Haynes Forums  

Go Back   Haynes Forums > Haynes Roadster Forums > Running gear
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 3rd February 2011, 11:11 AM
Aussie_Haynes_MX5 Aussie_Haynes_MX5 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Newcatle, NSW Australia
Posts: 39
Default Roll center height/position of arms

Can anyone shed some light on what a good roll center height would be for a Haynes? I've worked out the dimensions for where the top and bottom ball joints sit in relation to the wheel and tyre combination i'm going to be using, but from here i will need to know the RC height to start drawing up the geometry. Looks like my ride height will be about 120mm or so.

On the second part of the question/topic, do any of the arms have to be horizontal when the car is sitting at it's designate ride height, or is a matter of as long as the arms are the correct length and the ball joints are in the correct position, it doesn't matter.

Reason for the question, when using the NC MX5 uprights, the distance between the upper and lower ball joints is only about 161mm. This means that when using a 205/50R15 wheel/tyre combination, if the bottom arm was to be horizontal at rest, it would need to sit at 230mm from the ground.

Any thoughts, or if someone can steer me in a good direction, i'd appreciate it. There's quite a bit of calculation and maths that i've had to call on which i haven't used since i left school.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 3rd February 2011, 11:50 AM
ozzy1's Avatar
ozzy1 ozzy1 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: perth,australia
Posts: 760
Default

From what i recall in a previous thread i think handyandy or spud said that when the ride height is set correct the front arms are parallel to the ground.i stand to be corrected though.
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 3rd February 2011, 02:12 PM
fabbyglass
 
Posts: n/a
Default

http://www.racingaspirations.com/?p=286
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 3rd February 2011, 07:22 PM
flyerncle flyerncle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: gateshead,near cobbly bit of A1 North
Posts: 3,188
Default

Ride heights 4ins front 5 1/2 ins rear under chassis rails seems to work fine after corner weighting.
__________________
Cost : Little as possible.
Thanks : To those who by their generosity my build has progressed.
Its a handmade sports car not a flaming kit car !!!


If at first you dont succeed,avoid skydiving...

No parachute require to freefall,only if you want to do it twice.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 3rd February 2011, 08:06 PM
Bonzo's Avatar
Bonzo Bonzo is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Cornwall
Posts: 3,321
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flyerncle View Post
Ride heights 4ins front 5 1/2 ins rear under chassis rails seems to work fine after corner weighting.
Just written that in my book Paul
__________________
I am not a complete idiot...........Some of the parts are missing !!
Ronnie

www.roadster-builders.co.uk
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 3rd February 2011, 08:09 PM
flyerncle flyerncle is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: gateshead,near cobbly bit of A1 North
Posts: 3,188
Default

Measured from Spuds Roadster (when he was not looking ).

Did you see the housing price Ronnie ?
__________________
Cost : Little as possible.
Thanks : To those who by their generosity my build has progressed.
Its a handmade sports car not a flaming kit car !!!


If at first you dont succeed,avoid skydiving...

No parachute require to freefall,only if you want to do it twice.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 3rd February 2011, 10:29 PM
3GE Components's Avatar
3GE Components 3GE Components is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 370
Default

Suspension design is a real black art that's only understood by 3 people, and they don't agree

Seriously though, too much emphasis is placed on roll centres, they are not the be-all and end-all of suspension design, there are lots of factors to get you head around and the end result will always be a compromise. In reallity what you want to concentrate on is how the outside wheel, the one taking all the load in cornering, behaves, it's important that the wheel is upright through various angles of lean, with CAD you are able to plot all this.

Kind regards

John
__________________
Quality parts for the Haynes Roadster - manufactured to a standard, not down to a price.

Contact us at component-sales@hotmail.co.uk or visit our website www.3gecomponents.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 4th February 2011, 09:28 AM
fabbyglass
 
Posts: n/a
Default

That link i posted will give folk some idea what happens when you change things.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 4th February 2011, 09:33 AM
Tilly819 Tilly819 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 489
Wink

Oh boy what a question.......

Well it depends on many factors but it is something that you have to work out for yourself it is not a figure that can be quoted.

First you need to work out how high your front and rear CofG are. then this will alow you to decide how much leavarge you want the cornering forces to apply to the RC which will detirmine how far you want the roll center away from the CofG, like adjusting the length of a spanner to undo a nut, the longer it is the more leaveridge it has.

idealy you want the RC to move with the CofG by equal amounts so as to keep your leaverage the same.

once you have all this data you will probley wind that the camber curve for your wheels in bump and droop are awful and will find that you have to make a compromise beween
1) outer wheel control in roll
2) camber change in bump/droop
3) roll center location / control

you will find that the less suspension travel you have the more control you will have over these factors however another compromise then comes into the fray that you require a realistic amount of suspension travel do drive the car on the public highway due to all of our lovley pot holes etc

also consider the effects the KPI and caster have on the geomitary of the outside wheel when the car is steered more KPI will put on more positve camber when the car turns and caster will have the oposite effect.

i would highly recomend you get a copy of
"compotition car suspension" by allen staniforth
this covers all of the basics of suspension design and weight transfer

hope this helps i am awere it is not quite the answer you were looking for but the answer is not a simple of.

if you have any other question of this nature dont hesitate to ask, i will be as helpfull as i can though a little moe detail in the question may be required.

all the best of luck, it is a complicated process designing suspension

tilly
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old 4th February 2011, 09:38 AM
Tilly819 Tilly819 is offline
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: Leicestershire
Posts: 489
Default

oop missed a bit

in answer to your second question

the book car with the sierra upright has the lower bone say level with the ground at ridehight

however this is irelivent for yourself
you will find that having the lower bone inclined towards the chassis will make the wheel gain positive camber in droop and having the upper bone declined towards the chassis will make the wheel gain negative camber in bump
this can be desirable in some cases at it can help the tyre contact patch stay upright in a corner under roll conditions but is detremental under acceleration and braking.

tilly
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 10:33 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.