h a l f b a k e r yNaturally, seismology provides the answer.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Please log in.
Before you can vote, you need to register.
Please log in or create an account.
|
Autoweeeebile
Car that makes you go weeeeeee!!!! (during an accident) | |
Imagine you are driving along a familiar highway. All of a sudden - out of nowhere - there is a brick wall in front of you. You slam the brakes but it's too late. You hit the wall at nearly full speed - it didn't help that you were speeding after being late for work because you were putting the finishing
touches on your latest half bakery idea.
All of your life's croissants flash in front of your eyes - at this speed your chances are not good....
... Except .... it's your lucky day ... you are driving the 2005 Autoweeeebile. As the front bumber of your car detects the impact it releases your chair - which is in reality a sort of a comfy swing.
As you can probably imagine (with the help of the illustration below) the kinetic energy from the impact will propel the swing forward. You will see the wall coming towards you except that you will go up at the same time in a familiar swing motion. .... in short it will make you go:
Weeeeeeeeeee!!!!!!!!! .... while you spin round and round while your kinetic energy dissipates (you might make a few loops though)
The worst that can happen is that you spray the cabin with your vomit. The best that can happen is that you walk away from an otherwise deadly accident.
Note that there are many variations on this original idea. I've included drawings of them too. Of course each has it's own benefits and weaknesses.
Version 1: The classic.
Version 2: Survivability from roughly 270 degrees of impact rather than just head-on or rear-end collisions for version 1. Note that 360 degree survivability would be possible if there was a computerized counter weight which could offset the center of gravity on impact.
Version 3: Modified version 1 with no vertical component. Version 1 could be dangerous if you crash in a tunnel for example – or under a bridge. However I imagine that version 3 would be more messy in terms of vomit clean up after a crash.
(?) Autoweeeebile drawings
http://www.florian....e/autoweeeebile.htm
Here are the 3 autoweebile versions described. [ixnaum, Sep 16 2005, last modified Apr 08 2009]
Whee Shocks by [Cedar Park]
Whee_20Shocks
reminded me of this almost entirely unrelated idea -- be sure to click the first link within and then press the green button. It still makes me laugh. [krelnik, Sep 16 2005]
$11 nail gun, with battery, at alibaba
https://www.alibaba...&pricef=1&pricet=11
[beanangel, Dec 19 2020]
$3.5 trampoline at Alibaba
https://www.alibaba...itle.1cd6c0a3oLonbH
[beanangel, Dec 19 2020]
A $5.50 to $11 rowing machine at ALibaba, perhaps.
https://www.alibaba...&pricef=1&pricet=40
[beanangel, Dec 19 2020]
some weinermobiles (bubble front cars)
https://www.google...._B84Q4dUDCAY&uact=5
[beanangel, Dec 19 2020]
[link]
|
| |
[ixnaum] I can't see this working past the first loop but you get a bun for giving me a chuckle. |
|
| |
I admire the idea the the force of the impact is used to move the passenger to a safer place (if I've understood the blueprints properly). The shear-Aikido-ness is very neat... what's more if it makes you grin and go WEEEEE all the better! |
|
| |
hmm ... "move to a safer place" |
|
| |
maybe this could be combined with an eject feature ... especially with version 1. Instead of swinging round and round you could be automatically ejected from the swing on top of the loop ..... parachute opens and you land safely. |
|
| |
This would be very different from a regular eject because it would ensure that you would go vertical and lose all the forward momentum before actual eject.... therefore the eject would be safer except if you find yourself in a tunnel :-) |
|
| |
Every time you apllied the brakes you would be in for some weeeeee. I am thinking of rush hour driving, when some guy pulls in front of you and you must decelerate from 80 to 65. Thats a lot of weee. It would be hard to keep your eye on the road. |
