Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

www.elsevier.com/locate/mechmt

Transmission angle in mechanisms (Triangle in mech)

a,b a,*
Shrinivas S. Balli , Satish Chand
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, M.N. Regional Engineering College, Allahabad, 211 004 UP, India
b
Basaveshwar Engineering College, Bagalkot 587 102, Karnataka, India
Received 17 May 2000; received in revised form 16 February 2001; accepted 20 August 2001

Abstract
The transmission angle is an important criterion for the design of mechanisms by means of which the
quality of motion transmission in a mechanism, at its design stage can be judged. It helps to decide the
``Best'' among a family of possible mechanisms for most e€ective force transmission. Literature on
transmission angle in a planar 4-, 5-, 6- and 7-bar linkages and spatial linkages is organized. A survey of
synthesis of mechanism with transmission angle control is made. Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights
reserved.

Keywords: Transmission angle; Mechanism; Linkage; Quality of motion; Synthesis; Optimum

1. Introduction

Mechanisms for non-uniform transmission of motion such as linkages are characterized by

continuously changing transmission ratios. Ideally a smooth motion throughout the whole range
of operation is expected. For designing such mechanisms it is important to utilize fully all pos-
sibilities known from theory and practical experiences [1]. The criteria for the design of mecha-
nism are low ¯uctuation of in put torque, compact in size and links proportion, good in force
transmission, low periodic bearing loads, less vibrations, less wear, optimum transmission angle
and higher harmonics. The transmission angle is an important criterion for the design of mech-
anism as was pointed out by Alt [3].
It is very dicult to say that a particular design is the only solution for a given problem. For
example, there are number of alternate possibilities for the motion relationship between the input

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +91-532-445103x1110; fax: +91-532-445106, -445107.
E-mail addresses: ssballi@redi€mail.com, ssballi@ganesh.mnrec.ac.in (S.S. Balli), satishchand@redi€mail.com,
satish@ganesh.mnrec.ac.in (S. Chand).

0094-114X/02/$ - see front matter Ó 2002 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S 0 0 9 4 - 1 1 4 X ( 0 1 ) 0 0 0 6 7 - 2
176 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

and output links of a simple four bar linkage which has a very few parameters. When the number
of links and number of degrees of freedom increase the design becomes more complicated. Be-
cause of the many parameters, the possible solutions may also increase. This calls for an extensive
research on this topic alone [1]. Therefore, it is better to have a measure of how well a mechanism
might ``run'' when it is still in design stage, i.e. the e€ectiveness with which motion is imparted to
the output link. It implies a smooth operation in which a desired force component is available to
produce a torque or a force in an output member [2].
A good transmission angle is the solution to most of the problems in mechanisms. In this paper,
the primary concentration is on transmission angle and the other aspects of synthesis are attended
only to the extent to which they overlap. The transmission angle in planar 4-bar mechanism is
discussed followed by 5-, 6-, 7-link and spatial mechanisms. A brief touch of dwell mechanisms,
adjustable mechanisms and dead center position mechanisms is also made.

2. Transmission angle in planar 4-bar mechanism

2.1. De®nition

Transmission angle is a smaller angle between the direction of velocity di€erence vector VBA of
driving link and the direction of absolute velocity vector VB of output link both taken at the point
of connection (Fig. 1) [2]. It is the angle between the follower link and coupler of a 4-bar linkage
[12].
The de®nitions are related to a joint variable and depend on the choice of driver and driven
links. It appears to be an acute angle l and an obtuse angle (180° l). It varies throughout the
range of operation and is most favorable when it is 90°. The recommended transmission angle is
90°  50° [3]. In mechanism having a reversal of motion, i.e. if roles of i/p and o/p links are re-
versed during the cycle, transmission angle must be investigated for both directions of motion
transmission [1].
Referring to the Fig. 1, transmission angle in the form of equation is given by,
1 d 2 ‡ a2 b2
c2 2ad cos h2
l ˆ cos : 1†
2bc
Transmission of motion is impossible when transmission angle is 0° or 180°. If transmission
angle is zero, no torque can be realized on output link, i.e. mechanism is at its dead center po-

Fig. 1. Showing transmission angle.

 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 177

sition. A large transmission angle does not necessarily guarantee the low ¯uctuation of torque.
Very small or very large transmission angle results in large error of motion, high sensitivity to
manufacturing error, noisy and unacceptable mechanism [8]. It is not the absolute value of
transmission angle but its deviation from 90° that is signi®cant. Di€erent limits for transmission
angle suggested are 35±145°; 40±140°; 45±135° [10].

2.2. Maximum and minimum transmission angles

The transmission angles at the extreme positions of a double rocker linkage will also be the
minimum and maximum values of transmission angle for the entire motion of mechanism (Fig. 2)
[7].
In case of crank-rocker and drag mechanisms, the transmission angle will be minimum when
input crank angle is zero and maximum when input crank angle is 180° (Figs. 3 and 4).These
occur twice in each revolution of the driving crank. They do not occur at the extreme positions of
the linkage.
Hain [9] recommends that a drag mechanism is dynamically ecient when it experiences the
same lower limit of the minimum transmission angle at its two positions where they occur and
when this lower limit, lmin †max is as large as possible. Maximum and minimum transmission
angles depend greatly on rocker angle. The concept of pseudo-mini±max transmission angle is
discussed by Gupta [17].

Fig. 2. Double-rocker mechanism.

Fig. 3. The crank-rocker mechanism.

178 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

Fig. 4. Double-crank mechanism.

2.3. Optimum transmission angle

The deviation of transmission angle from 90° is the measure of reduction in e€ectiveness of
force transmission. So the aim in linkage design is to proportion the links so that these deviations
are as small as possible, especially in the presence of appreciable joint friction [12]. If the range of
operation is suciently small, it seems as if we could obtain a linkage with optimum variation of
transmission angle if it is set equal to 90° in the designed position [8]. Among the family
of possible 4-bar linkages, there is one linkage that has a minimum transmission angle, which is
greater than the minimum transmission angles of all the others. This is called optimum trans-
mission angle and this particular linkage has the best dimensions for most e€ective force trans-
mission [9].
If the designer tries to optimize the linkage with respect to its force transmission characteristics
simultaneously with optimum transmission angle synthesis, it increases the diculty of problem
extensively. Therefore combined force transmission and synthesis studies have been restricted to
relatively simple linkages. On the other hand, the problem simpli®es signi®cantly if the trans-
mission angle is restricted such that Dl < d where Dl ˆ maximum deviation of transmission angle
l from optimum one and d ˆ a speci®c bound on Dl [11].

2.4. Constant transmission angle

In some of the applications like direct contact mechanism (cam and follower mechanism) and
trammel mechanism, the transmission angle is kept constant. In such cases, the transmission angle
depends on the shape of the curved surface of the output link. If the curve is of the form of a
logarithmic spiral having a constant rise, then the transmission angle remains constant for some
part of motion. Hain [1] has shown how this can be done in 6-link coupler mechanism.

