|
|
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by b1driver
Then i guess we should all be running rabuds purple bar
Not what I was referring to.
Modern Day Wedge Racing
Florence -2
Atomic - 2
-
One night I found the roll center to be on top of my roof! The car wasnt too pretty after that.
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by FlatTire
One night I found the roll center to be on top of my roof! The car wasnt too pretty after that.
That is the most definitive explanation of the existence of "roll center" so far in this thread! Now someone will say that was more related to center of gravity.........
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by b1driver
Acording to this theory, would moving shock mounts on frontend also change moment center?
No. Front end is independent wishbone suspension which is a completely different mechanical model than a beam axle suspension which is what we're dealing with in the rear end.
-
Regardless of what theory we subscribe to on how to find the roll center, it is important to know that you are finding the STATIC roll center with the car at ride height. So if you're interested in knowing how the car will handle while you're following the pace truck, this is very useful information. But our cars are hiked up the majority of the time which drastically raises the CoG and shifts the RC to the left. It also changes shock angles, etc.
Oh yeah and by they way, when you apply the gas and the lift bar moves up, the j-bar pinion mount moves up also. Don't forget to factor that in :-)
In seriousness, the important thing to know if you wanted to understand it from an engineering standpoint, is the moment arm. The moment arm is the line between the CoG and the RC. Ultimately, its length and angle is what affects handling. This is what we are really changing when we move RC.
-
rc
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
Regardless of what theory we subscribe to on how to find the roll center, it is important to know that you are finding the STATIC roll center with the car at ride height. So if you're interested in knowing how the car will handle while you're following the pace truck, this is very useful information. But our cars are hiked up the majority of the time which drastically raises the CoG and shifts the RC to the left. It also changes shock angles, etc.
Oh yeah and by they way, when you apply the gas and the lift bar moves up, the j-bar pinion mount moves up also. Don't forget to factor that in :-)
In seriousness, the important thing to know if you wanted to understand it from an engineering standpoint, is the moment arm. The moment arm is the line between the CoG and the RC. Ultimately, its length and angle is what affects handling. This is what we are really changing when we move RC.
I think my head just exploded.
I think there should be lifeguards in the genepool.
-
Couldn`t agree more matt49.
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
No. Front end is independent wishbone suspension which is a completely different mechanical model than a beam axle suspension which is what we're dealing with in the rear end.
If your solid rod theory applies to the solid rear axle in changing the effective roll center, why would it not change the effective roll center up front? If you move the upper shock mount it can change dynamic roll rate, making the car feel like it has a softer or stiffer spring, charging how fast and far that corner travels. Obviously it doesn't change the RC statically, but it doesn't change the rear RC statically by having a solid rod in place of a shock. I've heard many differing opinions on this, just curious on your take..
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Bcollins82
If your solid rod theory applies to the solid rear axle in changing the effective roll center, why would it not change the effective roll center up front? If you move the upper shock mount it can change dynamic roll rate, making the car feel like it has a softer or stiffer spring, charging how fast and far that corner travels. Obviously it doesn't change the RC statically, but it doesn't change the rear RC statically by having a solid rod in place of a shock. I've heard many differing opinions on this, just curious on your take..
You answered your own question. On the front, it only affects wheel rate.
On the rear, the point that the mass of the car contacts the rear axle assembly is the upper coilover mount.
Modern Day Wedge Racing
Florence -2
Atomic - 2
-
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by MasterSbilt_Racer
You answered your own question. On the front, it only affects wheel rate.
On the rear, the point that the mass of the car contacts the rear axle assembly is the upper coilover mount.
MBRacer, do you think that is the main reason chassis builders designate rear spring lengths?
-
Spring length is not what he means when he says upper coilover mount. The car doesn't load the top of the spring, it loads the top mount. Spring length doesn't affect handling in any way unless you are so short that you're in a coil-bind situation or so long that you are in a spring bow situation causing interference with the shock body.
But pretty common spring lengths are LF-10, RF-12, LR-14, RR-12. Longer on the LF if you're down pretty low (like under 350).
-
Bcollins82,
Good question because I have thought about that also. If you had a 1000 pound spring on the RF, it would certainly decrease roll rate and visually it seems that it would change roll center also but this is never taken into consideration in front roll center calculations. I think the reason that it doesn't is because front roll center has to do with how the two moment centers (or front view swing arms) interact with each other. And for lack of a better way to put, the left hand doesn't really know what the right hand is doing.
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
Spring length is not what he means when he says upper coilover mount. The car doesn't load the top of the spring, it loads the top mount. Spring length doesn't affect handling in any way unless you are so short that you're in a coil-bind situation or so long that you are in a spring bow situation causing interference with the shock body.
But pretty common spring lengths are LF-10, RF-12, LR-14, RR-12. Longer on the LF if you're down pretty low (like under 350).