|
| |
the weeee part would unlock during collision detection (like airbag) |
|
| |
You wont be able to perform the loop if your loop gets crushed in the impact in which you would further slam yourself even harder and in a more aqward position. |
|
| |
You wont be able to eject if your car rolls in the crash |
|
| |
Pretty extreme idea though, I like it - made me laugh. Who knows maybe it could work with some major tweaks here and there. |
|
| |
+ for the drawings and also "life's croissants" |
|
| |
Um, wouldn't inertia and a swing combine to smack you very very very hard into the roof during an impact? "Wheee...ow." |
|
| |
Some small modification for a rollover: "Whee...ow...ow...ow." |
|
| |
Given that the little guy in version 2 seems to be really looking forward to hitting a brick wall, I'm going to have to bun this. |
|
| |
Perhaps this could be expanded into the field of bullet-proof weeeevests. Since bullet impacts have comparable momentum transfer to a 2-ton automobile impact (well in Hollywood they do - I've seen it!) maybe a device could make the victim spin round and round yelling weeeeeeeee when shot? It'd make attempted homicide more like an old-style shooting arcade! |
|
| |
<throws croissant, bagel, Hawaiian roll, and pretzel into wall> Oh, the croissant, by a wide margin. |
|
| |
This is either genius or lunacy. It's a shame those are so often similar. [+] |
|
| |
I very much like the idea for a weee bulletproof vest. It is hard to imagine how it might work. Perhaps a more feasible application would be for military vehicles like tanks that people are always trying to shoot at or blow up. |
|
| |
It occurs to me that with the lateral movement weeee schema, the deployment of a set of helicopter blades would enable the rotary motion to lift veweeeehicle up and away from the fray. |
|
| |
I think all this would do is make you crash ass first, as the swing would just pivot to the 9 o'clock position (as illustrated, in other words, as viewed from the driver's left) during the crash, and your dead remains would enjoy whatever swing action might occur once your vehicle has stopped. I hate to do it, because it's such a fun idea, but I have to fishbone. |
|
| |
[oc] Nah, the time of impact is quite short. Assuming the non-swing part of the vehicle stops by the time the weeeicle gets to the 90 degree point (which I believe would always be the case), it would act as if the weeicle was moving at 70 mph and suddenly attached to a swing - it would spin about the pivot. |
|
| |
Of course, this assumes that the vehicle doesn't get crushed or tipped over. |
|
| |
For purposes of this idea, I think maybe the W in WTAGIPBAN might stand for "Wheee.....". Nice one and welcome aboard. |
|
| |
yes, agreed - funny! pure hb. |
|
| |
Yeah, [World], maybe so. I'm sitting here trying to think about the time it takes an airbag to deflate, while it's saving your life, and I'm just not able to compare it to the time needed to swing you 90 degrees, conceptually. I'm still skeptical, but I'll vote neutral until I or someone else figures it out. |
|
| |
You are at least going to have some degree of rotation before the end of the impact (kids awake, finish later... |
|
| |
Well, at 70 miles an hour, you're travelling about 100 feet per second. I'd say the drawing shows about 10 feet from resting to 90 degrees, in the horizontal direction. That's 0.1 seconds. Airbags begin to deflate in about .05 seconds. So one may assume the major force of impact occurs during that first .05 seconds, and you're about halfway to the 90 degree mark in the horizontal direction. |
|
| |
Proceeding. The airbag has already moved your ass 80% of what it would've otherwise. |
|
| |
[re] I think I'm missing something about your comment. Are you talking about precession? And if the airbag moves your ass, you're using it wrong. |
|
| |
Great to remember what the hb is for!.
Poorly thought out.
Well written.
Great drawings.
Just about possible.
Very original.
This is possibly a dictionary definition of an hb idea.
