Has anyone thought of, or tried to use a strap material as a sway?

My thought would be to use a kinetic rope or heavy polymer rubber strap to act as a sway..

Thoughts? Flames?

Originally posted by redrangie
Thoughts? Flames?

My thoughts? I'm wondering what you'll eventually find out.

Flames? I'll hold them back until I see how whatever you eventually find out works (or doesn't).

Sounds like an interesting project. :D

I think you should buy LWG vehicle for your wife, for Christmas so that you have two rovers to tinker with. :flipoff2:

J-

Just got back into town.

You can have that swaybar I shot you a picture of. I'd still like to take that bumper facebar off your hands though.

Craig

I'm curious about this too. On my drive in this morning, I was thinking about air or hydaulic bumpstops to double as swaybars - increase pressure and maintain contact axle onroad, relieve pressure for offroad - kind of like cross-linked shocks.

I think we need to remember what a sway bar does...if one side of the suspension compresses, the sway bar exterts a force on the other side causing it to compress as well (albeit not as much as the other side). Without the sway bar, the tendency would be for the non-compressed side of the suspension to extend and possibly throw in extra body-roll.

If anything, straps will limit the extension on the non-compressed side of the suspension, but it will function completely independent of the compressed side (unlike a sway-bar). Since it sounds like you want to impede/resist the extension (not eliminate it), kinetic or elastic straps would certainly be more desirable over a limiting strap.

AFA the air-bump stops go...they will only resist compression on the compressed side of the suspension; if the bump stop is still in contact with the axle on the other side, it will have the tendency to extend that side, actually providing more "sway."

While DieLucas! is right about how a sway works, stiffer and progressive springs reduce roll as well. The bumstops mentioned would actually work as stiffer, more progressive springs.

What's wrong with a detatchable sway, anyway?

Originally posted by DieLucas!


If anything, straps will limit the extension on the non-compressed side of the suspension, but it will function completely independent of the compressed side (unlike a sway-bar). Since it sounds like you want to impede/resist the extension (not eliminate it), kinetic or elastic straps would certainly be more desirable over a limiting strap.




My thoughts exactly. Kinetic energy... With 340# springs and big dampenning, I don't have that much problem on the compression. I think it is coming from the unloading.

j

but if you put a strap on the extending end and nothing on the compressing end, it will over-compress, hurting your coils and possibly still pitching the same amount, just lower in the arc of the suspension. it could also cause the vehicle to lift a tire if the forces are strong enough, and if it lifts a tire, that would suck. can't an Anti-rock be adapted to fit? or even a similar set-up made from a tosion bar from a pick-up or something equipped with them? also, the longer the arm on a swaybar, the flexier the sway-bar, so, you could just add material to the ends and not worry about disconnecting, or disconnect it and forget about it. i haven't run a sway bar in over 2 years without any problems, but i'm still ifs for now and it operates a little differently than an straight axle as far as body roll is concerned.

When thinking of sway bar theory....also consider this.....

Old Minis use to have what was called hydrolastic suspension. In effect it did what you mentioned. When one side was compressed, it forced water to the other side, stiffening it.

What is your ultimate goal by doing this...what behavior are you trying to eliminate/correct.
Not being critical, just curious. Like to see how this works out.

Originally posted by sachilles
When thinking of sway bar theory....also consider this.....

Old Minis use to have what was called hydrolastic suspension. In effect it did what you mentioned. When one side was compressed, it forced water to the other side, stiffening it.



Alex Moulton should have stuck to designing bicycles.

This is the exact opposite motion as what occurs with an anti-sway bar.

The hydrolastic suspension, by stiffening the non-compressed side of the suspension, actually creates more sway (e.g. push down on one side of the bumper and that compression forces the other side up).

An anti-sway bar, in theory, could lift the inside wheel of a car going around a corner very fast. While this is not desirable, in most cases this is the tendency; the tendency to cause the inside tire to lift causes the center of gravity to lower (e.g. the outside tire/suspension is comrpessing, and in turn, the sway-bar compresses the suspension of the inside wheel, thus, both sides compress and lower the body and center of gravity). This is what helps reduce the sway (instead of the inside tire/suspension extending and causing extraordinary body roll).

BTW, I don't use straps or sways...I just go slow.

yeah, when I did scca, the gt3 cars did this.. mostly rabbits/golfs. they would lift a rear just like a dog from too stiff (large) diameter bar.

All I am looking for is about 1-2 inch less roll...

j

Originally posted by DieLucas!


Alex Moulton should have stuck to designing bicycles.

This is the exact opposite motion as what occurs with an anti-sway bar.


For the record the suspension was front to back....just showing how hydro lines can work. Just throwing the concept out there.
However, you are slightly incorrect in your assumption. In a no resistance world your assumption would be entirely correct.
The suspension was valved to reduce flow....think about how that could work for a minute. You are suggesting that it would push you over....when in reality it could not....at worst it could offer no resitance. Hard to explain in text.
Secondly....Mr. Moulton had one of the most successfull suspension designs in history(not the hydro stuff). Its what gave the mini its edge. Comfortable...hell no. Mini's have been extremely successful in motorsports and not because they were power houses.

Regardless of how it is valved...if it is fluid, it's not compressible, and if it is linked to other "cylinders," a compression on one part of the suspension is going to result in an extension on another part.

My mistake on the side to side...so I guess, then, if you push down on the front bumper, the rear bumper is going to pop-up.


WRT minis, the timed trials racing where they are zipping around the gated course like kayakers is friggin' amazing!

Originally posted by DieLucas!


WRT minis, the timed trials racing where they are zipping around the gated course like kayakers is friggin' amazing!

You mean like this?

http://www.pkadev.com/cm/autox/IMG_1538.JPG

That's me in my mini....currently for sale btw. Fast as snot.

In regards to using hydro....I'm sure its would be more work than its worth....but would be an interesting engineering exercise.

-Seth

ok, here's a weird thought, why not link some air shocks or even hydro shocks to a swaybar that isn't even connected to the axle. yeah, run a shock at the axle with a hose from it to another shock mounted up in the frame somewhere with one end attached to the frame and the other end attached to a swaybar or lever. then, when the first shock get's compressed, it will force the other shock to extend, pushing on the arm of the swaybar extending the shock on the other end which is linked to the shock at the other end of the axle, which would now be compressing. this way, you have a disconnected sway-bar, one shock at each wheel, unless you want more shocks, and you still have an anti-sway system, but the drawbacks will be testing to see what sort of sway-bar or lever will work and finding room to mount all that extra junk. also, if it's hydro, you may need to have all the shocks be the same lengths, but not sure.

I've been daydreaming at work about the physics involved in this....when I should be busting my butt to get some work done.

Keep in mind the chassis is not like a teeter totter on the axle. The distance from the center of the axle to the center part of the chassis can vary.
If one side is entirely compressed, it doesn't mean that the opposite side is full extended.(and at full lean)

So if you limit extension, in theory, you will limit sway.

So hears a wack ball idea.....What about an elastic limiting strap?

Even more crazy....gonna get flamed for it...but seriously what about seat belt retractors or something similar......a certain amount of lean would cause them to lock up. Or you could some how put a switch/lock on them while on-road but free spool when off-road. Or heck you could even weld the reciever from the seat belt on the axel and you could disconnect it just like a seat belt.....
I know it sounds stupid.....like I said daydreaming at work....as accounting isn't exactly the most exciting stuff.:rolleyes:

More daydreaming with hydro.

crackpot idea #2

retractor eliminator strap. As the axle drops, it is causing the retractor to spool in one direction. As that turns, it can turn a hydrolic pump that pumps fluid to the other side of the axle. That fluid exerts force downward the other side by some means.


Think I've been watching junkyard wars too much lately.

Originally posted by fledgling666
ok, here's a weird thought, why not link some air shocks or even hydro shocks to a swaybar that isn't even connected to the axle. yeah, run a shock at the axle with a hose from it to another shock mounted up in the frame somewhere with one end attached to the frame and the other end attached to a swaybar or lever. then, when the first shock get's compressed, it will force the other shock to extend, pushing on the arm of the swaybar extending the shock on the other end which is linked to the shock at the other end of the axle, which would now be compressing. this way, you have a disconnected sway-bar, one shock at each wheel, unless you want more shocks, and you still have an anti-sway system, but the drawbacks will be testing to see what sort of sway-bar or lever will work and finding room to mount all that extra junk. also, if it's hydro, you may need to have all the shocks be the same lengths, but not sure.

Reminds me of the g-force suspension from http://www.theautoedge.com.au which is similar.

A double acting hydraulic cylinder/shock is used for the link on one side of the swaybar. A pendulum on a directional control valve directs fluid to the appropriate cylinder port to correct body roll. Does not restrict articulation.

They make it for the RRC and the Discovery.....wonder what something like that costs?

Originally posted by Bush65


Reminds me of the g-force suspension from http://www.theautoedge.com.au which is similar.

A double acting hydraulic cylinder/shock is used for the link on one side of the swaybar. A pendulum on a directional control valve directs fluid to the appropriate cylinder port to correct body roll. Does not restrict articulation.

similar, yes, but not quite what i was talking about. there is still a sway-bar attached to the axle with this set-up and even thought the shocks are vertually non-functioning without the pendulum system, they didn't mention if it could be shut off, so it would hinder articulation off-road. then again, so would my idea to a lesser degree.

maybe disconnecting the existing sway-bar IS actually the best way for on-road handling and off-road performance. oh, well, at least we're thinking, gets me off the porn sites............

Why disconnect the sway bar when you have this?

Billster

And this?

Billster

Okay...that's just sick! :eek: :eek:

Glad you came out of the closet with your fancy sway bar Bill. It is the bomb

Fiat why can't you get off the Nutter bashing. Seems like a guy with a go fast Fiat would be more sensitive to a no BS advice Nutter newbie.

Hell pick on me I live for it.


Simca rules. Now there is a car to boast about doing a wheelie with. Help me with a new bio line.
Simply I Make Californians Awstruck. Come on Tony take a swing.

Jim Pendleton
Self appointed online flamegaurd for Nutter.

Originally posted by fledgling666


similar, yes, but not quite what i was talking about. there is still a sway-bar attached to the axle with this set-up and even thought the shocks are vertually non-functioning without the pendulum system, they didn't mention if it could be shut off, so it would hinder articulation off-road. then again, so would my idea to a lesser degree.

maybe disconnecting the existing sway-bar IS actually the best way for on-road handling and off-road performance. oh, well, at least we're thinking, gets me off the porn sites............

I did not intend to critique your concept, it just reminded me of the g-force system that I thought was also worth mentioning.

As far as I can determine from speaking to the manufacturer, the g-force system does not hinder articulation. The hydraulic cylinder is a form of disconnection or a variable length link. It pulls/pushes on the swaybar end only to compensate for body lean (or high speed cornering action on the pendulum), not articulation of the axle.

yeah, i wasn't accusing you of critiquing me, hell, it was just one of those late afternoon wish-i-was-in-bed thoughts anyway. frankenrangie has what i was talking about, but i don't know about those links, man, they look a little thin to me and bent too much without enough support, but hey, this thread is about sway, not links. ok, too early monday morning to continue a complete thought for too long, not to mention i keep having to delete and retype half my words because my hands just aren't working very well right now.

had this random thought:
On each corner of the rig, have two sets of springs. I think this could work on a coiler and a leaf sprung vehicle.
Have the second set of spring be coils of a very firm type(and small). Have a removeable perch. Get to the trail, disconnect the small coils and place in truck. Could also work as load leveling springs for towing. No clue how it could be done practically. Think of it as a removable springy bump stop.

Just had one more....inspired by the mini.

The non hydro suspended minis actually used rubber bell shaped things as springs. One of the popular mods, is what is called Hi-low suspension.....which in essence put a rod down the middle of the spring, with a trumpeted end on both ends. You can/could screw down the trumpeted ends together, to lower the ride on the car....could work in this situation.....can't explain it well in writing.
http://www.minimania.com/images/C-SRP004.JPG
http://www.minimania.com/imagesbig/c-srp004a.jpg
Something like the above....although the picture of a product above is of a conversion to a coil spring rather than rubber.

Its ok, you can call the idea stupid....i'm an accoutant...what do I know.

Weak links? That tubing is like 1/4" wall and took 2 guys an 8' cheater bar and a JD2 to bend it (barely). They are frickin beefy as hell, and they have been hit hard.

Much more likely to bend the frame or axle tubes than the trailing arms on FrankenROVER.

Billster (wireless from work)

Originally posted by FrankenRover
Why disconnect the sway bar when you have this?

Billster

Missed this the first time around....looks cool....can you explain whats going on with (in terms a fool like me can understand) it?
Looks like it turns a rod, how does that produce the opposing force on the other side?

The rod is splined on both ends and any difference in movement of the arms results in twisting of the rod. This can be dialed in via turning the rod down on a lathe.

On Frank, the front springs are slightly heavier in rate than KC prescribed (but I had previously run that rate and liked it). For the rears we went sorta light and so the rearend was doing alot of the articulation work. Now with the rear sway in place the front end does alot more of the articulating keeping the truck level, as well as really helping alot in off camber situations that a tall springy truck really likes alot.

Here is a pict of the approach to the last obsticle before the Rock Pile on Pritchett. At EJS this was less dug out and less of an angle to drive around, but felt WAY more tippy without the sway. This year (cut out much deeper and leanier) with the sway it was cake, with no pucker factor at all.

I haven't ramped the truck with the sway yet, but I think final articulation will not be decreased because anything lost in the rear has been gained up front.

Billster

ps. Not that it matters, but the on-road driving is much less tippy as well.

Clean solution, and you certainly look stable in the pic.

I've concluded I need a rear sway for my 110, but I took for granted I needed disconnects. Maybe not!

Question: Since you have driven with both 90 and 110 wheelbase
on the same truck, would you agree that a 110 needs a different balance between rear and front articulation? Scorpion and other Euro boys build their 90's with extreme articulation in the rear and not much in the front. I can't see myselft doing that to my 110, though.

Also, what is your weight distribution front/rear with the gear you carry?

Sach,
There is a torsion type rod that runs through the crossmember of the frame to the link on the other side. Does that help. Bill did not really explain this if you were still wondering how it works.
As for me all a fancy sway a way system would do for me is trick me into thinking I am not really about to roll over. I want a Central Tire inflation system to help me when I get tippy. Then I will just air up the low side on the fly as I am defying gravity.

Thanks pendy. makes more sense now.