This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?

363

ON THE MOBILITY OF MECHANISMS CONSIDERING THE STATE

OF JOINTS, WITH APPLICATION FOR VEHICLE

George Dobre, Viorel Mateescu, Marin Neacsa,

Mihai Tica

University POLITEHNICA of Bucharest, România

KEYWORDS – mechanism, mobility, joint, car, axle

ABSTRACT - The paper approaches an interesting aspect: the consideration of the states of

the joints in the calculation of the mechanism mobility. This aspect appears in the operation of

mechanisms modifying the meaning of the classical calculation of their mobility. After an

introduction revealing the subject and the content of the paper, some classical expressions of the

mechanism mobility calculation are discussed. After this, the paper proposes expressions to

calculate the mechanism mobility considering the influence of special factors changing the state

of the mechanism joints. The proposed expression is applied in the particular case of vehicle

(bicycle) mechanism. Final conclusions point out the main aspects treated and results.

INTRODUCTION

The mobility of mechanisms is an important criterion to define the motions of components of

mechanical systems having these structures. The problems connected to the mechanism

mobility were approached in large facets over time (Artobolevskij, before 1965 [3]; Voinea

and Atanasiu, 1959 [13]; Manolescu, 1964 [8]; Manolescu and Manafu, 1972 [9]; Antonescu;

1973 [1] and 1999 [2]; Hunt, 1978 [6]; Baker (1981) [4], Zhao, Zhou and Feng, 2004 [14];

Gogu, 2005 [5], Pennestrı et al. 2005 [11] etc.), as concepts, definitions, calculation

expressions and computing modeling. The mobility of mechanisms was generally an object

approached in the general case without considering the influence of different factors over the

relative mobility of components in operation.

The paper tries to consider the influence of special factors as temperature, lubrication, wear,

etc. on the relative motions between the mechanism joint components. These states modify

substantially the behavior of the mechanism and their mobility.

The paper begins with the presentation of some known expressions of the mechanism

mobility calculation. These expressions do not consider the change of the joint states

depending on influence factors. Starting from these preliminaries, the paper proposes derived

expressions for calculation of the mechanism mobility taking into account the states of joints

that lead to the change of the mechanism mobility. The proposed expressions are applied in

the case of mechanisms of a simple vehicle: a bicycle; but the application is possible for other

types of vehicle mechanisms (for example, multi-link axle mechanisms, a future study object

case). The final conclusions reveal the main aspects approached by paper and its results

emphasizing the benefit of using of mechanism mobility expression depending on some states

of joints.

SOME OF MOBILITY EXPRESSIONS

A critical and historical regard over the calculation of the mobility of mechanism is given by

Gogu (2005). Gogu gives a detailed historical overview of mechanism mobility formulas ad

interprets them with discernment; as a result, the analysis of this paper could be carried out by

the interested readers.

CONAT20104065

364

It is very interesting the group of the mechanism mobility calculation mentioned in this paper:

a) the consideration of the kinematic constraint equations and their rank for the given

mechanism position; b) the quick calculation without considering the kinematic constraint

equations. The second criterion will be considered later in the proposal of the paper.

Also, some expressions that will be used in the future proposal of authors are given below.

Expression Hunt. Hunt (1978) [6] gives a more general formula:

¿ ¿

= =

÷ =

l

j

j

g

i

i

d f M

1 1

, (1)

where: i is the index of kinematic pair (joint), g , i 1 = , g being the number of kinematic pair

(joint);

j

d - the order of the j loop, l j , 1 = , l being the number of loops. Hunt defines the loop

order as ì ÷ = 6 d , where ì is k –the number of the common constraints of the mechanism.

Expression Visa. For any mechanisms, Visa et al. (2004) [11] give the following mobility

expression adapted to the notations used in (1):

¿ ¿

= =

÷ =

l

j

j

g

i

i

S f M

1 1

, (2)

in which intervenes in addition

j

S – the spatiality of the loop j: the number of all coordinates

necessary to the loop to position of the element that close the loop.

