Give Me a Name!

How do you lean into the curve?

same way you do in a car... just lean over... okay, okay.. i did think of tilting it like a Carver..or a Carver One. but that would make it very complicated too.. and I wasn't sure it was necessary. I haven't ruled it out.. Do you see it as helpful?

Chris

Leaning would give the Biker the feeling we enjoy, but would complicate the entire thing greatly. I am thinking of a quad in cornering, the rider leans inside to some extent, but has to brace against the handle bars, where on a bike, you are pushing on the inside handlebar (push right, lean right, go right). Even with extreme counter balance I have seen quads lifting the inside tires in the bends, which would make your machine unstable.

It seems to have a higher center of gravity than many of the small sporty cars where the rider sits down in. (thinking of that GSXR powered sports car I saw on Top Gear) I would worry about it being unstable when cornering hard.

Beautiful concept, but would a biker give up their 165 mph sportbike that cost 3 or 4 thousand (used) for a quad that probably couldn't go much faster but will cost probably 10 times as much?

Drew

Yes, Yusef1 is telling me the same things off line. I acknowledge what you are saying, as I'm not an experienced rider. However, I think that it would be more stable than that because:

I've given it the wheelbase and stance of a sedan car, which makes it way more stable than a normal quad, and even a street legal quad. the only vehicle I've seen that comes close is called "Rod Quad"

I think it will hold more fuel and hold it lower down in it's belly, so that offsets the high rider. Another thing that can be done is to add a rudder to the sail, so to help control the beast aerodynamically at high speeds. Also, the flat wings can have adjustable ailerons added which can add downward force. (they should have negative lift anyway)

There are 2 ways to do a tilting wheel arrangement with this, from what I can see. With 2 hinges, or 4 hinges. Here is a quick render with the outboard sides tilted, (10 deg) plus the wheels turned (15 deg) (sorry, near side is off pavement accidentally) the center body does not tilt.

In order to do the 4hinge, I'd have to do some major surgery to my model...so will save that for later. the second 2 hinge points would allow the central body to tilt in unison with the outboards.. which I think is the effect you are after anyway...

tilting the body will require true motorcycle tires front and back.. but if it doesn't tilt, then flatter tires like cars will suffice. Tilting is one solution, but you could also shift internal weight inside the wings to the inside of the corner.. either way, it will have to be a powered articulation that is against the centrifugal forces incurred.

another vehicle which I'm inspired by, which would have a similar weight I think (but less power) is the Atom.

thank you,

Chris

"Millennium Falcate"

(All right, folks, off to the dictionary... = sickle-shaped)

interesting.. novel... thank you. and falcon has already been done... cheetah has not I think.

but the millenium falcon was a 'freighter'... lol. x-wing? I'm sure some would say Y-wing... or Why wing... hehehe.

Chris

Aha. I am seeing the real Chris. Very intereessting . . . Would it be safe to say that the controlling design element is emotional? ( please note: this is not! a negative criticism) I have never considered the possibility of doing such a thing. hmm So that is how a product is marketed (!). Using this new bit of wisdom, we search for a name. . . How about a series of models with different names to appeal to different groups, like "Bullette" for the pink crowd, "Bulldog" for animal lovers, "BullSitt" to emphasize the upright seating (a la motorcycle/ancient race car). Then there is "''Scorchcar" for alliterative quarter-milers, "Scorcher" for laundry workers, "Scorchier" for those from the continent. (Remember, engineering is supposed to be fun). How about "Musclecart" for secret shopping lovers, "Mousepouncer" to relate to the tiny size and quick performance, "Moosemouse" as in a little-thing-on-steroids. Now we are winding up with "Croozeeay" for the relaxed performance enthusiast, "Toomer" for either motorcycle with training wheels (two more) or those titillated by a brush with death (tomb-er), and last and possibly least, "Gizmo", for childhood memories of engineering dreams.

The previous statements have no relationship to my professional interests or qualifications. I hope to correct that.

"Would it be safe to say that the controlling design element is emotional?"

hmmm, I can't say. I will say it is subjective for me, so I can't rule it out. There is a feeling that I have, yes. As I said in the OP, it comes out of my subconscious, and then I play with that idea for a while, and it evolves... a process that I enjoy.

I will also say that products that are designed from a purely functional point of view don't perform as well in consumer markets, until they evolve into more aesthetic forms.

other than that, the only thing I'm selling here is enthusiasm...

I was responding to your design as a "concept car" (correctly I guess) which attracted me. I have a sailboat design- ultra level- which from purely functional design elements created an appearance very similar to Give-me-name, with required functions for your parts. The functions are related eerily. Fun

Welcome to CR4 woodpower

how do you use woodpower on a sailboat?

steam?

only kidding :D

I like "Gizmo". Just the right amount of "Gee whiz" with just the right amount of 1940's science fiction.