2.5. Importance of transmission angle

Alt and Volmer [3] used the transmission angle to isolate better chains for various linkage
applications. The mechanism designed with maximal transmission angle criterion will have
minimum force acting along the coupler and on the bearings resulting in small friction torque at
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 179

the shafts. Though a good transmission angle is not a cure-all for every design problem, however,
for many mechanical applications it can guarantee for the performance of linkage at higher speed
without unfavorable vibrations [13]. When l ˆ 90°, most e€ective force transmission takes place
and the accuracy of output motion is less sensitive to manufacturing tolerances of link lengths and
clearance between joints and change of dimensions due to thermal expansion [12]. Mechanisms
having transmission angle too much deviated from 90°, exhibit poor operational characteristics
like noise and jerk at high speeds [1,2,10]. If it is 0°, self-locking takes place.
Thus the transmission angle of a mechanism provides a very good indication of the quality of
motion, the accuracy of its performance, expected noise output and its costs in general [8]. In
other words, it is a simple and useful coecient of performance for mechanisms for non-uniform
transmission of motion. It serves as a basis for comparing mechanisms.

2.6. Transmission angle and other parameters

The e€ect of transmission angle on the other parameters of mechanism such as pressure angle,
force transmission, velocity, acceleration, input crank angle, friction, mechanical advantage tol-
erance and clearance and performance sensitivity is discussed in the following sections.

2.6.1. Transmission angle and pressure angle

Pressure angle (k) is the complimentary indicator to the transmission angle [20] and is given by
k ˆ j90 lj. It will reach two extreme values during the cycle when crank and ®xed links are
collinear. If these values are equal, then desirable chain characteristic results [1], i.e.
kmax ˆ kmin < 45°. Small pressure angles lead to reasonable mechanical advantages and a high
quality of motion transmission [1]. Pressure angle is signi®cant not only as an indicator of good
force and motion transmission but also as a prime factor in the linkage sensitivity to small design
parameter errors. Larger the maximum pressure angle, more sensitive the linkage will be [21].
Small pressure angles are consistent with minimal mechanical errors [2]. Therefore, it is reasonable
to attempt to minimize the maximum pressure angle in a linkage design.

2.6.2. Transmission angle and force transmission

Alt [3] de®nes transmission angle as:
1 Ft
l ˆ tan ; 2†
Fb
where Ft is the force tending to move the driven link and Fb is the force tending to apply pressure
on the driven link.
Rossner [1] considered the forces acting at the pivots to evaluate the quality of transmission
more accurately and de®ned transmission as,
Tangential force
tan l ˆ : 3†
Normal force on o=p link
According to Link, it is the angle between the direction of force and the direction motion [1].
When the force along the coupler drives the output link at 90°, i.e. when transmission angle is as
close to 90° as possible for entire motion of mechanism, the bending in the linkage will be reduced
180 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

and will produce the most favorable force transmission condition [27]. The minimum permissible
transmission angle of a linkage mechanism depends on magnitude of transmitted forces including
d'-Alembert's inertia forces [10].
The transmission angle does not consider the dynamic forces due to velocity and accelerations.
Because of this reason, it is widely used in kinematic synthesis stage during which the lengths and
mass properties of the links are still unknown [11], i.e. kinematically determined transmission
angle does not re¯ect the action of gravity or dynamic forces. For the determination of trans-
mission characteristics of the linkage only, it is not necessary to analyze the forces and torque
acting at each joint of the whole mechanism. It is suggested to ®nd the nature not the magnitude
of the force system acting at joint by ¯oating link and to see how this force system can a€ect the
rotation of output link. This force system can be conceived by simple conceptions of statics [16].
Liu and Angeles [100] resort to transmission angle to measure the goodness of force or torque
transmission to output link of 4-bar mechanism. To evaluate the performance of a linkage in
terms of its transmission angle within the mobility of i/p link, the transmission quality is intro-
duced.

2.6.3. Transmission angle, velocity and acceleration

Higher the value of a° =x20 , the poorer will be the acceleration characteristics where a0 is the
angular acceleration of output link and x angular velocity of input link. Though the cam driven
and geared linkages have better acceleration characteristics (lesser value of a0 =x2 ) pure linkages
are used where acceleration characteristics are not of major importance. It is because of ease of
manufacture, cheaper cost and compactness. The design technique that correlates the input and
output link positions though permits the designer to select the transmission angle at the ends of
cycle, provides little control over the acceleration characteristics of the mechanism [14].
Best acceleration characteristics occur when initial transmission angle is greater than 90° and
they are worst when initial transmission angle is smaller than 90°. Variation in the ®nal trans-
mission angle has negligible e€ect on acceleration. In crank rocker mechanism when angle of
oscillation reaches 180° mechanism will be in its dead center position. An auxilliary force is
needed for operation leading to extremely poor acceleration characteristics. The drag mechanism
with optimum transmission angle has less acceleration and hence a smooth motion. With lower
values of transmission angle the mechanism is subjected to high acceleration, objectionable noise
and jerk at high speed. Therefore high speed mechanism should have lmin > 40°. All these lead to
design a mechanism with optimum transmission angle for good acceleration characteristics [15].

2.6.4. Transmission angle and input (crank) angle

The choice of initial input angle h2 depends on following design control factors ± smooth in
force transmission, low in fatigue and wear loads, compact in size and link proportions. Among
these the most important is the force transmission characteristics [7]. With decrease in input angle
h2 ; lmin increases and crank length decreases. As h2 tends to 0°; lmin approaches maximum value
and crank length approaches zero which is impractical. Practical considerations limit the mini-
mum length of crank. A compromise is to be made between reduction in crank length and increase
in lmin when Dh ˆ 180° [18]. Higher the value of initial input angle more optimistic the trans-
mission angle will be.
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 181

Transmission angle as a function of input angle for various Grashof classes is dealt with and
categories of devices best suited for a particular type of transmission behavior is indicated by
Shoup in discussion of [17]. A functional relationship l ˆ f h2 † is produced by variation of the
motion variable h2 . An in®nite number of 4-bars exist that produce the same functional rela-
tionship [19].

2.6.5. Transmission angle and friction

Friction can change the basic manner of operation of a mechanism and impair its usefulness. In
functioning of mechanism friction forces can hardly be distinguished from bending forces. These
in¯uence the mode of operation of mechanism. In cases involving transmission of forces through a
mechanism, frictional forces may be neglected. In other cases, it is not allowable and many in-
vestigations on the e€ect of friction have been made [1].
When transmission angle deviates signi®cantly from 90°, the torque on the output bar falls o€
and may not be sucient to overcome friction in the system. To avoid this situation,
Dl ˆ j90° lj should not be too great. There is no de®nite upper limit for Dl because in practice
the existence of inertia forces may eliminate the undesirable force relationships that prevail under
static conditions [26]. Lenk and Bock take the frictional characteristics of a mechanism into
consideration in evaluating the quality of motion transmission. Bock suggested using the cosine of
the angle of force application as a better measure for the quality of transmission of motion [1].

2.6.6. Transmission angle and mechanical advantage

Mechanical advantage is the instantaneous ratio of output force (F4 ) or torque (T4 ) to the input
force (F2 ) or torque (T2 ) of a mechanism, i.e.
F4 T4 RC O4 sin l
Mechanical advantage ˆ ˆ ˆ ; 4†
F2 T2 RB O2 sin b
where RC O4 and RB O2 are the segments into which the common instant center cuts the line of
centers [16] and if the e€ect of inertia is neglected. As the transmission angle becomes small the
mechanical advantage decreases and even a small amount of friction will cause the mechanism to
lock. The mechanical advantage of a 4-bar mechanism is directly proportional to sin l.
A linkage with a good mechanical advantage may have an unacceptable transmission angle and
a linkage with an excellent transmission angle in a particular position may not have a sucient
mechanical advantage. Since both the transmission angle and mechanical advantage vary with
linkage position, either parameter can be critical to the designer in certain positions [54].

