Malleolus

BTW... I'm baaaaaack

Conveniently, I'm an armorsmith. Joint protection is not a major hurtle, and fully armored joints were commonplace in the later suit's, just look at the Maximillian styled armors. This is a suit, there's flesh, muscle, and fat in the way. If anything it'd be far easier to armor a mech where the armor is integral.

That's hilarious, yet sad at the same time... so no one else can be civil?

Wow, how did the appearance of mods shut this down?

Sorry boss man

The only person that put forward actual debate was ShuRugal, but human gait is vastly more multidimensional than what he covered, and you know what? He took it for what it is and I'm going to trust that he ACTUALLY IS GOING TO READ the information put forward. I've been working on biomechatronics for 15 years twit. If he still has consternation after reading it, I'm perfectly fine with that.

Thank you. All peer reviewed, scientifically backed research from accredited sources I would expect to be beyond your capacity to understand. As previously stated, you saying it's an apples to apples comparison means you have no idea what you're saying nor attempted, or lack the capacity to understand, that you are making an assumption about a multi-bodied non-linear system based off a linear single bodied system. I never brought in metabolism and the actual efficiency of human muscles, that was another person. I've been taking about the mechanics of human gait.

Ok, let's make this as simple as possible... yes, at any one time 80% of ONE HALF the cycle is powered by the muscles. Meaning one leg is under 80% power half the time. My little world is called reality, how about you?

You'd think, and when I get home I'll cite if you want, but human gait has evolved to walk through soil/etc and not on hard surfaces... This is why it has so many force recycling means, they recycle force consistently. The force lost to shocks on soft soil is just that, lost, muscle recycles this. A penalty accrues, but not nearly as rapidly as wheeled/tracked vehicles. How well, actually? Yes, it can, but at huge fuel consumption unless the tracks are designed to give the greatest purchase on snow... then you can argue snow shoes.

Sha, he's being a twit, but human muscles are energy inefficient, as is metabolism. Fat has insane energy density, and produces glucose that cells burn with oxygen that produces energy and acids. If I remember correctly, net oxygen usage in humans, which is a byproduct of energy use, is over an order of a magnitude more than a wheeled vehicle. HOWEVER, this does not compare to human gait. Human GAIT is very efficient and uses several mechanisms to store and expend forces while walking rather than constantly use muscle force to provide constant power. Fuel also improves the longer the hydrocarbon chain it consists of, which is burned with oxygen to produce carbon monoxide and dioxide. The longer the chain, the more energy is available when it is split and oxidized.

Wheeled vehicles are more efficient on extremely hard surfaces. In fact, a modern train is over 2 orders of a magnitude more efficient than walking... on hardened steel rails. This phenomena is because very hard surfaces reflect forces well, requiring little work to move. The softer the surface, efficiency of wheeled vehicles drop dramatically. Even on dry, but soft soil, like driving on packed soil, efficiency drops below that of a human. In situations where you consistently have very hard surfaces and properly maintained vehicles, it's more efficient. This isn't true for most cases, especially in the military. This is also why blacksmiths anvils are through hardened.

No, you are reading it wrong. It is saying that when the stride reverses, as the cycle of gait reverses the direction of the leg to push the body forward, the legs reverse direction... it's WALKING. Legs don't constantly move forward, their direction reverses, cycles, every step. Do you actually READ things, and think about it before you reply? Human gait constantly reverses, this doesn't mean they walk backwards.

How much energy, excluding regenerative braking that isn't included in most vehicles, is retained in a tracked or wheeled vehicle in between stops, starts, accelerations, and decelerations? That would be... none. Seriously, you don't know what the hell you're even saying.

What, that it says during the driving portion that gravitational forces perform 80% of the work, then when the gait is reversed muscles do 80%? And I said that 20% of the energy can be attributed to external forces independent of the prime mover, and that you could downsize the engine more than 20% but since half the gait is under 80% power by the prime mover this can be considered the "peak running" torque and the motor, I choose, should be sized to run at this load?

It's actually a very fun read, and yeah, but I did say shits and giggles.