Printable Version | Subscribe | Add to Favourites
New Topic New Poll New Reply
Author: Subject: Anybody thought of using Audi A4 front hubs and uprights?
sietze

posted on 21/8/04 at 07:24 PM Reply With Quote
Anybody thought of using Audi A4 front hubs and uprights?

Hello,
The latest Audi A4 (last 4 years at least) has a very funny front suspension. The cars are front wheel or four wheel drive. They use 4 seperate arms to connect to one front-upright (plus steering arm). The connecting arms are positioned in such a way that the tire maintains very good grond contact in turning (as opposed to some mercs). It is a sort of double wishbone set-up with flexible wishbones.
What do you guys think of this design? What do you think of using the upright in a Locost front suspension (especially if you consider building a 4x4 Locost)??

greetings

Sietze

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
giel

posted on 21/8/04 at 10:15 PM Reply With Quote
I'm not sure what the lower arms look like, but I know the upper one is made of two rods. The centre lines meet in a virtual point that lies 'inside' the tire. They're also quite high, might not be so useful for an open wheeled car.

I've been looking at them myself for my project, but my wheels will be inside the body (not a 7-style car).

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Mark Allanson

posted on 22/8/04 at 08:27 AM Reply With Quote
The uprights are about 2' tall!, the upper and lower arms are ally with metallastic bushes on the car end and non tapering balljoints on the other. They are also very heavy, except for the S4 which has ally ones.

If I remember, I will post a picture tonight (I've got a few at work)





If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
crbrlfrost

posted on 22/8/04 at 11:09 PM Reply With Quote
Anyone know of any good technical articles regarding the Audi four link? Checked SAE.org last night and was coming up somewhat dry. But regarding the applicability to the locost, seems like overkill to a problem that isn't significant. Not to mention the fun engineering problems of adapting a four link to an entirely different vehicle. But don't let that stop someone who wants to give it a try! Cheers!
View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
Mark Allanson

posted on 23/8/04 at 06:48 PM Reply With Quote
I think they are a non starter, just too tall and complicated, the lower arms are too long......


Just look at this photo I took today at work Rescued attachment A4Susp.jpg
Rescued attachment A4Susp.jpg






If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
Mark Allanson

posted on 23/8/04 at 06:49 PM Reply With Quote
The steering rack would have to be above the bonnet line





If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
sietze

posted on 23/8/04 at 08:50 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
I think they are a non starter, just too tall and complicated, the lower arms are too long......


Just look at this photo I took today at work


OK, I am convinced

But I find the principle operation of the two excentric arms intrigueing (spelling??). You could make something like that out of the lower part of the sierra macpherson strut. Cut the bottom 10 cm off, weld two plates (with matching holes) around this, brace it with a third vertical plate and you have got the facilities to fit trackrod ends between them. Of course, lengths, angles, etc. will be a pain to figure out, but still the result could be worth it!

Sietze

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Noodle

posted on 24/8/04 at 09:21 AM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by sietze
quote:
Originally posted by Mark Allanson
I think they are a non starter, just too tall and complicated, the lower arms are too long......


Just look at this photo I took today at work


OK, I am convinced

But I find the principle operation of the two excentric arms intrigueing (spelling??). You could make something like that out of the lower part of the sierra macpherson strut. Cut the bottom 10 cm off, weld two plates (with matching holes) around this, brace it with a third vertical plate and you have got the facilities to fit trackrod ends between them. Of course, lengths, angles, etc. will be a pain to figure out, but still the result could be worth it!

Sietze


I should try not to be too intrigued. I suspect all that elaboration in the front suspension is to try and quell the idiosyncracies of attempting to drive the front wheels. It's just plain unnatural

Cheers,

Neil.





Your sort make me sick

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
giel

posted on 24/8/04 at 05:56 PM Reply With Quote
quote:


I should try not to be too intrigued. I suspect all that elaboration in the front suspension is to try and quell the idiosyncracies of attempting to drive the front wheels. It's just plain unnatural

Cheers,

Neil.