2.6.7. E€ect of tolerance, clearance and play on transmission angle

It is necessary to have good transmission angle to have low sensitivity to manufacturing error.
If transmission angle is large enough and tolerances are small enough, the e€ect of tolerance on
output, is negligible [1,23]. The design allowing for eventual mechanical errors is the most fa-
vorable from standpoint of linkage length ratio and transmission angle [24]. For small l the e€ects
of tolerances in the link dimensions are much more unfavorable than for a l near 90°.
To know the e€ect of clearances, each member must be thoroughly investigated. As long as the
members of the joint remain in contact on one side, the clearances will have no harmful e€ects.
But greater the clearances, greater the impact becomes due to change of direction. The problem of
182 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

avoiding directional changes in oscillating mechanisms appears to be solvable. Thus it is possible

to decide how much the tolerances can be increased without impairing the performance of the
mechanism [1]. Maximum error in o/p of a 4-bar mechanism for a given range of i/p occurs when
jp=2 lj is the largest. Good transmission properties generally imply smaller error due to
clearance. Error is least when l ˆ p=2. As l moves away from 90°, the error increases rapidly [25].

2.6.8. Transmission angle and performance sensitivity

In linkages used for instrumentation and control, sensitivity should be optimum so that output
link responds well, even for very small changes in the input. Also it is most desirable to incor-
porate good transmission characteristics in the linkage. Rao [87] proposes a method to synthesize
a 4-bar linkage for three precision points having good transmission characteristics.
A mechanism with a poor transmission angle also subjects to large mechanical errors. Faik and
Erdman [86] derived the relationship between the proportions of a mechanism and its sensitivity.
Sensitivity is related to 4-bar solution space concept developed by Barker [101].
Transmission angle plays a crucial role in the upper bound sensitivity control during synthesis.
A sensitivity coecient contains the smallest value of transmission angle. If transmission angle is
zero or p, the sensitivity value for all linkages will tend to in®nity. Transmission angle should be
controlled to be greater than a desired value and should be kept as close as possible to p=2 which
makes output variables less sensitive to the transmission angle [85].

2.7. Synthesis of planar 4-bar mechanism with optimum transmission angle ± a survey

One important task of kinematic synthesis is to design a linkage in such a way that the
transmission angle does not fall below a prescribed minimum value. Using transmission angle for
rating the suitability of 4-bar linkages, a number of design procedures are proposed. Following is
the brief survey of such works. These graphical and analytical approaches include motion, path
and function generation. The references provided are representative rather than comprehensive.
Closed form equations are presented [7,27] for coordinating the prescribed extreme positions of
a double rocker mechanism. Design is reduced to the solution of algebraic quadric equation. A
crank-rocker mechanism is designed [13] by an approximate graphical method by Eschenbach and
Tesar by applying the knowledge of plane algebraic curve tracing. They established a geometric
bounded region to limit the link lengths of chain on the basis of inequality constraint
45° < l < 135°. To represent the overall quality of quick returning crank rocker mechanism with
respect to its transmission variation in a complete input crank rotation, a suitable norm of cosl in
the range of the input crank rotation (0; 2p) is to be set. The mechanism is considered to be
optimal when such particular norm is minimized as suggested by Gupta [6].
An approximate analytical procedure to synthesize crank-rocker mechanism with a better
transmission angle is presented for four di€erent situations. Closed form equations are developed
by Khare and Dave for i/p crank angle h1 > 180°, h1 < 180°, h1 ˆ 180° and h1 ˆ 180° ‡ w0
(w0 ˆ o=p angle) and minimum transmission angle for the complete rotation of crank. The upper
and lower bounds on crank angle correspond to a dead centre position of rocker are obtained by
using Grashof's criterion and the design is optimized by maximizing the lmin [18]. Cleghorn and
Fenton [34] and Lu [35] developed analytical synthesis methods of crank-rocker mechanism with
optimum transmission angle.
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 183

For unit time ratio, a crank-rocker mechanism with transmission angle criterion is designed by
Hain [1], Brodell and Soni [33], Hall [12], Harrisberger, Volmer and Chen [5]. Such iterative
method is proved to be ecient for other types of 4-bar linkages too. It is interesting to note that
satisfying condition lmin ˆ 180° lmax , satis®es the condition that the time-ratio for the designed
crank rocker mechanism is unity [22]. By writing vector loop equations based on the geometry of
constraint, if the parameters are allowed to vary, the solutions to loop equations provide a family
of possible designs. A ®nal design is determined by introducing an appropriate initial angle of the
crank on the basis of a design criterion [5]. For certain ranges of speci®cation such as time-ratio
and rocker swing angle, there is an unique optimal Chebyshev solution for quick return crank
rocker mechanism which can be found by solving a cubic equation in terms of a design parameter
[36].
The feasible ranges of design parameters are enlarged when transmission angle over the
working stroke is taken as design criterion and slow stroke of the rocker is taken as the
working stroke. Formulae are presented to facilitate the design with speci®ed optimum options
[37]. Several numerical design procedures based on the mathematical programming technique
presented incorporate various checks in the computation to ensure that the input link of the
designed 4-bar linkage is a crank and transmission angle variation is within reasonable range
[37±39].
Some other methods [1,40] require the analysis of a large number of points on the circle point
curve for the four position synthesis to insure input link rotability and to optimize transmission
angle. Graphical iteration schemes to identify crank type mechanism as well as to resolve problem
of crank ordering and branching in the precision position synthesis problem are proposed by
Filemon [41,42] and Waldron [43±45]. Gupta has designed precision point and least square 4-bar
function generator with fully rotable input links and desired transmission angle variation. This
algebraic-geometrical method can also be used e€ectively in the position synthesis problem. This
identi®es signi®cant portions of the design regions for crank type 4-bar mechanism in which
transmission angle variation is speci®ed [47]. Gupta [48] extends this theory for designing crank
type 4-bar mechanism for position, path and function generation in an uni®ed way.
The increased use of mechanism for high-speed applications requires the knowledge of inertia
forces and harmonic analysis of the motion involved. Freudenstain determined the dimensions of
linkage minimizing higher harmonics and optimizing the transmission angle [20]. To determine
the dimensions of a drag linkage, minimizing the higher harmonics and optimizing the trans-
mission angle, Hain [46] presented an analysis, which enables the designer to ®nd whether a given
mechanism possesses sizable overtones or not. A drag mechanism with more emphasis on control
on transmission angle rather than i/p±o/p motion coordination is designed and error in coordi-
nation is optimized by least square method by Kulkarni and Khan [15]. Crank type mechanisms
for exact generation of a set of FSP of a moving plane with transmission angle control are given
by Kazerounian and Gupta [105].
Synthesis of 4-bar path generating mechanism with optimum transmission characteristics is
presented by Roth and Freudenstain [22]. A numerical method for generators of function, path
and rigid motions is given by Cossaltor et al. [49] giving wide variability ranges for parameters
chosen randomly. Mechanism assembly is managed by introducing a proper penalty function.
Kacachios [51] used augmented Lagrangian penalty function coupled with a variable metric al-
gorithm for the dimensional synthesis of 4-bar mechanism.
184 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

