z-logo
open-access-imgOpen Access
On the flexibility and symmetry of overconstrained mechanisms
Author(s) -
Hellmuth Stachel
Publication year - 2013
Publication title -
philosophical transactions of the royal society a mathematical physical and engineering sciences
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.074
H-Index - 169
eISSN - 1471-2962
pISSN - 1364-503X
DOI - 10.1098/rsta.2012.0040
Subject(s) - symmetry (geometry) , flexibility (engineering) , bar (unit) , focus (optics) , pure mathematics , computer science , mathematics , type (biology) , kinematics , topology (electrical circuits) , geometry , algebra over a field , physics , classical mechanics , combinatorics , geology , paleontology , statistics , meteorology , optics
In kinematics, a framework is called overconstrained if its continuous flexibility is caused by particular dimensions; in the generic case, a framework of this type is rigid. Famous examples of overconstrained structures are the Bricard octahedra, the Bennett isogram, the Grünbaum framework, Bottema's 16-bar mechanism, Chasles' body-bar framework, Burmester's focal mechanism or flexible quad meshes. The aim of this paper is to present some examples in detail and to focus on their symmetry properties. It turns out that only for a few is a global symmetry a necessary condition for flexibility. Sometimes, there is a hidden symmetry, and in some cases, for example, at the flexible type-3 octahedra or at discrete Voss surfaces, there is only a local symmetry. However, there remain overconstrained frameworks where the underlying algebraic conditions for flexibility have no relation to symmetry at all.

The content you want is available to Zendy users.

Already have an account? Click here to sign in.
Having issues? You can contact us here
Accelerating Research

Address

John Eccles House
Robert Robinson Avenue,
Oxford Science Park, Oxford
OX4 4GP, United Kingdom