Im not sold 100% that spring length doesn't affect handling. When computing roll angles of front and rear suspensions, you have to measure from the top of each coil spring to the ground. I do know from experience that trying to match roll angles from front to rear, produces faster and more consistent handling, esp when the track slicks off.
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by drtrkr244
Im not sold 100% that spring length doesn't affect handling. When computing roll angles of front and rear suspensions, you have to measure from the top of each coil spring to the ground. I do know from experience that trying to match roll angles from front to rear, produces faster and more consistent handling, esp when the track slicks off.
I believe it was carerra that did testing with data acquisition at Eldora and proved to themselves that spring length didn't matter.
Modern Day Wedge Racing
Florence -2
Atomic - 2
-
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
Regardless of what theory we subscribe to on how to find the roll center, it is important to know that you are finding the STATIC roll center with the car at ride height. So if you're interested in knowing how the car will handle while you're following the pace truck, this is very useful information. But our cars are hiked up the majority of the time which drastically raises the CoG and shifts the RC to the left. It also changes shock angles, etc.
Oh yeah and by they way, when you apply the gas and the lift bar moves up, the j-bar pinion mount moves up also. Don't forget to factor that in :-)
In seriousness, the important thing to know if you wanted to understand it from an engineering standpoint, is the moment arm. The moment arm is the line between the CoG and the RC. Ultimately, its length and angle is what affects handling. This is what we are really changing when we move RC.
I don't have any special tools, just a tape measure and a plumb bob, but I did some testing a while back on this subject, with no shocks on and the car at ride height on jacks, I used the method of determining the rear roll center to be half way between the pan hard mounting points, then dropped a plumb bob from chassis down through that line, as I jacked the car into dynamic roll, left side up and right side down, the plumb bob moved to the right, which to me means roll center moved to left, using the between pan hard mounting point theory. my question is, how do you incorporate the spring mounting points into this?
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
Bcollins82,
Good question because I have thought about that also. If you had a 1000 pound spring on the RF, it would certainly decrease roll rate and visually it seems that it would change roll center also but this is never taken into consideration in front roll center calculations. I think the reason that it doesn't is because front roll center has to do with how the two moment centers (or front view swing arms) interact with each other. And for lack of a better way to put, the left hand doesn't really know what the right hand is doing.
Yeah, that is what I had always been taught. And I know most people subscribe to that theory. But I've also had people in the industry who are much smarter than me argue that theory. Lol I asked one to please clarify this when he mentioned it. He simply said if you have 500s across the front, then put a 300rf and 700lf in the car will it change the point the car actually rolls around? Yes, obviously it does... He then said OK, any argument that front spring rate doesn't change the dynamic roll center is invalid. It was hard for me to argue against that point... Definitely an interesting subject.
-
There is definitely something to the fact that we are dealing with independent suspensions up front. That being said, the engineering books that teach where front roll center is also usually assumed symmetrical suspension all the way down to spring rates. So my argument for why it matters in the rear could certainly be extended to the front.
That got me thinking...These days, most folks agree that a softer RF spring helps the car turn on entry. This is contrary to the old school thinking "heavy spring gets the weight" that was applicable when the cars ran much flatter. But it does seem to work today. My theory on WHY has been 3 pronged:
1) More RF travel allows for more RC migration to a lower position
2) More RF travel usually yields more camber gain
3) More RF travel usually means the LR stays in hike and gets more rear steer
All of the above would help turn the car and supersede any losses in tire loading due to the softer RF spring.
But now I'm wondering if we should also consider the theory that the softer RF is moving the "real" roll center to the left (toward the stiffer spring) which is giving the moment arm more leverage on the RF contact patch.
Thoughts???
-
![Quote](images/misc/quote_icon.png) Originally Posted by Matt49
There is definitely something to the fact that we are dealing with independent suspensions up front. That being said, the engineering books that teach where front roll center is also usually assumed symmetrical suspension all the way down to spring rates. So my argument for why it matters in the rear could certainly be extended to the front.
That got me thinking...These days, most folks agree that a softer RF spring helps the car turn on entry. This is contrary to the old school thinking "heavy spring gets the weight" that was applicable when the cars ran much flatter. But it does seem to work today. My theory on WHY has been 3 pronged:
1) More RF travel allows for more RC migration to a lower position
2) More RF travel usually yields more camber gain
3) More RF travel usually means the LR stays in hike and gets more rear steer
All of the above would help turn the car and supersede any losses in tire loading due to the softer RF spring.
But now I'm wondering if we should also consider the theory that the softer RF is moving the "real" roll center to the left (toward the stiffer spring) which is giving the moment arm more leverage on the RF contact patch.
Thoughts???
What happens when the lf leaves the racing surface?
Modern Day Wedge Racing
Florence -2
Atomic - 2
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
-
Forum Rules
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:52 AM.
|
|
Bookmarks