The performance characteristics such as acceleration, transmission angle and design require-
ments of mechanism which ®nd the widest practical use belong to broad rather than those that are
highly specialized in nature were dealt with by Schnarbach [53] and Aronson [14].
Mini±max velocity ratio chart for determination of the positions of the dynamically ecient
drag linkage for minimum velocity ratios are developed by Cemil Bagci [4]. To design a 4-bar
function generator of mini±max transmission angle type, an analogous to geometric entities (i.e.
circle point curve) in the precision point theory, loci of optimum transmission angle is derived by
Gupta [17]. The points on these curves or the intersections of these with other curves give the
desired and practical optimum solutions. Chiang et al. [52] provided the inaccessible previous
works of higher order synthesis techniques of 4-bar generators in a concise manner. Rao [50] tried
the application of geometric programming to synthesis.
Dijksman [19] gives a functional relation between input crank angle and transmission angle
l ˆ f h† which is produced by variation of motion variable h. Resit Soylu [11] determines the
dimensions of a mechanism such that the constraint (maximum) deviation of transmission angle
from optimum one is less than a speci®ed bound on it is satis®ed.
Sun and Waldron [88,91] suggest a graphical solution to satisfy branch, order and transmission
angle requirements. In a motion generation problem, it is not, however, possible to control the
actual values of the maximum and minimum transmission angles without trial and error. They
recti®ed the segments on circle point curve giving transmission angle variations in design range
[47].
Chuang and Chiang [89] present a computer-aided method minimizing the maximum error and
the maximum deviation of transmission angle from 90° by varying the scale factors. Using the
mean values of the optimizing scale factors obtained in both cases, it is made possible to syn-
thesize a 4-bar function generator with a compromise between optimum structural error and
optimum transmission angle. Shoup and Pelan [39] tried to optimize transmission angle and
structural error simultaneously for the design of function generating mechanism over some pre-
scribed portion of total range of motion by iteration based on solution of nonlinear algebraic
equations.
Barker and Shu [90] give the three position equations, which are combined with the equal
deviation of transmission angle condition on the non-dimensional link lengths to produce a third-
order polynomial. The roots of this polynomial produce potential solutions, which must be
evaluated for defects. Once the defects are removed, the remaining solutions yield defect-free
GCRR and GCCC mechanisms, which have equal deviation on transmission angle.
The selective precision synthesis (SPS) is a design method that uses optimization techniques
which can be applied to the path, motion and function generating planar mechanism with or
without velocity and acceleration speci®cations for which exact accuracy is neither possible to
obtain nor needed due to link manufacturing tolerance and need for pin joint clearances.
Arbitrary limits of precision (accuracy neighborhoods) are speci®ed around precision points.
These limits de®ne the error envelope and optimized mechanism is determined without branch,
order or locking defects. The designer can arbitrarily select large or small allowable deviations
for any and all of speci®ed precision conditions. If an unreasonable set of allowable deviations
was selected, it is likely that no solution would be found [55]. Bajpai and Kramer [99] states
that a mechanism constructed from dyads that satis®es all of the constraints speci®ed may
have locking defect. This happens when neither of its cranks is able to rotate fully. At each
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 185

Fig. 5. Slider-crank mechanism.

extreme point in the path (motion/function) generation, l becomes 0° or 180° and no motion
is possible beyond that point.
2.8. Transmission angle of slider-crank mechanism

The transmission angle in a slider crank mechanism is de®ned as the angle between the coupler
rod and the normal to the straight line path of the slider [32]. It is maximum when the input crank
angle is 270° and minimum when the input crank angle is 90° (Fig. 5). In an inverted slider crank
mechanism, the slider pair at the o/p link always maintains the transmission angle to be 90°.
Naik and Amarnath [84] provide a method of synthesis for adjustable slider crank mechanism
for di€erent time ratios and constant strokes and constant time ratio and di€erent strokes. The
method yields a design zone in which mechanism selected for adjustability experiences desired
minimum transmission angle leading to a practical solution to the problem.
Vadasz [83] developed design charts providing the designer with the links and eccentricity di-
mensions for a prescribed minimum transmission angle and time ratio. The user of these charts
can select the dimensions and con®gurations of slider crank mechanism when minimum trans-
mission angle lying between 5° and 175° is prescribed.

3. Transmission angle in planar 5-, 6- and 7-bar mechanisms

As the number of links becomes more than four and the driver is a ¯oating link, the
de®nition of transmission angle has peculiar diculties [2] and even does not have a common
agreement for all mechanisms. In some cases transmission angle is not de®ned so far and those
mechanisms with accepted transmission angle may fail to predict the quality of motion
transmission [76]. A compound mechanism may have more than two transmission angles. In
this section, the de®nition and the role of transmission angle in planar 5-, 6- and 7-bar
mechanisms are discussed (Fig. 6).

3.1. Transmission angle in planar 5-bar mechanism

A 5-bar linkage (Fig. 7(a)) is a 2-DOF mechanism having two independent driving links O2 A
and O5 C. The transmission angle in this case is de®ned as the angle between the two couplers AB
and BC.
186 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

Fig. 6. 7-link, 2-DOF linkage.

Fig. 7. (a) 5-bar mechanism: h2 ˆ 180°, h5 ˆ 0°; (b) 5-bar mechanism: h2 ˆ h5 ˆ 0°.

Rose [70] called these couplers secondary links. The transmission angle should be continuous,
i.e. it must not become 0° or 180° at any position in motion. If transmission angle is assigned a
constant value, secondary links AB and BC (Fig. 7(a)) form a rigid coupler and the 5-bar loop
reduces to a 4-bar linkage. Then depending upon the input link, either the angle O2 AB or BCO5
represents the new transmission angle. A ®ve bar linkage is called a coupler crank linkage if both
input links can be arbitrarily rotated without reaching a dead position, i.e. 0 < l < 180° or
lmin > 0° and lmax < 180° must hold true [72]. This condition does not have any singular position
for any input angle meaning that the linkage has at least two input cranks [73]. The positions at
which the maximum (when input angles h2 ˆ 180° and h5 ˆ 0°) and minimum values of trans-
mission angle occur (when input angles h2 ˆ 0° and h5 ˆ 0°) are shown in Figs. 7(a) and (b),
respectively. Minimum values of transmission angle will also occur when input angles
h2 ˆ h5 ˆ 0°; h2 ˆ 0° and h5 ˆ 180°; h2 ˆ h5 ˆ 180° [72].
Inverted mechanism of 5-bar has two transmission angles. With the two transmission angles
as guides, the second link set is designed completing 5-bar loop [70,73]. Balli and Chand [74]
proposed a synthesis method for 5-bar variable topology mechanism with transmission angle
control. They used allowable lmin and lmax to design 5-bar variable topology mechanism for
motion between extreme positions [71].
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 187

3.2. Transmission angle in planar 6-bar mechanism

Hain [1] has identi®ed the di€erent cases of 6-bar linkage such as:
(i) 6-bar linkage consisting of two 4-bar linkages in series having two transmission angles
(Fig. 8). In this case, there may be more than one transmission angle and the positions of the
mechanism in which the extreme values of l occur are dependent only on the dimensions of the
basic 4-bar linkage and on the position of the ®xed pivot [1].
(ii) 6-bar linkage with coupler drive (a) with one transmission angle; (b) with two transmission
angles.
In a two-phase synthesis of 6-bar linkage design, the designer makes a suitable choice for the
location of moving pivot in a coupler plane [75]. The designer can freely vary moving point so as
to optimize his design with respect to transmission angle or other criteria. The method also
provides a computer program output, which consists of a selected group of 6-bar mechanisms
capable of meeting the performance speci®cations. Selection of mechanism is made after passing
through optimal transmission test for further consideration.
Both dimensional variations and transmission angle of 6-bar linkage are closely related to the
magnitude of mechanical error, i.e. transmission angle is very sensitive to the variations of link-
lengths. Yan and Wu [76] proved that mechanisms with accepted transmission angle might fail to
predict the quality of motion. They dealt with the counter examples of l of in 6-bar linkages.

