- #1,541
- 2,425
- 408
Wylde said:Hey RM,
Every time I have a question I always revisit this forum (have intermittently frequented since 2014). I know you are a big proponent for the performance trends software and that is my next investment. While I'm budgeting the cash for this I do have a question.
While I was mapping out the rear suspension of my dirt late model I was thinking about instant centers. On the dirt cars we do have birdcages on both sides of the rear axle which is where my question lies. In order to calculate the instant centers of the rear end you have to use the lower bars for sure. Although, I'm not sure if you would use any other links to capture the instant centers. Both sides upper bars are angled in the positive direction so you would get no convergence other than aft axle. The lift arm is level at static so that wouldn't be the correct option either. The one given i have is that obviously we do have a positive anti-squat value on the left rear given that it hikes as soon as throttle is applied. Would you suggest just using the just lower bar to map out instant center? I've consulted all of the textbooks I have and have not found much in the way of instant center calculation for this scenario. I'm interested in the theory as it seems to help me conceptualize my direction, execution and optimization.
Also, do you have any reference that would help me understand the math of the instant center? I see a lot of articles referencing 100% but I'm not understanding what the base value and calculated value is that would yield your specific percentage.
I've done a ton of work mapping and optimizing lift bar (torque arm) application and optimization. This is the next piece to the puzzle.
One tip for @UFO -- You can use the SEARCH feature in the upper right corner to search just this thread for keywords or phrases. Just pull down the "Everywhere" default for where to search, and change it to "This thread".Ranger Mike said:ufo
i got halfway thru your post above, and stopped. was replying to each item but it became readily apparent you have not read thru this long 62 page class. if you had you would have seen my posts addressing each and every aspect you chose to comment on. i suggest you read and revisit your post.
Ignoring the front suspension in acceleration? Tell that to a drag racer.UFO said:With acceleration we only have to worry about forces from one end of the car, the rear.
True.UFO said:We know we cannot change the total weight transfer to the rear without changing center of gravity height, wheel base, or acceleration.
You seem to think that the fact that the sprung mass is moving, that it is somehow adding some vertical force. It does not. (Any extra vertical force would come from the increase in CG height, which would increase the weight transfer)UFO said:That is because as you get on the throttle the mass of the sprung weight is moving away from the track and the opposite reaction is pushing the rear axle into the track.
You seem to think that the weight transfer is slowly building under a given acceleration. It does not. It is instantaneous. If the acceleration is there, the weight transfer must also be there.UFO said:When you hit the throttle there is only static weight on the rear and as the car moves forward weight is transferred to the rear giving more traction and allowing more acceleration. This cycle keeps building off the turn,
I think this come from the fact that you think that the weight transfer is influenced by the body motion. Again, it is not (other than CG height change). The unsprung mass is accelerated and it will contribute to the horizontal inertial force acting at the CG (creating a moment about the ground, where the equal and opposing traction force lies), which in turn will be compensated by a reaction moment coming from the axles, i.e the weight transfer.UFO said:RM what is your opinion on the center of gravity calculations using the whole car, I think it should be on the sprung mass only. [...] This should move the CoG up a little, this is the only mass rotating around the roll center.
Yeah, no kidding. I gave up after a couple of hours -- looked like the rain would postpone it until today and also give tome for more car repairs...Ranger Mike said:thanks Jack, was watching goat screw at Daytona..what a waste..
jack action said:UFO said:
With acceleration we only have to worry about forces from one end of the car, t
Tom.G said:Me thinks somebody has never seen a car, with the brakes solidly applied, move around when engine power is applied to the drive train.
There is not only the side-to-side rocking from engine torque, but also, depending on the direction of driveshaft rotation, the front or the back suspension will rise.
Ranger Mike said:Anyway, you are welcome to comment but we are not compelled to reply
Tom .G Hi, I never really got into motorcycle suspension dynamics and don't know how they're linked. It looks like you're popping the clutch to take off. I was talking about having the brakes locked up. Yes, I was the rear rapping up in the front. You have to look at it like the wheel is welded to the end of the axle tube. The axle tube And the axle shaft are trying to rotate in opposite directions and balance each other out which leaves the axle housing not attempting to rotate in either direction. After thinking about it a little more there may be a little movement from the axle twist, relative to how long and thin they are compared to torque applied. I still think the rotation would happen the inside of the axle shaft and the ring gear and the housing will not moveTom.G said:I think you forgot about the drive shaft pinion in the rear end climbing up on the now-stationary ring gear.
I once had a motorcycle with a drive shaft that when you popped the clutch, the back of the frame would come up and boot you in the behind! (Kinda tough on the passenger too.)
Ranger Mike said:jack action said:
Ignoring the front suspension in acceleration? Tell that to a drag racer.
@UFO
Unless you have front or four wheel drive the front is not contributing to forward acceleration. It does enter in with controlling left to right distribution of loads, it has nothing to do with jacking forces from acceleration, which is what the discussion was about.@Ranger Mike said
Any Race car driver will tell you, front end lift has to be controlled on acceleration. It is a major tuning point to get the car to hook up.
RM If you read to the bottom it said it was the extreme, that's not dangerous it's more like history. I don't know who is running 40 gal. tanks today, but back in the day it was commonplace with at least the northeast Modifieds. They were poly tanks, called drop tanks because they were L shaped and dropped down behind the rear. They were mostly used for alcohol. I think today there is a lot of 24 gal. fuel cells in use, but some tracks don't require them, at least for alcohol. The foam in the tank doesn't let the fuel hit the side and bounce back, but the fuel still moves to the side, just takes a little longer to get there, it dampens the flowRanger Mike said:whoa up there UF
I have to step in here as you are putting out some dangerous information.
Have you ever been on a race team pit crew?
Ranger Mike said:Who in their right mind would run a 40 gallon fuel cell on a short track 1/3 mile 20 lap race? Nascar has 17.5 gallon fuel cell limit for DAYTONA! Most local race tracks have 22 gallon maximum limit on fuel cells.
Most Saturday night warriors will run a 8 gallon to 15 gallon fuel cell depending on if they run an occasional ½ mile track. A 20 gallon cell is too big and a waste of space.
Where you going to mount this 40 gallon monster? Where you going to race it?