Feasibility Discussion on Modular Vehicles

I see I miss spoke the 7.5 kw generator from here:

http://www.duropower.com/item.asp?PID=419&FID=1&level=0

more than 100 pounds, with an electric starter & battery, 240/120vac

More question about diesel fuel. What can I do with it?

Run a jet engine. Burn it in an oil-burning furnace. Use it to clean parts. Use it in lawn torches. Use it to run a diesel engine.

Is their a limit on how small of a motor can use fuel injection?

No. At least not in a practical sense. There are 50cc motor scooters with direct injection (meaning injection directly into a pressurised cylinder rather than into an intake manifold).

Is the air/fuel ratio of diesel motors about the same air/fuel ratio of gasoline motors? Are injectors about the same size?

The air/fuel ratio varies widely in a diesel, because there is no throttle. Diesels virtually always run with excess air (from a lot to a little) whereas gasoline engines run at very close to stoichiometric all the time. The injectors can be roughly the same physical size, but the construction is different. Diesel injectors operate at much higher pressures (which has to be much higher than peak combustion pressure). Most gasoline engine fuel injectors operate at only 45 psi, because they inject upstream from the intake valve. A few gasoline engines are direct injected, which requires higher fuel injection pressure.

To broaden my options, will diesel fuel work in a gasoline engine?

No.

Ray,

There are quite a few engine makers for you to chose from, in your quest. Hatz, Yanmar, Kubota, Honda, Yamaha (I think), and all of the Chinese copies of these, Lombardini and others Italian.

To get under the 100lbs weight you have imposed you'll probably find that the HP is limited to about 4 - 5, and that will be a recoil rope start, not electric, and not include the fuel tank.

When you calc the gen. losses in, is this enough to carry your load.

Remember, 746W per HP ( and that's when they're all home, and in good fettle) and lots of losses to heat.

From where you are just Google "small diesel engines mfrs". We're talking lawnmower/lawn tractor/pump etc, air cooled.

Cheers,

Stu.

ps. Someone is running diesel in a motorcycle. Don't know who. Be a good start for you if you can find one. S.

Diesel and Ethanol in gasoline engines?

Hi Stu et al,

Someone is running diesel in a motorcycle. Don't know who. Be a good start for you if you can find one. S.

Any idea if this is an actual Diesel engine Stu or is a petrol engine running on diesel.

Would diesel fuel work in an unmodified petrol engine?

If not, what changes do you think would have to be made in order for a modern computer controlled (this part could be a real pain) SI IC petrol engine?

What about a non computerized controlled one &/or one that was 'hacked' and the code modified to optimize it for the partial or completely running on diesel. I would have no idea of what modifications would be required to make this work and I doubt that the outcome would be better than running it with the 'hotter, dryer' fuel it was designed for. For one thing I would think that it would be very hard to start, especially when cold. Any thoughts / knowledge on these?

If this could be made to work, do you think that there would be any advantage to it or would it only be worse for trying to use it in an engine that was not designed for it?

I drove a '71 Datsun 510 for decades that I bought for $275 and had completely rebuilt and drove for decades until a much larger truck whipped it out with me in it.

At one point in time I encountered some 'moon shine' and got a bottle of ethanol that was 92% pure with the remainder of it being primarily water.

I dumped it in with a full tank of gas as an experiment and basically it wouldn't run worth a damn to the point that is was undriveable and was a real pain and I considered this to be a 'failed experiment'.

Given alcohols affinity for water including absorbing it out of the atmosphere, I've often wondered about the implications of this in ethanol powered vehicles.

Can you shed any light on this for us Stu ?

Regards,

Doug

Doug,

Even my 5yr old grandson knows you can't fuel a petrol engine with diesel fuel.

Why do you want people to answer your postulate all the time? You must know it's unworkable before you ask?

As I stated in another post ( dunno where) I'm not here to lecture or do anyone's homework, just give a little guidance in the hope you'll pick up the clue and do the hard yards. Just like most of the guys have done.

You should make it an urgent ambition to obtain the Bosch Automotive Handbook, published by Robert Bosch GmbH, now in it's 7th edition, and current. By all means start with an earlier edition,--4 or 5. Try Amazon. Ebay. Powells.

Read it ,learn it, understand it, and then come back here, and we'll really talk engines. Cheers, Stu

Stuey:

Even my 5yr old grandson knows you can't fuel a petrol engine with diesel fuel.

I have virtually no practical experience with diesels. It seemed very unlikely but one hears about it, mostly in here.

You are the one that said you were an experienced engine designer.

You asked me if I knew why Diesels have such exceptionally low bottom end wear.

Why, don't YOU know why YET?

To think, all that formal specialized education and experience and you still don't understand such simple things. Tis a pity and a shame. Perhaps I could direct you towards and give you the names of some rather technical compilations that might help you to figure it out all by yourself.

….pick up the clue and do the hard yards. Just like most of the guys have done.

I've been engaged in such mechanical things all of my life. I managed to 'figure out enough about it' to earn my living as an independent mechanic quite successfully for many years and figured out, understood and repaired everything that came my way.

This most uninformed, ignorant and truly unworthy one makes humble apologies for disturbing you about matters of my ignorance oh Most Great and Exalted One!

I have considerably more theoretical knowledge and understanding about heat engines than most self educated 'back yard mechanics' have. I guess I'm just not as sharp as you and don't have it ALL figured out yet.

This is not 'homework' and I'm not 'studying for any exams'.

This is a place to quest for and explore, expand and share ideas and knowledge.

If I already knew ALL of the answers, I wouldn't be asking. The only 'dumb questions' are the ones that people don't know but don't ask about out of trepidation of such answers, scorn and belittlement.

If you do not wish to respond and answer, then don't.

Otherwise spare me your platitudes, take your own advice, and don't 'lecture'.

Before you start giving me grief about my 'attitude', I responded to you in the same 'tone' that you addressed me with.

Which is nothing like the way or manner in which I originally asked you or anyone else for that matter that wished to include anything about these things.

I readily admit my 'weak points' and lack of knowledge and don't pretend to know otherwise when I don't. I say what I do know, what I think may be true and why, and outright say that I just don't know. My response to Ray Cox about diesels for a hybrid is a good example. Everything I said to Ray would have been completely unnecessary for you. But as Ray asked about the compression ratios for diesels, it was an indication of his level of knowledge in it and so responded as I thought was fitting for the circumstances. I stated and explained the advantages of a diesel over a petrol engine, and even about the advantages of the diesels and the electrical generator being well matched. But when it came to power generation, I know that compared to modern developments in electrical motors and generators, I'm aware of just how much I don't know; though by the very definition there is bound to be some 'I don't know what I DON'T KNOW!' There is a LOT more people here that know a LOT more about it than I do, and I indicated as such and left it to those who are knowledgeable in these matters. If I would have been among a bunch of youngsters that were curious about this, I could fill in some of the basic facts about the science behind it. But that is most certainly not the case here.

In regards to the ethanol, I told you of my own very limited failed 'experiment' with it, but I know that it is also used quite successful in significant quantities (Brazil comes to mind, as well as in high performance race cars. So I am curious to know about how they overcome the problem of the ethanol's affinity to water and the problems that it creates. Getting and keeping ethanol up to +99% purity and KEEPING it there requires some serious chemistry and added expense. I can see perhaps how it being fuel injected perhaps wouldn't be as problematic as with carbureted engines.

Obviously I am well aware that any positive displacement heat engine is 'pump', they are synonymous.

One of the hazards of being 'self educated is big holes and gaps in areas. When faced with a practical problem. I focus on it until it is solved.

Really Stu, I wouldn't of given you attitude if you hadn't imitated it. I only responded in kind. Frankly you where both quite condescending and belittling in the manner of your response. Which I returned in kind as a 'mirror'. A lot easier to 'feel' it, and the effects of it when on the receiving end of it.

Seems sort of damned if you do, damned if you don't in here.

When I state things that I have an understanding of including the theory and principals behind them, but don't' necessarily have the needed formulas, data and numbers in my immediate storage banks, , then I'm blasted for my ignorance.

When I acknowledge that I don't know something and make inquiries into it, then I'm portrayed as a lazy ignoramus.

I'm starting to think that all of use bipedal automations would be better off installed in separate isolated cubicles and regurgitating everything we know into an artificial intelligence bank and create a big 'engineering wiki'.

Being a 'big guy' (physically) and in spite of the way I have responded quite assertively and fiery when faced with the same, I am really quite on the passive side and quite laid back by nature, though paradoxically I do tend to be quite 'intense' by nature (triple Scorpio!) This tends to make me a ready target for bullying &/or for power tripping egos. I learned the hard way along time ago that in spite of my extreme reluctance to do so and engage on the same level long ago that 'turn the other check' is a great ethos if the one someone is dealing with operates in the same manner, But for power tripping egos &/or bullies, it is just an invitation to have the other cheek struck even harder and then it goes downhill rather quickly and deteriorates into much worse.

Like most relatively sane people, I do not like confrontations nor thrive on the adrenaline from them, but as I've indicated above, my responding in kind when faced with those that get into power tripping egos &/or are just out and out bullies, It IS the most effective way to prevent from it spiraling out of control, decaying into much worse situations that can becoming entrenched quite quickly. So reluctantly I do what I have to do to prevent such series of events.

As I've also indicated, I AM someone that seeks out sincere, meaningful communications and am inherently curious and seek knowledge about just about everything.

I was very doubtful about the usage of diesels fuels in petrol engines, but have found threads in here about people taking about doing it. As I said, by practical experience with diesels is virtually nonexistent. I'm not intending to modify a petrol Otto to utilize diesel, I'm not going to spend significant amounts of time that is basically wasted. Remember your advice to me on 'time management' that is valid with me. But as I've just indicated, I'm not totally clueless about it. Me tracking down the book you indicated and 'making it into a study coarse for me now WOULD be gross tiem mismanagement in my current life/situation. IF there comes a time when it is of immediate practical usage of to me, I hope I remember the name of it, which is very unlikely. But you telling me to 'go away, find and read and stdy it and only then dare to speak of any such matters is downright patronizing, condescending and belittling and what's more you know it.

But that doesn't prevent me from being curious or seeking out the knowledge to understand such things. It's how I've come to have at least some understanding of pretty well all the sciences, both hard and soft, technologies and all of the trades.

I am very much a 'multi disciplinarian and as such often come up with solutions to problems just because I can transpose knowledge between fields. So for the most part, when I have the opportunity to learn about something I don't know about I avail myself of the opportunity when I can. Obviously like most peoples, this tends to apply more to areas where I have a keener interest and perhaps an attitude for.

I never know when some little tidbit that I've picked up will be useful. Including passing information on to others that are likewise interested in it. Often within such interactions there tends to be more figured out and the knowledge advances. If it is a 'practical task' that I need to resolve, my approach is very much that of being a 'problem solver'. I can't begin to count the number of times my broad knowledge base has aided me considerably many, many times.

As someone who IS well educated, experienced and knowledgeable about these specific things Stu, I was looking to you as someone that is so and has the well earned authority to 'know' where others are trying things haphazardly or are acting out of shear ignorance, perhaps to the point of bringing about quite disastrous, destructive outcomes, and even dangerous.

But as is often quite appropriately quoted, eh beginning of ALL knowledge is "I do NOT know'

I'm not just a know it all out of changes of my own personality, I am ne because I'm curious and interested in almost everything and always learning: both about the concert, physical world, and the 'unseen one that stands behind it and that created and sustains it.

All you really had to say was, nope in spite of other delusions or ignorance, diesel doesn't work it doesn't work.

So here is one for you Stu: some time recently in here you made the statement that current gasoline engines are about 25% fuel efficient and that there was basically no way to get much higher than that.

I know this to be incorrect. I even had some quite forthright debates with PhDs and Doctorates of Physics. I came up with a very simple rudimentary apparatus and experiment that tested it and proved me to be correct. My guestimation is that a further 10% ~ 15% in fuel efficiency is quite readily possible and perhaps as much as 25% or even more of an increase. What is it ?

FYI: This is not about one upsmanship or egos Stu, it's just an interesting puzzle in your area of expertise. There have been many an invention or process figured out by people, just because they didn't have the (formal) education and knowledge and had been 'taught' that it 'was not possible' so thus never tried even tried to. As they say 'Scinece marches on, progresses and moves Death by Death.

I've been blasted for not contributing or sharing anything in here because it is 'proprietary. On some case this is correct, as it is for many other's here. I make no apologies for such things, but this I will readily share. Whats more, there are numerous people in here that would likely have the skills and knowledge to implement it. It would be implementable with current technology, though one vital piece would require modifications for significant market penetration. It could also be implemented on mass produced vehicles and would require less added complexity and expense that are involved in manufacturing hybrids.

As is VERY often the case with such things, they are often manifested by separate individuals, science/tech teams working in isolations form each other and without the knowledge of the other entities. This is true for this as well. An elderly American gentleman took it further and successfully modified a 1 cylinder 4 stroke and documented increases in efficiency over and above what I have stated.

So here is one for you Stu et al: some time recently in here you made the statement that current gasoline engines are about 25% fuel efficient and that there was basically no way to get much higher than that.

I know this to be incorrect. I even had some quite forthright debates with PhDs and Doctorates of Physics over this. I came up with a very simple rudimentary apparatus and experiment that tested it and proved me to be correct. My guestimation is that a further 10% ~ 15% in fuel efficiency is quite readily possible and perhaps as much as 25% or even more of an increase. What is it ?

