John:
yeah, I agree with Dave, and he gave a nice, simple illustration.
Let me add that I "did the math" on this a couple of years ago (would you
believe I can't remember where I put it?) Anyway, I remember enough to say
that I was very dissapointed at how much time I COULD NOT (theoretically)
keep the tires on the Salt at 400mph, using realistic wheel loading (about
1000lb/ tire, if I remember), and the lightest unsprung weight I could
imagine. (I think I was modeling a long-course "dip" I remember seeing in
2001, which was pretty severe by usual Bonneville standards.) I think the
best suspension model I could imagine only would keep the tires on the salt
about 80%. And I was assuming perfect damping, which is not easy to
achieve.
On the other hand-- the mathematical model for the "rigid" version would
have only been in contact about 50% of the time (or LESS--depending on
inflation pressure, downforce, etc.)-- so "suspended" definitely looked
BETTER, mathematically-- even if it was a long way from perfect!
Russ, #1226B
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-land-speed@autox.team.net
[mailto:owner-land-speed@autox.team.net]On Behalf Of Dave Dahlgren
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2003 2:08 PM
To: John Burk
Cc: land-speed@autox.team.net
Subject: Re: suspension/traction question
If you could yet a track that was perfectly smooth and level and zero wind
along
with zero slip at any power output then it is a perception.. For anything
else
it ought to help... A solid suspension has the equivilnet of two kick balls
at
each end for the suspension. I can roll one down a perfectly smooth road
very
easy until they hit a pebble and are undamped.. Try it sometime.
Dave
John Burk wrote:
> Is the benefit of suspension actual or a
> perception - John
|