Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriages — John Shaqi
Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriagesScott, Robert P. (Robert Pittis)
History
Cycling art, energy, and locomotion : $b A series of remarks on the development of bicycles, tricycles, and man-motor carriages
Scott, Robert P. (Robert Pittis)
Bicycles; Cycling; Tricycles
It seems superfluous at this stage of development of the art to
enlarge upon the fact that a bicycle has to be balanced by a particular
action not required in any other form of carriage; but when inventors
will keep on getting up means to lock the steering device, and riders
will persist in reminding us that the steering head “moves too easily,”
it is severely pertinent to remark that while a certain law of whirling
bodies might show us that a wheel will not fall over quite so quickly
when rolling as when standing still, yet it is not this law so much as
the action of steering that differentiates the bicycle, or single-track
carriage, from other machines. The action of the handle-bar while in
motion does substantially, in balancing the bicycle, what you would do
if you were balancing a cane vertically on the end of your nose: if the
cane starts to fall, you run in that direction with your nose till you
get under the centre of gravity again. But the bicycle can only fall
sideways, so, when it tends to fall in that way, or when the centre of
gravity gets to one side of the vertical line from the point of support
on the ground, you cannot run directly sideways with the support as you
would in the cane illustration, but you can run indirectly sideways,
nevertheless, with the point of support, the only difference being that
you must run considerably forward at the same time in order to shift
the lower extremity, or point of contact and support, in that direction.
After considerable discussion of this apparently simple subject with
eminent gentlemen well qualified to speak on such topics, the following
appeals to my mind as a more definite and complete explanation than
that given in the nose and cane case, bringing in an element of the
problem omitted above, to wit: in running the point of support of
contact across and under, as it approaches the vertical plane of
gravity and general forward momentum, the steering wheel lies slightly
across this plane, and its own plane is still out of vertical, leaning
a little, as it did before, with the centre of gravity back of the
point of support; the forward momentum then throws the entire system
upright. In rapid running this momentum does a large proportion of the
work, and it has been vigorously maintained that all balancing is due
to this element; for small motions, however, the cane explanation is
quite sufficient.
The foregoing explanation of uprighting the bicycle is, to my mind,
almost _entirely_ independent of any law of whirling bodies as
generally understood.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account