It will take a 'baby elephant' to knock over this bike [video]
news.bbc.co.uk
news.bbc.co.uk
Yes, due to loss of traction or excessive cornering speed. But those are both issues inherent to two-wheeled vehicles, and adding gyroscopes won't solve either.
So you gain the ability to ride in the rain without wearing rain gear, but you give up cargo space and visibility. Not to mention the fact that your head will now be in the perfect position to get rammed by a bumper, and the lower profile increases the likelihood that other drivers won't see you.
It's a nifty trick, but I don't see who this would appeal to. Most motorcyclists already have rain-proof gear, and non-motorcyclists will still think it's a death trap.
I invested in a decent sport touring bike with ABS and heated grips, plus riding gear. Yes it's warm and dry. There is some irritation where it takes a few minutes to put on all the gear (pants, boots, jacket, gloves, ear plugs, neck gator if cold, and helmet) over work clothes, take them off at work, repeat on the way home. Cargo can be an irritation, needing tying down. A bag of groceries or case of cans is okay but not much more. I need a better way to carry a laptop. Yes, I dropped the bike once, sudden braking at a stop sign. Yes, it's pretty common.
So an enclosed gyro vehicle would improve these issues for me: convenience and cargo. The tippy thing is a minor plus.
The downside: it takes away most of the fun of a bike. The fun is hard to qualify but it involves being outside, connected to the machine, shifting, leaning, braking, and in general micromanaging your outcome.
Am I likely to get one as a commuter? Maybe. A Miyata or Mini would fill a similar bill and buy more utility.
But yea, the most dangerous part of riding a bike, once you have even just a few months experience, is the other cars on the road (most of whom don't see you).
Low speed accidents where a rider drops a bike isn't enough of a concern to design something like this, so I'm ignoring those for the above statement.
Did you see the part of the video where they pulled the bike sideways with another vehicle and the gyros kept it upright? If the gyro tech they're using is good enough then the issues you mention are exactly what it will solve. The project still seems to be in its infancy though. They need an investor to come in with some money so they can build more test machines and destroy them with high-speed cornering on slick surfaces and side impacts from larger vehicles.
In that pull test the straps were attached to the bike below its center of gravity. Regaining traction in a turn would be like pulling it with the straps near the top instead, and it could cause some serious problems if the person inside isn't wearing a helmet when that happens at high speed.
It would maintain traction by not laying down and skipping across the pavement, keeping rubber against asphalt (likely to be better in the traction department than plastic/metal against asphalt). If the tech works properly the bike would slide in a fast corner similar to a car in the same situation.
I still think the project is really young, and their reported 2013 release date is super optimistic. This machine needs a lot more testing before it can be unleashed upon the roads.
I think it's rather telling the video doesn't show it negotiating a corner at a lean angle. Presumably that's quite a problem.
Having said all that, whereas I doubt I'd buy one as a motorcyclist, I might be tempted as a commuter if the price was reasonable (which, to be honest, it isn't).
I would expect that it is eventually intended that it leans in a corner, it would just require a controlled reorientation of the gyroscopes, it looks as if they're mounted on gimbals already (to provide reactive counterbalance to any attempt to disorient it). I'm just guessing they need more money/time to research and engineer the right control system to handle the right gyro control for the measured lean based on data from accelerometers.
I can't see why you'd have a profiled (i.e. not flat) rear tyre if it was going to remain upright all of the time.
If they did engineer it to lean then I'd love the chance to terrify myself going down the Corkscrew at Laguna Seca on it...
I assumed the same as you that cornering is still a problem since they didn't show it in the video. I think this project still needs a lot of work. The same project was on HN a couple of months ago and it was really no different except for the slightly more polished exterior. Basically they showed that gyros can keep a 2 wheel vehicle upright, but we haven't seen the thing in motion at all. This is why I think 2013 is way too optimistic for a release.
The price does seem a bit high, but it should come down over time.
I've done this a few times and did the over-correction thing helping me realize just how hard the ground really is (only on the race track - never on the road).
I do think a computer could monitor grip to a much finer accuracy and save the bike from a potential low side. In fact, with the electric motor, the computer could even adjust the spin rate, and thus angular momentum, of the wheels if need be.