Thank you and welcome! |
|
| |
OK, I'm wrong, I admit it, and now I can vote for this without reservation, but you still need to worry about crushing and rollovers, maybe. |
|
| |
So is the weeehicle for one passenger (driver) only, or would other passengers have swings as well? Sure would be cool to see 6 crash test dummies, each in their own bubble, looping around on a minivan based weeehicle... |
|
| |
I'm gonna go crash my car for fun! Weeee!! No, but seriously, I like the idea here. It might not work, but I like it. [+]. |
|
| |
nice idea, but it looks like you got tarzan to do the drawings. |
|
| |
Well it don't mean a thing if it ain't got that swing |
|
| |
There is no way this will work. The looping dead body is the most accurate comment so far I think. |
|
| |
Think - you can fall from a building into an air cushion and survive, but you can't fall from the same building, then at the last 0.1-second instant be rotated to horizontal without getting just as killed as if you had hit ground. |
|
| |
But it is very half-baked. |
|
| |
//Think - you can fall from a building into an air cushion and survive, but you can't fall from the same building, then at the last 0.1-second instant be rotated to horizontal without getting just as killed as if you had hit ground.// |
|
| |
That makes sense. I think it's more the decelleration that kills you than the actual injuries from impact. |
|
| |
Surely the trick is to leave the vehicle at a tangent before the swing reaches the nine o'clock position. |
|
| |
If your swinging pod breaks free when it's in the 7:30 position (traveling at 45 degrees from the ground), then you only have to soak up ... {flakes of rust fall from disused trigonometry} ... cosine(45degrees) times the deceleration you'd otherwise be dealing with... and this would be further mitigated by the airbag built into the seat of the swing so that it would, as [reensure] said, move your arse (US - ass). |
|
| |
Then, you'd still have a fighting chance of missing the obstacle... or maybe a missing chance of fighting the obstacle. It might depend on the length of your bonnet (US - hood). |
|
| |
Hey, wait - the airbag could provide you with a push at 45 degrees to the plane of the seat (so, at the point when the seat is leaving the vehicle, at 90 degrees to the ground), to give you a bit of extra lift so that you can clear the obstacle even if the seat doesn't. You don't lose all contact with the seat, because of the bungee ropes. If this means that you end up head down, nose-first into the far side of the wall, while the seat is snagged on the other side, you will just have to rely on your native dignity. |
|
| |
//Think - you can fall from a building into an air
cushion and survive, but you can't fall from the
same building, then at the last 0.1-second instant
be rotated to horizontal without getting just as
killed as if you had hit ground. |
|
| |
This is a little different though. The ideas is to
keep spinning for many seconds (not 0.1 second).
The harder you crash the longer you spin. Sure,
you'll pass out from the initial G force, but it won't
be lethal. |
|
| |
I like this idea a lot (+), It's really fertile ground and I think can be complemented with "instant supplemental mass via CPU" and applied to motorbikes as well. [ixnaum]'s idea reminds me of the Weeniemobile(tm) [link] in a good way. A Weeniemobile basically has a spherical fishtank on the end of a tube car. The advantage of a spherical fishtank windshield is there is more room for [ixnaum']s swing to do its lifesaving work. (also, it's futuristic looking). |
|
| |
if [ixnaum] could have any size or shape of windshield he or she likes they might prefer a full apex-of-swing (like top point on a playground swingset) space. I thinks that's unaerodynamic, but see the *note on duowindshields. They can increase the size of the front of the car some though. Cars might come in completely different shapes with ixnaum's safety swing. |
|
| |
Now that driverless cars are the thing (Tesla December 2020 scheduled software release release) perhaps driverless cars with face to face (limousine) seating will be popular and have particular variations on [ixnaum]'s safety swing. |
|
| |
Change the shape of acceleration from just a line, to a 3D shape that is more beneficial to people. Have airbag-explosive weights shootable onto the base of the swing change its mass profile and even 3D accelerating shape. Sort of like if you tossed sticky weights onto the bottom of a moving playground swing you could effect the arc of the swing and it's acceleration and velocity dynamically with computer control. |
|
| |
Also, what if you just loaded up one distal side of the bottom of a playground swing with additional dollop masses? You might get a twisting motion, a 3D acceleration graphical plot. As a safety feature at cars this could be beneficial as, depending on the angle of the accident there could be what I will call "torque forces" on the person's body, and putting twist on the seat-wing tethers/chains could reduce harm to people. |
|
| |
Seat belts already have some kind of @ roller-tensioners. Putting very fast computer controlled computer controlled roller tensioners at the flexible swing "chains" could be used to modulate the 3D motion of [ixnaum's] safety swing. Of course the idea says "swing" but I am sure it also means multisupport/multichain moveable platform (seat); this goes from the playground swing analogy, all the way to a a circle of springs at a trampoline topology, perhaps even with swing "chains" from the center of the base (balancing a plate on top of a pencil) doing things. |