3.3. Transmission angle in planar 7-bar mechanism

The transmission angle in 7-bar mechanism is dealt in [78]. It is the angle between the direction
of F6 and the component along Z6 (Fig. 6). It is necessary to control the deviation of transmission
angle from 90° for which the frictional resistance does not become excessive.
To obtain a practically useful mechanism, it is necessary to prescribe limits on the transmission
angle and link length ratio. With a view to enable to investigate the e€ectiveness of the chosen
minimization technique, Lakshminarayana and Narayanmurthi [79] control the transmission
angle alone by limiting its values in the design position by the method of transformation of
variables and their maximum rate of change by simply rejecting the point that violate the con-
straints as failures.

Fig. 8. 6-bar mechanism.

188 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

The reasonable values of transmission angles can be located by considering one of the two
inputs ®xed at a time each. The transmission angles thus obtained are named intermediate
transmission angle and output transmission angle [80]. A graphical method of 7-bar linkage
synthesis to generate functions of two variables is presented by Mrutyunjaya [77] yielding an
in®nite number of solutions and enabling subsequent selection on the basis of transmission angles.

4. Transmission angle in other mechanisms

The transmission angle in cam-follower mechanism, dwell linkage, adjustable mechanisms,

dead center position mechanism and spatial mechanism is discussed in the following sections.

4.1. Transmission angle in cam and follower mechanism

Cams having shape of constant rise will have a constant transmission angle for some part of the
motion. Beyer [56,57] discussed this for disc and cylindrical cams. In a roller follower, the roller
diameter has no in¯uence on the transmission angle though it can in¯uence the frictional forces.
Pressure angle in cam mechanism is the complimentary angle to transmission angle [1].
The de®nitions of pressure angle and transmission angles are applicable to followers driven by
only a single cam. For followers driven by multiple inputs, these de®nitions are not applicable.
Dresner and Bunton [65] draw attention to this fact and presented a precise de®nition of
pressure angle along with mathematical consequences that properly characterizes the performance
of either single input or multi input cam follower mechanism. For single input systems this def-
inition is shown to be equivalent to the de®nitions for pressure angle found in the literature. They
also discussed the applicability of this de®nition to determine the transmission angle for planar
and spatial linkages with multiple input.

4.2. Transmission angle in dwell mechanism

Smith and Tesar [67] provided a number of comprehensive contour charts to enable the de-
signer to select the linkage lengths and orientations of four bar dwell mechanism to satisfy the
design criteria, i.e. minimum transmission angle, establishing the region of optimum orientation.
Choudhari and Tesar's [68] design charts supply working data to enable the quick design of 6-bar
cycloidal dwell linkage design based on four ISP having transmission angle within speci®ed limits.
Raju et al. [69] provide design charts for 6-link double dwell linkage based on transmission angle.

4.3. Transmission angle in adjustable mechanisms

In adjustable mechanisms, since there are reactions on the adjustable link, that link is also an
output link. To keep the reactions small and avoid them completely if possible the transmission
angle must be very small or if possible, zero [1]. In the construction of a 4-bar linkage adjustable
for o/p velocity while holding i/p and o/p displacements constant, the o/p crank-pin at its terminal
position is selected based on a favorable transmission angle and suitable crank length [81].
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 189

Krishnamoorthy and Tao [82] have given a synthesis procedure for an adjustable linkage
mechanism for generating intersecting and non-intersecting circular arcs of speci®ed radii.
Usually one gets better results by having one or two free choices of parameters for an adjustable
4-bar linkage, than solution without any free choice of parameter. This is because the design of
linkage has to satisfy not only the basic equations but also the transmission angle, etc. [92].

4.4. Transmission angle in dead center position mechanism

The dead center position of a planar 4-bar mechanism is de®ned as the position when trans-
mission angle becomes zero [1,32]. In case of 5-bar if the two coupler links lie on a common
straight line, then 5-bar loses one-degree of freedom and becomes a temporarily 4-bar linkage. At
this position the linkage is at a dead position or at an indeterminate position [72]. The dead center
position of 6-bar linkage and transmission angle are discussed in [66,76]. For symmetric 2-DOF,
7-link mechanism in a position of symmetry the transmission angle is equal to 0° or 180°. Then the
mechanism will be in a locking position. If such a linkage is required, it is necessary to provide an
auxiliary drive [78]. A second driving link is used in dead center position, then there is generally
another transmission angle at another point of linkage so that it is possible to overcome the dead
lock. This driving link may be a link, which gives up some of its kinetic energy to overcome dead
center position. Spring, ¯ywheel, lever may be used for the purpose [1].

4.5. Transmission angle in spatial mechanism

The de®nition of transmission angle is justi®ed in spherical 4-bar linkage too, [58]. Transmis-
sion index (TI) in case of spatial 4-bar linkage is given by sinl [59].
A general index of the quality of motion transmission for spatial mechanism based on trans-
mission angle is developed using the theory of screw by Sutherland and Roth [59]. A method for
synthesis of spatial linkages with desirable motion transmission and mechanical error charac-
teristics is presented which is similar to the method given by Denavit and Hartenberg [2].
Alizade et al. [63] used the same algorithm (that of planar 7-links, 2-DOF, function generating
mechanism) for optimal synthesis of 2-DOF spatial RSSRP mechanism using transmission angle
in equality design constraint for force transmission. The simply skewed 4-bar spatial mechanism,
centric simply skewed 4-bar mechanism and a skew slider crank mechanism are designed based on
transmission angle criteria. Soylemez and Freudenstein [64] also provide the design charts, which
give optimum transmission angle and corresponding initial crank angle.
Soni and Dikkpati synthesized a spherical 4-link function generator for three position points
maintaining the deviation of transmission angle from 90° to a minimum through out the range of
rotation of the crank. The method is same as that of Shoup and Pelan [39] for planar version of
the problem. The transmission angle of a spherical 4-bar linkage throughout the whole range of
input angle can be optimized in a Chebyshev sense, i.e. the deviation of it from 90° can be
minimized if its maximum absolute values at the middle and at both ends of the range are equal
and opposite [58]. Equations in simple trigonometric form are presented for optimization method
of transmission angle of spherical crank-rocker and double-rocker function generator by Chiang
[60,61].
190 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

McLarnan [102] used replacing technique and optimized both transmission angle and structural
error for three position points. Chen [62], after designing RRPR mechanism for coordinating two
extreme positions, allowed position angle of the in put crank (measured from horizontal axis in
ccw) to vary within a reasonable range and suggested to obtain an optimal design based on
transmission angle.

