Chebyshev Wheel[br][br]From here, We can make N = 6 Hexagon wheel , easily.[br][br]cf. another method. [url=https://www.geogebra.org/m/cRajdZcP]Chebyshev Linkage Wheel2 [Hexagon (= 6 edges)][br][/url][br]■ velocity check: 0.7 to 6.3=5.6, 5.6/8=0.7 --- 70% distance[br]N=3 : 2/3 round 　to , 5.6/8=70% ≒66% (=2/3)[br]i.e. velocity of N=3 is almost the same N=2. ---- distance 4/ round, no merit.[br]cf. [url=https://www.geogebra.org/m/eekXcx7A]Chebyshev Linkage Wheel (N=4) [different algorism][/url] ---- distance 8/ round [= twice distance] [br]

This fig. looks like a good.[br]But, I think this fig. indicates bad.[br]#1 black, #2 pink, #3 purple,[br]2 restrictions have done, between black-pink, black-purple[br][br]i.e. purple-pink restriction is lack/ free/ no-restriction.[br]So, next cycle, purple foot is ground base, ----- here, we supposed that clockwise rotation is forward.[br]it will fail at its finish point, perhaps.[br]Because, when purple 120° rotation end, pink foot should be just touched the ground.[br]This is no guaranteed. ---- is not controlled. [br]So, This is bad implementation sample.[br][br]Please improve this. Denken Sie nach.[br]--------[br]Above has yet logic miss.[br]2 restrictions is enough number of restrict.[br]3 restriction is odd.[br]grounded foot/ leg is independent, and other 2 legs is dependent by one restriction,[br]so, number of 2 restriction is enough number. [br][br]Please find the best tuning result.[br][br][br]From the line symmetry applying, [br]about r[sub]2[/sub] = 1.27, t[sub]2[/sub] = 1.27, j[sub]3[/sub] = 1.06[br]is/ may be the feasible unified value(?).[br][br] If above value is true, it's good. The coordinator 2 bars don't conflict the axis, this brings a easy implementation, good property. [br]See check the one cycle movement in above Fig.[br][br][b]Remark:[/b] This is N=3 solution, As a result, looks like a N=4 solution. (near the square rotation)[br]----- line symmetry brings about this.