Just got back Chris, I'll give it a name tomorrow. Talk soon Mate, love your work, Ky.

Very nice, An engineer with artistic talent, I'm envious. Now you have to market your skills. which is a different talent altogether.

Jim C

correction.. technologist with artistic talent.. thank you.

I don't see what causes the front wheels to turn. There is no obvious mechanical linkage. Perhaps the linkage is hidden in the body, but if so it is a very complex arrangement of rods, levers, gears or what have you. (Perhaps the wheels are turn by electric motors in the outriggers, controlled by wire?)

Anyway, the vehicle seems like it would have lots of speed but based on this apparent lack of steering, I'd say it lacks direction -- so my name for it would be The Scalar.

usbport. I said in the OP I was thinking 'fly-by-wire', and with discussions of tilting bodies, I think that using actuators for control becomes the simplest method. but I'm open to suggestions. mechanical linkage is not out.

Cheers,

Chris

Won't get there

looks to be very front weighted

even if you make the wheels tilt there won't be the feed back.

you can steer 2 wheelers with a tip of your shoulder or hip

part of the sportbike experience is that the rider weighs 1/2 of what the bike weighs & can use their weight to move the center of gravity

worst of all where's my trophy wife going to sit?

reminds me of a P-38 & has some resemblance to F-1

what sort of powerplant, v-10?

you probably wouldn't want to go with leading link on the front, consider center hub

no idea how the power gets to the outriggers?

maybe name it

The Homer :D

I was thinking the engine (100hp) would be mounted center-rear, under and behind the driver. Lateral driveshafts would run through the wings to the outboards, where they can turn chains. If that method is complicated, then the whole thing can be electric. I'm open to suggestions. I really did just create the form.

As to the front suspension, you are most likely right. As I said, it was just for appearances.

thank you,

Chris

I would suggest putting functional bits in the outriggers, but that would be the opposite of centralizing the weight.

you probably would be better off with shaft drive,

the wheels are always a trade off unsprung weight, grip, gyro effects

It might be good to define what the use for the vehicle would be? & see how much of the form you can keep...

How about "Impaler"

You know, sort of, the wildlife/road kill/pedestrian POV?

You could have a range - like "Ankle" - "Calf" - "Thigh"

so imaginitive!

it won't be any more dangerous that way than other vehicles. If you get hit, it is the relative inertia that hurts... the shape of the vehicle is incidental.

cheers,

Chris

Awful lot of Monday morning quarter backs here, How many concept cars/bikes make it to the street on first draft? it's a starting point . What did this concept look like before they started production?

Jim C

Chris knew the job was dangerous After this

http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/56684/Motorcycle-Accident

http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/49156

"What kind of vehicle might give riders a similar sense of excitement and freedom, while giving them greater visibility and safety.

I have seen allot lately is a modified version of the tri-motorcycle. One not with the single wheel in front with two in back but with the conventional single drive wheel in back and a conventional type (2) wheels in front with a tie rod type steering. a narrower wide pattern though.

I do not know the handling characteristics of these units, if time allots I'll search the web for a picture of these.

^{As far as a name.......Jack's a good name.}

p911

Jim C posted the CanAm version

http://spyder.brp.com/ 3 wheelers of this type generally have a wider rear wheel, much safer to have the rear loose that the front push. The Spyder has anti-lock & traction control

Hey chris, A unique name might be the easy part. Not getting sued, could prove a little more difficult. Better check existing designs first, http://images.google.com/images?hl=en&source=hp&q=motorcycle+car+hybrids&aql=&oq=&um=1&ie=UTF-8&sa=N&tab=wi

I've checked... I am google image ho... lol. I'm always looking at vehicles. (cars, bikes, trains, planes, ships, etc...)

and I think mine is original, even if it don't fly... it is sufficiently different from other vehicle types. I can't see anything like it. you can't patent the fact it has four wheels.

do you see something specific?

cheers,

Chris

Nothing specific, besides the fact, that there are some pretty established companies involved with these type of vehicles. Just being the devils advocate here.

1) From what I've read about things like this, the hours and money involved from idea to prototype are astronomical.

2) If any aspect of your machine can be construed as infringing on existing patents, these existing companies will spend the money to crush you.

3) Realistically, for any original design ideas that you do have, patent protection should be applied for, otherwise it's free for taking, ( Unless you are in the US, then it is first to invent, not first to patent, that has rights to an idea. But.......You still have to prove it was your idea first).