5. Transmission angle and design curves for optimum linkage design

Design charts re®ne and simplify the design procedure. The suitable dimensions of mechanisms
can be read o€ directly, saving much of time. They, however, cannot displace all other methods
[1].
In early years, the charts for designing crank-rocker mechanism with optimum transmission
angle were provided by Alt [28,29]. Improved versions of the same are provided by Volmer and
Jensen [30]. They are again modi®ed by Leu and Lun [31]. Jensen [9] developed a chart to single
out the linkage with optimum transmission angle from a family of possible crank-rocker linkages.
Design charts are available for ®nding optimum solutions for planar crank mechanism when
time ratio and rocker swing angles are speci®ed, in the works of Hain [1], Hall [12] and Soni [32].
Design charts of crank rocker mechanism with optimum transmission angle for output link
completing the forward stroke in 180° rotation of the input crank are evolved by Brodell and Soni
[33]. To facilitate the design of crank rocker mechanism with optimum transmission angle over its
working stroke for a given time ratio and other parameters as rocker swing angle or allowable
transmission angle for both working and return stroke, a set of design charts are devised by Lun
and Leu [37].
Bagci [4] developed two types of design charts for the selection of dynamically ecient drag
mechanisms with most favorable transmission angle when designing them as driving loops of other
mechanism loops. They are (i) mini±max velocity ratio chart (ii) input±output displacement chart.

6. Transmission angle as an index of merit

Since the ease with which it can be visually inspected, the transmission angle has become a
commonly accepted measure of quality of kinematic design of a linkage. If transmission angle
becomes too small, mechanical advantage becomes small and even a very small amount of friction
will cause mechanism to jam [16]. The most widely accepted design bounds imposed on l are
45° < l < 135°, over a full cycle of motion. Hall [12] puts in other words, j90° ljmax is to be
considered one ``®gure of merit'' in comparing alternate possible designs for a particular appli-
cation.

7. Role of computers in optimum mechanism design

Synthesis of 4-bar linkage has been reduced to the solution of algebraic equations. The use of
computers in solving these equations is a simple standard process. From among many possible
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 191

solutions generated and tabulated by computer, an optimal design can quickly be obtained based
on transmission angle [7]. Graphical methods of dimensional synthesis are desirable because,
visualization of solution space yields an intuitive knowledge that can be easily be lost when using
only equations to solve a synthesis problem. Computers can eliminate the tedium and inaccuracy
inherent in graphical design. By using CAD package the graphical methods are rendered to speed
up while maintaining reasonable accuracy and allowing the designer to concentrate on developing
a more intuitive understanding of the synthesis process [55,103,104].
SYNTRA ± SYNthesis using TRAces is a software package, which can be used to design
mechanisms with prescribed transmission angle. It can handle three-position synthesis problem
for function, motion and path generation. It has two versions-Apollo and IBM-PC. It is able to
®nd all the solutions, which have equal deviations of transmission angle from the ideal one [93].
KINSYN-III (KINematic SYNthesis), a revised version of KINSYN has ``analysis during
synthesis'' messages about Grashof type, transmission angle and branching. There are ¯ashing
signals that appear on screen when de®ned-conditions are satis®ed. The user can request a ¯ashing
signal when a 4-bar being designed is found to have the speci®ed transmission angle [96].
LINCAGES-6 (Linkage Interactive Computer Analysis and Graphically Enhanced Synthesis).
By applying non-linear programming (complex number) methods and dyadic construction of
mechanism general solutions through computer can be readily determined. LINCAGES-6 deals
with recti®cation method that has signi®cantly enhanced the software over the years [55].
RECSYN-(RECti®ed SYNthesis) [94] is the improved version of [95,97,98]. It incorporates the
control of maximum and minimum transmission angle in the design positions to enable the design
optimization [95]. A rectifying synthesis method of 6-bar linkage (Watt-I crank driven) with well-
de®ned transmission angles is guided to pass through 4 FSP. It eliminates circuit, branch and
order defects [97]. The synthesis of motion generation of crank driven 4-bar mechanism designed
to go through 2, 3 or 4 FSP, based on optimum theory and recti®ed synthesis. The technique for
automatic synthesis presented has been implemented in the software package [94].

8. Conclusions

In the initial stage of kinematic design of any mechanism, whether it is a geometrical or an

analytical method of synthesis, the knowledge of transmission angle is necessary. It helps the
designer to compare his design with other similar mechanisms and to select the best among the
family of mechanisms. Though the transmission angle is not the only solution for every design
problem, however, for many mechanical applications it can guarantee for the performance of
linkage at higher speed without unfavorable vibrations. The solution space for the feasible
mechanisms is also reduced. Therefore, an attempt is made to bring the entire information about
transmission angle in spatial 4-bar, planar 4-, 5-, 6- and 7-link mechanisms under one umbrella.

References

[1] K. Hain, Applied Kinematics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1967 (translated by Adams and others).
[2] R.S. Hartenberg, J. Denavit, in: Kinematic synthesis of Linkages, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1964, pp. 46±47.
192 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

