Again, your going to have to show me this whole 'crank and con rod' thing. And do this drawing without your meandering wording and 'force vectors' on it. That may mean something to you but it just complicates things in the long run.(where have we heard that before?) What is going to stop your 'crank/con rod' from going over center? Or for that matter rotating backward when it doesn't make it to center? /*
O: It would need to be locked top and bottom dead center to hold it in place. That means it would need a "kick-off" to get it turning. Maybe a pull-rope?
The advantage of a crank is that it always rotates in the one direction, or rotation sense. That suits the one-way bearing/clutch. The motor drive can lag behind the crank rotation, but instantly engages when it needs to.

The disadvantage to me is that it doesn't allow easy locking at a floating lower position.
*/
And you evidently didn't even look at my drawings I made for you. They had the "adjustable/floating lower lock", using the 'spot brake' you were talking about many, many posts ago.

*/
O: I wanted to see how compatible it was with the chain-driven linear actuator, as that was a good place to mount
a disk brake. I saw the drawing, I just didn't examine it really closely.

 

I saw the drawing, I just didn't examine it really closely.

And yet you have told me SO MANY TIMES it won't/can't work. Why don't you just say up front in these posts, "this is my idea, don't you agree how great it is"?

 

And yet you have told me SO MANY TIMES it won't/can't work. Why don't you just say up front in these posts, "this is my idea, don't you agree how great it is"?

O: The idea had to work with the linear actuator, as it seemed to be a good method of fitting the mechanism in.
You didn't suggest the "double over-center" crank device, which could have been a usable alternative.
Your drawing didn't seem to refer to either of these.

 

Again no drawings of what you are talking about. I never suggested a "double over center crank device" because it isn't necessary or even a real thing.

 

Again no drawings of what you are talking about. I never suggested a "double over center crank device" because it isn't necessary or even a real thing.

O: I shouldn't need to draw it. It locks at top by being centered-you could use a latch.
It also locks at the bottom. That is not strictly over-center, but on-center.
There can be another latch there, which has no side loading on it.
The advantage as I see it is that the main crank throw can be quite small-only 300 mm diameter (plus a bit),
and easy to fit in. The disadvantage is that it doesn't easily allow a variable bottom extension.
Drive goes to the center of the crank, using chain or belt reduction. The one-way bearing could be on the motor
gearbox output shaft.
The crank is not intended to reverse rotation.
The "training wheels" will travel up and down like the piston in a car engine.

 

I shouldn't need to draw it. It locks at top by being centered-you could use a latch.
It also locks at the bottom. That is not strictly over-center, but on-center.

More of your not understanding of even the simplest of mechanical elements.

The disadvantage is that it doesn't easily allow a variable bottom extension.

Which my 'swing down' outrigger will do.

The one-way bearing could be on the motor

Why in the name of all that is holy would you even consider doing that? If the motor isn't ever going to be reversed it's totally unnecessary, if it is to be reversed it won't allow drive in the reverse direction.

The crank is not intended to reverse rotation.

If it is to 'lock over center' it has to have a stop for it to lock against, without this it can't lock. Without a stop, the weight of the bike will just cause the crank to continue to rotate, and not 'lock'. Think off how a set of Vicegrip pliers work, they go over center and that is what causes them to 'lock'. A crank and con rod is never stable "on center", the smallest movement past center starts the crank to move which ever way the center point is violated on, and it doesn't take a very big movement.

The "training wheels" will travel up and down like the piston in a car engine.

Have you thought that out? What do you think will happen if the outrigger deploys by accident, straight down at any speed? You had better not make the assembly to well attached to the bike, have a 'break away' devise at the attachment point. Without that you are looking at a wreck. Where if a 'swing down' arm is used it will act like a 'caster' since the out rigger can swing instead of digging in like a plow. Even a center stand 'swings down', not drop down like your proposing for a reason, the reason is safety, in case the retention devise fails when riding.

 

*Q/ crank runs in one direction Q/*
*q2/Why in the name of all that is holy would you even consider doing that? If the motor isn't ever going to be reversed it's totally unnecessary, if it is to be reversed it won't allow drive in the reverse direction.q2/*
O: Think of a starter motor and engine. The engine can rotate in the same direction of the starter motor, but faster. doing the crank this way allows the fast gravity drop we have been aiming for.



If it is to 'lock over center' it has to have a stop for it to lock against, without this it can't lock. Without a stop, the weight of the bike will just cause the crank to continue to rotate, and not 'lock'. Think off how a set of Vicegrip pliers work, they go over center and that is what causes them to 'lock'. A crank and con rod is never stable "on center", the smallest movement past center starts the crank to move which ever way the center point is violated on, and it doesn't take a very big movement.
O:The latch detent can go on the crank or on a locking wheel next to the crank.


q/*
Have you thought that out? What do you think will happen if the outrigger deploys by accident, straight down at any speed? You had better not make the assembly to well attached to the bike, have a 'break away' devise at the attachment point. Without that you are looking at a wreck. Where if a 'swing down' arm is used it will act like a 'caster' since the out rigger can swing instead of digging in like a plow. Even a center stand 'swings down', not drop down like your proposing for a reason, the reason is safety, in case the retention devise fails when riding.[/QUOTE]
O: yes, that is a problem. Possibly I would want to stick with the original linear actuator with the chain. it will ride up and down a bit until locked.