FYI: This is not about one upsmanship or egos Stu, it's just an interesting puzzle in your area of expertise. There have been many an invention or process figured out by people, just because they didn't have the (formal) education and knowledge and thus had never been 'taught' that it 'was not possible' so they never knew that 'they couldn't do it' and thus did it! As they say 'Science slowly and inexorably progresses and marches on Death by Death.'

.....this I will readily share. What's more, there are numerous people in here that would likely have the skills and knowledge to implement it. It would be implementable with current technology, though one vital piece would require modifications for significant market penetration. It could also be implemented on mass produced vehicles and would require less added complexity and expense that are involved in manufacturing current hybrids.

As is VERY often the case with such things, they are often manifested by separate individuals, science/tech teams working in isolations form each other and without the knowledge of the other entities. This is true for this as well. An elderly American gentleman took it further and successfully modified a 1 cylinder 4 stroke IC engine and documented increases in efficiency over and above what I have stated.

The above post is the Starting point for this 'Automotive 'Energy egg' hunt' and gives the objective. It is from the end of my previous posting #389 for the beginning of this 'game'.

Everyone is invited to play.

I'll respond with 'Burning, Hot, Warmer, Warm' or 'Cool, Colder, Frozen and 'I'M FRIGGIN FREEZING to DEATH OUT HERE! LET ME IN RIGHT NOWwwwww!' as is (somewhat) the fashion in such games.

Here is the first of the (very rare) clues/hints:

This 'Hot or Cold' has two meanings in this context.

Sometimes it will be the traditional mode, other times it won't BE!

Geeze, talk about a 'helpful?' starter clue eh!

OK, I'll give you more help at the starting point: what I just said about the 'duality of the 'hot vs cold' feedback' IS the first clue!

Good luck! (< 8)

I'll be sporting about it though. If anyone figures out what this 'double meaning of 'Hot or Cold' is, I'll tell you. After that, I'll tell you which of the two meanings is applicable to insights that your sleuthing uncovers.

I will allow some 'initial out right guessing, but only within reason. This is not '2,000 questions' You'll have to do better than that!

It will be even better luck if it ends up being implemented on large scales, which is quite feasible and can also be done very quickly.

Auto manufacturers can have this into mass market vehicles available for sale within a year IF they really want to.

Do we patent? and license it and use the revenue it to further some of our projects and inventions in here that are far enough along to help to get them into the commercial marketplace ?

Or do we 'give it to the world?'

I'm thinking that just the ways we are going about it that anyone that wants to do so can. In which case if we can generate some revenue out of this, it could go towards furthering it and assisting getting it into the (mass) market.

Time will tell.

Ready?

(8 >) Lets Play (< 8)

In my understanding, internal combustion engines are absolutely limited by the Carnot Cycle which rules over all "Heat Engines".

basically you are limited by the materials used (melting point) and also by the fact that you have to have a difference of temperatures that it cycles between.

but I'm a beginner compared to all y'all.

I would however appreciate at least some commentary on Modular systems...

Chris

I want to thank everyone for the comments regarding diesel fuel. The info given was quite helpful; found out things I missed before.

My frustration in not being able to draw an idea about a modular frame suspension influenced me to kick out this off subject topic.

My apologies

Hi Ray,

The weight is definatley a challenge for a diesel.

Did you find and indentify an appropriate Diesle engine?

If so, what is it?

Can you tell us about the details ?

I'm just playing with ideas now, targeting affordability.

The least expensive diesel engine I found around 100 LBS. is 116 LBS, 9 HP, and @ $800.

http://www.duropower.com/item.asp?PID=300&amp;amp;FID=3&level=1

I still have to figure out what I can do with it.

For another example; this is not affordable. http://www.northerntool.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/product_6970_405826_405826

For fuel preservative http://www.theepicenter.com/tow021799.html

For diesel boost https://www.amsoil.com/storefront/acb.aspx

To explain what I 'm playing with I will be brief.

For distance traveling I want a vehicle to be all combustion and less traction. For day to day and changing velocity I'm shooting for all electric with ample traction. No transmission needed because the electrical does that. The electric should switch from delta parallel to delta series to get range up to combustion mode. The only connection from the combustion to drive the electric regeneration is drawn from tire to tire connection through the road. Hopefully clutching logic will stay simple to keep transition smooth. If I have to pedal to keep it cheap then so be it.

A modular platform would be helpful to let the cheap thing evolve.

Hi Ray,

Planning on taking it off Road on to trails etc Ray ?

Like into mountain trails etc, of just want it to be able to get off of main roads?

How many seats & how many wheels ?

Regards,

Doug

Hi Ray,

So you are thinking that going modular will make it easier to upgrade to newer technologies as they come out?

Definitely, a big price jump in the 2 you have listed to be sure. However the difference in power output is likewise quite a bit higher.

I see that the lower priced outfit has a 10 KW engine and generator combo but is a petrol engine though. Too bad as the combination is quite cost effective in comparison. Diesels do tend to be more expensive.

I wonder how 'stinky and noisy' these small Diesels are?

Any idea of what sorts of voltage (AC or DC?) you are going to utilize for the electric motor and batteries?

I'm not sure what you mean by: 'The only connection from the combustion to drive the electric regeneration is drawn from tire to tire connection through the road' though? Does this mean that both power sources will only have a drive train to the wheels themselves as opposed to them being 'tied together' (intermittently) otherwise?

Are you thinking in terms of something like: the electrical motor driving the front wheels and the IC engine driving the rear wheels for example? Or ??

I had not thought of that method though I can see that in some ways it would make it easier to implement if going that route.

Most hybrids use the IC engine to drive a power generator so that the engine can operate as efficiently as possible. I hadn't thought of the first method before, if that is what you even have in mind?

Are you working at building one for year round use?

How many seats & storage etc?

I learned of an interesting conversion kit a couple of years ago, and even tried to get the exclusive marketing rights for the province I'm in. It is a small single cylinder motor that is a 'replacement' unit for standard size front wheels on bicycles. The whole motor revolves and the crankshaft is what attaches and bolts to the front forks and does not rotate. The fuel bottle goes where the water bottle usually goes, and there is a handle bar throttle grip like a motorcycles use. The 'starter' is the person riding it that pedals to get the motor started up from a standing start, which is an innovative good idea that helps keep the cost and weight down and reliable. I didn't see any battery of any sort in the picture of it in the short blurb in Popular Science a couple of summers ago. One is able to use both power sources when needed or desired. I think that they said the top speed was about 25 MPH give or take 5 depending on conditions. The whole conversion takes less than an hour.

Hi Doug

I think the trailer generator Like Stu said at thread 218 would be a much better idea than putting even the smallest Diesel engine onboard. But if there isn't room around for the trailer and you don't need a generator for anything else then maybe a removable Diesel engine could sit on a shelf leaving more storage in vehicle. (Hernia)

Just evaluating 100 LBS to see what kind a boost and relief, I could get on a small vehicle. It's like a spare tire but already mounted and ready to go. To keep it as simple as possible it would be independent except electric sensors and controls link to computer. Regeneration would be by push- pull through tires and would only work at higher speeds. The purpose is for higher speed distance travel not recharging. The diesel engine wouldn't even be any good for climbing at low speeds, but could boost or relief if in the right pre determined gear range. The electric motor weight is a trade off from not adding weight of a transmission to the electric motor.

Why consider so cheap?

The reason for being so vague is that I'm just playing with the idea at this point. Quality standards and expectations for the typical automobile make it risky for factories to invest in the production of minimal cars. Money is made by selling accessory and proprietary parts. Liabilities from litigation and protecting its brand name would increase. This leaves a big hole in the market. What would drive this market? It will never get real for me unless it is inexpensive and the project can be broken down into smaller jobs (modular). I think that would be the case for most individuals. Module section can be pre-manufactured for quick build kits, broadening the market with limited liability. A person can build a small kit plane with purchases and deliveries in increments, why not a car.

I'm just thinking ahead for when the lines get long at the gas stations. Even war can't keep gas in my car for ever. I can't change politics, economics, or tell the factories what to build but we as individuals can make a difference.

The main investment would go towards the electrical technology and you can expect that to evolve and change often.

For example check out the White Zombie

http://www.plasmaboyracing.com/reviews.php

Great description of modular benefits Ray! GA from me.

Low volume hybrid auto feasibility

Hi Ray et al,

I agree with you about (safety) rules, regulations and certification being a significant obstacle for small outfits/ low volume car manufacturing. Thus your approach to this and the reasoning behind it is a good idea in my mind. It's a tricky area as one would want to have everything as safe as possible with the best efficiency and the lowest pollution, but as soon as one is 'mass producing' cars it seems very unlikely that they could get below 3,000 pounds. With all the advantages of Carbon fiber construction, it is too bad that it is so expensive and requires the use of molds.

As I've said: do we really need ~2 tons ~tonnes to haul around ~100 kilograms/ ~225 pounds most of the time? Can we afford it either financially or ecologically anymore? (Fortunately) The recent hike in hydrocarbon fuels accompanied by the downturn in the economy have all but brought about the demise in the manufacturing of big, HEAVY needless SUV's in north America. Historically the increasing price of fuels has been the most effective factor behind increased efficiency. Though I believe that it was Blink's recent posting on north America's 'sense of entitlement' attitudes clearly illustrate that this has been minimal over the last couple of decades. But I believe that current financial conditions which quite likely herald significant permanent changes in economics will also FORCE changes in these attitudes, to the long term betterment of our world.

I heard today on the radio that the sale of the consumer 'Hummer' to a Chinese company by the financially troubled General Motors fell through and they won't be making them anymore. Ah shucks. NOT!

We ARE mortal after all, and I have had (all too much) personal experience with 'when your 'number's up': it's up' and it's time to move along. If one is in a head on accident with a fully loaded semi trailer in a personal vehicle of any size, the safety standards are going to make very little difference. This is at the extreme end of the scale, but there are those that ride 'exposed' on 2 wheelers. Here again, alas likewise from personal experience, if you are one 2 wheels and riding in amongst 4 wheelers with the type of mass that they have, it's a moot point 'who is in the right'. It has no effect on the laws of physics, which unlike motor vehicle legislation, can't be broken.

Years ago when I started riding my bike to machine shops in the summer, I began riding on the same main routes as motor vehicles do. It didn't take me long to figure out that 'this was nuts' for a number of reasons, and I figured out alternative routes where I only had to cross high traffic routes the minimum of times, but never rode on them.

In the city where I live, they are VERY slowly starting to incorporate bicycle routes, but tend to make the same mistake of putting them on the same primary routes. Even if they are physically separated for safety, riding in close proximity while doing heavy breathing from the exertion and 'recycling' all of that exhaust… 'YUK!'

To be fair, we do have a quite a number of 'walking trails' some of which bicycles are allowed onto, along with 'designated bike routes' that are not on main thoroughfares. To date they are primarily conceived of as being for 'recreational/fitness' bicyclists so are not necessarily effective as transportation routes to get where one needs to go. As soon as they start thinking about trying to accommodate larger numbers of cyclists for 'regular transportation' they go right back to only conceive of putting them on the high traffic main routes.

They used to have relaxed regulations in north America for fewer than 500 cars of the same model, but I'm not sure if it is applicable anymore.

It's too bad that with China's new found economic prosperity that they are actively working towards and replacing the very numerous quantities of bicycles with automobiles. In some of their large cities they are even bringing in laws to stimulate this, speed the process up and ensure that this happens.

Some 'manufacturers' of (very) small personal planes have got around the challenges of extensive and prohibitively expensive safety certification process required by commercial airplane manufacturers by providing 'everything but the labor'. There are still minimal safety requirements, but they are nowhere near what airplanes intended for transporting the public'. I don't fly often, but when I do I'm quite clear that I wouldn't want these safety standards reduced so that he planes can be made 'cheaper.'

Like many others, I have ideas about personal urban transportation vehicles that operate in 3 dimensions and not just two. But with gravity being what it is, the fallout from mishaps and accidents of such modes of transportation over heavily populated areas make them another matter entirely in comparison to ground vehicles.

I have heard numerous times over the years about the comparison of the power output and ratings between an ICE versus an electric motor was 'a horse of a different color'; with the electric motor of the same power rating as the ICE having significantly more capacity. I don't know all of the specifics and the 'math' so I won't speculate on it and will leave that for those that do to comment, clarify and quantify it in postings of their own on this matter if they wish to do so.

FYI: Traditional steam engines have maximum torque at the lowest speeds so don't require different transmission ratios. The 'Stanely Steamer' 'Rocket' built in the USA in the very early part of the 20^th century set the world land speed record of over 125 MpH in 1906 on the sands of Daytona Beach in Florida. It also regularly placed first in hill climb competitions with vehicles with other modes of power.

Are you planning on building a light weight hybrid for your own use, or sticking to providing components for them ?

The best of luck with it,

Regards,

Doug

Correction: end of second paragraph.

"The electric motor weight is a trade off from not adding weight of a transmission to the electric motor."

Meant to say:

The diesel motor weight is a trade off from not adding weight of a transmission to the diesel and/or electric motor.

I'm postulating the statement made: By Stu post 218

"With the trend to pure electrics, hybrid being only a range extender, I clearly see the demise of the auto transmission as we know and love it. Diesel electrics."

I'm looking for minimum marriage of the two.

