Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Strandbeest

strandbeest.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 114 posts

Re: Strandbeest

#61

Post by [deleted] »

fragmede wrote: post #26
polishdude20 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a legged vehicle still have that problem if it can achieve the same speeds and weights that regular cars go at? Scale up a human for example to the weight and speed of a car. Crazy powerful and big legs, big feet, big shoes. The rubber must hit the road either way and push down with a force to propel the weight of this car-heavy legged human at speeds of 100km/h. It would still wear rubber away just like tir…

> The rubber must hit the road if the wheels were metal and the roadway was also metal, but arranged into parallel small roadways, then we could avoid using rubber and not have the problem of rubber particulates.

[deleted]

Re: Strandbeest

#62

Post by crazygringo »

xg15 wrote: post #59
throwaway920102 wrote: post #11

For anyone who wants to know more: This is an application of Jansen's linkage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jansen%27s_linkage There are other similar linkages but Jansen's is quite good. For anyone who doesn't have an idea why something like this matters or is inspiring beyond art, legged vehicles have many downsides but one big upside is that you can theoretically avoid the rubber/microplastic particulate emission…

Isn't another advantage of legged vehicles being more applicable to uneven/unstable terrain? (Like in this case the constantly shifting water/mud/sand boundaries of a beach) If you wanted to build a similar contraption that is powered by wind but moves on wheels, I imagine there is a much larger chance of it getting stuck.

Sure, but on the other hand legs produce a LOT more force/weight per square inch, which can lead to them sinking more easily.

Which is why what the military uses for unstable terrain is treads like you see on tanks. Same for construction equipment that operates on soft soil.

Re: Strandbeest

#63

Post by mensetmanusman »

fragmede wrote: post #26
polishdude20 wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wouldn't a legged vehicle still have that problem if it can achieve the same speeds and weights that regular cars go at? Scale up a human for example to the weight and speed of a car. Crazy powerful and big legs, big feet, big shoes. The rubber must hit the road either way and push down with a force to propel the weight of this car-heavy legged human at speeds of 100km/h. It would still wear rubber away just like tir…

> The rubber must hit the road if the wheels were metal and the roadway was also metal, but arranged into parallel small roadways, then we could avoid using rubber and not have the problem of rubber particulates.

Metal particles are more reactive and toxic than rubber particles.

Re: Strandbeest

#64

Post by xg15 »

crazygringo wrote: post #62
xg15 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't another advantage of legged vehicles being more applicable to uneven/unstable terrain? (Like in this case the constantly shifting water/mud/sand boundaries of a beach) If you wanted to build a similar contraption that is powered by wind but moves on wheels, I imagine there is a much larger chance of it getting stuck.

Sure, but on the other hand legs produce a LOT more force/weight per square inch, which can lead to them sinking more easily. Which is why what the military uses for unstable terrain is treads like you see on tanks. Same for construction equipment that operates on soft soil.

Makes sense. I suppose the additional constraint here is "with minimal damage to the environment".

Like, some caterpillar-type vehicle could move fine on that beach, but you'd definitely see the trace of its movement afterwards...

So legs are not a useful movement mechanism for tanks, but they might be for delivery bots, etc.

I also wonder about the energy expense. The strandbeests seem to be powered by nothing else than a number of sails and the movement mechanism has little enough resistance that the wind force is enough to pull the vehicle along.

It feels as if a caterpillar would have more resistance, though I don't have the numbers. I guess you could in theory make a wind-powered caterpillar vehicle by using a turbine - but the vehicle would probably be slower, I.e. less efficient?

Re: Strandbeest

#65

Post by Animats »

Oh, that guy is still at it and has made progress. There's pneumatic logic now and the new model can reverse direction.

Re: Strandbeest

#66

Post by burkaman »

jpk wrote: post #54
throwaway920102 wrote: post #11

For anyone who wants to know more: This is an application of Jansen's linkage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jansen%27s_linkage There are other similar linkages but Jansen's is quite good. For anyone who doesn't have an idea why something like this matters or is inspiring beyond art, legged vehicles have many downsides but one big upside is that you can theoretically avoid the rubber/microplastic particulate emission…

> legged vehicles have many downsides but one big upside is that you can theoretically avoid the rubber/microplastic particulate emission associated with tires and wheeled vehicles if you can make legged vehicles as good as wheeled ones. How do you square this idea with the fact that my running shoes wear out? I'm a legged vehicle, and it's clear that the soles of my shoes wear down over time and the lost mass of the…

You could wear wooden clogs or something. It would be uncomfortable but if you were a robot you wouldn't care. They would still wear out, but sawdust is less permanent than microplastics.

Re: Strandbeest

#67

Post by ElCapitanMarkla »

bensmoif wrote: post #8
anfractuosity wrote: post #3

Really love the idea of the strandbeest :) He also sells little miniature ones too - https://www.strandbeest.com/shop/animaris-ordis-parvus

Bought one of these miniature kits years ago and kept it on my desk at work and goddamn is it cool and fun and works great! Really encourage any model machine nerds to get one.

Oh those ones look much better than the one I brought off AliExpress years ago. Not to mention it was missing a bag of parts and they wanted me to send them a photo of the missing parts…

Re: Strandbeest

#68

Post by Cthulhu_ »

throwaway920102 wrote: post #11

For anyone who wants to know more: This is an application of Jansen's linkage: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jansen%27s_linkage There are other similar linkages but Jansen's is quite good. For anyone who doesn't have an idea why something like this matters or is inspiring beyond art, legged vehicles have many downsides but one big upside is that you can theoretically avoid the rubber/microplastic particulate emission…

You seem to posit that legged vehicles doing 100+ km/h for hundreds of thousands of kilometers do not have as much wear and tear as rubber tires do. What is that based on? And does it have the same or better friction / energy efficiency?

(I know the answers, I'm just trying to provoke you into thinking about your comment)

Re: Strandbeest

#69

Post by Cthulhu_ »

phendrenad2 wrote: post #30

I love simulation theory because it keeps me from going insane when I think of something randomly and it's on the front page of HN the next day (for the first time in 7 months). Anyway these would be cool if they could actually move humans. Imagine crossing a vast desert with some friends on one of these bad boys.

I'm sure they could, but they'd need a different design to carry the extra load; at the moment it only carries its own lightweight construction.

That said, for personal transport in windy / flat conditions, a kart with a parachute kite works as well, you see those on the beach on occasion too.

Post reply on HN