Pole Propelled Tandem Vehicle Steering Mechanism

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing two-wheel tandem vehicles require handlebars for steering and balance, making hands-free operation theoretically possible but not practically feasible, as the rider's upper body must control the vehicle while the lower body stabilizes it, leading to instability and difficulty in maintaining balance, especially at slow speeds or on uneven terrain.

Innovation Solution

A two-wheel tandem vehicle design where the rider uses hand-grasped poles for propulsion and employs their lower body to stabilize and steer the vehicle by shifting weight and using footholds and a saddle, allowing the upper body to remain free for poling, with the poles assisting in balance and steering by generating forces perpendicular to the direction of travel.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of operation

If handlebars are used for steering and balance control, then the rider can maintain control of the vehicle, but the rider cannot operate the vehicle hands-free

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvehands-free operationVSAvoidsteering control mechanism
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of operationVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The invention removes the handlebar from the vehicle design, extracting the steering control function from the upper body and relocating it to the lower body through foot-operated mechanisms. This allows hands-free operation while maintaining steering capability through alternative means.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #2Taking out (Extraction)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention introduces intermediary mechanisms between the rider's feet and the steering system, including footrests, levers, and linkages that translate foot movements into steering actions. These intermediaries enable the lower body to control the vehicle without direct hand contact.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #24Intermediary (Mediator)

2Stability of the object's composition

If the rider uses upper body to control steering, then steering precision is maintained, but the lower body cannot effectively stabilize the vehicle

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvevehicle stabilityVSAvoidsteering control
Core Design Contradiction:
Stability of the object's compositionVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The invention inverts the traditional control scheme by having the lower body perform the steering function instead of the upper body. Feet operate levers and linkages connected to the front wheel steering mechanism, while the upper body focuses on maintaining balance and propulsion.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #13The other way round (Inversion)

Solution Approach 2:

The invention segments the control functions between upper and lower body: the lower body handles steering through foot-operated mechanisms, while the upper body manages balance and propulsion. This segmentation allows each body part to optimize its specific function without interference.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

3Productivity

If hands-free operation is implemented, then the rider can use poles for propulsion, but steering and balance control becomes difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvepropulsion efficiencyVSAvoidsteering and balance control
Core Design Contradiction:
ProductivityVSEase of operation

Solution Approach 1:

The invention makes the lower body multi-functional by having it perform both propulsion assistance (through leg movement) and steering control (through foot-operated levers). The feet and legs become universal control elements that can execute multiple functions without requiring hand involvement.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #6Universality (Multi-functionality)

Solution Approach 2:

The rider's body serves itself by using the lower body for both propulsion and steering functions. The natural leg movements used for poling also engage the foot-operated steering mechanisms, allowing the same body parts to simultaneously perform multiple functions without external control devices.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #25Self-service

4Speed

If the vehicle is designed for slow speed operation, then maneuverability is improved, but stability decreases

Engineering Contradiction:
Improveoperating speedVSAvoidvehicle stability
Core Design Contradiction:
SpeedVSStability of the object's composition

Solution Approach 1:

The invention employs dynamic steering mechanisms that respond to subtle foot movements, allowing precise control at low speeds. The foot-operated levers and linkages provide mechanical advantage that amplifies small input forces, enabling effective steering even when the vehicle is moving slowly or stationary.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #15Dynamics

Solution Approach 2:

The direct connection between the rider's feet and the steering mechanism provides immediate tactile feedback about vehicle direction and stability. This feedback loop allows the rider to make real-time adjustments to maintain balance and steering control, particularly important when operating at slow speeds where stability challenges are greater.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #23Feedback

Data Source

PatentEP2969728B1Pole propelled velocipede
Publication Date: 2024.12.25 DODDS ROBERT B
  • EP2969728B1 patent drawingFigure 1
  • EP2969728B1 patent drawingFigure 2
  • EP2969728B1 patent drawingFigure 3

AI summary

A two wheeled tandem vehicle is propelled by hand-grasped poles. A forward wheel on a forward member and a rear wheel on a rearward member align along a longitudinal axis. The forward member rotates about a vertical steering axis. A saddle and footholds support the rider and allow the rider to balance and steer the device. The rider's hands never contact the vehicle but are used to propel the vehicle with the poles.