rec.sport.unicycling · Public discussion

The concept of a guwi

Started by unisk8r · · Last activity · 22 posts · 799 views

This thread is locked and is currently read-only.

Thread navigation

Jump through the discussion

Go to the original post, the replies on this page, or the latest preserved contribution.

Thread details

What we know about this thread

Original section
rec.sport.unicycling
Published
24 January 2008
Last activity
6 February 2008
Original author
unisk8r
Posts
22
Discussion status
Public discussion
Total views
799
Views / 30 days
0

The navigation and discussion metadata provide context. Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Showing posts 1–20 of 22
Posts remain in their original chronological order.

Text size
  1. Just taking this topic out of another unrelated thread, because I find
    it intriguing.

    The idea of a geared ultimate wheel has been suggested. Like a guni,
    the wheel would travel further than its circumference with each pedal
    revolution.

    The first substantive debate issue was essentially: how could this be
    done with planetary gears but without a torque arm on a standard frame
    (like a Schlumpf/Harper?Bonsch type guni)?

    That's a very good question. One way might be some kind of attachment
    to the rider's leg, but this could be a problem during dismounts
    (whether planned or unplanned).

    So must we use a planetary gear arrangement? Or could there be another
    to accomplish the goal? Anyone?

    --
    unisk8r
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    unisk8r's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4660
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  2. You could do it with a standard Schlumpf hub... but... you'd need to
    extend the torque arm to at least the radius of the wheel so that it
    pushes against the ground for it's fixed position. To stop it wearing
    away, you'd probably want to put a roller (or small wheel) on the end
    though.

    It would need to be a lot longer if you plan on doing jumps and stuff
    though otherwise it'll spin around when you leave the ground.

    But riding a two wheeled geared vehicle kind of takes away from the
    basic simplicity of an Ultimate Wheel.

    STM

    --
    semach.the.monkey
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    semach.the.monkey's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12078
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  3. dork-o-man would know.

    Simply apply a DAKOROMAN DRIVE SYSTEM

    --
    pdc

    "What doesn't kill you strengthens you, what kills you strengthens your
    mother"
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    pdc's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/8160
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  4. Gearing down would seem to be easy (to conceive, anyway). Just sit the
    externally-toothed axle in an open hub with internal teeth. There'd be
    more to it than that to be able to transfer torque in other dimensions,
    but I imagine it would be reasonably workable.

    Gearing up is a different beast.

    --
    U-Turn

    Weep in the dojo... laugh on the battlefield.
    -- Dave Stockton
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U-Turn's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/691
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  5. I posted about his in the DAKOROMAN thread. The biggest problem is that
    you need something to transfer the torque to. I think the best way to
    do this is to use a torque arm that is as long as possible but shorter
    than the radius of the wheel with a heavy weight on the end. With a
    schlumph style hub you could have the weight attached to an extended
    torque arm. To keep things centered you should probably have a wheel
    that is sort of shaped like this

    [ so the weight can be more central side to side.

    It would be even better if you could have the weight inside a hollow
    wheel to limit the number of exposed parts

    The amount of weight and the length of the torque arm would determine
    how hard you could pedal this thing. for example a 29" UW with a 12"
    torque arm and 10lb weight would be able to handle 10 foot-pounds of
    torque before the weight "gerbils" in the wheel effectively turning it
    into a poorly balanced BC. Higher gearing would produce more torque.

    Hey this is starting to sound fun 😄

    --
    saskatchewanian
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    saskatchewanian's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14180
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  6. U-Turn said:

    Gearing down would seem to be easy (to conceive, anyway). Just sit the
    externally-toothed axle in an open hub with internal teeth. There'd be
    more to it than that to be able to transfer torque in other dimensions,
    but I imagine it would be reasonably workable.

    Gearing up is a different beast.

    ...............................................................

    U-Turn, if you want to manufacture, please try [email hidden]
    and [email hidden].

    Thnks, Ioan "Dakoroman" OASA, Sydney, Australia.

    --
    dakoroman
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    dakoroman's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16388
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  7. sorry, LOL.

