Well, yes, but...

Balancing on two wheels is pretty cool, but about as pointless as designing a robot to stand on one leg. Ultimately, the only thing keeping it upright is energy. So, has anyone calculated how much energy is wasted keeping it upright, when the same effect could be achieved by a thing called a "wheel"?

This idea's a dodo.

"Ultimately, the only thing keeping it upright is energy. So, has anyone calculated how much energy is wasted keeping it upright, when the same effect could be achieved by a thing called a "wheel"?"

On the flip side, having more wheels increases the energy lost to friction between the wheels and the pavement. It's not clear to me which side of the fence the numbers would fall...

I agree that there is alot of wasted energy by balancing on two wheels.

Personally I prefer the domestic electric GemCAR, http://www.gemcar.com/, to this one.

The Camper Lotus is not a "dodo idea", IMHO, but probably not as efficient as a tradition 3 or 4 wheeled vehicle.

I personally thing this is really kool for a city commuter. Like a all weather Segway for 2. I really don't know the energy requirements for the gyroscope balance but I don't think that it could be too high of a drain on it.

Lol you really think so? I can't imagine it is much. Slight corrections. Do you really think it is more than the extra weight of other tires and axles and the energy required to move them?

Though many two wheel vehicles will use energy to balance standing upright on two wheels does not require constant energy input.

And yes I have done work with robots that have only two wheels.

The whole reason ultra-econoboxes like Geo Metros have such narrow wheels is that cuts out a lot of drag. Cutting out a set of wheels entirely is even better - assuming that the additional energy needed to balance isn't more than what is lost by removing the frontal area of the missing wheels. Actual numbers would be interesting.

In fact, there's no need for the 'gyroscopic technology at all. Why not just increase the wheel size, putting the axles at roughly chest height on the occupants? Then the whole vehicle's centre of gravity would rest below the axles, and balance would be automatic. No extra energy consumed, and huge benefits (which other posters have apparently not considered) in reduced rolling resistance, easier steering, turn radius, ease of maintenance, interior space use, and so on.

Of course, on accelerating, the cabin would tend to counter-rotate against the turning of the wheels, but that isn't really a problem. Just arrange the drive system to shift the cabin forward when accelerating, backward when decelerating; the torque applied by gravity would then counter the torque applied by the engine, and voilá.

(I can diagram this for anyone who really needs it, but honestly, if you just draw it out with pencil and paper, you'll see it intuitively.)

I've been trying to work out a regular human-powered bicycle on this principle, and the big difficulty isn't balance, but arranging to transfer from the feet to the wheels. My best solution to date is, funny enough, a generator/electric motor drivetrain.

I think people reach too quickly for high-tech solutions. Deliberately adopting the constraints of low-tech leads to better overall designs.

Dominic

ummm...the artists' mockup shows it on sidewalks or some kind of pedestrian path. Unlike the Segway, this thing looks like it has pretty big blindspots. I'm already sharing walking pathways with inline skaters, skateboarders, and the occasional university delivery truck (I work at a college campus). It's getting to be a bit much "shared use" as it is!

If they are really contemplating selling this there would have to be a means other than the gyroscope to keep it upright when the batteries run out.
I think it's a great idea. So small, so light, but tall and visible. A bicycle whomps a Segway but this is a lot better than a Segway.

You guys, take a closer look: this was somebody's senior thesis for design school. It's not a real commercial product.

Well that shutts them up all right.