4) In the US, if you publicly disclose any ideas, before filing for patent protection, you may lose your right to file for patent protection.

That's just a little, " food for thought", off the top of my head.

Oops, I forgot that you were looking for a name. How about, "Time for a beer" ?

I'm not about to patent. this is given freely. if anybody wants to develop it... that would be fun to see. I'm not likely to even build an RC model, or a prototype. I just imagine myself riding one...

and I love metalflake paint jobs...

thank you.

Chris

I kind of thought so, but couldn't be sure.

Sounds like it could be interesting. Kind of create a fantasy CR4 design team to work on your creation. I can do the paint job, (even metal flake).

BTW, with the way your mind works, if you ever do come up with a viable idea that you think could be a commercial success, the last thing you want to do is post it here. I'm sure you already know that though.

I like my name, but it would probably be more appropriate for a boat.

in the artistic design of vehicles, I think my process is normal... as in, like others. form and function are equal factors to me.

I do follow your plan. I don't post things that I would be taking to market. I enjoy posting all the other stuff like this to cr4, and yakking about it.

cheers,

Chris

I would describe this process as bench engineering.

the more usual way is getting together with a couple of like minded friends [Tasty Drinks may be involved] cocktail napkins & sharpies can be helpful, usually flights of fancy

one deviation is try to figure the process to go along with a product [extra points for correctly identifying innovation].

with an arty crowd form leads function

usually the opposite in the engineering, with manufacturing process sometimes forcing both into the background....

I think it is fair to say that you believe engineering pertains solely to function, and art pertains solely to form.

I think the pinnacle of design is when form & function coincide

I don't think a design can be successful without having a high level of functionality.

The functionality can be just to look good...

agreed...

so how would you steer a vehicle like this? linkage, or with remote actuators. (not including suspension.)

Chris

I've been mulling over the similarities to my boat. Being so different in basic form, overlap of design does not seem a problem, and the patentable stuff of mine is specific for a boat. I got ideas which you might want to hear, but not in public venue. Do you want a private connection? I am new to blogging and do not know how to send you a personal message - or whether you want one. I will mention that shifting sprung weight to the outriggers from the body, with the outriggers flexibly connected with springing and shock absorbers; and with the wheels sprung and shocked from the outriggers, creates an interesting suspension that gives significant increase of grip for the tires and motion isolation for the body. Also, flexible outrigger connections can allow closer placement of the center of gravity to the road surface with resulting increase in stability. Some of the above is related to DOD research, but not secret.

Formula One is closer than CanAm. If you can tolerate a recumbent driving position the performance characteristics are potentially awesome. I would love to see a working model. I like your stuff, Chris

-Woody

thank you!

I've sent you a pm (private message) so check your mail system on cr4.

Chris

I've been thinking Chris

Maybe name it after an Aussie. Heath Ledger, Batman sort of a thingo. Your the movie buff, you should know best how to spell his name correctly.

That is BTW the only realistic chance of this machine ever being used, in a film. I'll draw up another one and we'll make an animated movie like in "Three wheelers fight for supremacy" or "Last stand of the three wheelers".

You could do wonders with the right graphics card but you know more about it than I do.

I'll send you some drawings, whenever, Ky.

Batman vs Transformers

and here I thought I had invented a whole new class of vehicle... cross breeding motorcycles with ... everything else... lol turns out I'm just a technoho hoho.

oh well... back to the drawing board digitizer tablet 3d software

Vertagone.

Chris you still amaze me

thank you. what would Vertagone mean?

cheers,

Chris

It would mean that I like the word, and can not think of anyone using it yet.

Vertigo, Vertigoing, Vertagone.

Or you could market it as a remedy for curing vertigo.

What does Camaro mean. What about Virago, or Vitare? What do I look like, a frickin encyclopedia? I am an artist working in the media of speech. Poetic licence.

hahahahaha..

Hey Chris, personally I like the design.

After a recent motor cycle biff, I'm even thinking more on safety ideas. btw, if it hadn't been for the gear I wore, I'm pretty sure I might not be here right now or in way worse shape. Just a broken ankle and wrist with lots of bruising and zero road rash. I (my body) hit a guard rail at 30 ft per sec., fast enough though. 30 years of riding motor bikes and this was my first real downer, never broke bones either. The ER folks were happy to see what I was wearing. So off a bit off the topic, but I thought a bit of that last forum over the past three weeks! A guy last week hit the same guard rail and was not as lucky (? or choices we make).

I'd love to put my turbine electric hybrid combination in your design idea. I still like go fast stuff! I'd just name it "Hasta"

sorry to hear about your accident Tim... glad you are alive. you have too much to contribute to be exiting just yet.

and I actually like that name Hasta...

great to hear from you. heal up.

