As the wishbone moves up in its arc, it pushes up on the bottom of the shock.
The pushrod also pushes up, but against the pivot.
The pivot pushes down on the top of the shock.
Twice as much travel on the shock.
2.0 Pinto powered Mk Indy.
10 years in the making.
Wouldn't the inner joints on the upper wishbone and the shock be much better turned through 90 degrees.
I think continuous movement under load in that plane would see them off really quick
Photo Archive
Building: confidence and miles with smiles
posted on 2/3/16 at 08:18 PM
Nope, im happy with that.
The suspension goes up, the rod that is attached to the shock at one end and the rocker at the other pushes against the rocker. That rotates the
rocker, compressing the spring.
Its just like a normal bell crank but the photo angle dont help.
JeffW F2 indycar front ARB is a good one for this. I think its anti dive and an ARB controller so its 2 functions in one.
Track days ARE the best thing since sliced bread, until I get a supercharger that is!
At first glance it looked as if someone made a mistake & there would be no pivoting action at all. At second glance I see the movement, but it
seems like that's a lot of force on that one rod. Would that be a problem?
quote:Originally posted by SCAR
Wouldn't the inner joints on the upper wishbone and the shock be much better turned through 90 degrees.
I think continuous movement under load in that plane would see them off really quick
IIRC (usually wrongly) There is no load on the upper wishbone apart from under braking - it is only there to position the upper ball joint. if you
look on a mcpherson strut assembly the upper mounting is the shocker - there can't be much load as the seals wouldn't last long as
that's where all the movement under load would be would be.
The only load, as mentioned before, is under braking and maybe from the wheel down towards the inner mounts and the spherical joints are positioned in
a way that can accept this.
I would think there could be considerable forces on the upper wishbone during cornering. As the tyre grips the road the lower wishbone mount would act
as a pivot point for the hub carrier subjecting the upper wishbone to either compression (inside wheel) or tension (outside wheel) loads. No idea of
the magnitude though.
quote:Originally posted by SCAR
I would think there could be considerable forces on the upper wishbone during cornering. As the tyre grips the road the lower wishbone mount would act
as a pivot point for the hub carrier subjecting the upper wishbone to either compression (inside wheel) or tension (outside wheel) loads. No idea of
the magnitude though.
[Edited on 3/3/16 by SCAR]
Yeah I did mention that in the last line of my post.
quote:Originally posted by SCAR
I would think there could be considerable forces on the upper wishbone during cornering. As the tyre grips the road the lower wishbone mount would act
as a pivot point for the hub carrier subjecting the upper wishbone to either compression (inside wheel) or tension (outside wheel) loads. No idea of
the magnitude though.
Magnitude is going to be whatever the cornering force is (slightly over 1g at most for a non-aero car) x corner weight x % weight transfer x whatever
leverage you have between the tyre contact patch and the lower ball joint.
... but that's only until you clip a kerb. I'd allow 4g for kerbs.
The left hand wheel ends up at the front of the wheel pod and at 90 deg to the centreline of the aircraft. It's also a double wishbone
suspension, but to allow the verticalpost to come into the pod the side of the aircraft moves out of the way. 1 1.5" dia actuator moves
everything including the doors.
Go on then I'll bite I can't help myself, I suppose you're fully qualified to critique what an "engineer" should find
interesting? Are you chartered then or a fellow maybe?
quote:Originally posted by sam919
Engineer being a loose term then?
