front Triangulation idea!!!

[COXJ]

ok i know i cant draw on paint but check it out i think it gets the basic idea acrosshttp://community.webshots.com/photo/63626949/84448859zMKMPu
the red is your normal long arm set up the yellow is a currie like j arm set up traingulated to the center of axel. is there any reason why this wouldnt work?

WIll

[Beezil]

What this will give you, esentially, is a front suspension that behaves exactly like a radius arm, without the need for a trackbar....and, there are some fabricating and joint issues you'll need to think hard about.....I have not drawn out, or printed your model, to see if I could plot any pinion movement, but if that program you are using allows for any kind of motion plotting, you may find that you are leaving lots of room for axle rotation, since the upper and lower arms are operating on the same arc center, even though they have different arc radii.......

I'm no expert, I'm int he process of researching and building my own set-up, but I'm not too wild about this concept for many reasons....

[COXJ]

what if you raise the front/center j arm mounting locations to just above the axel tube and then the lowers just below the axel tube? obtw im using ms paint fyi i havent started my engineering classes yet and wont for about a year. ill try to make another sketch right quick

WIll

[keith haw]

I'm no expert or even close. But you might want to think about the routing of the arms.. I'd think it would be better to run them OVER the axle instead of under it, better ground clearence.
Keith

[COXJ]

http://community.webshots.com/photo/63626949/84453282tBRFeC

there is the link to the re design for axel twist. any way keith if you go under the jeep you will notice that you have almost no vert clearence if you are running long arms they hit the drive shaft and the oil pan. by running them under the axel you solve the clearence isue and if you fallow any of curries product line or watch rock crawling and se there rig or pick up i believe july isue of JP the strangler all use the J arms cuz they give you the movement of a longer streight arm so i figure mount the triangulated arm just in front of the others would make i believe the same arc so ya have a radius arm like beezil said

WIll

[keith haw]

OK that makes sense. Hadn't thought about hitting the pan,ect.

Keith

[Beezil]

no, yer not following me......

"axle twist"....meaning "caster change".....

the way I'm plotting it, you are going to have SICK pinion angle rotation.....

[COXJ]

what happens when ya run short uppers and long uppers? or what would happen if you move the try links folward = amount on the frame ya know what i am sayin there? like if the try links are 4 in folward of the arms then move the mounting for the try arms folward 4 in? would what work?

WIll

[Beezil]

the way I see it your axle would "flip-flop" forward and backwards and easy 20 degrees or so....there is no axle control....

this has to do with how obtuse your triangle is......

if point a is your frame mount (both upper and lower share the plane of "a") and b is your lower, and c is your upper, you included angles do not allow for stability....the axle mount of the red arm is free to swing under and over the axle mount of the yellow arm....the angle b-c-a is WAY too obtuse.

you need to have at least 7-8" of seperation between your axle mounts, perpendicular to the radial of your frame mounts to achieve rotational stability of the axle tube.....

[Beezil]

furthermore, once you control axle wrap, your axle is still moving in an arc and is esentially a radius arm, so at that point, theres no benefit from having curves in the wishbone arm, as far as I can see from plotting your axle movement....

http://users.rcn.com/beezil/public/1.jpg

[COXJ]

i got ya there makes more scence now. so you got a program that lets ya plot points and move them around to se how something works? if ya do if you are fimiler with toyota design the pardon the crude attempt but like an f layed down were one arm controols all move ment of axel from a pinion stand point. then use a triangulatin in center or would this bind? i need some software so i can throw these ideas around in my head

WIll

[Beezil]

http://users.rcn.com/beezil/public/22.JPG

if you can imagine in your head the motion the axle takes, you might be able to understand what I'm plotting.....

if the yellow arm stays fixed, I content that the angularity of the red arm in relation to the other fixed points allows it to move within the shaded red area......

[Beezil]

aboutn the only thing that keeps the axle rotating in the above senario is vehicle weight....I could see where someone could utilize something liek this and build in some anti-squat, but it can't work that way on a front axle.....

[COXJ]

what program are you doing this on? i like, i want. any way i se how this works now it would work if the axel only moved streight up and down liek jumpin a jeep not flexing out. thanks for the info.

WIll

[Beezil]

what program???

(snicker)......................................... .


photoshop!!!!!!!!!!

[COXJ]

i cant get my circles to work grrr pluss i only have paint but im gonna keep lookin. and say you keep the radius arms like you hade in moab right then ran the tri arms on the exact same plane as the long lowers this would eliminat binding right? and controol pinion motion just liek b4 try correct im tryin to work out pic lol takes me a wile not a pro

WIll

[Beezil]

I dunno paint, but on photshop, if you wanna draw circles, you center the pointer on whatever you want to be the center of the arc.....you press both the shift and alt key......i forget which button does what, but one constrains the "elliptical" tool to a circle, the other button changes between "center" and "tangent" of where you wanna locate your ellipse or circle.......