Ultimately it would be nice to engage a reciprocating motor to a vehicle directly and mechanically to achieve its maximum efficiency. To use an electrical system as a transmission, torque converter, or clutch would introduce more losses not to mention making the electric a critical to drive component. The minimum of a clutch will always be needed to remove or engage the forces of a reciprocating motor. Yada yada yada

What I just want to come out and say is. Input the diesel into a differential, the out put of one side drives mechanically to traction, the second side will spin out extra RPM to the electrical. If the vehicle is setting still then all energy is transferred to electric. If a brake is applied to electrical side then all power is transferred to mechanical. There are numerous ways to go from there, but the result would be each link mechanical and work together or independently. Possible all wheel drive using electric link. Orientation made so differential losses are minimum in full direct traction mode.

Ray,

With respect to the latter para of your post, How much do you know about automatic shift transaxles? Seems to me , without, I must admit, a very close look, that it'd be possible to strip out one of these to accommodate just what you want to do. Leave in only the ratios you want to use and extend the input shaft right through, so you can couple the motor/generator to it at the bell housing and the diesel on the rear end. Why this way round? The electric has way more torque than the little diesel, and it needs to be fed into the device at the strongest input.

Seems to me ,from your description, that an epicyclic is just what you need.

Any good?

Cheers,

Stu

Hi Stu

You are a sharp shooter. The epicyclical gearing or planetary gearing is compact and efficient.

Thanks for pointing me in a better direction. I am going to have fun playing around with that implementation for a while.

In response to:

"Why this way round? The electric has way more torque than the little diesel, and it needs to be fed into the device at the strongest input."

That is clearly true and if I were to try to integrate the two system in a more centralized manor that would be the route to take.

I'm playing around the idea to decentralize the two systems and make it modular.

This is a simplified description of what I'm thinking.

For day to day use: I want the front end to do all the hard work. Enhance the front drive train for hard breaking (mechanical only and to break pedal), acceleration (electrical to throttle pedal), and turning; with the added traction to handle all the electric torque (isolate to front). Work the hell out of the front end. The rear end to do the least possible; to keep the vehicle tracking and isolate the regenerative breaking to rear. A multi zone throttle pedal would allow for acceleration, diesel boost, coasting and regenerative braking.

For straight cross country use: isolate all combustion drive to push from rear with the least mechanical overhead. The diesel will be slaved by electrical auxiliary control and would work like a typical overdrive mode. Use minimal electrical in the rear for several reasons; generation to charge batteries is slow, the rear could be optimize for generation and to bleed out power of the full running diesel at vehicle slower speed. My goal is to isolate as much as possible to make modular and serviceable.

The epicyclical gearing or planetary gearing would be great for the rear. It would be compact for a minimal rear end.

Ray, Maybe you can find an old auto box transaxle, cheap, or better, free, at a junkyard somewhere, pull it to pieces and look for the possibilities. VW. Alfa Romeo. Must be others.

Cheers

Stu

Hi Ray,

Frankly I thought Stu was kidding about the trailer, but I'll leave that for Stu to respond to.

If you are planning on a trike/3 wheeler, you could do away with the differential altogether on the single (back?) wheel.

Even if it is a 4 wheeler, it would be possible to still leave the differential out altogether and have one power wheel in the back and one idler. Trade offs.

I realize that it is a very different application and circumstances, but some race cars did not use a differential at all for many years. I am not referring to dragsters, but ones that do significant cornering. The better part of a century ago numerous racing car drivers died trying to prove the theory that the 'fastest way around a corner was a controlled skid' until they finally proved it and broke through this 'barrier'.

I acknowledge that I do not know if they have gone past this point now and thus have differentials in all cornering race cars again which seems quite likely.

I know that you are looking for the cheapest, lightest most effective method possible. But I think that perhaps you are overcomplicating it and making it both heavier and more expensive with duplicating drive train components.

If you are going to have both an electric motor AND an IC engine on board to start with, why not stick to the IC–Electrical power generation pair and electric drive motors? It allows the IC to operate at maximal efficiencies for far more significant amount of times. The latter is undergoing a lot of rapid development and improvements at this stage with numerous impulses to move to 'electric cars.' It also give you significantly more design flexibility as you are not tied to a fully mechanical power train.

You are likely aware of the annual automotive efficiency contest that they hold annually now for universities. About the only restriction they have on it is that they are all given new, identical single cylinder air cooled Otto cycle engines. Though their test runs are really too short to extrapolate them out to such distances with any sort of accuracy, but the crew at UBC (Vancouver, BC) won it a couple of years ago and their results translated into being able to cross Canada from ocean to ocean on ONE liter of GAS!!! This is not my extrapolations, but from a crew member of the UBC team.

Also have you checked out Garth's thread: http://cr4.globalspec.com/thread/51538 ? I think you will find that it is worth your while to take a look at it.

Just passing on some food for thought and some tidbits.

All the best.

Doug

Atlantic to Pacific on one liter? Documentation, please. I doubt that would be achievable even in Panama,but I might be mistaken.

Atlantic to Pacific on one liter? Documentation, please. I doubt that would be achievable even in Panama,but I might be mistaken.

You will note that I was just as incredulous and said that given the very short distance that the milage consumtion testing was done over, that it was hardly a realiable extrapolation. The references and the sources are there, be my guest.

Atlantic to Pacific on one liter? Documentation, please. I doubt that would be achievable even in Panama,but I might be mistaken

I'll be very surprised if you are mistaken. It certainly doesn't seem realistic. A few laps around a track at slow speed is one thing, but...

I originally saw it on the 'DailyPlanet' show on the Canadian science TV channel.

Hi Doug

I'm playing with a few options that arise in building a Vehicle built with Modules.

Should I register the front or the rear of the chassis or maybe just the cab? The three wheel vehicle would be treated as a motorcycle by the California DMV, so maybe I should only ID the rear single wheel chassis and not register the front. I'm thinking to register the front chasses as car for the Department of Motor Vehicles to expand the option of four wheels, and not register the rear at all. The car is not going to go anywhere with out a drivers, so maybe the cab should be the item to register. The DMV will need a unique Vehicle Identification Number (VIN#). The VIN# should represent the model connection # and not the specific model parts # in order to allow replacements.

The idea of building in phases is appealing to me, but raises some issues. By removing the cab and breaking the chassis into two workable pieces, I have room to play with it. I can build the first concept car on the cheap, knowing that I can upgrades major sections later, allows for shopping based on cost and part availability. With chassis section made to stand up vertical to reduce space requirements and improve work access, I could work on upgrade separately for section replacements. A small quick build cab would be ideal for testing and debugging, all the while working up a deluxe replacement.

The affordability approach of the 1^st chassis pair would have choices unique to it. For instance with electric motor (DC, brushed) placed on each front wheel, electric generative braking and small spare power source (diesel) on single rear wheel. Nothing needs to be elaborate because the system is distributed and less dependant on each other. I'm pondering the question; should the rear begin to generate when the throttle pressure is release or should it in gauge at the beginning of the brake pedal? I think it might be nice to have a little drag action on the release of the throttle. One reason to not have generator tied to the throttle is the advantage of coasting. Coasting can be an element of efficiency but is vehicle control an issue. With a 2^nd chassis being AC regenerative breaking, the throttle pedal is already the choice.

The wiring harness would need to be a digital bus to accommodate changes and reprogramming.

Manual brakes and emergency disconnects.

Ray

Hi Ray,

The modular aspect certainly brings up some issues that otherwise wouldn't exist.

The VIN is such an example.

Have you deiced on a possible trike configuration with 2 wheels at the front and one at the back?

I'm thinking about the differential issue here.

But with it being modular, it might start out as a trike and end up being a four wheeler.

If you are going to go with two drive motors on the front, and you are computer savy enough or know someone that is, you can program the differential into the 2 front wheel drive motors.

I'm concerned about what you mean by 'manual' brakes Ray? Are you talking about hydraulics with no vacuum assist as is the norm with most modern mass produced passenger vehicles or a purely mechanical system. The latter is legal on a 3 wheeler, but it wouldn't surprise me to find out that purely mechanical brakes are illegal on a four wheeler. Likewise by law the emergency/parking brake is required to be a completely separate and autonomous mechanical system in the event of hydraulic failure.

FYI: Many modern automotive braking systems, including ones that don't have AntiLock have a proportioning valve. This is there to keep the brake bias balance. But many of them also have the capacity to seal off each individual hydraulic brake line in the event of a line or a slave cylinder being severed or developing a substantial leak. This is 'volume activated'.

FYI: 75% ~ 90% of the braking is done by the front brakes due to weight transfer in braking. Basically the rears are primarily there to keep the vehicle stable and braking in a straight line rather than spinning out of control. Likewise the emergency or parking brake only activates the rear brakes to reduce the vehicles chances of becoming uncontrollable (steering). This is reduced and offset on most modern vehicles that have 'anti-dive' and the reverse designed into the suspension as well so that the nose doesn't drop as much during hard braking and reduces weight transfer and makes the back brakes do more of the braking. It also assists in reducing the nose coming up and the rear dropping down during heavy acceleration.

If by 'manual' brakes you mean all brakes have a completely mechanical linkage, I have MAJOR alarm bells going off. In north America we call it an 'emergency brake'. In some ways this is a very apt description, because if that is all you have for brakes, you really ARE in an Emergency situation!

In Europe they more accurately describe it as a parking break, which is a much better description of it, as that is really all it is good for. With having separate front and rear modules. Hydraulic brakes become problematic. Most people don't use the mechanical parking brake regularly enough so that it doesn't end up being completely rusted and frozen in one place and is inoperable the rare occasion that they try to use it. FYI: I recommend staying away from using the parking brake around the freezing point as it can get water into the cable that can then freeze up and likewise is inoperable. I had more than one customer that had their vehicle towed into my heated shop just to thaw out the frozen parking brake that they couldn't disengage.

The realistic solution that comes to mind for me is air brakes as is found on large semi trailer tractors. If they are good enough to handle a load of ~ 100,000 pounds when pulling a single trailer...... Do they use air or hydraulic brakes for the tractor? I have no experience with such heavy duty vehicles. But my guestimate is that the tractor has hydraulic brakes, if only for the volume that the brake actuating mechanisms take up. I encountered a proposal for true 'mechanical brakes' in Popular Science (should be 'Popular Technology' now) that basically is what is normally used as an 'over running clutch' with roller bearings as a 'mechanical' braking mechanism with no ablative brake linings to wear out. I strongly suspect that even in this scenario that they are still using hydraulics to activate them though.

In regards to the regenerative or coasting brakes. In your circumstances I would recommend that if when you are in the situation where neither the gas pedal is being activated, that it is purely rolling/coasting for maximum efficiency: INCLUDING the front module. A 2 stage braking pedal: If lightly activated then it engages regenerative/ ICE braking, and then when pushed harder, the brakes actually kick in like normal brakes and the harder you push, the more it engages the braking force. I likewise have some concern over this scenario as well. Brakes and steering are something that HAVE to work 100% of the time. A statement of the obvious, but in your situation worthy of being brought to mind. Personally I would utilize antilock brakes on all wheels for numerous very good reasons. All one would need for the two stage brake pedal is a contact switch like the one used for the brake light. You might even be able to use the same switch. Some of them utilize switching the ground as they do in the courtesy lights that are activated when the doors are opened. This design makes for a much simpler layout: the light is always powered, and anytime it is grounded in any of the numerous contact points it is activated. Thus only a single wire needs to go to any switch that activates these lights.

I have noticed an electronic scrolling add here on CR4 for a company with a very wide range of connectors.

I highly recommend that for all electrical connectors, that you utilize MG Chemicals' Super Contact Cleaner' that is aimed at the electronics industry. I don't make any computer, electronic or electrical connections without it. It is also an anti-oxidant, which is going to be vital in your circumstances. Remember that it IS conductive though, so when using it on any battery connections, I spray some on a cotton swab (Q-Tip) and very carefully apply it to just the actual contacts, and in some cases with small batteries: AAA, AA, C, D etc likewise very carefully only get it on the actual contact point. Otherwise your batteries are dead in short order. Their product # is 801b-125g with the later 4 figures being the size /weight in grams. The bar code # for the 125 gram size is: '7 79008 80112 3'.

In regards to the VIN: I would think that you would want to do some studying on the legislation and regulations. Also the ramifications on insurance. I wouldn't use the VIN on the passenger compartment, thus aren't faced with the administrative hassles of changing it. If you register the rear 3^rd 'trike wheel' then if and when you change it into a 4 wheeler, with the dual rear wheels having a different VIN for the dual rear wheels, you can register it as a car as opposed to a trike, which is going to be necessary anyway. Once both rear modules are registered, it remains registered regardless of which one is currently in use. Ditto for the insurance. Personally, I wouldn't even bring up the issue of the 'swapping modular' aspect of it. Just register and insure each one as a car or a trike with the separate VIN on the back modules.

Thus to me always utilizing the rear module for the VIN makes sense with the rear being either 1 or 2 wheeled. It takes care of a number of issues.

FYI: VIN numbers are located in a number of hidden, subtle areas that are not publicly published to aid in cases of auto theft. An Australian company (PopSci again) has developed a comprehensive component registration system that utilizes 'microdots' in liquid suspension for ease of application. The idea is that there are literally hundreds or even thousands of them all over the place, so that no criminal can possible get rid of them all. They likewise market them as 'product ID' systems with a unique number being utilized on different components. This can even include unique serial numbers for the same component pieces.

