[HN Gopher] Leonardo Da Vinci's Self-Powered Cart (2021)
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Leonardo Da Vinci's Self-Powered Cart (2021)
        
       Author : areoform
       Score  : 134 points
       Date   : 2023-12-22 01:21 UTC (21 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (selmec.org.uk)
 (TXT) w3m dump (selmec.org.uk)
        
       | LegitShady wrote:
       | would have liked to see a video of it actuating
        
       | stavros wrote:
       | "Automobile" here might not mean "car". Rather, something that
       | literally moves under its own power.
        
         | signa11 wrote:
         | just hyphenate at the right place, and the meaning spills out.
        
           | OJFord wrote:
           | Well, along those lines, 'car' just means 'carriage', so if
           | there's a problem with calling it a car it's that it was a
           | _cart_ , not a seated-people-carrying device (not typically
           | or in a way that would be called a carriage anyway) - not
           | that it doesn't resemble modern carriages. (IMO.)
        
       | cf100clunk wrote:
       | Fellow grownup geeks I'd worked with in the U.S. didn't know what
       | the term ''Meccano'' meant, but sure remembered what "Erector
       | Sets" were. Same product. I remember that our home first aid kit
       | came in handy when I was building the impractical with Meccano.
       | 
       | This da Vinci example is a true celebration of Meccano.
        
         | saghm wrote:
         | As someone born in the 90s, I've only heard the term "erector
         | set" maybe 2-3 times ever (I feel like maybe I remember it
         | mentioned in a Calvin and Hobbes comic, or something of that
         | nature), so I have no knowledge about which term was more
         | common, but one of them kind of sounds risque to me...did the
         | word "erect" not have that connotation back then? It's not hard
         | for me to imagine kids (or even adults, really) giggling every
         | time someone used the term "erector set", so I'd expect that to
         | be something people remembered more than "Meccano", which to me
         | sounds like the name of a coffee brand or something.
        
           | cf100clunk wrote:
           | Different times, so I doubt there was much blushing.
        
           | dharmon wrote:
           | The 1996 movie Jack with Robin Williams had a joke playing
           | off this. I don't remember the joke exactly, but one of the
           | boys asks Jack if he's ever had an erection, and he says
           | something like "No, but I was hoping to get one for my
           | birthday."
        
           | freetinker wrote:
           | It's exactly like you imagine. The connotation of the word
           | hasn't changed much. I can confirm the giggling (personal
           | experience).
        
           | monitron wrote:
           | From a Firesign Theatre album, 1969:
           | 
           | "That's okay, I brought an Erector Set."
           | 
           | "Throw a towel over it!"
           | 
           | "Do some pushups, Pablo, Maybe it'll go away."
        
       | shermantanktop wrote:
       | Fascinating the lengths to which people will attempt to fill in
       | the gaps or correct "errors" to make a semi-working modern model
       | appear physically similar to a paper sketch of a fanciful idea. I
       | think I sort of get it: at some point the challenge becomes a
       | thing unto itself.
       | 
       | But Leonardo was a genius precisely because his insights predated
       | the experimental and iterative science spirit that came later,
       | and which were necessary to produce practical technology. Can't
       | we just accept that his helicopter designs suck, his submarines
       | were impractical, and his car was nonfunctional? They are still
       | amazing and fascinating. Why contort or correct the designs to
       | make them work?
        
         | soperj wrote:
         | > Why contort or correct the designs to make them work?
         | 
         | Because the end goal is something functional. If Leonardo was
         | actually building it, he would have done the same.
        
         | sph wrote:
         | A cynic and contrarian on the Internet, arguing that what is
         | universally praised is overrated? What a unique phenomenon.
         | 
         | Sorry, a weird dude designing helicopters and tanks some 500
         | years before their invention, among his incredible research in
         | other scientific fields, is nothing short of remarkable for
         | anybody, unless you are a professional internet cynic, which is
         | as mundane as air itself.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | He literally said
           | 
           | >They are still amazing and fascinating.
           | 
           | Doesn't look like cynic or contrarian.
        
           | GuB-42 wrote:
           | I don't think making someone a legend is the best way to
           | celebrate an actual human being.
           | 
           | Leonardo da Vinci was human, he had flaws, he wasn't always
           | right, and I think these are important things to point out in
           | order to make the real achievements stand out.
           | 
           | Leonardo's flying machines were crap, which is to be expected
           | when basic understanding of aerodynamics came hundreds of
           | years after. Helicopters in particular are deceptively
           | complex. And it would be a shame to put them on the same
           | level as mechanisms he designed that actually worked.
           | 
           | I think it sets unreasonable expectations if you don't
           | recognize the flaws of great men. And especially in science,
           | being wrong happen, and it is not even a flaw.
        
         | mitthrowaway2 wrote:
         | Leonardo was surrounded by practical technology developed by an
         | experimental and innovative science spirit. How else do you
         | think people were able to make towers, cathedrals, dyes, looms,
         | cannons, dikes, bridges, ships, aqueducts, windmills,
         | cranes...?
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | Functional things emerge from iterating over non-functional
         | things. You have to start somewhere.
         | 
         | The first trial I made at a windmill blew apart in the first
         | storm and you might not even have recognized it. Back to
         | school, 6 months of learning, lots of math and engineering
         | later: a scale model 1:2 to check if I got any better at it,
         | that one worked but produced too little power for its size but
         | we figured out why. Scale that up to 1:1 and it worked like a
         | charm and powered our house for a couple of years. Without the
         | failures there would be no success.
        
           | andrepd wrote:
           | >Functional things emerge from iterating over non-functional
           | things. You have to start somewhere.
           | 
           | Isn't this precisely what GP said?
        
