COSMOS bicycle

/\/\3qq3/\/\

Likes Dirt
COSMOS Bicycle
Ripped straight from http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s1952528.htm

COSMOS bicycle has a planetary crankshaft system that creates a unique alternating pedal rotation.
About the Inventor

Peter Bortolin is a ‘seventy something’ ex-builder who’s fascination with bicycle mechanisms has lead him to experiment with his own systems of cranks and gears for more than 40 years.

He came out from a country town in North Italy in 1953, and stayed in Lithgow with cousins. He has his own grown up family now, and is retired from the business of concreting and formwork that established the family in Sydney. His son runs a fitness centre.

Peter spends his time in one corner of an engineering workshop in Silverwater where he and Norm the owner have a gentleman’s agreement. Peter is currently working on developing protoypes for a new kind of engine that will use the planetary gearing system to run at an extra high engine compression of 20 to 1. He already has one prototype running (on the workshop bench) and hopes to put together another.

Peter has put in almost as many patent applications for his devices as old Tom Edison! The most recent 40 or so are listed in the IP Australia current up-to-date system.

How it works
The COSMOS uses a ‘planetary’ drivetrain (or gear system, or sprocket system). For the purposes of clarity we’ll call them sprockets and hope to reduce the confusion (not to zero confusion – there will be some confusion about this invention – guaranteed).

The pedals in the COSMOS drive a small planetary ‘18’-size sprocket that revolve around an 18 ‘sun’ sprocket . The largest sprocket is a 150, and is attached to and driven directly by the ‘sun’ sprocket.

This ‘150’ is a huge sprocket – you’d never see one on a track simply because you’d never get the thing moving. But with the COSMOS system, it is no harder to pedal than a regular high gear on a racer.

The way the COSMOS drives this huge sprocket is that it takes two revolutions of the pedals to drive one revolution of the large gear. However, and this is the unique point of difference of the COSMOS, those revolutions alternate between a large and small revolution.

This seems odd when first you ride the bike, but soon becomes accepted by your legs.

Why does this happen? If you look at the pedal in the photograph above, you see it fully extended. But because there are TWO axes (centres) of rotation, the pedal traces both the largest and the smallest rotation.

It is not necessary to run such a huge gear – the COSMOS system could apply equally well to a smaller drive sprocket. In fact, Peter hopes to develop the planetary system as a retro-fit for any type of bicycle; maybe one day we’ll all be enjoying the benefits of the COSMOS alternating pedal rotation!

http://www.abc.net.au/tv/newinventors/txt/s1952528.htm
Click on the link above to watch the video

Just wondering what you guys think about it.
 
Last edited:

Matt H

Eats Squid
I watched a bit, but changed channel because I felt sorry for him when that engineering guy started ripping into him. One thing I didn't understand was is there an actual benefit in efficiency from this drive system? Or is it just "different"
 

Pete J

loves his dog
I kind of dig it, even though pedalling must feel very strange compared to a regular bike. Backyard inventors are way cool in my book!
One thing i really want to know is exactly how fast something like that is capable of going, was that covered at all in the show?
 

NCR600

Likes Dirt
I dug it. I don't know what it's for or WHY it is, but I can safely say that the dude who came up with that has more engineer in his little finger than that eyebrow ringed tool.

Who cares if he couldn't justify it? Who cares if it offered no improvemnet on existing designs? Engineering isn't just about calculations, FEA, cost benefit studies, stupid hair and eyebrow rings. It's also about mental cases coming up with completely unworkable solutions to problems everyone else solved ages ago, because those mentalists are generally pretty driven and prolific, they often come up with blindingly simple solutions to problems everyone else has thrown into the too hard basket.

Just look at the Wright Brothers. There's a lot to be said for just trying something and seeing what happens. It's called experimentation and even if it fails, it's still a valuable experience.
 

tu plang

knob
I disagree completely. I would be inclined to think that he is quite good with his hands and is capable of putting something into practice to a decent standard. His idea was clearly the problem. Sure, he was trying something a bit different but being an engineer is also about knowing when something hasnt worked out and figuring out why.

Even in terms of running a planetry gear set up there would be better ways to go about it (ie, the planet gear is the last gear you would fix a drive input to). At that point he really should have stepped back and thought, is this a motion you can do fast?

Its all well and good to tinker around with stuff (my child hood was basically spent entirely with Lego Technic) but i think he really lined himself up to be shot down. The guy on the show was really only pointing out the obvious, i'm not sure why that makes him a tool.

To add to that, i was opened minded about it until he said he thought it would be a big thing for competitive cycling. That just completely killed it for me. You've gotta do your homework if you want to go on a show like that and put your idea out there. There are so many reasons why that bike would be ridiculous to try and ride fast.
 