I don't know if it is mandated by regulations, but most auto manufacturers VINs are also information codes on the vehicle as well. A good idea and one that makes a lot of sense in your situation as well. Even if you are only utilizing the rear module for the legal registration, with a (VIN) on both the body and front power train and steering, then it will immediately give anyone information as to just what it is. An online database definitely makes sense and will assist considerably in your plans to be a component supplier. Also automatic electronic serial 'component database registration' as well as control make sense on the vehicle. In north America, Motorola works with the Automotive industry considerably. They have a serial bus configuration worked out that utilizes this method and configuration. This is akin to computer HDDs etc that now use the much less cumbersome SATA connection as opposed to the older style big, wide flat ATA ribbon cables. This is akin to the industrial 20 milliVolt sensing and control standards. In your environment, it's not difficult to see the obvious choice and advantages.

"Manual brakes and emergency disconnects"

I made comment at the last minute editing, after posting #482.

What I would like to have said instead is; "Braking to stop the vehicle, wheels, and emergency disconnects of electric motors will be applied by manual brake pedal, also the motor controller ignition should not start if the accelerator is pressed down."

Note: I propose using conventional off the shelf parts, and to target better than economic level brakes. I would need to add an electric vacuum pump for vacuum assist hydraulics. It would be OK for regenerative braking, to be controlled be wire.

Hi Doug

I just want to highlight great stuff you posted #483. It speeds up my ability to find again. Good Answers.

Emergency/parking brake is required to be a completely separate and autonomous mechanical system in the event of hydraulic failure.

A proportioning valve.

Capacity to seal off each individual hydraulic brake line in the event of a line or a slave cylinder being severed or developing a substantial leak.

the emergency or parking brake only activates the rear brakes to reduce the vehicles chances of becoming uncontrollable (steering).

Brakes and steering are something that HAVE to work 100% of the time.

Utilize antilock brakes on all wheels for numerous very good reasons.

All one would need for the two stage brake pedal is a contact switch like the one used for the brake light. You might even be able to use the same switch.

recommend that for all electrical connectors, that you utilize MG Chemicals' Super Contact Cleaner' that is aimed at the electronics industry. Remember that it IS conductive though,The bar code # for the 125 gram size is: '7 79008 80112 3'.

An Australian company (PopSci again) has developed a comprehensive component registration system that utilizes 'microdots' in liquid suspension for ease of application.

Also automatic electronic serial 'component database registration' as well as control make sense on the vehicle.

This is akin to computer HDDs etc that now use the much less cumbersome SATA connection as opposed to the older style big, wide flat ATA ribbon cables. This is akin to the industrial 20 milliVolt sensing and control standards.

Hi Ray,

Happy to be of assistance. This is the kind of stuff one only gets from applied experience that otherwise would in many cases would not even occur to most people until they got deep into the R&D cycle or even the finished product and then realize that they had just designed a significant flaw that perhaps influences a lot of aspects and thus becomes an expensive nightmare in more ways than one.

Utilize antilock brakes on all wheels for numerous very good reasons.

If you have ever had a vehicle with good AntiLock brakes you will readily appreciate this recommendation.

However my reason for suggesting it over and above this is because of the modular factor. Getting good, reliable braking that keeps the vehicle under control in emergency situations can be quite difficult and finicky. Thus in a modular scenario so long as the AnitLock brakes all utilize the same 'control standards'. Then regardless of what changes are made to the vehicle 'shifting center of gravity fore and aft' etc, significant changes in the vehicles mass that require different braking capacity etc. Then the AntiLock brakes will automatically compensate for these factors and you will have a stable, much more controllable vehicle in a crisis scenario regardless of the configuration.

You mention having 'superior brake' performance, a very good idea and easily accommodated. Because of the modular concept, this is a good place to over engineer it and design the brakes for the 'worst case scenario' weight/mass wise. Even here you will want to have additional safety margin and have brakes that are not 'at their limit' if the vehicle is configured at it maximum mass. One good thing about the modular scenario is that the brakes can be calculated and designed for the weight of the module. If it is heavier or lighter, it comes with brakes that are appropriate to the mass of the module.

I mentioned the problem of introducing air into the hydraulic braking system. A significant factor here is how readily convertible is it? If you are going to have a set configuration for years perhaps, then having to bleed the brakes isn't overly significant. But if you are thinking in terms that you might want to reconfigure the vehicle for weekend use as being suitable for specific needs, and then quickly convert it back to 'commuter mode' very quickly Sunday evening, then hydraulic brakes are going to be a real pain.

A proportioning valve.

Capacity to seal off each individual hydraulic brake line in the event of a line or a slave cylinder being severed or developing a substantial leak.

Note that some proportioning valves add specific additional specific procedures and sequences for bleeding the air out of the braking system.

Frankly I don't see the 'short term' frequent reconfiguration being very likely. Most people are not going to have a bunch of complete front or rear modules sitting around unused and taking up space most of the time. They are much more likely to have separate purpose specific vehicles.

Undoubtedly you have heard of the 'short term' rental concept that are starting to appear in various urban centers. This is not a typical 'automotive vehicle rental agency' scenario. There are specific locations throughout the urban center where one can pick up and drop a vehicle off when needed. There are no 'dealers/personnel at these locations. You make arrangements for it, which vary, and then just 'get in and go' when you pick it up. Likewise you just lock it up and leave it at the closest parking location. The vehicles are basically either 'communally owned' or it is owned and operated by a business. I don't currently have a motor vehicle and looked into it in the city where I live, but it is basically just getting started or more like 'stalled' for quite some time now and is quite ineffective' This is unfortunate as it would meet my needs for the rare occasions that I need one for quite well. The old 'chicken or the egg' conundrum.

Modular vehicles might have significant advantages and fit into this scenario quite well.

It could also be utilized for both more traditional auto rental agencies AND dealerships. It could be quite advantageous in both of these scenarios.

One might 'rent a different module' to suit their specific needs for something like 'summer holidays' etc.

Modules are a natural for a communal ownership, rental, leasing and dealship scenario.

Also automatic electronic serial 'component database registration' as well as control make sense on the vehicle.

This is akin to computer HDDs etc that now use the much less cumbersome SATA connection as opposed to the older style big, wide flat ATA ribbon cables. This is akin to the industrial 20 milliVolt sensing and control standards.

This is akin to advanced 'Plug n Play' in computers or as it is quite commonly termed: 'Plug n Pray'! LoL

USB memory sticks are a good example. They contain the drivers that they need to operate that are automatically configured when they are plugged in. One larger one that I have also contains an OS and can be booted to without any additional procedures.

The VIN# should represent the model connection # and not the specific model parts # in order to allow replacements.

As I indicated VINs are multipurpose and DO contain specific info about the auto: Paint code, manufacturing date, Engine, Trans(axles) etc. This makes even more sense in the modular environments. It should contain info on the entire module for interchangeability compatibility, but also specifics of major components as indicated.

The VIN for the body/passenger modules would contain the paint codes which obviously wouldn't be need for the wheels, suspension, and power modules.

VINs need to be standardized as well.

In both the VINs AND the connecters again I suggest 'over engineering' them and having extra currently unused codes & connections in them to allow for future expansion that you might not foresee initially.

In regards to the 'AntiDive & Anti Squat' aspects into the suspension, it is worth 'Climbing the learning curve' or utilizing someone that is knowledgeable and experienced in this.

Hi Doug

Response to (something missing)#487

"As I indicated VINs are multipurpose and DO contain specific info about the auto: Paint code, manufacturing date, Engine, Trans(axles) etc. This makes even more sense in the modular environments. It should contain info on the entire module for interchangeability compatibility, but also specifics of major components as indicated."

I do not see the reference to connection in the above. I am trying to stress the importants of the connection specification.

I will try to state my point by reference to the electronic industry that evolved by modularity. The circuit board or part is required to meet the connection specification and not the other way around. The actual parts become irrelevant. You made my point when you mention "USB memory sticks are a good example" The memory stick is like a black box, and the most important reference is the connection USB Universal Synchronous Bus. A truly evolved modular car could have a VIN# UMV Universal Modular Vehicle. And without the right UMV stick and all the history to identify it you will not be able the register or start it.(not a good thought)

If the electronic industry used proprietary connections similar to the automobile industry, then we might slide rule instead of calculate.

All my attention is to identify the connection that brings existing parts together. The part is only relevant to the point that the connection begins to rule.

I'm I losing the point by being to direct?

Ray

Hi Ray,

As I indicated VINs are multipurpose

This section was specificly targeted to the VIN because you had made the statement that the 'VIN should contain info on the module but NOT any major components'. Thus I was stressing the point that like mass produced autos, they should contain both and that there is a 'standard' for this for interchangeability.

I do not see the reference to connection in the above. I am trying to stress the importants of the connection specification.

I did specifically address this:

In both the VINs AND the connecters again I suggest 'over engineering' them and having extra currently unused VIN codes & electrical connections in them to allow for future expansion that you might not foresee initially.

You are correct that in computers the initial specification is for the buss. Then appropriate concetors are selected to meet the need. Again I strongly suggest having more unused connections than you initially foresee to allow for future expansion!

I want to reiterate the 'serial wiring concept' that will be a great advantage! The 'big 3' want it but currently have a number of significant factors tying them to the old style. They are slowly migrating towards it as more and more 'electronics' are utilized.

It is VERY advantageous as all you have to do is to run hot/live wires throughout the vehicle with an added ground were necessary. You don't even need separate control wires. Everything can be digitally encoded over the hot line and only the components being addressed are then given commands to carry out. Compared to traditional wiring harness, this is many orders of magnitude ahead and has numerous VERY significant advantageous: Totally automated (hot) Plug n Play for example.

A word on automotive electrical systems and instrumentation: Voltages very widely in automotive systems even today with the inclusion of electronics. All the way from 8 vDC (Cold weather starting) to 18 vDC.

The instrumentation needs a stable reference with which to 'calibrate' from. Thus most instrument clusters have a precision 8 vDC voltage regulator in them. Be aware that there is a voltage drop across voltage regulators that varies with the components and the design. Thus if you want a regulated 12 vDC for instance, you are going to need a voltage supply that is perhaps 13 or 14 vDC to reliably get 12 vDC from it. When the voltage starts to get below what the input needs, it starts to stress out the voltage regulator and the amperage goes up as to compensate for the lower voltage. The power requirements remain the same. This can shorten their life span (considerably) and burn them out. I've even seen some voltage regulators explode: Literally! Lights etc are not voltage critical. But modern electronic components that do need it have voltage regulators built into them. Including polarity protection!

I'm sure you can very readily see the advantage of only having to run appropriate gauges of hot wires throughout the vehicle, plus a ground where needed. Given the 'modular aspect' I would tend to always run both a hot and a neutral/ground as some modules may not be grounded through the body and chassis. Likewise this allows for easier future unforeseen expansion and the ability to add ANY modules anytime anywhere VERY easily without any further wiring except perhaps a short lead from the module to the power/control bus where needed. Anything that needs to just taps into the both the hot and the ground and then all of the components have both power and are controlled with the digital signals over the hot wire.

Starting with a 'clean slate' allows for implementation of this very advantageous system that also can handle any future needs as likewise they just tap into the 2 wires throughout the vehicle. This will be a HUGE advantage and will make the viability of modular systems much more feasible and a lot less grief across the board as most electrical connections between modules will only need to be 2 wires!.

You'll have to watch out for the current requirements and again 'over engineering it' with heavier gauge wire than you initially calculate for your CURRENT needs will be worthwhile in the long run. This system will likewise make electrical connections between modules significantly simpler as most of them will likewise only need two wires!

Obviously VERY high current components such as a starter and electric motors are going to need much larger electrical cables that most of the vehicle. But even here you can still control them digitally through the hot & ground connections.

This is actually a fairly mature technology and is the same as numerous electrical devices in houses that use the existing high voltage wiring for transceiving control codes as well as things like intercoms, radio/music, TV and computer LANs etc. This system has been in existence for at least 30 years.

Hi Doug

Reference ideology change.

As a mechanic you are comfortable with the system that allows you to be an expert in your field. You have a better understanding of connection associations of automobiles, because of a life time of experience. Your experience makes you a prime candidate to identify connection, suited to be labeled as a modular connection.

We do not need to know Manufacturer, Year, Model, or Part #. You only need to now the connection is XYZ and document it to CNC code . Substitute parts catalogs will identify (for customers) the suitability, by the manufacturer, to be ably to fit the specified connection. Some day we could just print a part to 3D printer from the information assigned as a connection specification. If the part does not meet any common specification it is not likely to be designed into production unless it has special advantages. The new part if popular would evolve a new connection specification to be used again by any manufacturer.

The Electronic industries evolved rapidly because of common connect ability. A part replacement does not require Manufacturer, Year, and Model to order a replacement. Many manufacturers have parts substitution catalogs for ordering alternate parts. Parts are grouped into, ever miniaturized, subassemblies that can readily be joined by standard sockets (in a circuit board or at the end of a wire connector). If you can read the part number you can order a part. If you recognizer a configuration and identify adjoining parts you might determine the part without the part #. Digital component are more connect able than discrete analog components. The evolution of the connection is so important that now the connection can configure itself, be communicate to multiple devices with a common standard connection and interface (USB) .

Chris if you read this, can you set up a category called "connection specification for modularity".

I'm trying to establish a point of reference to dictate the connection with the part as subordinate. Your point of references (in your references) dictates the part with the connection as subordinate. Am I reading you wrong? I'm looking for key words to see if you understand my points.

