well, AWD would make more sense.

New ideas are always a good idea, regardless.

WarpedOne
05-10-2009, 10:50 AM
Again, usual chain does look reasonable with usual bikes like the one in my first post - It is quite short and simple. But just look at the chain on that recumbent bike! It is wh;aa;aa;t1

Now I came accros a nice little simple hydraulic pumps - gerotors (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerotor). Using two combined gerotors with different displacements you could even build simple hidraulic transmission with very wide selection of gear ratios.

For example, using two same gerotor modules with two internal gerotors (having displacement of 1 and 1.618) and a simple selection valve you can build 5 different gear ratios: 1:1, 1.616, 2.618, 4.235, 6.854. Every other gear ratio is 62% heavier/faster or easier/slower. Five such ratios cover very wide range of speed. Gear change is effortles - just rotate a valve a little. It can be done at anytime even when stationary. This gerotor modules would be connected to the rear wheel and pedals via simple gear - removing rear wheel becomes super simple without any hard-to-clean filth (no grease). With small enough pump modules out of aluminum it could be even lowerwight than standard chain and gear setup. It would certainly be easier to use and maintain.

Now I only need a man with a CNC! ypslj:kes;7(