[COXJ]

i cant get any circle action for arc of suspensino in ms paint i need to go get a cumpous but its to late and i live to far from town to run to store any way. now i wont sleep great.

WIll

[Beezil]

yer like that too huh?

I hate that shit......

I'm getting four-five hours of sleep lately......

when my eyes do close, I start second guessing every design decision I made int he garage that night.....

hey if it get real bad, tie some string around a pencil, and use a wall tack as your pointer.....


"emergancy compass"

[COXJ]

i think i was 2 sec ahead of ya on that now my calender is on the ground but at least i can draw circles lol. this is why i wanna go to engineering school so i can actualy know what im talkin bout instead of just making guesses educated but still guesses

WIll

[Beezil]

I thought most people went to engineering school to hang out with other trekkies?

[COXJ]

i gotta go to colage for sumething right i figue why not go to school and lurn something that can help me and fellow jeepers along the way and maby even get me a job i enjoy

WIll

[Willis]

At least you guys think about design stuff, I sit and think "Oh, sh!t, did I tighten that drain plug on that oil change??". Now I'm not talking some Geo here, Ferrari, Maserati, and Lamborghini engines cost just a bit more. I'd say that I've not had any second guesses come back to me yet, but soon as I do, tomorrow morning there will be a 360 on a hook. Just my dumb luck.

[MaXJohnson]

It's hard to tell if you guys are bonding or post padding.

Maybe both :D

[COXJ]

im looking at this and its lookin promising if you keep lowers on same plane as triangulated lowers so esentually 4 lcas and run a radius arm tqr arm what ever off just one or both streight lcas i think you can do it you maintain the same geometry with regards to anti dive aquat as we do now but you lose the track bar. check me on this Y /\ l kinda ya se what im gettin at there just one upper controol arm to set pinion like i believe you have up front or had up front. let me knwo

WIll

[Beezil]

sorry Max, I'm not into bondage.

[MaXJohnson]

I thought "Beezil" was Spanish for "Bondo" :confused:

[CW]

Am I missing something or are you now contemplating a 6 link front with 4 lcas and 1 or 2 uppers? What would the befefits be with this as apposed to a 3 or 4 link radius arm setup? There would be more links to bind with your setup, thus possibly a lot less articulation. It is a cool idea though.

[Beezil]

I sure as hell am not proposing that! 6 links? that's crack!

[CW]

Originally posted by COXJ
esentually 4 lcas and run a radius arm tqr arm what ever off just one or both streight lcas

I count at least 5 links in that setup. Please tell me if Im missing something.:confused:

[CW]

This is what I invision from the last description. (http://www.geocities.com/caseysphysics/suspension.html)

[MaXJohnson]

There was no benefit to the original design other than bright colors. As already mentioned, it is nothing more than multiple arms doing the job of a simple radius arm. Extra complexity with no gain in functionality.

Why are you guys trying to improve on it? If you want triangulation, you don't need 4 lower arms to accomplish it.

Time for the shi+ can.

[Beezil]

if you are talking about my picture, I was merely showing where the arms need to go, as in RELOCATE.....not ADDING a pair.

that thing is no more than a radius arm set-up with goofey arms and no tracbar. If you want your axle operating on a single arc, there is no reason to design your arms to be any more sophisticated than straight links.

Co, maybe yo misunderstood my pic, but your update still shows the red arm.......get rid of it, it isn't doing anything that the green arm doesn't already do....then, put your yellow arm mounting point where the red one used to go.....but of course I mean for it to go in the center left-to-right of the axle tube for adequate triangulation since you are running no tracbar........

this will be my 3rd edit.................

actually....what I said above, and the addition I was gonna make here.........delete the drawing.......start over.

You show a single frame point. That is a radius arm, plain and simple. if that's what you want fine, there are straight-foreward ways to do it, such as the "clayton style" or whatever you wanna call it......

if you want to get rid of the tracbar, thats a different story all together......

think about a rigid a-arm for your upper, and straight links for your lowers.....the articulating joint for the wishbone is the secret to sucess.

I will try to post pics of my latest entry to this topic on a seperate thread....

[CW]

That was the point I was trying to make. That design becomes overly complicated and would produce no better performance than a radius arm setup.

[COXJ]

just a thought but can you run triangulation on the lowers then a single upper or is that to much stress?

WIll

[Beezil]

That idea sure makes it easier to think about what the hell you would do about the oil pan, but it presents some serious issues about clearance behind the front axle.......

LUCKILY, I am planning on rolling my wishbone arm on a cnc roller-bender so I'll be able to roll a perfect parabola around the pan, but I STILL may have to cut the front corners off the pan.....

If I'm able to design a shape that has a good combination of clearance and strength, I may be able to offer a DIY piece if this mod gets popular in the future as long arm mods are now.....(but it won't be cheap with one-off setup costs)

seems like a lot of work to accomodate doing the triangulated arm up top, but the upside is ground clearance, not to mention the driveshaft issues!

[COXJ]

if ya get that try set up lookin good send me a pic or a drawing or sumthin i would like to se

WIll