Thanks

Ray Cox

I was trying to make some of these points early on in the thread

disc brake pads would be a good example of parts that could easily be standardized

the diameter of the disc & number of pistons acting on the pad determine the actual area of brake pad. the mounting method is proprietary now, but this is some of the needless complexity introduced by the present manufacturing structure.

SAE isn't going to support any movement to change this. Starting from scratch is probably not practical.

for hardware the most logical route is using identifying subsystems that have been mass produced in large quantities so are obtainable from the after markets

the motorcycle world has more examples. companies like rotax & SS make generic engines for various small specialty builders, the economics of scale is there on that level

the end product being sold at a premium price compared to more standardized models from larger manufacturers

the trick in our case being how to identify as many obtainable subsystems as possible.

all that being said there is a straight forward simplicity to the 3 wheel drive concept. How about electric brakes similar to an RV set up? air also has a certain appeal, any system that would default to locked is going to be inherently safer. The primary braking would be regenerative any way.

Hi Garth

I see you get the connection point.

Response to:#490

"The primary braking would be regenerative any way."

I'm trying to think through the regeneration aspect of braking. How much control can I expect to get from my regeneration braking, if my batteries ability to take charge will change? Could I get better drive efficiency if the drive motor was not set up to regenerate (also cheaper)? Can I get more regeneration efficiency if generator is isolated? Redundancy by isolation may increase serviceability and less critical interactive failure. One reason to have regeneration as part of the gas pedal is, we already reorient the gas pedal pressure in response to hills and valley using engine back pressure. This could be to the rear wheel. The regeneration brake might be slight or strong, similar to response of hill or valley. There should be a visual indication to help identify expected effect of pedal. An ultra capacitor bank might allow for a fast regenerative brake. When it is time to brake you are ready for that reliable brake pedal. The ultra capacitors can be tied to the first stage brake pedal and to front wheels for maximum stopping.

Thanks

Ray

This is really Blink's area,

but I do know if all else fails some big ass resistors can use up any excess charge capacity

the best bang for the buck is combined systems, a little bit of hardware & some well thought out software is the key. I'd have a look at industrial PLC's computers/controllers for severe environments.

steuy got my point exactly, which trickles down to lots of other parts, shocks, tires, brakes. another good example of a modular is a crate motor, small block chevy comes to mind, you can buy one ready to rock, add a battery, fuel line & dry contacts [keyswitch]....

lycoming in the airplane world

volkwagon's boxers converted to kit cars

the 1st step is gonna be defining the operational parameter,s

Ray be aware you can change the title of your replies, if you feel there is a reason

Hi Garth

"the 1st step is gonna be defining the operational parameter,s"

You are so right, good discipline there.

I'm trying to put something on the table for discussions.

Operational parameters is the first thing and the last thing, it is the whole thing.

Hope to match operational parameters of existing parts to desired operational parameters.

The existing parts might determine what is feasible to promote. As existing part availability change, so will sub assemblies need to change? The sub assemblies can be stronger than necessary, keeping weight less a consideration, with the offset of regenerative braking. The planning and building of subsystem will have to keep the weakest element in mind. Hopefully over time as battery weight is reduced, the strength can be used for other needs.

Target existing available part to match needs and categories?

Needs:

Transportation; Fuel availability, Fuel capacity, Fuel efficiency

Seating; Permanente, Collapsible, Removable

Cargo; Safety, Tie down, Long, Tall, Wide, Weight

Characteristics; Smooth, Stiff, Ability

Categories:

Economy; Compact, Light weight, Inexpensive, Serviceable.

Sport; Quick, Agile, Attractive.

Utility; Cargo, Off-road-able, Live-able, Boat-able, Fly-able

Leisure; Comfortable, Roomy, Visibility, Climate control

Luxury; Leisure with quality

Likely uses for majority:

Most uses tend to be as short, in distance and time, as possible. If commuting short distance to work, I guess solo. If commuting long distance to work, I guess solo. Occasionally for long distances, it seems like solo (with cargo) or for the entire family. The occasional trip explains the choice for all the large vans, and it works great, for family taxi too. It depends on public transportation and need for freedom of travel.

Likely needs for majority

Daily distance; Short for 2, Long possible for 1 to 6

Occupancy; 2 people + cargo=same space as 4 people

Safety; Seat belts, Airbags, and Frame

Comforts; Enclosed and climate controlled(warm or cool?)

Shielding; Complete to all people(wind and impact), Aerodynamics for short distance at 65 Kilometer/Hour, Aero dynamics for Long distance at 110 Kilometer/Hour, Ample visibility with safety glass, Front and rear bumpers,

Why modular;

Bring existing parts to the masses.-Needs Data of appropriate parts.

Allow individuals to build there own, Need plans for bridging subsystems.

Allow for serviceable platform.-Tailor plans for easy build.

Allow for options of change .-Needs "(operational parameters)"

__________________________________________________________

Dream to make a difference, make a product to fulfill it. By: Ray Cox

Thanks to Garth, I'm starting to get my head straight.

Operational Parameters In Perspective.

What can we expect with the introduction of the new electric cars? From a buyers point of view expect to see a lot of anxiety. Cars are evolutionary and production errors will be maid. Advances can make cars obsolete sooner and service support harder to find. The new cars will have fewer parts for a mechanic to fix, but expect to see a lot more electronics. The electronics will be more sensitive to the elements (moisture). People need to learn safety and maintenance issues specific to the danger of electricity. Sparks and fuel should not mix, more precautions needed. Manufacturers are hesitant for the reasons above.

The greatest difference of operational parameters of future electric car is likely to come from the difference in the power source and drive train. The function of the electric car will naturally fit most driving needs. Charging is likely to be at home during the night. The electric motor has more torque and less weight, and will fit in a smaller space. The electric drive train can be mounted closer to drive wheel (the motor fits inside the wheel). It will be interesting to see the redevelopment of power train parts, designed for new demands. Needles to say the manufacturer of these parts will change there work orders. The absence of combustion engine, supporting parts, and drive train; will attract new suspension opportunities. Passenger compartment or trunks space will move forward to use the new available space.

The suspension will evolve slower. The electrical storage (batteries) is distributed, low and rear; similar to the combustion engine power source (fuel tank).

There should be plenty of existing suspension parts and control parts to fit the needs of electric cars without retooling for suspensions.

Ray Cox

the motor fits inside the wheel

As I may have mentioned to you, the engine design that I have readily lends itself to being within the wheel and in essence 'being the wheel'. But it is very likely that one would do so. It makes for too much 'unsprung' weight which is a significant factor. Also the constant jarring, high G loads from being unsprung mass would wreak havoc in a motor or engine within the wheel. There is also the addition of the constant rotational torque loads resulting from being the propulsion source all the time as opposed to this normally only occurring during braking. All of these factors would require a significantly heavier suspension all around which adds more weight. Both the significantly larger unsprung weight and the substantially beefed up suspension (more partially 'unsprung' weight) would cause a noticeable reduction in performance.

But in regards to this being more realistic and a wheel design that would lend itself more readily to this, do a web search for a 'tweel' and take a look at it.

The place where I see the engine rotating being valid is for air bourn vehicles, where the engine is also the propeller/fan blades.

Mind you I saw a powered 'bolt in replacement' for the front wheel of bicycles a couple of years ago in PopSci and tried to get exclusive distributor rights for the province. The crankshaft remains stationary and bolts to the forks and the single cylinder engine rotates with the wheel. Motorcycle rotating grip throttle, fuel goes into and looks like a water bottle. One would want to be careful about that! Would get some interesting looks pulling up to the gas pumps and filling up the 'water bottle'. Perhaps might be taken as a 'Terminator'. LoL (< 8)

No starter: the person is 'the starter' and pedals to start the bike moving and starting the engine. Can pedal or not once underway. About 20 ~ 25 mph. Half hour swap over time! ~ $750 USD. Haven't seen nor heard anything more about them since then.

Still not really a realistic comparison of a bicycle and a 'car'.

With the current very limited range of many electric vehicles, it is likely that many would require being 'plugged in and recharging' during working hours. Like hydrogen, the lack of such a existing infrastructure hampers implementation.

Lots of a very wide variety of a very wide range of parts readily available these days. That's not really 'the problem.'

You mention 'weight', which IS a very important factor in efficiency and economy.

Even in 'modular' there isn't going to be 'one size fits all'.

One isn't going to have a 'power train' module that will handle hauling a ton/tonne of sand or gravel occasionally but wants to have light weight economical urban transportation most of the time.

Mind you modular or not. In most such occasions, one pays for the delivery of it by someone that owns a 5 ~ 20 ton/tonne truck with a tilt, dumping box that is a full time work/revenue producing vehicle.

In that sense, fifth wheeler semi trailer tractors are already 'modular.' The tractor can and is used to haul around a wide variety of different 'trailer' configurations and loads.

Yes. And why can't a battery be a battery? Why do we have to have 50 different styles?

Sizes, yes.

Small one for small car. Big one for big car, etc.

Common connectors? Now 5 differences.

Unneccessary complication and needless expense. Not to mention inventory for battery sellers.

(but, that's the ploy, Eh?)

Stu.

Stu

I put this under fuel -systems.

Do you have a favorite battery connection, should we declare one as an open market connection to support?

I will look at my local parts store for info on connection types, to share back to you. It will be interesting to see if North Americans have same battery connections as OZ

I'm sure there are new batteries coming out soon. Hopefully open market in nature.

Cheers

Ray

Hi Ray,

The 'traditional, old style' battery connectors with the two tapered posts on top of the battery with the positive being slightly larger in diameter than the negative is being phased out.

The newer modern standard has two threaded female connectors (like a nut) recessed into the side of the battery with them spread out and each being located near the top of opposite ends of one side of the battery. It is a better, safer arrangement with less chances of being shorted out accidentally or in the event of a collision. It is also less prone to corrosion build up and accumulation.

I have no knowledge of what the configuration is outside of north America.

Do you have access to SAE or ISO standards?

I'd be very surprised if you couldn't find more information on this on the wWw.

Hi Doug

Regards to Post #483

"This is reduced and offset on most modern vehicles that have 'anti-dive' and the reverse designed into the suspension as well so that the nose doesn't drop as much during hard braking and reduces weight transfer and makes the back brakes do more of the braking. It also assists in reducing the nose coming up and the rear dropping down during heavy acceleration."

This caught my eye, and I'm slow to get back to you, too asking about anti dive in the suspension.

I hope you might have an example of a car that uses anti-dive in the suspension. I would hope to find such a car at the Local "Pick In Pull.

I'm interested in the idea, as I drive vehicle that ride higher than typical passenger cars, I like to have the extra visibility. A high center of gravity would likely need anti dive characteristics.

Thanks

Ray

Hi Ray,

The big, heavier and more 'lumbering' the vehicle is, the more prone it is going to be to weight transfer in all dimensions. Obviously how the vehicle is 'sprung' is going to influence it as well. If it is a large, heavy vehicle that has a fairly soft suspension to make for a smoother ride, the worse it will tend to be. Likewise as you mention, the higher the center of gravity, the more prone it is going to be like this. Shock absorbers or 'dampeners' as the Europeans more accurately term them will make them more critical in large, heavy (& high CG) softly sprung vehicles.

I don't think that getting old, dead clunkers to examine is the way to go about this. Most modern vehicles will have it built into them, it would be harder to find one that doesn't have it. You would need a lot of very expensive and accurate equipment to measure this on a vehicle and ascertain it. It they have been in major accidents then it's much more likely that they are going to be off anyway.

As I've said, suspensions designs are very critical and even very minor differences in geometry can have very significant effects. Even if you did go about it this way, you wouldn't really even know what it is that you are looking for and thus it would basically be meaningless for you. If you VERY accurately measure 100 or 1,000 of them; then you would have to try and figure out what all this data even is and what it's implications are. You would waste a LOT of time, energy and money needlessly almost literally 'reinventing the wheel.'

I suggest that they way to approach this is from theoretical, mathematical, Engineering and Scientific means. Not only will you be able to find out about it, you will also be presented with the theory of it and how it is applied and works than you would by attempting to measure one vehicle and then try to figure out all of the very complex factors engineered into a suspension design and to ascertain which factors are responsible for the specific information that you seek. Depending on the source material you may also get design implementation and application guidelines and theories and the mathematical & Engineering formulas that will allow you to at least get your designs into the 'ballpark' From a design point of view, suspensions are by nature are very complex, dynamic, intricate, interdependent mechanisms. You can not just design the 'anti-dive and anti-squat' geometries into them in isolation interdependent of many other complex factors involved. There performance is an amalgamation of numerous factors which as I indicated are intricately interdependent.

I would be happy to recommend some titles to you Ray, but at this point in time my technical library is packed away. I suggest the SAE is a good starting point. Searching the web. You will discover some outlets &/or publishers that have a strong orientations towards matters such as these and once you do, it is quite likely that they will become a valuable resource that you will return to over and over again.

Do you know someone that is an SAE member through which you could gain access to there very considerable technical knowledge base?

I know Stu's specialty is engine designs, but he may be able to supply you with resources more specifically oriented to in these matters. Likewise he may have a current SAE membership though which you might gain access to the SAE. This is of course for Stu to say and not me. Just a suggestion.

If I'm not mistaken, you may still be able to buy technical books from the SAE, but at a higher cost. I have in the past. I suggest that you start with one that is an overview of suspension designs and considerations for passenger vehicles initially, with some basic mathematical information in it so that you can get a much better 'lay of the land.' Having done that, you will be in a much better position of knowing what you need to focus on and seek further more specific information including the detailed mathematical tools that you NEED in order to carry out such designs.