    --
    jamessd


    Add me, but tel me who you are :p:
    [email hidden]

    Kieron said:

    I tell u wat they would have to be a very commited pedo to learn to ride
    a unicycle in order to mingle with us, steel one of us and rape us in a
    bush.


    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    jamessd's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/15102
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  8. Wow that guy doesn't give up does he? Saskwatch has an intersting idea,
    but i think the weight moving would alter the drive too much to
    balance, it would be a simlar effect to riding with very bendy cranks,
    pushing hard on the pedals would swing the weight rather than spin the
    wheel initially.

    --
    kington99

    Dave

    - what a thoroughly post-modern subversion of the cycling genre -
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    kington99's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9417
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  9. Good stuff so far! But the guwi in my head is still gerbiling...:o

    --
    unisk8r
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    unisk8r's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4660
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  10. on leo's website he had a link about a motorised unicycle where the
    rider sat inside of the wheel .The effects experienced by that setup
    can give you an insight into how a rotation inside a rotation works and
    thereby what would be involved in controlling it,and how the eccentric
    weighting would be critical to make it work.

    --
    dangerdog
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    dangerdog's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/16398
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  11. kington99 said:

    Wow that guy doesn't give up does he? Saskwatch has an intersting idea,
    but i think the weight moving would alter the drive too much to
    balance, it would be a simlar effect to riding with very bendy cranks,
    pushing hard on the pedals would swing the weight rather than spin the
    wheel initially.

    Dave, was it you that tried mounting a Schlumpf hub in a penny farthing
    frame? Anyway, whoever it was found that it wouldn't work with a few
    cable ties holding the torque arm to the fork as it snapped the ties.
    If that's the kind of force the torque arm can resist, then I'd hate to
    think how heavy some weights would be to acheive this effect.

    STM

    --
    semach.the.monkey
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    semach.the.monkey's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/12078
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  12. semach.the.monkey said:

    Dave, was it you that tried mounting a Schlumpf hub in a penny farthing
    frame? Anyway, whoever it was found that it wouldn't work with a few
    cable ties holding the torque arm to the fork as it snapped the ties.
    If that's the kind of force the torque arm can resist, then I'd hate to
    think how heavy some weights would be to acheive this effect.

    STM

    Yes it was me, and yes a schlumpf hub can easily snap half a dozen
    cable ties securing the torque arm.

    Employing some slightly ropey science, max torque generated is your
    weight times crank length, the torque arm has 1.5 times this torque,
    assume the balance weight is at twice the crank length from the centre,
    for me the weight would have to be 75kg, more than twice what a man can
    comfortable lift.

    --
    kington99

    Dave

    - what a thoroughly post-modern subversion of the cycling genre -
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    kington99's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/9417
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  13. semach.the.monkey said:

    Anyway, whoever it was found that it wouldn't work with a few cable ties
    holding the torque arm to the fork as it snapped the ties.

    it was OK for a few changes and rides, but otherwise they weren't up to
    the job. luckily the torque arm freeing up wasn't so critical on the
    PF.

    --
    mikepenton

    Uni - The Unicycle Magazine
    'www.unicyclemagazine.com' (http://www.unicyclemagazine.com)
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    mikepenton's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/7090
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  14. Wouldn't adding a schlumpf hub (or any hub for that matter) make it
    ....simply not an ultimate wheel? If you did that you would have
    yourself a GNAUWI, geared not an ultimate wheel. Ultimate Wheels don't
    have hubs or cranks right? Either way, I would still want to see
    someone riding a GNAUWI.

    --
    siafirede

    James = my name
    'This' (http://www.myspace.com/clawsout) = my myspace

    Pump Air Not Gas
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    siafirede's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/6057
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  15. We're not talking about a central hub & cranks. An UW simply has pedals
    mounted to it in the right locations. The guwi concept would simply be
    a multi-part disc wheel, with the same pedal hole locations. Just that
    there would be an outer ring section (with the rim part) rotating
    faster than the section to which the pedals are attached, which fits
    inside the rim portion.
    Sorry I have no drawing program to visualize what's in my head, but
    it's basically a 2-piece disc wheel that fits together, with the gears
    inside.