[3] Von H. Alt, Der ubertragungswinkel und seine bedeutung fur dar konstruieren periodischer getriebe,
Werksstattstechnik 26 (Heft4) (1932) 61±65.
[4] B. Cemil, Synthesis of double crank (drag link) driven mechanism with adjustable motion and dwell time ratios,
Mechanism and Machine Theory 12 (1977) 619±638.
[5] F.Y. Chen, An analytical method for synthesizing four bar crank rocker mechanism, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME
Ser. B 91 (1) (1969) 45±54.
[6] K.C. Gupta, A note on the optimum design of four bar crank rocker mechanism, Mech. Mach. Theory 12 (1977)
247±254.
[7] F.Y. Chen, Position synthesis of the double rocker mechanism, J. Mech. 4 (1969) 303±310.
[8] J.T. Kimbrella, in: Kinematics Analysis and Synthesis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991, pp. 14±15.
[9] P.W. Jensen, Selecting the dimensions of four bar mechanisms, Mach. Design (June 22) (1961) 173±176.
[10] D.C. Tao, in: Applied Linkage Synthesis, Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA, 1964, pp. 7±12.
[11] S. Resit, Analytical synthesis of mechanism part-1, Transmission angle synthesis, Mech. Mach. Theory 28 (1993)
825±833.
[12] A.S. Hall, in: Kinematics and Linkage Design, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cli€s, NJ, 1961, p. 41.
[13] P.W. Eschenbach, D. Tesar, Link length bounds on the four bar chain, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME Ser. B 93 (1)
(1971) 287±293.
[14] A. Raphael, Large oscillation mechanisms, Mach. Design (Nov.) (1960) 190±196.
[15] S.V. Kulkarni, R.A. Khan, Synthesis of a four bar mechanism with optimum transmission angle, in: Proceedings of
6th World Congress on Theory of M/c and Mechanisms, 1983, pp. 94±97.
[16] S. Joseph, U. John Jr., in: Theory of Machines and Mechanism, second ed., McGraw-Hill, New York, 1995, p. 132.
[17] K.C. Gupta, Design of four bar function generators with mini±max transmission angle, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME
(May) (1977) 360±366.
[18] A.K. Khare, R.K. Dave, Optimizing four bar crank-rocker mechanism, Mech. Mach. Theory (1979) 319±325.
[19] E.A. Dijksman, How to design four bar function cognetes, Inst. Mech. Eng. 847- (1975) 853.
[20] F. Freudenstain, Harmonic analysis of crank rocker mechanism with applications, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME,
Ser. E 26 (1959) 673±675.
[21] Sutherland, Siddal, Dimensional synthesis of linkages by multifactor optimization, Mech. Mach. Theory (1974)
81±95.
[22] B. Roth, F. Freudenstain, G. Sondor, Synthesis of a four bar link path generating mechanisms with optimum
transmission characteristics, in: Transactions of Seventh Conference on Mechanisms, Purdue University,
Lafayette, Ind., 1962, pp. 44±48.
[23] K. Lakshminarayana, R.G. Narayanmurthi, On the analysis of e€ect of tolerance in linkage, J. Mech. 6 (1971)
59±67.
[24] R.E. Garrett, S.H. Allen, E€ect of tolerance and clearance in linkage design, J. Eng. Ind. (1969) 198±202.
[25] S.A. Kolhatker, K.S. Yajnik, The e€ects of pay in the joints of a function generating mechanism, Mech. Mach.
Theory 5 (1970) 521±532.
[26] P. Burtan, in: Kinematics and Dynamics of Planar Machinery, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cli€s, NJ, 1931,
p. 17.
[27] A.K. Khare, R.K. Dave, Synthesis of the double rocker mechanism with optimum transmission characteristics,
Mech. Mach. Theory 15 (1980) 77±80.
[28] H. Alt, VDI Z-85 (3) (1941) S69±S72.
[29] H. Alt, Getriebechnik 10 (1942) S173.
[30] J. Volmer, P.W. Jensen, Product Eng. 23 (1962) 71±76.
[31] Y. Leu, M. Lun, J. Waxi Inst. Light Ind. 11 (1992) 142.
[32] A.H. Soni, Mechanism Synthesis and Analysis, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1974.
[33] R.J. Brodell, A.H. Soni, Design of the crank rocker mechanism with unit time ratio, J. Mech. 5 (1970) 1±4.
[34] W.L. Cleghorn, R.G. Fenton, Mech. Mach. Theory 19 (1984) 319±324.
[35] K. Lu, J. Tianjin Univ. Mech. Mach. Theory (1986) 68±76.
[36] F. Freudenstain, E.J.F. Primose, The transmission angle problem, in: Proceedings of Conference on Mechanisms,
institute of Mechanical Engineers, London, 1973, pp. 105±110.
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 193

[37] L. Ming, L. Yonghou, Design of crank rocker mechanism with optimum transmission angle over working stroke,
Mech. Mach. Theory 31 (4) (1996) 501±511.
[38] R.L. Fox, K.C. Gupta, Optimization technology as applied to mechanism design, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (May)
(1973) 657±663.
[39] T.E. Shoup, B.J. Pelan, Design of a four bar mechanism for optimum transmission angle and optimum structural
error, in: Proceedings of Second OSU applied Mechanism Conference, Stilwater, Okla, 1971, pp. 4.1±4.9.
[40] R. Beyer, The Kinematic Synthesis of Mechanisms, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1963.
[41] E. Filemon, In addition to Burmester theory, in: Proceedings of 3rd World Congress on Theory of M/c and
Mechanisms,Yugoslavia, 1971, pp. 63±78.
[42] E. Filemon, Useful ranges of centre point curves for design of crank rocker linkages, Mech. Mach. Theory 7 (1972)
47±53.
[43] K.J. Waldron, Elimination of branch problem in graphical burmester mechanism synthesis for four ®nitely
separated positions, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (1976) 176±182.
[44] K.J. Waldron, Graphical solution of the branch and order problem of linkage synthesis for multiple separated
positions, Trans. of ASME paper no.76 DET 16.
[45] K.J. Waldron, Location of burmester synthesis solution with fully rotable cranks, Mech. Mach. Theory (1977).
[46] K. Hain, Drag link mechanisms, Mach. Design (June) (1958) 104±113.
[47] K.C. Gupta, A general theory for synthesizing crank type four bar function generators with transmission angle
control, J. Appl. Mech. Trans. ASME (1978) 415±421.
[48] K.C. Gupta, Synthesis of position, path and function generating four bar mechanism with completely rotable
driving links, Mech. Mach. Theory (1980) 93±101.
[49] V. Cossalter et al., A simple numerical approach for optimum synthesis of a class of planar mechanisms, Mech.
Mach. Theory 27 (1992) 357±366.
[50] A.C. Rao, Synthesis of four bar function generators using geometric programming, Mech. Mach. Theory 14 (1979)
141±149.
[51] A.J. Kacachios, S.J. Tricamo, Optimal kinematic synthesis of a four bar mechanism with mini±max structural
error, in: Proceedings of 6th World Congress on Theory of M/c and Mechanisms, 1983, pp. 81±83.
[52] C.H. Chiang et al., On a technique for higher order synthesis of four bar function generators, Mech. Mach. Theory
24 (1989) 195±205.
[53] K. Schnarbach, VDI Z-96 (9) (1954) S279±81.
[54] A.G. Erdman, G.N. Sondor, in: Mechanism Design: Analysis and Synthesis, 1, Prentice-Hall, NJ, 1984, p. 124.
[55] A.G. Erdman, Modern Kinematics-Developments in Last 40 Years, Wiley, New York, 1993.
[56] R. Beyer, Der ubetragungswinkel bei kurvenscheiben, Reuleaux-Mitteilungen 1 (1933) S67.
[57] R. Beyer, Der ubetragungswinkel am zylinderkurventrieb, Reuleaux-Mitteilungen 3 (Heft 3) (1935) S.167±S.169.
[58] C.H. Chiang, Kinematics of Spherical Mechanisms, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1988.
[59] G. Sutherland, B. Roth, A transmission index for spatial mechanism, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (1973) 589±597.
[60] C.H. Chiang, Design of spherical and planar crank-rockers and double rockers as function generators-I, crank-
rockers, Mech. Mach. Theory 21 (1986) 287±296.
[61] C.H. Chiang, Design of spherical and planar crank-rockers and double rockers as function generators-II, double-
rockers, Mech. Mach. Theory 21 (1986) 297±305.
[62] F.Y. Chen, Algebraic synthesis of a class four-bar linkages and their equivalent mechanisms, J. Mech. (1971)
213±230.
[63] R.I. Alizade, A.V. Mohan Rao, G.N. Sandor, Optimum synthesis of two degree of freedom planar and spatial
function generating mechanism using the penalty function approach, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (May) (1975)
629±634.
[64] E. Soylemez, F. Freudenstein, Transmission optimization of spatial 4-link mechanics, Mech. Mach. Theory 17
(1982) 263±283.
[65] T.L. Dresner, K.W. Bunton, De®nitions of pressure and transmission angles applicable to multi-input
mechanisms, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Design Dec. (1991) 495±499.
[66] H.S. Yan, L.I. Wu, On the dead-center positions of planar linkage mechanisms, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Design
111 (1989) 40±46.
194 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195