(8 >) See Blink, I can too read and know how to use a calculator and even do so on occasion! (< 8)

You also may discover something like we have here in Alberta. Though it has recently been re-branded, reorganized and centralized in cost cutting measures: it is the 'Alberta Research Councils' massive scientific, Engineering, technical and industrial libraries including suppliers. I can't remember the name of it now, but they also always have a current set of books that are like a very large encyclopedia of 'yellow pages' of industrial suppliers and manufacturers in the USA. If you have need of a solution's to a problem, but don't know what it is or even if there is something available that suits your needs; it can be an invaluable resource. Here their library is readily open and available to anyone that wants to use it. I've utilized it numerous times. No membership or admission fees. I just walk in, introduce myself to the librarian, tell them what I am looking for and with there assistance find it then spend the day or even a week or two in their library doing research. A company name and business card is advantageous, but not required. Such things are invaluable, even if only to find 'a good starting point' and 'pointing you in the right direction'.

Though I suggest to you that in this day and age, the internet is hard to beat for at least finding out basic information and helping you to determine what and where the specific info is that you need to utilize is located or sources for it.

Sorry I can't be of more specific assistance to you at this point in time Ray. But at least I made you aware of this factor so that you can design it into the suspensions right from the start as opposed to after the fact and as such will be a lot less grief and needles loss of time, money and energy.

It's a heck of a lot easier at least getting it in the ball park to start with than having it all built and then having to take the cutting torch to it and trying to do a patch up job on it. With that I mind, I suggest that initially you try and design and implement as much 'adjustability' into the suspensions that you feasibly can.

Even with these, it will remain quite challenging as numerous other aspects of the vehicles are likewise interdependent and have dynamic relationship with and influence the overall suspension design and vica versa.

At this point before you have sought out, obtained and become familiar with some of the more technical aspects of suspensions; but once you do I suggest that you will likely have to make decisions over basic overall suspension designs: McPherson struts or 'dual wishbones'. Coil, leaf or torsion bar springs? Though the latter are not used that often, I suggest that you don't rule them out as they have a number of design features that are advantageous: especially in lighter vehicles of the type that you are aiming for. They are also very compact and take up much less room and tend to be lighter than either of the other two. They are the only one out of the three that can more readily be made 'adjustable'. Also a factor that I have mentioned a number of times: they have less 'unsprung mass' than the other designs mentioned which affects and improves the 'performance and handling' characteristics of a vehicle. On the down side, the torsion bar makes the design less of a 'compartmentalized' and 'self' contained' one, especially in comparison to coil springs. I can't see leaf springs being a good design choice for the type of vehicle that you are aiming for. Likewise they take up considerable amount of space fore and aft of the axles or wheel spindles and are much less compliant than the other two and have a considerably stiffer, bumper ride. They are the heaviest option which results in the suspensions having 'lower performance' and handling characteristics. Normally leaf springs now are only found on vehicles that carry very large amount of weight. Primarily (large) trucks.

The Best of Luck to you Ray,

DougRH

While certainly not the final word the usual wiki over view

What you are looking for has probably been done in the 2 wheeled world, which has seen many more of what would be thought of a alternate configurations

A front leading link can be set up to rise, under braking. A typical swing arm is a trailing link.

Some amount of weight transfer is good, increasing the grip of the front wheels under braking & improving the ability to negotiate turns, Citroen [4 wheel]had a classic design to counteract roll, making the car lean into a turn

A standard fork, close to mcpherson struts [coil over damper], the position & exact method of mounting causing different characteristics to manifest

The position of the brake caliper on a disc brake set up will influence the tendency to rise, as will the mounting of the prime mover. A shaft driven bike will tend to rise under acceleration, literally leaping off the starting line.

motorcycles have less mass, so greater care has to be taken with the various geometries, as undesired effects tend to be magnified.

consequently the literature tends to be much more explicit in the description of both positive effects.

Hi Garth and Ray:

improving the ability to negotiate turns, Citroen [4 wheel] had a classic design to counteract roll, making the car lean into a turn.

The Citron's hydro-pneumatic suspension was way ahead of its time, and frankly STILL is! As well as being readily adjustable in a number of ways: both automatically and manually; it does things like raising the car up when the doors are opened to make it easier to get in and out of it by raising the car up. They have controls in the glove box that allows for raising one wheel off of the ground in order to change a flat tire. Gotta like that !

There is a passive hydraulic system that primarily gets utilized on trucks with campers primarily on the rear axles on them which gives them significant weight riding up high and appreciable large flat areas that are affected by wind. This system utilizes two hydraulic cylinders very similar in appearance, construction and mounting to shock absorbers. These have hydraulic ports at the very top and bottom of both of the cylinders and are connected with crossed over hydraulic lines in an 'X' configuration. The line for the bottom of one cylinder goes to the top port on the one on the other side and likewise for the other one. The side of the piston that has the rod connected to it has less force due to the smaller surface area than the other side of the piston which encompasses the entire piston face. Thus one port has more pressure & power while the other side has more travel for the same given amount of volume due to the volume that the rod takes up. Thus it's not perfect but it is an effective, simple completely passive system that reduces roll but allows the vehicle suspensions to travel up and down simultaneously quite readily. One could even add orifices or valves into the connecting line to control 'damping' rates.

Likewise there is also an effective completely passive mechanical design that causes the car to lean into the corner as opposed to out as is the norm from centrifugal forces.

The passive design is very simple in theory and principle and I'll be happy to share it if anyone is interested. I got on the phone with Chris and using the white board and my VERY poor drawing techniques with a trackball, (the built in 'lines: straight, circular, etc didn't work between us.) But as I said, with it being so simple, we still managed to get across in only 10 ~ 15 minutes easily and quite readily.

Regards,

Doug

I am living proof that that same water pump on the Merak was a bear to repair also. The hub is pressed on and requires a 5 flanged puller to remove. All the work is done through a small square access hole in behind what passed for rear seats.

There are a few well sorted out independent suspensions for larger vehicles. If you have an idea of the finished weight of the vehicle you have in mind, I might be able to point you at something that might be workable for you.

About the anti dive in the suspensions question. I wish I had time to pose the question more specific in post #543. I try to eliminate complexity to arrive at simplicity. I assumed most suspensions to be dual wishbones, and guessed the geometry would be the main anti dive component. Dodge has a K member to bring front drive and suspension to the body. The suspension I had in mind would be, lighter and simpler, like this.

http://www.apexdrivelabs.com/brushless-electric-motor-images.html

Economy, availability, and simplicity; would be the driving factor.

Ray

Hi Ray,

In suspensions like the one shown, the standard method for achieving anti-dive is to angle one or both A-arm pivot axes. If you look at the photo, and imagine tilting the entire assembly forward at the top (so the that each road wheel would move forward slightly as it goes over a bump) then pulling back on the road wheel axle would tend to make the suspension extend. So the drag of a braked wheel tends to lift the car, countering, so some extent, the overall tendency to pitch forward. In a second method, the torque reaction (transferred from brake caliper, to upright, to suspension arms) can also be used to cause the suspension to extend.

In practice, a certain amount of dive is beneficial, because the driver uses it (subconsciously) as feedback in panic stops.

It's probably been mentioned previously, but one of the most modular front suspension systems was used on the early VW Beetles. Trailing arms were used, but they were paired, and joined to the uprights by link pins (or later ball joints) so that the brake torque reaction (which on a single trailing arm tends to cause squat -- usually beneficial in the rear but not in the front) is uncoupled from the trailing arms, so the pro-dive effect was reduced, and there was little-to-no anti dive effect. Squat effect, from the rear trailing arms (on which the brakes reacted) tended to keep the car reasonably level under braking. The fact that the front wheels remained parallel to the body promoted understeer, to counter the rear weight bias, which would have produced oversteer. (Pushed hard however, the rear of early VWs would jack up , putting the outside rear wheel on its edge, promoting really dramatic oversteer.)

In a vehicle that is that light, you might want to look at some of the "quad runner" type of vehicles. They are simple, light weight, relatively strong, mass produced (cheap), and would require simple frame attachment points, which would be easy enough to copy from the quad chassis, to work with your frame.

"Listening" to the posts I get the feeling that you are definite in the want to simplicity. Maybe it's time to take a look again at the Ford/Peugeot/Chev Corvette transverse leaf spring, doing double duty as a suspension control arm, and, it's self damping in multi-leaf form. Maybe if we look to some of the developments in metallurgy and spring design an entirely workable suspension can result? Stu.

I was also thinking of the Corvette design, which has used a composite spring for a while (and maybe still does?).

I remember in the 1960's Head skis advertised "snaking action" from a layer of rubber in their metal skis. They chattered less than other metal skis on hard rough icy conditions. I've thought that a composite leaf spring with a layer of high hysteresis rubber might provide spring, damping and suspension location in one piece.

Wood encapsulated in Kevlar (the latter being noted for its deadness re sound)?

Hi Ray et al,

The 'dual wishbone' has long been the defacto standard for high performance vehicles. They tend to take up a lot of width though.

I'm not familiar with the suspensions that Blink and Stu spoke of, but I would think that McPherson struts with single (fairly) long suspension member almost parallel to the frame that controls the wheels position fore and aft might be your best bet. This is the most common (front) suspension design found in most cars these days and has been for quite a while.

Interesting about the 'composite' springs/suspension members. I hadn't heard of any such automotive implementations before.

Some skis have even had piezoelectrics built into them that as such had 'passive-active' damping.

Concrete is strong but brittle right?

I remember reading about a concrete research institute in the US years ago. They had developed coil springs made out of concrete! The also made thin sheets of flexible concrete: down to as little as 0.001" thick!

Wild!

Regards to all,

Doug

Hi Doug

"McPherson struts with single (fairly) long suspension member almost parallel to the frame that controls the wheels position fore and aft"

I'm starting to explore this next. My first thought about McPherson struts is that it will be tall in height. Tall might be OK, how tall is typical McPherson strut?

"Concrete is strong but brittle right"

I got lost when you said concrete; maybe the article should have been written by the composite research institute instead.

Concrete using Portland cement as glue for sorted rock gravel is strong in compression. Six (80 pound) Sacks per one cubic yard of sorted gravel will give you 3000 pound per square inch compression strength; steel reinforcing ribbed bars provide the tensile properties. A typical example would be an eight inch retaining wall holding back earth.

What types of concrete components were involved? Stiffness results from tensile and compression qualities combined in relative orientations. Concrete is an interesting word choice.

Thanks

Ray

Ray,

you have to ,early on, decide where you want the forces of suspension to enter the body structure.

Mr MacPherson's strut has been adopted for a multiplicity of reasons, some of which are: structural simplicity, only three basic elements; exerts the forces into the body structure over a large area; few moving joints to wear; not as easily damaged into misalignment as some other types; relatively inexpensive to manufacture; easy to fit and adjust at the factory.

It does not afford optimum wheel control, especially when subject to varying load conditions. It is difficult to reduce the 'profile', or strut height, to much less than 1.3 x wheel diameter. I'm talking really broad-brush here.

One of the trickiest suspensions was developed by the Rover Company in the UK and produced in front IFS of their Rover 2000 and 3500 sedans of the late 60s and early 70s. The linkages in this type spread the long. and lat. forces, as well as putting the load( spring) into the body horizontally at the innerguard/firewall interface area. In practice it proved to be remarkably tough as well.

The rears in these cars were De Dion tube IRS. Technically superb, but not without their practical problems.

You will perhaps by now realise that to spread the forces over a large area (multiple attachment points) affords the use of lighter structure overall, as there is little need for massive structure members such as a chassis, to absorb and transfer forces into the body.

The suspension of a vehicle is to keep the wheels perpendicular to the road's surface so as to afford the optimum adhesion, as well as affording comfort to the structure and the occupants.

I remember a conversation with Alan Jones the World F1 champion, when we were talking about 'experiences', I brought up the subject of suspensions. In a study his team did in the UK on the F1 car at one time ( decades ago), involved the removing of the springs and setting the car on it's bump stops, just to see if the very seriously 'stiffened' suspension would afford some cornering and/or performance advantage.

He said that the lap time was horrendously increased, due to lack of controllability, not to speak of the abominable ride quality.

So you see, unless you can achieve properly controlled compliance in the suspension of a vehicle, the performance will suffer.

It's a lesson which obviously escapes the drongos who lower their road cars to the bump-stops to achieve 'cool' ( Yuk) Run out of time now, Cheers, Stu.

Ray,

Go to this: www.carbibles.com/suspension_bible.html Cheers, Stu.

carbibles.com/suspension_bible.html

Good resource Stu!

Yes, Doug, but don't take him too seriously, he's left a lot out. There are many more. I just thought that Ray would benefit from some illustration. And everyone else too for that matter.

We got the Imp front end to work pretty well ( see prev. post) but I'm not the race car driver ( or the race anything driver, I'm too big 6'2" and always been 225lbs) so we up against it from the start. But we never had a DNF.

My family think it's weird that I've always liked small (SMALL) cars. I love to beat the ass off the big guys in 'em.

Not that I've not had some big stuff. Younger days - Chev Bel Air '62, Pontiac Laurentian '62, Ford Galaxy '65 ( the beautiful crisp, sharp edged one, still one of my old loves), Facel Vega Facel ll '62, Daimler Majestic Major '62. Didn't have 'em all in '62 tho'. Bought 'em all used, but still in the 60s. The Chev and the Pont were RHD Canadian cars. Ford was produced here in RHD.