However, the statement that there are "two for redundancy" is dubious. The torque from a control moment gyro is not produced in a constant vector - the torque vector rotates with the gyroscope as it is gimballed. Thus, if there was only one gyro, some component of its output torque would be aligned with the yaw axis, which would create some rather unpleasant and dangerous effects. The scissored-pair configuration is required to cancel out the yaw torque.
More worryingly Kevin's linkedin page shows he's not working at Lit Motors for last two months.
Looks like on technical side Daniel is pretty much alone. It's not necessarily bad, maybe they are just starting. I'm just worried they'll disappear.
Does anyone know if they are funded?
I like that the presenters don't take technology too seriously - it's refreshing. And for the intended audience, the format is well balanced between 'dumbed down' and informative. I wouldn't expect anything more geeky, from Click or Tomorrow's World (which I remember well).
The bit about the gyros in the Click video is awful. I was expecting her to use the word boffin at any moment.
Twenty four thousand is definitely out there but even twelve thousand will price it beyond the means of many. Many used bikes if not cars will fall under that price and unless gas is just astronomical it becomes a bit hard to justify its purchase. Its a great idea, don't get me wrong. However compared to existing transportation options its very pricey.
Safety wise, with good use of LED lighting one could make it stand out very well in traffic without blinding other drivers because its a bit diminutive for my liking.
Add to this that this is considerably more comfortable, more weatherproof, and not a 10 year old like mine it seems a fair price.
My commuter bike is a 250cc with 28hp. It has 9 years, carbed. Inside the city (less than 100kph) it gets about 3.2L / 100km and 280km per tank. It's cheap as fuck to fix and the bike itself was like 1K (used, around 3-4K new, it's shinny).
On most countries/states is also competing with small cars because you can't legally lane split. Right now I've got a loaner and it's a 4 seater, a Seat Mii. It consumes just a bit more than my bike and it's very small and cheap (around 6-7K new, cars are expensive around here).
I think it will take a lot for regulators approve this vehicle, because it really is something quite new, and untested in the field. It does appear to be fantastically safer than "normal" motorcycles, and I would love to try one out.
What was never mentioned was how it performs on extremely slippery surfaces. This is where two-wheeled vehicles have a lot of trouble.
Also, one complaint about the BBC article itself - it uses "technology from the Space Station and Hubble Telescope: gyroscopes" - Really, BBC? :-)
Doesn't sound like it'll be an issue anymore.
Highsiding this could still happen I guess.
I don't see anything about ABS in the FAQ, but that would avoid the problems of locked front or rear wheels.
Also, I imagine this has only one brake control, unlike a motorcycle, so you can't lock up one wheel by stomping on your rear brake but not grabbing the front brake.
I also wonder how effective the gyroscopes would be against a high-side crash. Would the having to adjust for hills limit their ability to prevent one?
Having a seatbelt seems like it might help with high-sides, too.
But before I purchased it, I'd definitely want to have a test ride to see how it went, and perhaps some decent feedback from Top Gear - how does it really handle in a variety of situations?
So I would only be worried about it falling over while stopped, which is not as bad I guess.
Here in Paris I see a lot of those motor tricycles that don't require motorbike license, so I think there's definitely a market for a not-so dangerous and simpler motorbike in congested urban areas.
By the way I hate it when the hostess introduces gyros like "space age technology". Yeah, my bike has bits of steel soldered together, you know, like the International Space Station!
Except gyros don't... stop. Sure, they require regular torque input to maintain constant angular velocity. However, they're typically constructed with all their considerable mass at the rim, so they have very high angular momentum. If power to the gyros fails for some reason, they will continue to spin, and continue to regulate balance, for quite some time. Certainly long enough to pull to the side of the road and deploy the kickstands.
It would be good engineering to tie some sort of gyro power failsafe into motive power and some sort of driver alert system, if it weren't even better engineering to just tie both of the "redundant" (I suspect that two horizontal gyros act to cancel any unwanted yaw torque that one would create by itself) gyros directly to accessory power. If the key is on, the gyros are either starting to spin or are spinning at normal speed. Like with any other vehicle, if you lose power at high speed, coast to a stop at the side of the road. At that point perhaps there is a non-powered mechanism to extend the kickstands?
I don't imagine the dynamics would be the same, after all, you're the gyro on a normal bike. If the vehicle was unloaded and you were going straight, you'd probably be able to keep enough manual balance control to come to a relatively controlled halt deploying the parking struts.