Last edited:

Mo

Likes Bikes and Dirt
i think the idea is great but the it would rate really low on a usable scale.

it would work well for old people like him

apart from the huge chain ring thing, the pedalling circle is not ergonomic.
it would work well on flat terrain but im sure there would be a problem if you had to go up and you were in a wrong position. then im sure it wouldn't move because the rider wouldn't have enough torque to get the thing moving.

it's like the Yeti 303, there is the proof of concept that it can work, but work efficiently over a long time, that's unknown.
 
Last edited:

NCR600

Likes Dirt
i'm not sure why that makes him a tool.
I thought he was a tool long before this episode aired!

It's the stupid hair, the eyebrow ring and the smug, smarmy attitude that does it for me.

Oh, and the fact he added the name of a famous engineer he was related to, but wasn't given to him at birth to gain some sort of cachet in engineering circles.

And, lego ain't no good for engineers. Eny fule kno Meccano is where it's at. ;)
 

tu plang

knob
apart from the huge chain ring thing, the pedalling circle is not ergonomic.
it would work well on flat terrain but im sure there would be a problem if you had to go up and you were in a wrong position. then im sure it would move because the rider wouldn't have enough torque to get the thing moving.
apart from providing the bizzare crank path, the whole set up is completely redundant. In the end, it'd have the same mechanical advantage as a normal set up. You increase mechanical advantage and you have to pedal faster and vice versa, there is no magical way to make a bike that goes fast without proportional effort from the rider (short of adding an engine/motor.) The crank path would almost definitely reduce efficiency from an ergonomic point of view.
 

tu plang

knob
I thought he was a tool long before this episode aired!

It's the stupid hair, the eyebrow ring and the smug, smarmy attitude that does it for me.

Oh, and the fact he added the name of a famous engineer he was related to, but wasn't given to him at birth to gain some sort of cachet in engineering circles.

And, lego ain't no good for engineers. Eny fule kno Meccano is where it's at. ;)
Haha, yeah i dont like the guy either but i thought id raise the question to see if it was based purely on this last episode or just in general.
 

Mo

Likes Bikes and Dirt
apart from providing the bizzare crank path, the whole set up is completely redundant. In the end, it'd have the same mechanical advantage as a normal set up. You increase mechanical advantage and you have to pedal faster and vice versa, there is no magical way to make a bike that goes fast without proportional effort from the rider (short of adding an engine/motor.) The crank path would almost definitely reduce efficiency from an ergonomic point of view.

sorry i meant Wouldn't move
and yeah i'd have to agree, there cannot be a gain of speed without a lack of something else.
to me it would equal riding a bike with both cranks on the same side, IE both pointing the same way.
 

thecat

NSWMTB, Central Tableland MBC
One thing i really want to know is exactly how fast something like that is capable of going, was that covered at all in the show?
No faster than a standard bike I'd think. Think about it. The plantary gears were used to turn the large cog. The cranks needed to turn twice to turn the big chain wheel once. The big chain wheel then transfered motion to the rear cog by the chain.

In effect you could get the same forward motion by using a standard chain ring and spinning the crank once. I could be wrong but all that the cosmos added was complexity and weight.

As the judges said, claiming something is more efficient is no good without numbers to back it up.
 

tu plang

knob
No faster than a standard bike I'd think. Think about it. The plantary gears were used to turn the large cog. The cranks needed to turn twice to turn the big chain wheel once. The big chain wheel then transfered motion to the rear cog by the chain.

In effect you could get the same forward motion by using a standard chain ring and spinning the crank once. I could be wrong but all that the cosmos added was complexity and weight.

As the judges said, claiming something is more efficient is no good without numbers to back it up.
Yup thats exactly the case. In the end you still have the same mechanical advantage. Everything he said was just so underdone and incorrect.

If they wanted to be arseholes they could have pointed out the efficiency loss due to far more moving/mating parts, additition weight (which i can imagine would have just been laughable) and non existent ergonomics.
 

Turner_rider

Likes Bikes and Dirt
I thought he was a tool long before this episode aired!

It's the stupid hair, the eyebrow ring and the smug, smarmy attitude that does it for me.

Oh, and the fact he added the name of a famous engineer he was related to, but wasn't given to him at birth to gain some sort of cachet in engineering circles.
You won't get any argument from me or any other engineers I know - that guy makes everyone cringe.

On the Cosmos itself I thought it was an interesting design, but its probably going to end up in a similar place to the Alenax Transbar - for those who know what one of those is... and the Alenax logo is almost fitting ;)

 
Ive actuately ridden the model before the one aired last night. Same concept except you pedalled backwards. The basic idea was you had more hamstring strength than calf? It was heavy, awkard and may be only siuted to track work...
 

floody

Wheel size expert
He should take it to Taiwan, you always see these nutjob systems at interbike with some Asian brand every year...
 
Top