The 'elaboration' does actually serve a purpose: a small kpi without the disadvantage of either
- the upper balljoint inside the rim with a resulting small distance from upper to lower BJ
- the upper BJ above the tyre, wich requires a taller upright and pushes the fenders up too

This could well be a plus for every suspension, driven or not.

BR
Giel

[Edited on 24/8/04 by giel]

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
crbrlfrost

posted on 27/8/04 at 05:50 PM Reply With Quote
Not to mention with a little ingenuity it could be tuned to give turn in caster gain, or put another way, added negative camber on a turning wheel while being able to leave the wheel upright in the straight ahead condition. However, with these advantages come disadvantages, like the really tall upright. In order to control caster, the angle gain has to relatively small. The longer the upright the smaller the angle change per unit of longitudinal travel of the upper pivot point. Not to mention that the change doesn't have to be symetrical (ie inside and outside wheel the same), so that adds another layer of complexity, as most likely you won't want them to be identical. Add some steering concerns and you can see it would be quite an undertaking, but doable if scientifically and mechanically inclined. However, due to the light weight of these cars and the usually moderate aspect ratios of the tires, I wouldn't, in this case, think of it as a large gain worthy of the effort. Cheers!
View User's Profile E-Mail User View All Posts By User U2U Member
Peteff

posted on 27/8/04 at 07:25 PM Reply With Quote
The steering rack would have to be above the bonnet line

Which would solve the problem of getting the column round the alternator. It's all good news so far then, go for it Sietze.

[Edited on 27/8/04 by Peteff]





yours, Pete

I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member
Mark Allanson

posted on 27/8/04 at 09:38 PM Reply With Quote
If you are thinking about using something similar, make sure you get the trackrod end with no tapered attachments, as this height adjustment is used to alter the 'S' curve of the castor/camber





If you can keep you head, whilst all others around you are losing theirs, you are not fully aware of the situation

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
robinbastd

posted on 27/8/04 at 09:58 PM Reply With Quote
If you use the shims from the octavia range (less complicated setup), you can alter the castor, the KPI and the camber at the same time, and if you invert the shims, you will increase the castor as lock increases thus getting more self centering as you turn the wheel.
Alternatively you can use something that is tried and tested and build a locost.

sietze: Ik hoop je neemt het me niet kwaadlyk.


[Edited on 27/8/04 by robinbastd]





Only a dead fish swims with the tide.

http://smuttygifts.com/

View User's Profile Visit User's Homepage View All Posts By User U2U Member
sietze

posted on 31/8/04 at 06:41 PM Reply With Quote
quote:
Originally posted by robinbastd
If you use the shims from the octavia range (less complicated setup), you can alter the castor, the KPI and the camber at the same time, and if you invert the shims, you will increase the castor as lock increases thus getting more self centering as you turn the wheel.
Alternatively you can use something that is tried and tested and build a locost.

sietze: Ik hoop je neemt het me niet kwaadlyk.


[Edited on 27/8/04 by robinbastd]


Almost right: 'Ik hoop, je neemt het mij niet kwalijk' or better ' Ik hoop dat je het mij niet kwalijk neemt'

BTW, the idea is to take a locost as starting point but craft 4 wheel drive onto it. And as a locost is for twisty and turny roads you want to be able to apply power in corners, especially at the front wheels as this provides the main advantage of 4 wheel drive. So you need a good contact patch. Which means, due to the low weight of the car, keeping the tire flat to the surface. Hence my interest.

Sietze

View User's Profile View All Posts By User U2U Member

New Topic New Poll New Reply


go to top






Website design and SEO by Studio Montage

All content © 2001-16 LocostBuilders. Reproduction prohibited
Opinions expressed in public posts are those of the author and do not necessarily represent
the views of other users or any member of the LocostBuilders team.
Running XMB 1.8 Partagium [© 2002 XMB Group] on Apache under CentOS Linux
Founded, built and operated by ChrisW.