However, I imagine the gyros are going to be compensating for internal imbalance (shopping, baggage) in everyday scenarios, or be travelling around a corner, or in traffic, etc, so you might have less time than you think to regain control before toppling.
Generally the gyroscopic force caused by the spinning wheels is not enough to counteract other forces.
What actually keeps the bike upright is the steering. When you steer the bike slightly left (by pulling the left handlebar), the bike will lean to the right (because of the apparent force caused by inertia). Thus, if you are "falling" on the left side, steering left will bring you back upright.
(This technique can be also used explicitly, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering)
You normally don't think of it in this terms, partially because once you learn riding a bike it all becomes automatic for you, and partially because the geometry of the bike which causes it to steer in the direction of a lean.
This is accomplished by having a "positive trail". See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_and_motorcycle_geometry and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_and_motorcycle_dynamics.
Although there is also a demonstration of bike self-stability which doesn't depend on the positive trail: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-mass-skate_bicycle
In any case, if you find a way to make it steer in the lean, then it will be self stable.
This is also why you can be stable on a bike at very low speed. The amount of steering becomes very apparent. You might be surprised how long you can stay balanced at extremely low speed if you just allow yourself to change direction.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_and_motorcycle_geometry...
A banked-over bicycle naturally tends to turn into the corner because of trail, and that turning-in torques the bike back towards upright - turning the handlebars towards the centre of the curve moves the bottom of the bike towards the centre of the curve, and that pulls the bike upright.
The larger the trail, the more stable the bike is. Sportsbikes tend to have shorter trail so that they turn in faster, cruisers tend to have longer trails so they are more stable on long straight roads.
Loss of gyros would be far more noticeable at low speeds (less than 20mph) than high speeds IMO.
ithkuil's comment is the more accurate description of what is going on.
They are sometimes a neutral party? I always thought Top Gear was a car-themed sitcom...
I guess this will be only an issue to people who own a motorcycle already. I on the other hand as someone who never rode a motorcycle would have no problem with the C1. (But maybe that's because I know how reliable gyros are?)
Did nobody notice that they never show anyone driving the thing more than 5 meters at a time and only straight forward?
And when the reporter is "trying" to knock the thing over she hardly touches it.
I would like to see a video with some rougher scenarios before i believe in this thing.
(I am UK native, but not a bike person)
"Imagine a touchscreen embedded in the steering-wheel"
Yes, imagine all the crashes it's going to cause.
People annoy me far too often.
Notably, C-1 is a code name, not the final product name.
I'm curious how the gyros interact with turning. Presumably they have a limited ability to change orientation (necessary for say hills at the very least). It sounds like the steering wheel is hooked to the front wheel mechanically (from the FAQ: ”… with mechanical backups to allow the driver to steer and stop the car even in a catastrophic failure of all systems”). Does that mean you have to countersteer like in a motorcycle? (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Countersteering)
I could imagine the steering wheel manipulating the gyroscopes to initiate leans rather than turning the front wheel. I'm unsure how effective that would be, especially at low speeds.
EDIT: I looked at some of the videos on their website. It seems like the steering wheel does turn the front wheel, and the gyros are free to tilt to accommodate hills. The video shows them tilting toward each other on a lean — I think that means they rotate in opposite directions? Not my area of expertise.
Edit: a baby elephant weighs 3 tons, whereas an average car weights 2 tons. Hmm.
Is it easier to fit small vehicles like this with things like roll cages, or more encompassing air bags? Or will a car always have a safety edge because of crumple zones etc?
I'm much more interested in what happens if an SUV at speed hits the bike (or, I guess, an adult elephant at speed). I see more SUVs on a day-to-day basis than baby elephants.
Holly cow, gyroscopes! The technology of space travel!
tsss...
(edit) OK, let's make "abruptly" optional. So what's the contingency plan for when gyros spin down and stop?
Every technology might fail. And every device will fail. And it does so in cars, in planes, in trains or whatever.
That's why (so do I believe), they built two gyros in there. One for fail-save-mode.
Another issue with fast spinning disks is that they can rupture and send splinters flying, but it's rather unlikely that both gyros fail in the same catastrophic way at the same time.
Nothing happens
> anti traction in cars
Nothing happens.
Without Gyros this thing falls sideways