Chris- steering is going to be a problem, because the way you have drawn it, the two front wheels are moving independently, with no synchronizing link. Lots can go wrong with a "fly by wire" control that is supposed to be keeping those two front wheels pointed int he same direction...

Why not what was once called a diamond wheel pattern- one fore, one aft, two outriggers. Forward wheel is for steering, rear wheel is for balance, two outrigger wheels for drive. The outriggers can be configured such that you can lean in to your turns. Plus, they can be fitted with Ben Hur style spoke cutters to keep the big guys from getting to close to you...

hey Charlie,

I wasn't anticipating a huge problem with the steering... but I didn't model it either.

do you mean that the angles can change with respect to each other because of variations in the suspension at any given moment?

I did see one old design with that diamond pattern, but I like this one because we have lots of old roads with ruts in them from trucks, as well as gravel roads, so this sort of wheel base and stance is best for here I think. (car sized)

so any steering issues would have to be engineered properly to work... and I don't think they have the exact same angle as they turn anyway, due to the radius difference.. see here.

cheers,

Chris

You are right about steering angles- the wheels do point slightly differently in conventional steering- but I would be more concerned about one of your wheels trying to turn left while the other was trying to turn right...

I would do the outrigger drive wheels with a pair of universal joints (and appropriate struts that could be tuned to give you different degrees of tilting in to a turn), if they were the drive wheels (one would also need a differential that could handle the wheels turning at different rotational speeds in a hard turn...). Maybe a single chain drive on the back wheel would be easier to achieve...

As to rutty roads, I don't see high speed and rutty roads being a very good combination.

And, you did not comment on my most significant design contribution- the Gen Hur spoke cutters on the outriggers...

I was just explaining to my new friend woody, how the design started out by twinning a pair of bikes, and lengthening the wheelbase... etc.. and that might just be the best plan... have two universally attachable bikes, with control actuators built in..

then a main processor on the main body, that strokes and calibrates when all is plugged together.

I guess you can't really see it on the other pics, but there are already big wingnuts on the rear wheels.. easy enough to sharpen them up... and I'll add a water fountain... lol

"As to rutty roads, I don't see high speed and rutty roads being a very good combination."

seriously.. canadians were practicing their drifting long before tokyo, on the gravel backroads... at least where I grew up...

Cheers,

Chris

I wouldn't stress on the steering too much - film dollies, bomb loaders, container cranes and several other things, manage Ackerman correction by other means than a 'track rod', and a couple far more accurately than any car maker ever has.

I'm not stressing it..

but while pondering this design, I did have an other idea for another sort of front wheel steering system, using semicircular curved rails that the wheels slide on. As they slide, the turn and camber. the outside wheels moves rearward and outward, while the inside wheel moves forward and outward. both are slightly cambered at center, but cut more during a turn... I'll make a sketch if you are interested.. just a curious idea.. don't know if it will work of course.

Chris

You might as well go whole hog to 4 wheel steering & drive which greatly mitigates the need for differentials, would be great for parallel parking & high speed lane changes.

Possibly each pod containing it own powerplant. Incorporate the squibble's idea for a moving passenger pod. The weight could shift [or tilt] which ever way was needed to improve the road holding or just to enhance the ride, depending on the preference...[imagines his new trophy wife, hanging on for dear life, both passengers in a sportbike crouch]

Steering and propulsion pods, similar to the concept used on current design large cargo/passenger ships.

I think that was what Garthh was referring to... like this Jeep Hurricane.

Chris

Now that sounds like something you might want to experiment with and patent before distributing. To my not expert brain it seems like nothing I have seen before.

Drew

Hi Drew,

I'm not in patent mode right now... lol and I am a bit 'open-source' too.

anyway... here is the basic idea. its rather anti-soap-boxy, and would need a great deal of scientific testing and development to make it functional. I'm still thinking of how a suspension would work for it. I hope it is reasonably self-explanatory. I think steering would involve just linear actuators, with an ability to deflect as the wheel moves round the curve. perhaps the front wheels should be closer together.. anyway...

Chris

Wow! Hand me that joy stick.

Hmm guessing bumping into curbs with the tires turned would extremely bad. so if the drive that moves the axles along the rail fails some how do both wheels get forced to the back of the rails when in motion? Seems like that would create a lot of toe in.

there are lots of ways to skin a umm badger ... motorized gear systems etc.