Gotta go again,

Cheers,

Stu. ps. did you get the Bosch Book yet? Gte an early one too as it's got a lot of earlier stuff in it. Current is 7ed, so get a 3ed too.

Stu. ps. Did you get the Bosch Books yet? Get an early one too as it's got a lot of earlier stuff in it. Current is 7ed, so get a 3ed too.

Stu: Thanks for the information, recommendations and references.

I'm documenting such things and will obtain them when and as I can and they get to the top of the priority list.

Finances/priorities make it unrealistic now.

So what is the reason for the very low wear on the bottom end on Diesels Stu?

Also my first major product and focus will be my CVT. It has the best chance of and the quickest and fastest R&D & patenting time frame and then being very widely licensed.

I'd like to do my engine next. It has a number of substantial & desirable advantageous features, but still is just an ICE.

So I'll likely turn to the VERY high efficiency electric motor using only very powerful rare earth magnets to generate the torque and power. Because the output is NOT dependent upon electro-magnetic fields that make the power output in direct portion to the power input. The external power is only utilized to dynamically control the interaction of the powerful permanent magnets and the interaction of the magnetic lines of force that generate the torque and power. This may result in an electric motor that is anywhere from 50% ~ 500% more powerful than any other electric motors relative to the power input. Too soon to say until I get some more detailed analysis done. But if successful, this will make mass market electric transportation feasible very quickly as it will dramatically reduce the power storage requirements (in the batteries) and the very significant reduction in 'dead weight' that leverages their efficiency considerably. A vehicle with 150 ~ 250 Kilos of batteries is going to do a lot better than one with 350 ~ 600 Kilos of batteries.

With the quantity and power of the magnates involved, I realize that I will have to design and build dynamic jigs to (safely) assemble and disassemble these. Two of these magnets the size of the plastic screw tops on 2 liter/quart pop bottles are powerful enough to shear off the end of a finger! For obvious reasons I'll start with scaled down versions initially, but the forces involved will warrant a great deal of caution. Especially if they prove to have the type of efficiency that I think they will and I scale them up to the size large enough to power a vehicle. The task of assembly and disassembly will be a VERY formidable task requiring proper methods and means of doing so along with a considerable amount of awareness and caution.

FYI: GM Designed and successfully implemented a starter based on theses principals specifically for use on the Corvette because of their power to weight ratio. Evidence of the viability of my ideas.

But I'm working on the finances issue and have made quite significant progress very recently. FYI: Something that is low cost to get into but has the substantial of bringing back VERY significant returns very quickly: I doubled my account in two hours after one of Toyota's recall announcements. Finally made/found some things that are steadily and reliably bringing in very high returns. Will be 'rolling most of the profits back into it' initially to both build up the balance thus significantly increasing and compounding returns and getting all my credit paid off. Plus it will be a product that can and will sell like crazy and will bring in VERY large and substantial profits very quickly.

I want SO much to get my 'Life's Work' underway at this late date of this current 'life cycle' before I move along again. But for the first time, the potential financial means are in sight.

If it works out, I'll be very happy to share the info & products with others here to do the same. Won't be free, but very reasonable, obtainable and feasible to get into and the potential profit rates make it increase VERY rapidly.

I have others, but they didn't return the high, stead and reliable returns that my current ones are proving to have. I won't sell them until they do. Already lots out there that the only ones making any money on them are the authors and the sales & marketing people. Even though I could sell the 'losers' like lots of others do and make lots of money off of them, I refuse to do this until I know it will also be very profitable for those that buy and apply them.

So what is the reason for the very low wear on the bottom end on Diesels Stu?

I'm documenting such things and will obtain them when and as I can and they get to the top of the priority list.

Finances/priorities make it unrealistic now.

Also my first major product and focus will be my CVT. It has the best chance of and the quickest and fastest R&D & patenting time frame and then being very widely licensed.

I'd like to do my engine next. It has a number of substantial & desirable advantageous features, but still is just an ICE.

So I'll likely turn to the VERY high efficiency electric motor using only very powerful rare earth magnets to generate the torque and power. Because the output is NOT dependent upon electro-magnetic fields that make the power output in direct portion to the power input. The external power is only utilized to dynamically control the interaction of the powerful permanent magnets and the interaction of the magnetic lines of force that generate the torque and power. This may result in an electric motor that is anywhere from 50% ~ 500% more powerful relative to power input. Too soon to say until I get some more detailed analysis done. But if successful, this will make mass market electric transportation feasible very quickly as it will dramatically reduce the power storage requirements (in the batteries) and the very significant reduction in 'dead weight' that leverages their efficiency considerably. A vehicle with 150 ~ 250 Kilos of batteries is going to do a lot better than one with 400 ~ 600 Kilos of batteries.

But I'm working on the finances issue and have made quite significant progress very recently. FYI: Something that is low cost to get into but has the substantial of bringing back VERY significant returns very quickly: I doubled my account in two hours after one of Toyota's recall announcements. Finally made/found some things that are steadily and reliably bringing in very high returns. Will be 'rolling most of the profits back into it' initially to both build up the balance thus significantly increasing and compounding returns and getting all my credit paid off. Plus it will be a product that can and will sell like crazy and will bring in VERY large and substantial profits very quickly.

I want SO much to get my 'Life's Work' underway at this late date of this current 'life cycle' before I move along again. But for the first time, the potential financial means are in sight.

If it works out, I'll be very happy to share the info & products with others here to do the same. Won't be free, but very reasonable, obtainable and feasible to get into and the potential profit rates make it increase VERY rapidly.

I have others, but they didn't return the high, stead and reliable returns and profits that my current ones are proving to have. I won't sell them until they do. Already lots out there that the only ones making any money on them are the authors and the sales & marketing people. Even though I could sell the 'losers' like lots of others do and make lots of money off of them, I refuse to do this until I know it will also be very profitable for those that buy and apply them.

computerized racing simulators have suspension control, tire pressure, camber, etc and you get to race to see the difference it makes adjusting different aspects of the suspension. I haven't raced in a few years, but spent a lot of time with a particular NASCAR simulator like this... very educational and realistic.

Chris

Just in case you didn't catch this from the beginning of the thread

http://www.wired.com/magazine/2010/01/ff_newrevolution

Hi Ray,

how tall is typical McPherson strut?

Just going by personal experience of changing quite a number of them, I would say that they average about 2 feet. I'm erring on the side of caution here.

NB: CAUTION: If you are going to change some McPherson struts with 'coil over' spring design which is the norm, The struts AND springs come out of the vehicle as one unit. As such the springs are still 'preloaded' and compressed with VERY significant forces involved! Thinking of these in terms of being an 'armed bomb' with a very delicate fuse is good to keep in mind when changing the struts because that IS WHAT THEY ARE! Many ignorant (I'm literally speaking of 'knowledge' here and not an insult) NuBs that are unaware of this have been (seriously) injured and even killed as they didn't put adequate spring compressors properly on the coil springs before they started to dissemble them. I'm experienced and knowledgeable in this and have industrial grade equipment that I subsequently modified and improved to do this job. EVERY time that I have done this job I have a healthy dose of constant nervousness, apprehension and fear when doing the actual spring compression and treat and handle them very cautiously and gently until I have them back installed with the strut confining and controlling them again. I always have a great sense of relief once I get them re-assembled!

You have to remember that these McPherson struts do 'multiple' suspension duty. They incorporate all of the following suspension elements:

1 - Dampers / shock absorbers

2 - Holding the camber and the caster in place while accommodating the constant up & down motion of the suspension and steering as well.

3 - The coil spring usually goes over the struts. That is: the McPherson Strut goes up inside the middle of the coil springs. This is known as a 'coil over' design.

Re:

#1 : When the 'dampers/shock absorbers' are worn out they should be changed.

#2 : Likewise when the 'dampers' are worn out, the struts are usually worn out as well. This makes for more constant and erratic camber and caster movement than they normally do or should have.

Many people leave the worn out dampers/struts long past the point where they are doing their job properly, effectively and safely.

All of these make the vehicle much less likely to be controllable in an emergency crisis situation. Even worse it is going to contribute (significantly) to such incidents occurring in the first place!

#3 - As I've stated a number of times, though McStruts normally have coil springs, McStruts combined with torsion bar springs would result in what is likely the lightest, most effective and compact independent suspension that you can get with a good balance of reasonably good performance. Torsion bar springs would also add the ability to (relatively) easily and readily adjust the springs as well: something not normally found in passive suspensions.

This is WHY they are now found in the (front) suspensions of most production vehicles. Numerous vehicles have McStrut suspensions on all 4 wheels as well because of the stated advantages.

As indicated by both Stu and Blink, the inclusion of carbon fiber and composites would result in lighter suspensions, but likely significantly more expensive ones. With carbon fiber it is due to the high cost of both the materials and the labor. They are also relatively scarce which always makes such items more expensive.

Double wishbones are the defacto choice in racing vehicles because they tend to be the design that gives the vehicle the lightest suspension with the maximum and optimum handling characteristics. But this is not what you are designing and building.

McStruts are an excellent all around design balance and compromise.

.

"Concrete is strong but brittle right"

I understand your questions and queries.

I have the same ones as well as none of these attributes are normally associated with concrete.

Which is precisely why I posted them.

It was a short article years ago in Popular Science(Technology!)

As is typical with their publishing modus operandi, they tend to have lots of 'what', but only go into the why & how on the couple of 'featured items' every month.

"#2 : Likewise when the 'dampers' are worn out, the struts are usually worn out as well. This makes for more constant and erratic camber and caster movement than they normally do or should have." Doug,

This is not right.

I've never seen a top slider bush that worn, and can't think how it could get so. To adversely affect the geometry the bearing would have to be so worn that you could put a pencil down beside the piston rod.

Damping would have gone out the window long before this.

Most struts are 'Cartridge' filled these days, and even those that are not the only way to repair them is to fit a cartridge.

A torsion bar applied to the lower control arm of a strut suspension ceases to be a Mac. There are some, in service. I must confess I have always liked the the torsion bar, ever since I came across it in the early Morris cars, Minor and Oxford. Dad had 'em from'49 through the 50s. The biggest down fall of these iterations was the lever-arm dampers. Tubular dampers were eventually to be a aftermarket fitment.

Chrysler had 'em for years too. At least mine were. They were marketed as Valiants here. I have a mate who still loves 'em, even when they put that bloody great boat anchor of a motor into a small 4cyl French Simca.

Ah! Well!................... Stu.

This is not right.

I've never seen a top slider bush that worn, and can't think how it could get so. To adversely affect the geometry the bearing would have to be so worn that you could put a pencil down beside the piston rod.

Hi Stu,

Your right on the first part, but I have changed McStruts that have had well over an inch of play at the end of the rod without the spring loading on them and them extended out to their full length! The top bush was worn in an oblong (transverse) shape almost enough to get a pencil between that and the rod. Unfortunately, this is NOT an exaggeration.

It's amazing how some folks, especially ones that have no mechanical aptitude or knowledge tend to take on the 'I don't know and don't WANT to know' approach will keep on driving a vehicle until it gets so bad that it is basically inoperable before they will do anything with it. This was something that I was constantly 'educating' my clients about: don't ignore 'new, unusual and unhealthy noises and sounds that you hear. Most folks intuition are right about such things more often than not. I would tell them to let me look at it ASAP. It might be nothing that can easily be left until the next occasion of necessary work or even left as is. OR it might be something very dangerous &/or that if attended to immediately will cost them 10 or 20 TIMES more if left unattended to and not fixed until it had completely destroyed numerous other elements needlessly.

One on occasion picking up brake parts from a high volume brake and clutch place, they had what was left of a dual plate, ventilated brake rotor from disk brakes. One of the disk plates was COMPLETELY GONE!!!! There was about ½ of the other disk left and then the numerous radial webs that used to tie the two disks together. One would have had to be completely deaf and work very hard at tuning such problems out to ignore this! You can imagine both the incredible noise it must of made wearing this away and the very erratic and dangerous resulting vectors when (what was left of the) caliper clamped down on these radial webs. This is not a hearsay 'urban myth' I saw and inspected this item personally. Though understandably is quite 'unbelievable'. I wouldn't 'believe it' if someone told me about it!

A torsion bar applied to the lower control arm of a strut suspension ceases to be a Mac.

I can't see why this would HAVE to be the case Stu. I can see that they might be designed in such a fashion, but there is no real reason that a torsion bar spring tied into the lower control arm could not and would not still have all of the exact same components, except for the configuration and loading point of the spring.

Given the simplicity and compactness of them, it's hard to see why torsion bar springs aren't in use more, even now. When faced with the concept of them, many have a hard time understanding or believing that they can and would work quite effectively. But if one takes the point of view of the cross section of a coil spring, it likewise works by 'twisting the metal' in the coil spring in the same fashion that a torsion bar spring does. Coil springs basically ARE torsion bar springs wound into a coil.

I think that reason that they are not used more is because of the VERY heavy loading that most require if applied to the inner pivot of the lower control arm which is a natural layout for them. With the coil spring, they can get the spring further out and closer to the wheel and thus has more mechanical advantage and requires much less force to implement and less heavily loaded spring mountings.

Still, my folks had a had a HUGE and Very heavy Plymouth (Chrysler) '72 'land cruiser' with torsion bar front springs that loaded at the inner pivot of the lower control arm. I'm 6' 4" & ~ 260 #. The trunk was big enough that you , me and another person our size could of comfortable slept in the trunk!

