Phillip,
    I see you're discussing manual countersteer again, so I need
    to chime in
    strongly: I CRASHED HARD in
    Magna, trying to follow your advice about "manual
    countersteer". Anyone
    listening/paying attention,
    do NOT try to manually countersteer a dynamic STV, as this
    results in immediate
    high-side crash. I
    had listened to all this talk about manual CS, and spent hours
    programming
    myself to do this, which
    proved to be the exact wrong thing to do. I have watched
    Rocky and John pilot
    the Magna at various
    speeds and lean angles including straight up to max tilt, and
    at speeds so far
    not exceeding 50mph,
    steering directly IN THE DIRECTION of Lean/turn IS the
    correct thing to do.

    Ernest Buckler


    Ernest  returns later....


    .OK, countersteer is a momentary movement of the ft wheel
    (s), however
    induced, AWAY from the intended direction of turn, in order
    to initiate
    a lean or tilt in the intended direction.

    On a motorcycle, pushing on the right-side bar-end (as if to
    turn left
    in simple steer) initiates a turn to the right. At which point
    simple
    steer returns and steering right equals turning right.
    Except.....see
    below.

    Here's the question: Doing some experiments the other day
    on a
    two-wheeled tilter (in this case a FF scooter), it became clear
    that
    continued CounterSteer force on the bar-end caused a
    continued lean in
    the intended direction. Specifically, pressure on the right bar
    end
    caused the machine to lean further to the right and complete
    the corner.
    When I released pressure on the rh bar end, the machine
    stood up and
    went straight again. If CS & SS are separate and distinct
    movements
    and/or forces, why does CS alone suffice to cause
    cornering? Careful
    observation indicated that SS (steering in the direction of
    lean) never
    did take place.

    Ernest B.
    Spokane




    Re: Manual counter steer - ANSWER


    What I can't believe is that people still debate this.

    I can understand that some aspects are subtle and some are
    counter-intuitive - anyone who remembers their childhood
    experience of
    learning to ride a bicycle will agree with that - but I can't
    understand
    why people are so passionate in their ignorance.

    Isaac Newton wrote it all down 300 years ago, he's still right.
    Tony
    Foale's description of the application of Newton's laws is
    right.

    What exactly is the big deal?

    Damian




    Hi everyone,

    anyone who thinks that it's a good idea to sell 2-wheelers (
    outriggers or not ) for commuting on slippery surfaces might
    learn
    something from watching this video -

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ogd9VFolhsg

    - Mitch Casto



    1] the auto industry has no desire to make vehicle pull in
    excess
    of .9g They do not desire to do this for obvious [ very good]
    reasons.

    2] they dont desire any complex control interface between
    driver
    and machine so they desire "simple steer" as the standard.

    3] they desire stability in vehicles that is automatic

    4] they would prefer not to do anything different from what
    they
    did last year

    5] they need to cater to the demands[ if any are forthcoming]
    of
    their customers to maintain market share.

    6] they need to respond to political pressure on
    envoronmental/social concerns which filter through via
    observations
    of the impacts caused by their products on the environment.

    And they need to make a profit thats the important thing. If
    they
    ignore any of the above points the result will be an impact on
    their
    profits in various ways depending on the weight being
    placed on the
    various points at any given time. So it simply depends on the
    way
    that the various weights of the points are evaluated as to
    what they
    will do.




    In tilting@yahoogroups.com, "nsampson58" <nikal58@...>
    wrote:
    >
    A large number of posts on here the past couple of weeks
    sadly
    > demonstrate two factors;
    > · Many of those on here do not really understand the
    > complexity of the engineering challenges around the
    concepts of
    > tilting vehicles

    Phillip here... true.. and you are adding to these many and
    now
    there are more.

    In tilting@yahoogroups.com, "nsampson58" <nikal58@...>
    wrote:
    , "you can eliminate the need to countersteer by lean
    > movement. Not like riding a bike with your feet on the
    ground,
    just
    > like riding a bike with your feet on the foot pegs..stand up
    and
    put
    > all your weight on the left peg.. what happens? The bike tilts

    left
    > and turns left. Yes it does try it…

    Phillip here... now you were challenged on this and I have not
    seen anything from you by way of an explanation as to how
    you arrive
    at your conclusion. In the same way that you were able to
    describe
    the flow of events when countersteer IS used to initiate a
    controlled turning of a motorcycle I now invite you to
    describe
    the flow of the dynamic events that will support your claim
    that
    countersteer is NOT necessarily required. Regards P.


Arthur  says...
    >
    .I see these people, while trying to sound scientific, fall into
    the trap of
extrapolating beyond their experimental data. Calling counter
steering counter
intuitive is misleading. An intuitive action is usually one where we
don't
consciously think about what to do. People riding bicycles rarely
think about
what they are doing, which makes the act intuitive as opposed to
driving a car
which is not intuitive, but a consciously learned response. This is
why, once
mastered (often in a few minutes), counter steering is hard to
unlearn, whereas
it frequently takes much longer to learn to accurately steer a car or
a child's
tricycle.
    Re: Bicycle dynamics




Hi  Ernest...  in all fairness to
Phillip, I dont believe you can
blame him  for your experience.

Please  go out and try again and
report back later... TvA.



























Hi Ernest..NOW  you have the
idea  except for a few errors.
CS[ countersteer] is a
force/torque based control input
that requires modulation  of the
drivers applied force.  As you
observe  it is applied in the
opposite direction to the
intended direction of travel
SS[ simple steer] is never
observed on a motorcycle.  SS[
simple steer]  is what a driver
does on a motorcar or a simple
steer tilter like the TvA  where
the control is turned in the
direction of the required  
turning of the vehicle and the
control style is basically
displacement based... CS  has
balancing inputs   from the
driver whereas simple steer has
no balancing inputs from the
driver  TvA.











Damien....
I agree  with your comments but  
some people  are not
consciously aware of how they
achieve control on a
conventional motorcycle  TvA















Absolutely agreed  Mitch  ..TvA















very well put... who said  this?































































Phillip  please calm  down....














Hi  Arthur, welcome to the
group....  your views seem
contradicted by  other postings,
but I for one welcome all views...
...TvA
TILTING VEHICLE  FORUM
UPDATED WEEKLY
QUESTIONS?
ANSWERS [TvA]
0
0
0