             | ListeningPie wrote:
             | Yes, but here you get a little anecdote. Similar to
             | Calvin's dad's wooden escalator story.
        
           | ajb wrote:
           | Sure, but the point is that unfortunately a lot of the
           | writing about Da Vinci doesn't locate his sketches correctly
           | on this continuum. Often it is assumed that they all already
           | worked, due to his (perfectly deserved) reputation as a
           | polymathic genius.
        
         | xtiansimon wrote:
         | "...at some point the challenge becomes a thing unto itself."
         | 
         | Erector/Meccano set is a solution waiting for a problem.
         | 
         | And you don't get to the front of the internet making a daft
         | version of Leonardo Da Vinci.
        
       | alentred wrote:
       | I remember the time, quite a long ago, when I have visited
       | Leonard Da Vinci's house (museum today), where many of his
       | original drawings and modern replicas where exhibited, and I have
       | discovered many more apparatus than I knew he imagined.
       | 
       | I was _very much inspired_ by human capacity to imagine the
       | things that don 't exist, and often couldn't even be created by
       | the time they are imagined. Da Vinci's machines, first computers
       | (Babbage's "analytical engine"), modern works like fusion power
       | or quantum computers for example. And as new technology is
       | invented and new discoveries are made we continue challenging
       | ourselves.
       | 
       | Having said that I am certain humans are not the only ones able
       | to do so. So I will live this open-ended like this, just a
       | tribute to the marvelous complexity of the intelligent life on
       | Earth.
        
         | jacquesm wrote:
         | It is inspiring. And many times when building things my most
         | recurring thought is "I wonder how many other people have this
         | exact same thing sitting in their garage". And far less
         | frequently "How strange that nobody else thought of this
         | before".
         | 
         | Da Vinci was essentially a 'maker' but he didn't have todays
         | tools, and you have to wonder what he would have been able to
         | imagine with that kind of access that we today haven't seen yet
         | and then go do that!
         | 
         | At the same time: in the 1600's almost everything related to
         | technology was still in the future and Da Vinci didn't even
         | know about the possibilities of some of the fundamentals of
         | technology yet. So without much knowledge about electricity,
         | magnetism (though there was some of this it was very
         | rudimentary) and other 'common' knowledge nowadays he was able
         | to see very far indeed but only on those parts of science that
         | were well illuminated at the time.
        
           | zabzonk wrote:
           | to be pedantic, da vinci lived in the 1400s to 1500s.
        
       | tiku wrote:
       | I often find it weird that we don't have more devices powered by
       | gravity / heavy weight, except our old school scales for weighing
       | our bodies.
        
         | berkes wrote:
         | In order to store any significant energy, you'd need great
         | heights or giant mass. Both rather impractical.
         | 
         | That said, one of the oldest energy captures is a watermill.
         | It's powered by gravity.
        
         | mdiesel wrote:
         | Counterbalances are in use all over the place, look at lifts
         | (/elevators) if they didn't have the weights they'd need much
         | much more energy to move the system. Almost everything that
         | works with weights+heights will have some kind of
         | counterbalance system.
         | 
         | Hydroelectric energy storage is one example that is hugely
         | successful, albeit requiring geography to help. We also use
         | water towers in some places to maintain pressure in pipes with
         | the hydraulic head.
         | 
         | On a smaller scale, it's more space efficient to use weights to
         | store rotating energy as a flywheel.
         | 
         | That said, stored energy in a system isn't always a desirable
         | property, generally it means more careful designs are needed so
         | that the system defaults to safe.
        
         | sho_hn wrote:
         | There are many mechanisms powered by the Huygens weight drive +
         | a governor, for example many clocks.
         | 
         | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maintaining_power
        
           | a1o wrote:
           | Here is the cool interactive blog
           | 
           | https://ciechanow.ski/mechanical-watch/
        
       | Physkal wrote:
       | In Assassin's Creed: Brotherhood, you come across many ot
       | Leonardo's war machines. As an assassin you befriend Leonardo and
       | must destroy his blueprints as well as any prototypes the Borgia
       | created. Very historical game worthy of checking out.
        
         | ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
         | Sir Terry had Leonard of Quirm[0], who The Patrician kept
         | locked in a back room, producing war machines.
         | 
         | [0] https://discworld.fandom.com/wiki/Leonard_of_Quirm
        
       | tibanne wrote:
       | For anyone else wondering:
       | 
       | Leonardo da Vinci's self-powered cart, often considered one of
       | the earliest forms of a robotic vehicle, was powered by a coiled
       | spring mechanism. Here's how it works:
       | 
       | Coiled Spring Mechanism: The cart was powered by a pair of coiled
       | springs, which were the main source of propulsion. These springs
       | were wound up manually, storing potential energy.
       | 
       | Gear and Pulley System: Once the springs were wound, the stored
       | energy was transferred through a system of gears and pulleys.
       | This system was designed to control and direct the movement of
       | the cart.
       | 
       | Steering Mechanism: Da Vinci's cart also featured a programmable
       | steering mechanism. By setting pegs into a series of gears, the
       | operator could predetermine the cart's path, allowing it to turn
       | and move in specific directions.
       | 
       | No External Forces: The cart did not require any external forces
       | like animals or humans to push or pull it once the springs were
       | wound. The energy stored in the springs was enough to move it
       | forward.
       | 
       | Early Example of Automation: This invention is significant as it
       | represents an early example of automated transportation,
       | displaying Da Vinci's advanced understanding of mechanics and
       | engineering.
       | 
       | Leonardo's self-powered cart was far ahead of its time,
       | showcasing his genius in mechanical invention and his ability to
       | think centuries ahead of the technological capabilities of his
       | era.
        
         | csdreamer7 wrote:
         | Why is this being downvoted? Seems informative to me.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2023-12-22 23:02 UTC)