E-bike4life said:
E-bike4life said:Check this out. Even with the torque created by the front wheel of a motorcycle canceled out, you still need to counter steer at speeds above 15mph. This shows that it's merely the angle created by the lean that makes it necessary to counter steer on a motorcycle/ 2 wheeled vehicle that leans.
http://www.reverserotatingrotors.com/whyitworks.html
http://www.reverserotatingrotors.com/index.html
if this were the case, i would rethink the gearing.flathill said:
ptd said:
hmmmm... hadn't thought of it that way. the flywheel capacitor. i had just envisioned them as stabilization. but now the pancake 4 lb stator/gryo idea seems like a decent idea. i had also guessed their flywheels to weigh in at about 15-20 lbs for both. the thing i haven't figured out yet, is how were you thinking method of transfer? considering the flywheels need to be gimbled. and i can see the flywheel acting like supercap, but i can't see a smaller motor taking the burst. very interesting tangent though. and now i can't stop thinking about I ROBOT, and the audi wlith it's spherical wheels, and wondering what would happen if the gyro were inside them, with some kind of mechanical transfer, instead of electrical. speed racer here we come.flathill said:
the gyro on the bus has no stabilizing affect. it's merely a flywheel, being used, as an energy storage device. yes, we're talking about using the gyro's for dual duty. but i still see a problem, in that the gyro has to tilt to generate a stabilizing effect, but needs to be fixed, to provide propulsion. UNLESS, you either use a high speed u joint, or collect the energy indirectly, via my idea of the flywheel BEING the rotor of a motor. which has the added ability of using regen from the drive motor to spin the gyro motor back up. and vice versa. (i also have a weird suspicion that 'tapping' the gyro for power, will induce a gyroscopic effect. it was my original belief that you could induce the effect by simply speeding up, or slowing down, a non tilting gyro.) however, i'm quite sure that the gyro runs at all vehicle speeds, slow, or not. i believe it will be quite necessary, for the C1 to corner the way they want it to. ie steering wheel, and no counter steer. either way, i still like the idea of gyrorotor, instead of flywheel AND motor to spin it up. kinda fits nicely into that ephemeralization way of doing more with less.vax said:
Wrong. Every rotating mass has gyro-effect.ptd said:
i never said it didn't have an effect, i just said that it wasn't utilised for stabilization. and, iirc, it was attributed to causing difficulty in steering. my guess is that they had a single gyro, not a counter rotating pair.vax said:
i think this is already the case. i'm just thinking that a rotor and a gyro have some similarities, hence an opportunity for a more compact, less complex, unit.vax said:
the vacuum is only necessary if the outer edge of the flywheel is travelling at faster than the speed of sound. although in any case, it should result in a bit more efficiency. but again, quite a bit more complex. might be easier to just add mass, instead of diameter. also, no need to encase the motor, when just a shaft will do.vax said:
i believe the gyros on the C1 are primarily for stabilization, not propulsion. not that you couldn't have both, but you'd have problems with stability when you ran low on stored energy.vax said:
flathill said:
EBJ said:
Right. The idea is to apply a torque to the gyro mechanism, causing the vehicle to lean enough to balance the forces. This is important because the gyro can only provide torque for a limited period (until the mech. has rotated circa 45 deg. and it hits the stops).chrispw said:
