Stressbar discussion...

[mr.utility at highstream.net (David Utley)]

Larry,
  Wouldn?t that be relative to the one that you are measuring, and which way
the car is turning?


David

-----Original Message-----
From: L F [mailto:rocco16v@netzero.net]
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 8:13 PM
To: Dan Bubb; David Utley
Cc: scirocco-l@scirocco.org
Subject: Re: Stressbar discussion...

ref. last sentence.
Yes, he could have said something like "if the tower deflected four feet,
then your wheel would be laying on the ground"  It would have conveyed the
same thought, just more exagerated.
 Fortunately, the towers don't deflect four feet.  They also don't deflect
.420".  They may not even deflect .200".  In fact, they probably DON'T
deflect .200".

Irregardless, the guy has the towers deflecting the wrong way (outward)
under cornering...a detailed mental stress analysis tells me ( :) ) the
stresses would be INwards.

Larry
----- Original Message -----
From: Dan Bubb <mailto:jdbubb@ix.netcom.com>
To: David Utley <mailto:mr.utility@highstream.net>
Cc: scirocco-l@scirocco.org <mailto:scirocco-l@scirocco.org>
Sent: Friday, March 05, 2004 3:19 PM
Subject: Re: Stressbar discussion...

"Another point to consider is that if your outer strut tower is deflected
outwards 0.20" by this 333
lb force, then you just lost 0.5? of negative camber!  If it deflects 0.42"
you have lost a full
degree of negative camber. "

This is the quote. He doesn't state any measured deflection. He's only
equating deflection to camber
change. Both deflections, 0.20" and 0.42",  are hypothetical.
I'm merely pointing out that if the chassis was so weak that it had that
much deflection the extreme
movement and resultant stresses (beyond the material yield point) would
fatigue and crack the metal
very quickly.
The actual deflections can't be as high as his examples so the camber change
due to deflection is
proportionally much less.
Just making the point that he's exaggerating the possible camber change due
to deflection.
Dan