Expression DOF. It is very interesting to bring for discussion a modern approach of the

modality to consider the mobility of mechanism in the frame of multi-body system (MBS)

analysis:

DN DOM DOF ÷ = , (3)

in which: DOF (Degrees of Freedom) is the number of the motions non-determined

kinematical; DOM (Degrees of Mobility) - the number of degrees of mobility, that is of the

generalized coordinates defining the motions of all mechanism parts; DN (Driver Number) –

the number of driving motions, that is of restrictions in kinematics (number of driving

motions). The expression (3) is used by MBS software promoting different types of analysis

of the multi-body systems.

Observations. The analysis of the mentioned expressions of mobility (1)…(3) could lead to

the following conclusions:

1. The expressions Hunt (1) and Visa (2) are similar, but these are written using specific

concepts: the order

j

d of loop j, by Hunt, and the spatiality

j

S of the same loop j, by

Visa .

2. The expression (3) seems to be similar to the previous (1) and (2). But this aspect is

deceiver, because: a) the concept DOM is similar to the mobility M from (1) and (2); b)

the concept DN is not appearing in (1) and (2), it is practically the number of driving

elements that determine the desmodromy of the full mechanism; c) the concept DOF is

not according to the IFToMM terminology [7], but it is more used in the modern

software for the motion analysis of multi-body-systems. As a result of these

observations, the expression (3) could be written in the form:

CONAT20104065

365

DN M DOF ÷ = . (4)

Conclusion. In the following part of the paper, the last expression (3) will be considered in a

modified form.

PROPOSAL TO CALCULATE THE MOBILITY

The intention of the paper is to take into account some quantities influencing the mobility that

change the degree of freedom of joints (kinematic pairs). The following general expression of

mechanism mobility could be written using (2):

¿ ¿

= =

÷ =

g

i

l

j

k j k i k

) q ( S ) q ( f ) q ( M

1 1

, (5)

in which intervene in addition to meaning of the quantities described before:

k

q - the

influencing quantity, k –the index of quantity.

The number of these influencing quantities depends on the type of the kinematic pairs. Some

influencing quantities are given below.

The lubrication is an important factor: the lack of the correct lubrication could determine the

joint operation lock: of piston in engine cylinder, of pair of surfaces of the cylindrical

articulation, etc. In other words, the joint could be annulled in operating if the motion of its

connected elements disappears. The friction state could block the relative motion of

connected elements.

The clearance from joint has a visible influence: as example in the sample case of

cylindrical articulation: the joint clearance determines relevant supplemental displacements

between the components of the joint (their relative radial motions), modifying in this way the

mobility of the mechanism having these real joints.

The operating temperature could influence other quantities with influence on the

mechanism mobility: lubrication, deformations, clearance, etc.

There are other influencing quantities on the mechanism mobility not discussed below.

Thus, the final expression of the DOF is according to (4):

DN ) M(q ) DOF(q

k k

÷ = . (6)

STUDY CASE. APPLICATION TO VEHICLE MECHANISMS

An interesting mobility analysis case is the mechanism of bicycle (fig. 1, a). The

corresponding mechanism has:

1. five elements:

a) the base 0 (road);

b) and the mobile components m = 4: 1a – front wheel fork; 1b – chassis; 2 – front wheel;

3 – rear wheel;

2. five joints:

a) two joints A and B composed by a cylinder (the wheel 2 or 3) on a plane (the road 0);

b) three revolute joints:

1

O (between 1a and 1b),

2

O (between 1a and 2),

3

O (between 1b

and 3).

For analysis of the mechanism mobility in the case of states of joints A an B, it is considered

that the vehicle is moving in curve. In this case the joint

1

O is blocked by the driver to

CONAT20104065

366

inscribe the vehicle in curve trajectory; so that the elements 1a and 1b are relatively blocked

and form the element 1 (fig. 1, b). In this case:

a) the number of mobile elements is m = 3;

b) the number of joints is g = 4:

- of class II is 2: A and B; their mobility is 4

2 1

= = f f ;

- of joints of class V is 2:

1

O and

2

O ; their mobility is 1

4 3

= = f f ;

The number of loops is given by the classical known expression:

1 3 4 m g l = ÷ = ÷ = . (7)

The analysis of the motion possibilities of the mobile elements is given in the table 1. In this

table, the coordinate system (not-figured in the fig. 1, b) is placed in a point on the trajectory

curve and having the directions: x – on the tangent at curve; y – on the normal on curve; z –

perpendicular on the both directions. The symbols of motions represent the true or false value

in bivalent logics. The analysis of the results from table shows that the number common

motion restrictions is 2 (two values 0 of sum of troth values), respectively the spatiality is

4

1

= S .

Thus, the mechanism mobility is (5):

6 4 1 1 4 4

1 1

= ÷ + + + = ÷ =

¿ ¿

= =

) ( ) ( ) ( ) (

g

i

l

j

k j k i k

q S q f q M . (8)

Thus the mechanism has not determined motions of mobile elements. Actually the mobile

Figure 1: Schema of the mechanism of a bicycle

a) Current position. b) Motion in curve trajectory. 0, 1a, 1b, 2, 3 – elements; A, B, O

1

, O

2

, O

3

– joints.

Note. Tx, Ty, Tz – translations on the directions x, y, z. Rx, Ry, Rz – rotations after the

directions x, y, z.

CONAT20104065

367

components have determined motions if the vehicle no skid. In this case the sufficient friction

determines the adherence in the linear displacement between the two elements from joints A

and B, allowing only their relative rolling: 1

2 1

= = f f . So the spatiality of the mechanism

becomes 3

1

= S and:

1 3 1 1 1 1

1 1

= ÷ + + + = ÷ =

¿ ¿

= =

) ( ) q ( S ) q ( f ) q ( M

g

i

l

j

k j k i k

. (9)

Considering that the driving motions are 1 = DN (of the wheel 2 on road), the DOF is:

0 1 1 ) ( ) ( = ÷ = ÷ = DN q M q DOF

k k

.

Thus the mobile components have determined motion. It is now considering that the

mechanism has not determined motions of its mobile elements. In this case, the centrifuge

force value causes the vehicle slip. The simple expression considering this effect is:

g m

v

m · · > · µ

µ

2

, (10)

in which appear: m is the vehicle mass; v - the linear speed of the vehicle; µ - the curvature

radius of the vehicle trajectory; µ - the friction coefficient between the wheel and the road; g

- the gravitational acceleration. The following linear speed at which appears the skidding is

given by:

g v · · > µ µ . (11)

Because the current unit of the vehicle speed is h km / , thus the corresponding its expression

is:

| |

(

¸

(

¸

(

¸

(

¸

· · · >

h

km

s

m

g m , v

2

6 3 µ µ . (12)

For different states of the road determining different coefficients of friction between tyre and

road (the joints A and B from fig. 1), the linear speeds from which starts the vehicle skidding

(non-adhesion) depending on the trajectory radius and specific coefficient of friction tyre-road

are given in the fig. 2.

Figure 2: Variation of the limit linear speed of the vehicle depending on the curvature

radius of the vehicle trajectory for different state of the road (coefficient of friction

according to Nazar, 2008 [10]

CONAT20104065

368

Under these speed values for a concrete road, the guiding mechanism fulfills the mobility

condition to have determined motions of its mobile components. For example: for the linear

speed h km / 30 and the curvature radius m 30 :

- the vehicle does not skid if the road is dry, wet or even sludge;

- but it skids for road with loose snow or ice.

The approached example shows that the joint state (that is, the value of the friction between

components) decisively determines the mechanism mobility. If the adhesion between the joint

wheel-road is exceeded, then this joint has not a single mobility – see the expression (9) – and

restored a joint cylinder-plan with the mobility 4. As a result the mechanism will not have the

degree of mobility equal to the number of driving elements and will have an indefinite motion

(sliding on random trajectories).

CONCLUSIONS

The following specific conclusions could be stated.

1. The mobility of the mechanisms is an important object of study in mechanical

engineering using these structures.

2. The expressions for mobility of mechanisms given by the specific literature do not

generally consider the influence of different factors on relative motions of components.

3. The paper proposes expressions for the calculation of the mobility of mechanisms taking

into account some influencing factors on the relative motion between the components of

joints.

4. The proposed expressions are applied in the case of a simple vehicle: a bicycle. The

application emphasizes the benefit of considering the state of the road (or coefficient of

friction between wheel and road) to describe correctly the mobility in operation of the

studied mechanism.

REFERENCES

(1) Antonescu, P. Extending of structural formula of Dobrovol'skij to the complex mechanisms with apparent family.

Proceedings of the SYROM, Bucharest, 1973.

(2) Antonescu, P. General formula for the d.o.f. of complex structure manipulators and robots, Tenth World Congress on the

Theory of Machines and Mechanisms, Oulu, 1999.

(3) Artobolevskij, I. I. Teoria mehanizmov, Izd. Nauka, Moskva, 1965.

(4) Baker, J. E. On mobility and relative freedoms in multiloop linkages and structures, Mech. Mach. Theory, Vol. 16, Issue.

6, 1981, pp. 583-597.

(5) Gogu, G. Mobility of Mechanisms: A Critical Review. Mechanism and Machine Theory, vol. 40, pp. 1068-1097, 2005.

(6) Hunt, K. H. Kinematic Geometry of Mechanisms, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1978.

(7) Ionescu, T. Terminology for the Mechanism and Machine Science. Mechanism and Machine Theory 38 (2003), pp. 597–

605, 607–682, 767-776, 777–785, 787–812, 813–818, 819–825, 827–829, 831–834, 835–844, 845–853, 855–857, 859–

879, 881–895, 897–901.

(8) Manolescu, N. Une méthode unitaire pour la formation des chaînes cinématiques et des mécanismes plans articulés avec

différents degrées de liberté et mobilité, Rev. Roum. Sci. Techn..—Méc. Appl. 9, No.6, 1964, pp. 1263–1273.

(9) Manolescu, N., Manafu, V. Sur la détermination du degrée de mobilité des mécanismes, Bull. Inst. Politechn. Bucharest,

25, 1963, pp. 45–66.

(10) Nazar, N. R. Vehicle Dynamics: Theory and Applications. Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, 2008.

(11) Pennestrı, E., Cavacece, M., Vita, L. On the Computation of Degrees-of-Freedom: A Didactic Perspective.

Proceedings of IDETC’05, 2005 ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and

Information in Engineering Conference, Long Beach, California, USA, September 24-28, 2005

(12) Visa, I., Alexandru, P., Talaba, D., Alexandru, C. Proiectarea functionala a mecanismelor. Metode clasice si

moderne. Editura Lux Libris, Brasov, 2004, ISBN 973-9458-17-3.

(13) Voinea, R., Atanasiu, M. Contributions à la théorie géometrique des vis. Buletinul Institutului Politehnic Bucuresti,

Tom XXI, Fascicula 3, 1959, pp. 69–90.

(14) Zhao, J-S., Zhou, K., Feng, Z-J. A theory of degree of freedom for mechanisms. Mech. Mach. Theory, Vol. 39,

Issue 6, 2004, pp. 621-643.

The second criterion will be considered later in the proposal of the paper. Hunt (1978) [6] gives a more general formula: M f i d j . The expression (3) seems to be similar to the previous (1) and (2). The analysis of the mentioned expressions of mobility (1)…(3) could lead to the following conclusions: 1. As a result of these observations. b) the concept DN is not appearing in (1) and (2). i 1. and the spatiality S j of the same loop j.CONAT20104065 It is very interesting the group of the mechanism mobility calculation mentioned in this paper: a) the consideration of the kinematic constraint equations and their rank for the given mechanism position. Hunt defines the loop order as d 6 . l . the expression (3) could be written in the form: 364 . where is k –the number of the common constraints of the mechanism. by Visa . (2004) [11] give the following mobility expression adapted to the notations used in (1): M S j . that is of restrictions in kinematics (number of driving motions). (3) in which: DOF (Degrees of Freedom) is the number of the motions non-determined kinematical.the order of the j loop. Expression Hunt. DOM (Degrees of Mobility) . Visa et al. Expression DOF. 2. It is very interesting to bring for discussion a modern approach of the modality to consider the mobility of mechanism in the frame of multi-body system (MBS) analysis: DOF DOM DN . fi i 1 j 1 g l (2) in which intervenes in addition S j – the spatiality of the loop j: the number of all coordinates necessary to the loop to position of the element that close the loop.the number of degrees of mobility. but it is more used in the modern software for the motion analysis of multi-body-systems. j 1. some expressions that will be used in the future proposal of authors are given below. c) the concept DOF is not according to the IFToMM terminology [7]. But this aspect is deceiver. because: a) the concept DOM is similar to the mobility M from (1) and (2). by Hunt. g being the number of kinematic pair (joint). it is practically the number of driving elements that determine the desmodromy of the full mechanism. that is of the generalized coordinates defining the motions of all mechanism parts. but these are written using specific concepts: the order d j of loop j. DN (Driver Number) – the number of driving motions. For any mechanisms. Expression Visa. Also. Observations. The expression (3) is used by MBS software promoting different types of analysis of the multi-body systems. i 1 j 1 g l (1) where: i is the index of kinematic pair (joint). The expressions Hunt (1) and Visa (2) are similar. l being the number of loops. g . d j . b) the quick calculation without considering the kinematic constraint equations.

clearance. etc. modifying in this way the mobility of the mechanism having these real joints. The number of these influencing quantities depends on the type of the kinematic pairs. i 1 j 1 g l (5) in which intervene in addition to meaning of the quantities described before: qk . (4) Conclusion.CONAT20104065 DOF M DN . The lubrication is an important factor: the lack of the correct lubrication could determine the joint operation lock: of piston in engine cylinder. In other words. For analysis of the mechanism mobility in the case of states of joints A an B. There are other influencing quantities on the mechanism mobility not discussed below.the influencing quantity. 2. 3 – rear wheel. it is considered that the vehicle is moving in curve. b) three revolute joints: O1 (between 1a and 1b). In this case the joint O1 is blocked by the driver to 365 . PROPOSAL TO CALCULATE THE MOBILITY The intention of the paper is to take into account some quantities influencing the mobility that change the degree of freedom of joints (kinematic pairs). Some influencing quantities are given below. the joint could be annulled in operating if the motion of its connected elements disappears. The friction state could block the relative motion of connected elements. the final expression of the DOF is according to (4): DOF(q k ) M(q k ) DN . b) and the mobile components m = 4: 1a – front wheel fork. In the following part of the paper. The clearance from joint has a visible influence: as example in the sample case of cylindrical articulation: the joint clearance determines relevant supplemental displacements between the components of the joint (their relative radial motions). 1b – chassis. APPLICATION TO VEHICLE MECHANISMS An interesting mobility analysis case is the mechanism of bicycle (fig. etc. five joints: a) two joints A and B composed by a cylinder (the wheel 2 or 3) on a plane (the road 0). The corresponding mechanism has: 1. 2 – front wheel. k –the index of quantity. of pair of surfaces of the cylindrical articulation. the last expression (3) will be considered in a modified form. The operating temperature could influence other quantities with influence on the mechanism mobility: lubrication. O3 (between 1b and 3). Thus. The following general expression of mechanism mobility could be written using (2): M ( qk ) f i ( qk ) S j ( qk ) . five elements: a) the base 0 (road). a). (6) STUDY CASE. deformations. O2 (between 1a and 2). 1.

b) Motion in curve trajectory. respectively the spatiality is S1 4 . 1a. (7) The analysis of the motion possibilities of the mobile elements is given in the table 1. their mobility is f1 f 2 4 . the mechanism mobility is (5): M ( qk ) i 1 g f i ( qk ) S j ( qk ) ( 4 4 1 1) 4 6 . The number of loops is given by the classical known expression: l g m 4 3 1. O1. their mobility is f 3 f 4 1 . O3 – joints. z. y. Tx.CONAT20104065 Figure 1: Schema of the mechanism of a bicycle a) Current position. Thus. Rz – rotations after the directions x. z. The symbols of motions represent the true or false value in bivalent logics. 2. In this case: a) the number of mobile elements is m = 3. A. so that the elements 1a and 1b are relatively blocked and form the element 1 (fig. b) the number of joints is g = 4: of class II is 2: A and B. the coordinate system (not-figured in the fig. 0. Ty. The analysis of the results from table shows that the number common motion restrictions is 2 (two values 0 of sum of troth values). j 1 l (8) Note. In this table. of joints of class V is 2: O1 and O2 . Thus the mechanism has not determined motions of mobile elements. O2. Rx. y – on the normal on curve. b). z – perpendicular on the both directions. Actually the mobile 366 . 3 – elements. Ry. B. Tz – translations on the directions x. inscribe the vehicle in curve trajectory. y. 1. b) is placed in a point on the trajectory curve and having the directions: x – on the tangent at curve. 1b. 1.

1). Figure 2: Variation of the limit linear speed of the vehicle depending on the curvature radius of the vehicle trajectory for different state of the road (coefficient of friction according to Nazar.the linear speed of the vehicle. . thus the corresponding its expression is: m km v 3. It is now considering that the mechanism has not determined motions of its mobile elements. In this case.the curvature radius of the vehicle trajectory. 2. In this case the sufficient friction determines the adherence in the linear displacement between the two elements from joints A and B. the linear speeds from which starts the vehicle skidding (non-adhesion) depending on the trajectory radius and specific coefficient of friction tyre-road are given in the fig.the friction coefficient between the wheel and the road. (10) in which appear: m is the vehicle mass. g . the centrifuge force value causes the vehicle slip.CONAT20104065 components have determined motions if the vehicle no skid. j 1 l (9) Considering that the driving motions are DN 1 (of the wheel 2 on road). 2008 [10] 367 .the gravitational acceleration.6 m g . (12) For different states of the road determining different coefficients of friction between tyre and road (the joints A and B from fig. The simple expression considering this effect is: m v2 m g . v . allowing only their relative rolling: f1 f 2 1 . the DOF is: DOF (q k ) M (qk ) DN 1 1 0 . The following linear speed at which appears the skidding is given by: (11) Because the current unit of the vehicle speed is km / h . s2 h v g . Thus the mobile components have determined motion. So the spatiality of the mechanism becomes S1 3 and: M ( qk ) i 1 g f i ( qk ) S j ( qk ) ( 1 1 1 1 ) 3 1 . .

