Dooey99
|
| posted on 5/4/13 at 07:26 PM |
|
|
CAD Plans Are Getting There
Had flu from last friday and have finally got into the recovery stage but still have no energy to do anything so have been drawing up my locost on
Sketch Up!
shes getting there...
probably alot of people already done it and done and done a much better job but im really pleased with how my plans are coming along...
unfortunately the plans won't help me on this build as im way past these stages on my build hey ho, might be helpful for the next one!
[img]
 
Description
[/img]
Less weight more speed, more power more speed
If in doubt, give it a clout
|
|
|
|
|
twybrow
|
| posted on 5/4/13 at 07:37 PM |
|
|
I hope you have added some additional triangulation in the engine bay... Currently you have a big box! Just a thought... 
|
|
|
Dooey99
|
| posted on 6/4/13 at 01:57 PM |
|
|
[img]
 
Description
[/img]
Less weight more speed, more power more speed
If in doubt, give it a clout
|
|
|
Sam_68
|
| posted on 6/4/13 at 02:37 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dooey99
[img]
Description
[/img]
Not a bad effort, but...
Your upper rear trailing arm is feeding a bending load into the middle of a tube (and that tube doesn't triangulate with the chassis top rail
that forms the cockpit edge). Difficult to tell, but your trailing arms don't look parallel - is that intentional?
The tube that runs horizontally across the top of the transmission tunnel on the rear bulkhead is wrong in that it divides the rear bulhead up into a
series of rectangles. Youu should be trying to divide everything up into triangles - you'd be better triangulating from the corners of
the transmission tunnel up to the shock absorber mount positions (and down to the corners of the lower chassis rails, if you want to triangulate
fully).
As Twybrow said, you need more triangulation in the engine/front suspension bays, too.
Remember:
* Triangles are good. Quadrilaterals are are bad.
* Never put a bending load into the middle of a tube.
|
|
|
Dooey99
|
| posted on 6/4/13 at 03:27 PM |
|
|
the top and bottom rear trailing arms are different lengths as when the same length ones are used when the suspension in compressed the the axle moves
forward slightly. these ones are different so when the suspension compresses the bottom of the axle moves forwards slightly more than the top which
creates a slight twisting motion therefore the axle doesnt move forward as much allowing the wheel base to allow more the same length... if that
makes any sense? its tried and tested by myself
Less weight more speed, more power more speed
If in doubt, give it a clout
|
|
|
twybrow
|
| posted on 13/4/13 at 01:02 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Dooey99
the top and bottom rear trailing arms are different lengths as when the same length ones are used when the suspension in compressed the the axle moves
forward slightly. these ones are different so when the suspension compresses the bottom of the axle moves forwards slightly more than the top which
creates a slight twisting motion therefore the axle doesnt move forward as much allowing the wheel base to allow more the same length... if that
makes any sense? its tried and tested by myself
So no more plans for triangulation in the engine bay then....?
|
|
|
Dooey99
|
| posted on 13/4/13 at 02:08 PM |
|
|
I have added more 'triangulation' in the engine bay now the plans have slowed down alot now as I only was doing them when I was recovering
from flu and didnt have enough energy to continue you my real build, they will get finished eventually! Maybe
Less weight more speed, more power more speed
If in doubt, give it a clout
|
|
|