[67] J.A. Smith, D. Tesar, Use of contour charts for dwell mechanism design, in: Second Applied Mechanisms
Conference, Oklahoma, State University, Oklahoma, 1969, pp. 11-1±11-13.
[68] A. Chaudhari, D. Tesar, Cycloidal dwell linkage design charts based on four in®nitesimally separated positions, in:
Second Applied Mechanisms Conference, Oklahoma, State University, Oklahoma, 1969, pp. 12-1±12-11.
[69] D.L.N. Raju, Y.R. Patole, C. Amarnath, Design charts for double dwell linkage mechanisms, in: Proceedings of
the Eighth NaCoMM Conference, IIT, Kanpur, 1997, pp. 15±20.
[70] R Stanley, Five-bar loop synthesis, Mach. Design (1961) 189±195.
[71] S.S. Balli, S. Chand, Synthesis of a ®ve-bar mechanism with variable topology for motion between extreme
positions, Mech. Mach. Theory 36 (10) (2001) 1147±1156.
[72] K.L. Ting, G.H. Tsai, Mobility and synthesis of ®ve-bar programmable linkages, in: Proceedings of nineth OSU
Applied Mechanisms Conference, Kanas City, MD, October 1985, pp. III-1±III-8.
[73] K.L. Ting, Five-bar grash of criteria, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Transmiss. Automat. Design 108 (1986) 533±537.
[74] S.S. Balli, S. Chand, Synthesis of a ®ve-bar mechanism of variable topology type with transmission angle control,
Trans. ASME, Mech. Design (2000) Manuscript No. 010103 (communicated).
[75] R.E. Kaufman, Synthesis of the Watt-I six-bar linkage form ®ve position higher coupler motion correlated with
input crank rotations, in: Proceedings of Second OSU Applied Mechanisms Conference, Oklahoma State
University, Stillwater, 1971, pp. 28-1±28-5.
[76] H.S. Yan, L.I. Wu, Counter examples in transmission angle, in: Proceedings of 10th OSU Applied Mechanisms
Conference, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater, Oklahoma, 1987, pp. 1±4.
[77] T.S. Mruthyunjaya, A note on synthesis of the general, two-degree-of-freedom linkage, Mech. Mach. Theory 10
(1975) 77±80.
[78] R.E. Philipp, F. Freudenstein, Synthesis of two-degree-of-freedom linkages-a feasibility study of numerical
methods of synthesis of bivariate function generators, J. Mech. 1 (1966) 9±21.
[79] K. Lakshminarayana, R.G. Narayanmurthi, Derivate synthesis of plane mechanisms to generate functions of two
variables, J. Mech. 5 (1970) 249±271.
[80] K. Lakshminarayana, A simpli®ed approach to two degree of freedom linkages, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (1973)
584±588.
[81] D.C. Tao, Adjustable four-bar linkages, Mach. Design (December 20) (1962) 127±129.
[82] S. Krishnamoorthy, D.C. Tao, Adjustable linkage mechanisms using coupler points on pole tangent for variable
circular arcs, in: Proceedings of OSU Conference on Applied Mechanisms, pp. 1-1±1-20.
[83] A.F. Vadasz, Design charts for slider crank mechanisms with prescribed minimum transmission angle and time
ratio, in: Proceedings of Proceedings of 6th Annual Applied Mechanisms Conference,Colorado, October 1979,
pp. XXXI-1±XXXI-8.
[84] D.P. Naik, C. Amarnath, Planar slider-crank mechanisms adjustable for prescribed dead-center positions, J. Indian
Inst. Sci. 66 (1986) 247±252.
[85] M.Y. Lee, A.G. Erdman, S. Faik, A generalized performance sensitivity synthesis methodology for four-bar
mechanisms, Mech. Mach. Theory 34 (1999) 1127±1139.
[86] S. Faik, A.G. Erdman, Sensitivity distribution in the synthesis solution space of four-bar linkages, Trans. ASME,
J. Mech. Design 113 (1991) 3±9.
[87] A.C. Rao, Kinematic design of four-bar function generators with optimum sensitivity, Mech. Mach. Theory 10
(1975) 531±535.
[88] J.W.H. Sun, K.J. Waldron, Graphical transmission angle control in planar linkage synthesis, Mech. Mach. Theory
16 (1981) 385±397.
[89] S.H. Chuang, C.H. Chiang, Fifth order synthesis of plane four-bar function generators optimized by varying scale
factors, Mech. Mach. Theory 22 (1987) 53±63.
[90] C.R. Barker, G.H. Shu, Three-Position function generation of planar four-bar mechanisms with equal deviation
transmission angle control, Trans. ASME, J. Transmiss. Autom. Design 110 (1988) 435±439.
[91] J.W.H. Sun, K.J. Waldron, Graphical transmission angle control in planar linkage synthesis, in: Proceedings of
Sixth Annual Applied Mechanisms Conference, Colorado, October 1979, pp. XXXIV-1±XXXIV-8.
[92] S.J. Wang, R.S. Sodhi, Kinematic synthesis of adjustable moving pivot four-bar mechanisms for multi-phase
motion generation, Mech. Mach. Theory 31 (1996) 459±474.
 S.S. Balli, S. Chand / Mechanism and Machine Theory 37 (2002) 175±195 195

[93] C.R. Barker, P.L. Tso, An enhanced version of the synthesis package SYNTRA, in: 10th OSU Applied
Mechanisms Conference, New Orleans, LA, December 7±9, 1987.
[94] S. Bawab, S. Sabada, U. Srinivasan, G.L. Kinzel, K.J. Waldron, Automatic synthesis of crank driven four-bar
mechanisms for two three or four-position motion generation, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Design (1997) 225±231.
[95] S.M. Song, K.J. Waldron, Theoretical and numerical improvements to an interactive linkage design program-
RECSYN, in: Proceedings of Sixth Annual Applied Mechanisms Conference, Colorado, October 1979, pp. VIII-1±
VIII-8.
[96] A.J. Rubel, R.E. Kaufman, KINSYN III: A new human-engineered system for interactive computer aided design
of planar linkages, J. Eng. Ind. Trans. ASME (May) (1977) 440±448.
[97] S. Bawab, G.L. Kinzel, K.J. Waldron, Recti®ed synthesis of six-bar mechanism with well de®ned transmission
angles for four-position motion generation, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Design 118 (1996) 377±383.
[98] J.C. Chuang, R.T. Strong, K.J. Waldron, Implementation of solution recti®cation techniques in an interactive
linkage synthesis program, Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Design 103 (1981) 657±664.
[99] A. Bajpai, S. Kramer, Detection and elimination of mechanism defects in the selective precision synthesis of planar
mechanisms, Mech. Mach. Theory 20 (1985) 521±534.
[100] L. Zheng, J. Angeles, The properties of constant branch for-bar linkages and their applications, Trans. ASME, J.
Mech. Design 114 (December) (1992) 574±579.
[101] C.R. Barker, A complete classi®cation of planar four-bar linkages, Mech. Mach. Theory (6) (1985) 535±554.
[102] C.W. McLarnan, On linkage synthesis with minimum error, J. Mech. 3 (2) (1968) 101±105.
[103] A.G. Erdman, Computer-aided design of mechanism: 1984 and beyond, Mech. Mach. Theory (1985) 245±249.
[104] A.G. Erdman, Computer-aided mechanism design: now and the future, Trans. ASME, Special 50th Anniver.
Design Issue 117 (June) (1995) 93±100.
[105] S.M.K. Kazerounian, K.C. Gupta, Synthesis of position generating crank-rocker or drag-link mechanisms, Mech.
Mach. Theory (4) (1982) 243±247.