|
| |
Genetic algorithm, Ok, so I like geneic algorithms, they make things 30-300% better. (I hear the amusement in the gallery). using a genetic algorithm to make and screen millions (billions) of variations on dollop weights, accident velocities, person centers of gravity is likely really beneficial. It is likely gentlest if best. |
|
| |
What id [ixnaum's swing had two-vehicle collision rserve capacity and decreasable mass dollops?" |
|
| |
The two part safety swing. The hard brake, the long skid, the actual collision; that's a different occurence that compares with a two car collision; somebody side contacts you, car spins around, and a subsequent completely non-lane "unexpected" collision occurs at a radically different angle than the swing has already compensated for. Computers could notice these things happening much faster than people, and ixnaum's safety swing could have reserve capacity to do a second shot of accelleration compensation. At shooting mass dollops, more mass dollops would be shot, and at different angles, and just possibly, with IOT (internet of things), already attached weghts on the seat would drop off, providing more Newtonian action laiitude. |
|
| |
At the seat during normal driving it would already have mass dollops on it, perhaps the genetic algorithm minimum mass (*MPG"-aware) to do soe good. If there were an accident from a novel angle, dollops could be added, and the IoT dollops on the seat could automatically detach in some computed pattern. The seat doesn't just mass up, it can mass-down 1%. I think some physicists and engineers would love calculating and making a computer simulation that does this. |
|
| |
Just how affordable can[ixnaum]'s invention be: compared with expensive airbags, chemical explosive nail guns exist [link] and are only $11 at alibaba.com [link]; this same technology could be used to put the velocity-adjusting dollops of matter on the base of the swing at high enough gun-to-swing dollop velocity to make a difference and reach the swing before the stop of swing head jerk, interior body collision, or with a really big front windshield, just apex of swing arc. One benefit of Nail gun mass dollop delivery is that you can deliver the supplemental mass dollops at angles that complement safest stopping by tossing adherent matter onto the swing seat base at 20 degrees, or 160 degrees angle, rather than just the 90 degrees of attach it quick angle. |
|
| |
[icnaum] says swing, but I kind of think perimeter spring/tether trampoline. The cheapest seat sized individual adult sized trampoline is just $3.50. |
|
| |
IoT bluetooth keyfobs are $1, I think they do internet. |
|
| |
So, all the parts add up to about $19-24, including the stuff, that is hyperaffordable like MEMS accelerometers, a CPU, wires, plastic, perimeter trampoline suggests an absence of slider rails. |
|
| |
[ixnaum]'s vehicle safety swing might work on electric and fuel motorbikes and motorcycles, particularly at the developing world. I perceive these wee a big source of 2020 accidents. The construction is a little different but if you think of a moveable seat voluntary exercise rowing fitness machine [link] ($5-10 on alibaba), the motorbike seat could dynamically slide under computer control in some kind of helpful complement way and "gradually decrease velocity" at the right direction of acceleration at a motorbike accident. |
|
| |
At a motorbike the idea of the trampoline like perimeter tethers ("swing chains" analogy) at the swing to make side-collisions less harmful comes up again. Also, rather than just think of it as a XY plane of acceleration *ker thunk forward and spinny sideways" to be compensated for you could do alll three directions, yaw pitch and roll, and even have the "nailgun safety swing" technology pushup or push down the seat. That works for cars and motorcycles. |
|
| |
I do not know if motorbike users ever wear seatbelts, but if they do, they can be pulled opposite to "fling off the bike" forces as well as pushed up. |
|
| |
*note on duowindshelds. The two windshield car: at one extreme is a motor vehicle with completely optimized aerodynamics, and rather than a windshield, a big video screen inside. A 2020 vehicle has an angled curved windshield. An intermediate form is a superaerodynamic windshield that covers an unaerodynamic smaller bubble windshiled, perhaps at a longer front hood length, with more drawing-out room for|:. raking angle. |
|
| |
The superaerodynamic transparent windshield would cover a [ixnaum] safety-swing friendly big vehicle front. (weinermobile bubble). making a duo windshield. Genetic algorithms would be used to find maximum transparency and maximum field of view at a duowindshield vehicle. |
|
| |
For industrial designers this would possibly be a huge treat. During 2020 there were all these Big Front trucks around my town, and the owners might have liked something 1-40% bigger for styling purposes. The MPG-friendly long hood duowindshield might be both possible and appealing to some people. Personally, I’m enthused about electric vehicles 'mileage, and feeling casual about petroleum, so a 1-3% mileage penalty to save 10-30% of car and motorbike accident lives sounds appealing. |
|
| |
Besides, Engineers and Halfbakers are already likely woking on better mileage as you read this. |
|
| |