I agree that a coordinating mechanism would be a good safety feature. (arm on central pin) How crazy would it be when your toyota accelerator sticks and your wheels are pointing different directions... you would you be doing donuts? hee hee hee.. _{^{(sorry toyota, I couldn't help it)}}

Chris

hey Chris, with that steering arrangement, do you know the stability on that?

its all in my head.... so either I'm stable or unstable... I can't decide which... I'll just go lie down instead..

I think it is more stable than the old soap box axle, which open up on the outside, and can tip over that way. To me stability is more of a COG vs tipping forces. I can't say this arrangement is more stable than conventional arrangements, but it might offer different turning characteristics. It probably is too slow in turn response to make a realistic system for road vehicles. (dependent on steering actuation system)

Chris

I made a tracking system with carts for moving product in a cheese plant that was simular ^{yes I intentional stressed that word} It turned out more complcated than I anticipated.

p911

pictures?

pictues, I don't think so, may have drawings though. I look. The problem I recall is curves on a slope

yes... curve raises and lowers the distance from axle center to ground... I had twinned the tubing when modelling it (see image).. and immediately saw that.. but I think it can be done, by designing with a line that maintains constant height. my picture isn't perfect here.. but gets the idea across.. there is a center line between the rails that the wheel center would follow in its path...

Chris

You unlike, me foresaw that

On the plus side it has the potential to offer and effective parking brake benefit for those hills in SF.

yes, the wheelbase on the outside is shorter. My thought was that the stance gets wider, (and the inside wheelbase gets longer) and the wheels in this configuration might carve the corner more effectively, especially as the two front wheels are tilted into the corner. (the twist of the beam does that) If there is more weight on the front wheels, then won't that force the turn more? I agree that there might be more potential to tip, if you lose traction, or have too high COG.

good thinking. I don't know the answer without testing.

Chris

Modifying the concept to put the curvature convex-out would reverse which side widens, w/o losing the slide-on-rails idea...

But Ron,

your post couldn't be much more on topic[unlike this one]

Chris is always interested in the functional aspects, [contrary to what he may write from time to time]

On this thread, with this crowd, feel free to let it rip

who knows what happens when you start using tires with a much rounder profile, larger diameter, different shape contact patch?

or even start shifting the weight to the inside of the corner [see sprint car offset]

it comes back to what kind of driving experience is the goal of the design?

I marked it as OT because 1) The original post and question was asking for a name, not a discussion of technical aspects, and 2) My initial response really only related to the comment from 34.5. I have no objection if someone wants to vote it as on topic.

But you are still discussing about the .........."thing"........and who knows, may even stumble across a name in doing so.

interesting comments from you, that you seem to be supported or knowledgeable about.

With a steer-by-wire setup couldn't you try many different set ups. Perhaps even make it adjustable for road conditions or driving style/technique?

Drew

here is that diamond pattern vehicle link.

Somewhere in the archives I've got an article about a Victorian design for a ship. The thing has a secondary inner hull that some how remains horizontal as the ship rolls (it was one of those victorian flight-of-fancy designs I think). Anyhows, going back to your vehicle, it's the sensation of physically tilting the body that marks bikes out from cars.

Howabout designing your vehicle so that the drivers seat/compartment tilts upon the axles/cjassis as the thing corners ? When cornering fast, car drivers tilt their body into the corner anyway, so have the vehicle help them along a little.

Haven't got a clue how you could make such a Friday-morning idea, but it might be fun. The Victorian ship was going to rely on gravity to sort of let an inner shell level out withing the outer, but you might need some complex hydraulics and feedback.

Very cool artwork, Chris

Isn't this design more restrictive than a motorcycle, thus giving less freedom, much more like a convertible car. If you really want to go for the freedom and excitment effect of a motor cycle and more visibility and mobility, I would suggest a jet pack. Plus they would gain the added benefit of even greater excitement due to risk (you don't want to run out of fuel in transit in those).

oh gosh, you get, what, thirty seconds of flight?

grin!

but thats nowhere as exciting as the 31 - 35 seconds of flight afterwards .

It would definitely be exciting though and great visibility. Oh also probably fewer interactions with cars that could lead to accidents, and no traffic jams. I wonder if they would require a helmet?

Could be more than 30 seconds

Of course then Seagulls become much more of a risk than a nuissance.

Interesting. As a former Formula Ford racer, I believe that light weight can be the core of an exciting machine. One example would be the Lotus 7, which is now manufactured by someone else. Caterham I think. It weighs around 1200 pounds, is quite low and with even a mild engine can be quite quick.

The is also a subculture called Locost where people build their own version of the 7 or buy a pre-built frame that accepts Mazda Miata engine, suspension etc. Sort of the minimalist kit car.

believe that light weight can be the core of an exciting machine.

light weight, yes.....just have to see about the aerodynamics on it....