621-643.. Nauka. For example: for the linear speed 30 km / h and the curvature radius 30 m : the vehicle does not skid if the road is dry. Metode clasice si moderne. LLC. but it skids for road with loose snow or ice. Roum. The application emphasizes the benefit of considering the state of the road (or coefficient of friction between wheel and road) to describe correctly the mobility in operation of the studied mechanism. Proceedings of the SYROM. Tom XXI. 1999. Bucharest. 9. P. 767-776. 6. pp. E. 787–812. Bucharest. N. Oulu. If the adhesion between the joint wheel-road is exceeded.CONAT20104065 Under these speed values for a concrete road. 2005 (12) Visa. As a result the mechanism will not have the degree of mobility equal to the number of driving elements and will have an indefinite motion (sliding on random trajectories).. R.. (5) Gogu. Proceedings of IDETC’05. the guiding mechanism fulfills the mobility condition to have determined motions of its mobile components. (9) Manolescu. Atanasiu. Izd.. USA. Fascicula 3. Mech. 1068-1097. 881–895. 1263–1273.. Mach. C. Theory. Extending of structural formula of Dobrovol'skij to the complex mechanisms with apparent family. Issue 6. A theory of degree of freedom for mechanisms. Vol.. G. Sci. 897–901. (14) Zhao. (6) Hunt. Mech. General formula for the d. N. (4) Baker. 813–818. 1. ISBN 973-9458-17-3. J. Oxford University Press. 16. Sur la détermination du degrée de mobilité des mécanismes. Brasov.. 1964. Terminology for the Mechanism and Machine Science. of complex structure manipulators and robots. Manafu. Zhou. 45–66. wet or even sludge. 2008. 835–844. The proposed expressions are applied in the case of a simple vehicle: a bicycle. 777–785. (13) Voinea. Feng.. Alexandru. 597– 605. Techn. Politechn.f. REFERENCES (1) Antonescu. 607–682. then this joint has not a single mobility – see the expression (9) – and restored a joint cylinder-plan with the mobility 4. (2) Antonescu. Vol. 3. 69–90. 1965.6. Theory. (3) Artobolevskij.. 39. 4. P. H. P. The paper proposes expressions for the calculation of the mobility of mechanisms taking into account some influencing factors on the relative motion between the components of joints. Appl. (11) Pennestrı. Tenth World Congress on the Theory of Machines and Mechanisms. Oxford. I. Bull. 831–834. 855–857. K. 845–853. K. 1978. Vita.—Méc. pp. Teoria mehanizmov. vol.o. Cavacece. D. Rev. pp. Buletinul Institutului Politehnic Bucuresti. 827–829. 2. I. Mechanism and Machine Theory 38 (2003). California. L. Inst. The approached example shows that the joint state (that is. pp. I. 25. CONCLUSIONS The following specific conclusions could be stated. The mobility of the mechanisms is an important object of study in mechanical engineering using these structures. J-S. 1973. 2005 ASME International Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference. R. Editura Lux Libris. 1963. 40. 1981. Z-J. the value of the friction between components) decisively determines the mechanism mobility. 819–825. (10) Nazar. Moskva. pp. E. pp. No. (8) Manolescu. V. 2004. 583-597. 2004. 1959. Talaba. Vehicle Dynamics: Theory and Applications. Contributions à la théorie géometrique des vis. N. Alexandru. 859– 879. M. M. 2005. 368 .. (7) Ionescu. On the Computation of Degrees-of-Freedom: A Didactic Perspective. On mobility and relative freedoms in multiloop linkages and structures. T. September 24-28. Une méthode unitaire pour la formation des chaînes cinématiques et des mécanismes plans articulés avec différents degrées de liberté et mobilité. Proiectarea functionala a mecanismelor. Mach. Mechanism and Machine Theory. Long Beach. Springer Science+Business Media. The expressions for mobility of mechanisms given by the specific literature do not generally consider the influence of different factors on relative motions of components. Issue. Mobility of Mechanisms: A Critical Review. Kinematic Geometry of Mechanisms. pp.

Sign up to vote on this title

UsefulNot useful- inverse_kinematics_and_control_of_a_7-dof_redundant_manipulator_based_on_the_closed-loop_algorithmby Habib Rk
- Wheeled Vehicleby arvoip
- 1979 Hundal - Response of a Base Excited System With Coulomb and Viscous Frictionby Edicson Alexander Alvarez Sanchez
- Minnesota DVS Business Partner Individual Web Applicationby ghostgrip

- Course 14
- TOM-1.pdf
- Car Seat Design
- Syllabus
- 11_kinematics_wksht4
- Kinematic Equations and Free Fall
- Sun 1994 Creative Mechanical Design
- 10-EASY-ROB-Chapter-08
- mathcad_intro.pdf
- MEC 1392 Sem I 2014-2015-CourseOutline
- Ed 32820827
- Introducing
- inverse_kinematics_and_control_of_a_7-dof_redundant_manipulator_based_on_the_closed-loop_algorithm
- Wheeled Vehicle
- 1979 Hundal - Response of a Base Excited System With Coulomb and Viscous Friction
- Minnesota DVS Business Partner Individual Web Application
- Nostradamus Villanueva vs. Priscilla R. Domingo, Et Al.
- Design and Fabrication of Film Frame1
- Confernce Abstract 1
- Newton's Laws of Motion.
- Akay Acoustics of Friction
- Annexes 2012 En
- FRICTION.doc
- KMV Taxation Schedule-2014
- TM 9-2320-340-10
- Project Report 00(1)
- IJMEE_14
- Dynamic Friction EJC 98
- Robotics Term Paper
- Maintenance Manual Ottawa 4x2, 6x4
- Con at 20104065