    --
    unisk8r
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    unisk8r's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4660
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  16. This should actually be fairly easy to make. I think that using a
    jack-shaft gearing system would be the best way to gear this thing if
    it is not to be shiftable.

    At them moment I am thinking that using zero Q cranks on a square taper
    axle might give the most flexibility and ease for DIYers to build
    their own, but a "disk and doughnut" design could be slimmer, lighter
    generally better if this was to become a manufactured product.

    I will try to draw up some plans and scan them at school some time next
    week and post them up.

    I am liking this, maybe I shouldn't of dropped out of engineering
    after-all.

    --
    saskatchewanian
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    saskatchewanian's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14180
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  17. After making a few sketches and looking at some bearing websites it
    became clear to me that using unicycle cranks and a central 17mm axle
    to hold most of the bearings would be much cheeper, less complex and
    probably stronger than the disk and doughnut/disk in disk approach.

    In my drawing I have it down to 48mm wide plus cranks (which
    unfortunately bring the total up to almost 100mm.) We could use
    slightly smaller 17x38x10mm bearings but I used the unicycling standard
    17x40x12 size in the sketches.

    I will scan some of my drawings on monday at school.

    --
    saskatchewanian
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    saskatchewanian's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14180
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  18. Forgot to scan yesterday. here is a preliminary drawing
    [image:
    http://www.unicyclist.com/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=562625&g2_serialNumber=2&g2_GALLERYSID=b4f385bafa4bad1ad5623f35adf88769]
    basically it is just a hanging jack-shaft with a weight on the end
    driving the left disk that would make the side of the wheel.

    If anyone wants to build it I could make more detailed drawings from
    different angles.

    --
    saskatchewanian
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    saskatchewanian's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14180
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  19. Nice job there! I have a couple q's:

    (1) How much weight do you think it would take so that the hanging
    jackshaft doesn't "gerbil" around the central axle?

    (2) Assuming the usual profile (thinness) of an ultimate wheel is about
    the width of the tire at any given point (to minimize the "Q" factor,
    the distance between the pedals), what could you do to minimize the
    pedal width?

    --
    unisk8r
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    unisk8r's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/4660
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  20. I originally thought that that if you put 10ft*lb of torque into the
    main shaft you would need 10lb of weight on a 1ft arm to prevent the
    garbling on a stationary wheel. I realized this was wrong before I
    posted it then put it aside and did my homework.

    Once I started to work on the problem it became obvious I would need a
    much lighter weight than I previously thought. The amount or torque
    applied to the wheel is inverse to the gearing, so a GUWI with a
    gearing ratio of 1.5:1 would have 67% of the torque go to the wheel and
    the remaining 33% to the torque arm. A GUWI geared 2:1 would have the
    torque split 50-50 etc.

    So if you built a GUWI with 18 and 22 tooth gears to get a gearing
    ration of 1.49:1 and are able to put 20lbs more into the front pedal
    spaced 6” (152mm) from the center you would need a minimum of
    3.3lb of weight on a 12” arm.

    I hate using the imperial system unless I can make up my own numbers
    (like 6 and 12”) but I doubt many people would be able to relate
    to Newton meters like they do to Foot Pounds (or Pound Feet)

    To Minimize Q you could have a smaller gearing system, possibly using
    square cut gears instead of chains and then have the pedals. My
    original drawing was using almost all pieces that are easily obtainable
    in the biking/unicycling world. It would take a lot more custom parts
    and therefore be much more expensive to minimize the Q.

    I will post a new sketch with the reduced Q

    Edit: square cut gears won’t work due to the twisting force they
    would put on the hanging arm, a smaller chain system then.

    --
    saskatchewanian
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------
    saskatchewanian's Profile: http://www.unicyclist.com/profile/14180
    View this thread: http://www.unicyclist.com/thread/67196

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    ** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

Active in the last 60 minutes

Active in this thread

0 users · 0 guests ·0 bots ·0 total

No signed-in users are active right now.

No known search crawlers active right now.