As applicable to a 'modular vehicles' though, they have the disadvantage that the end of the torsion bar rigidly attached and affixed to the frame/body structure extends out quiet a ways away from the rest of the suspension and thus requires the suspension 'module' to be considerably larger.

Likewise this mounting point is VERY highly loaded and stressed. Not something that one would want on a modular vehicle.

A much maligned little British car of the late 60s had an innovative single transverse leaf spring working on the lower wishbone of a sort-of standard dual wishbone system, the GM England Vauxhall Viva. I do think it may have gestated as an Opel though.

One of the cars I did enjoy was my Hillman Imp. Rear engined all alloy Climax OHC 4 of about 800cc. Real game little darlin'.

Had a single element pressed metal, wide based, wishbone, near centre pivoted, so it was actually a swingarm, really. Rears were semi-trailing arms.

Made by the Rootes Group in Paisley, Scotland, to take on the popularity of the orginal Mini. Chrysler bought Rootes and the rot set in and it didn't make it. Damn shame. They made a 'quick' version too, the Imp GT. Not all that quick tho'.

A really effective, cleverly deployed , simple suspension. And to those detractors who might pop up, I drove mine on rough gravel country roads all it's life. I did have to do some mods to get clean air to the carb tho'.

Stu.

In a past life, I was the proud owner of a Hillman Husky. A friend had a Hillman Minx. Was a 62 I think.

....had an innovative single transverse leaf spring working on the lower wishbone of a sort-of standard dual wishbone system,

Had a single element pressed metal, wide based, wishbone, near centre pivoted, so it was actually a swingarm, really. Rears were semi-trailing arms.

A really effective, cleverly deployed , simple suspension.

As indicated by Stu and others, there are some innovative designs utilizing leaf springs. But as most commonly found, for one thing they aren't usually independent suspensions but are usually encountered in heavier work vehicles and in this configuration are very heavy suspensions. One positive aspect of the 1 piece' solid axle is that both wheels remain the same orientation in the upright/leaning plain at all times.

But as indicated, they tend to be quiet a 'heavy' solution.

I think that a McPherson strut with torsion bar springs would be optimal as far as weight and compactness go. While other suspension deigns tend to take up a fair bit of room in width and fore and aft, McPherson struts at quite 'tall' and require a fair bit of height.

The pic in Blinks posting #547 is down right unnerving! Such leaning is due to the suspension design and geometry and not because of the Hyrdo-Pneumatic spring system that some Citrons utilize.

My first vehicle was a rear engined Renault R-10. It's rear suspension had two solid 'half shaft' axles that pivoted at the differential. Thus in cornering it had a 'jacking effect' that raised the vehicle and it's center of gravity up in cornering with the inside wheel tending to lean out at the top considerably.

It was a total piece of very unreliable junk. Yet I had a friend that bought one brand new straight from the factory in France and as it was destined to end up in the US had crank windows and not the sliding versions of the European models. He drove it for years in Europe and England and had it shipped to the US along with him when he returned. Never had any problems whatsoever with it at all and actually sold it for more than he paid for it.

Cheers,

Doug

"Wood encapsulated in Kevlar (the latter being noted for its deadness re sound)?"

Perhaps not. It'd be a great boxbeam, albeit shallow. With the compression and tension members being as they, are I'd guess that the resin bond to the wood would fail at it's boundary layers in time. How much time? Dunno! Depends a lot on the type of wood too. Narrow angle elastic limit?

Effective damping only comes with multiple leaves, as it's the interleaf friction that does it.

We tried resin encapsulation of Bamboo, of various textile, a few years ago. Just to see what happens? Then resin/fabric encapsulation of bamboo/ balsa core composite, and bamboo/RCC foam composite. Back in '92. Very interesting. VERY strong and stiff. Amazing in compound curves.

Always thought it'd make ripper bodies for vehicles of various types.

Just a few random thoughts.

I love wooden structures. Always said I'd build a GRP boat when they grow GRP trees. So I built a wooden one. There are a couple more in me, I hope, although I won't go so big again. There is a guy ( another one) who built a wooden car, and right smart one it is too. I have some stuff on it somewhere. If I can find it.............

Cheers, mate, Stu.

I worked for a guy in the early 80's who sold plans for a plywood bodied car the design was current F1 at the time the running gear & suspension from a bug.

I always imagined a bicycle frame could be built from a carbon fiber honey comb, flex being determined by the length of the tubes. the hollows being filled up with rubber for damping

various grad prix motorcycles have used carbon fiber swing arms & designed in the amount of twist desired, after finding out some degree of deflection was actually good for providing dynamic feedback to the riders

Howdy all,

I did make a rather lengthy posting ( yes I do manage to make the odd short one! (< 8) that somehow got lost in the posting. Though perhaps it wasn't as the one that went astray, or got censored out for 'irrelevance'

I believe it may have been the one where I refereed to the article, most likely in popular Science(Technology! It is unlikely one would see such a thing in Scientific American, so most likely PopSci) of a someone building a very modern car made primarily out of wood. from what was shown they appeared to be doing a very good job of it. 3d compound curves laid up in laminations. A trip to the body shop for repairs would be quite interesting LoL

Interesting stuff Stu.

GRP?

A while back when I posted about rebuilding a 5 cylinder diesel in a car and how little wear there was on the bottom end as it was in excellent condition: like a petrol with ~ 10,000 on it as opposed to the +250,000 that it did have. You asked me if I knew why to which I responded I though it was primarily do to the slower pressure increase once the fuel is ignited in comparison to a petrol one. You said that this was not the case.

What is it attributed to ?

"GRP?"

Glass reinforced plastic. Commonly called fiberglass.

Hi Stu

Thanks for pointing me in this direction. I enjoyed the journey and the destination. A mono spring would allow for front wheel drive and easy instillation. Here are some souvenirs.

• Corvette Monospring System, Complete, Front, Lower, 1963-1982

Ecklers @ $949.99 kit

http://www.ecklers.com/product.asp?pf_id=A7181&dept_id=1825

• For the bare basics, this next one looks like a fair price at $329.99 with other weight categories and prices available.

Name: 300# Spring Kit Rubber, 1978-79 Vette

Manufacturer: Vette Brakes & Products, Inc. (VBP)

http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.vbandp.com/images/pimagel/42301.jpg&amp;amp;amp;amp;amp;imgrefurl=http://www.vbandp.com/detail.aspx%3FID%3D536&usg=__hqQtEfvIHami3s3PjBDgeZNIsEw=&h=273&amp;w=350&sz=15&amp;hl=en&start=265&sig2=062w89JILNAemgK2DKYuQw&amp;amp;itbs=1&tbnid=LNwT1ekY254MjM:&amp;tbnh=94&tbnw=120&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dcorvette%2Bfront%2Bmono%2Bspring%26start%3D252%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26sa%3DN%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-US:official%26gbv%3D2%26ndsp%3D18%26tbs%3Disch:1&ei=a161S7SXBouYMai5naUJ

All spring kits include the Monospring, Steel Center Mount Plate Kit w/hardware and 8" grade#8 spring bolts with washers, nylock nuts, rubber cushions (rubber available – part # 42304) and detailed instructions. 5 year limited warranty.

• Corvette Monospring Kit, Dual Mount, Composite, Rear, 1963-1979, $599.99 Kit

VBP has links to utube videos to show instillation. Find the links down to the left on most catalog pages.

Thanks

Ray

The bottom two springs replace the existing rear steel spring. The first one is for the front though, and was a good improvement over the coil springs I was told.

A mono spring would allow for front wheel drive and easy instillation

Looking at photos of many numerous first very early automobiles, many of them had such transverse (front) suspensions.

'Everything old is new again'?

Wouldn't such a suspension cause almost constant camber changes and thus make for constant erratic handling problems?

Doug,

In a word - No!

You'll find that Engineers can do better than that.

Stu.

Hi Ray et al,

I am learning, understanding and appreciating that this IS an Engineering site primarily orientated towards solutions to specific real world problems, so am becoming more cautious and conservative in my postings when I know a little about it but don't know or remember the specifics. There is still a place for such postings otherwise here though. They make for interesting discussions and having others contribute what they do know that aids and benefits us all. I made you aware of the AnitDIve and AnitSquat that can be accomplished with suspension design, but didn't get into 'speculating on it' as it was decades ago that I studied it and haven't applied it since then so my memory of it was vague.

I always have the instructions about this forum to 'do your own homework': This isn't here in order to cheat on Engineering courses, papers and exams etc'. to fall back on!

I also look at it as keeping Blink sharp and on his toes! Lol (< 8)

This is an excellent forum and I am driven to know and understand and learn the why and wherefore of pretty well everything. Thus I very much appreciate and enjoy almost constantly learning about new things and furthering my knowledge on things that I have some familiarity on at.

I'm enough of a 'know it all' to know that I don't 'know it all!' ROFLol (< 8)

All the best to one an all (< 8)

Hi Chris,

You are defiantely 'hot' and heading in the right direction.

Good start

Hi Doug,

Your challenge might be better as the start of a new thread. We get so many outlandish fuel-efficiency schemes being promoted at CR4, however, that people will be skeptical. You'll need to provide BSFC data from dyno runs with a simple prototype to come across as believable.

You seem to be saying that an elderly gentleman modified a single-cylinder 4 stroke engine and documented, to his satisfaction, a large increase in efficiency. For your challenge, it would be helpful to put his figures in BSFC terms. Increases in efficiency are mathematically ambiguous unless you carefully explain what you mean. For example, when above you mentioned "a further 10~ 15%" you could mean 10 - 15% added to 25%, (35% to 40% efficient) or you could mean a 10 - 15% change in consumption (which would mean an improvement of efficiency from 25% to 27.5% - 28.5%). Using BSFC makes things unambiguous.

Given that this modification is in the public domain, perhaps you could simply describe it in a post to start a discussion about it, rather than starting a guessing game. But who knows -- maybe people with nothing but time to burn will like the guessing game format.

some time recently in here you made the statement that current gasoline engines are about 25% fuel efficient and that there was basically no way to get much higher than that.

I doubt that Stu made that statement. Current car engines are generally just over 30% peak efficiency, with the Prius engine being 38% efficient at peak. All engines are, of course, lower in efficiency at lower loads. Commercial engines (lawn mower, generator, etc) are 1950's tech, and are at the low end of efficiency, with peak efficiency being about 25%.

(BTW PhD and Doctorate are synonyms.)

Definitely very cold.

Hi Blinky,

You may be right about my attributing the statement to Stuey.

If so, I'm sure I will hear about it and be corrected on it.

Just a short while ago you made the very valid point about the vehicle weight being a very significant factor in mileage. (I'm still wondering what the metric equivalent for this term is? Anyone know?)

Stu likewise did make the comment that there are appreciable design and functional improvements that have been continuously applied to and utilized on the engine design per say.

Regardless: I am speaking about a significant improvement in the efficiency of the engine itself: significantly less fuel utilized to make about the same power and torque output.

Hi Blink,

I'm familiar with the scenario.

As I've said, I personally did an experiment that confirmed it, another elderly gent in the US converted an petrol 4 stroke with VERY good results and proof of this.

Once illuminated, I'm fairly certain that most will agree with this assessment, including those that are more knowledgeable and experienced with the technical side, who tend to (rightfully) be more skeptical. Anyone as familiar and knowledgeable as you are will have very little difficulty 'doing the math' and find that it confirms this. It will take someone such as yourself and Stu less than a minute of mental contemplation to confirm it.

Though as I indicated sometimes a formal advanced education in very specific area can stifle some peoples creativity and be a handicap as many such people don't contemplate other options that they might otherwise consider.

I've got you down as a 'frozen' skeptic on your score card so far. (< 8)

How's your project progressing? Making any progress or stuck with lack of resources like so many of us are?

Did you happen to see the article in Popular Science a while back of someone building a modern high performance vehicle with wood? Including being skin stressed. Quite the undertaking and by the looks of the article they were doing a good job of it. I want to be there when someone takes one into the body shop for repairs! LoL

Hi Doug,

As I've said, I personally did an experiment that confirmed it, another elderly gent in the US converted an petrol 4 stroke with VERY good results and proof of this.

I don't want to participate in hijacking Chris's thread, but would be at least vaguely interested in reading more about this engine mod if you posted the test results in a different thread. It would be interesting to know what the BSFC figures were before and after the modification. If BSFC is less than 250 g/kWh that would be interesting to talk about, if the baseline engine is otherwise pretty standard.

Hi Blink,

Chris is aware of this and was the first one to respond and has no objections and it does have some relevance to this thread.

I don't have the specific figures, so I can't provide them. But I'm sure that you will readily grasp the validity of it and that the theory that it is based on and that the 'numbers' support the conclusion.

Regards,

Doug

Point Made, and taken

What I am saying is that once you know what the modification is, and how it works and the results; is that you will most readily understand that the results will readily indicate that the 'numbers and the math' will be reflected in the results.

Sounds good. Start a thread with the results in BSFC, and perhaps you'll get some interest.

The point that I'm trying to make is for example if you knew for certain that a specific chemical reaction is exothermic and the end result was more acidic, you would know that this will be the end result of it even though you are unable to quantify it mentally from your general knowledge and experience of this unless presented with the specifics that you could either calculate or find out by measuring the results of the experiment.

But this would not negate your knowledge or your experience that you KNOW that this is what the relative result will be WITHOUT calculating it or doing the experiment for the 1,000 time. It's not going to be any different than the previous 999 times.

The same principal applies here.