[Author Prev][Author Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Author Index][Thread Index]

Re: cf, constant for this discussion please

In a message dated 98-03-04 13:17:16 EST, you write:

<< We cannot go anywhere with this argument with the fallacious assumption
> that a locked diff transfers 50% to each axle.  It simply isn't true.
> The distribution is infinitely variable between 0/100 and 100/0.
For the KISS, Orin, can we go with the front and rear cf's as a constant?  I
made it that way for a reason.  And the reality is, most turns have this
assumption.  Otherwise, I would argue, you may want to think twice about ANY
slip angle discussions.  For my model in a turn, the above presentation holds
true to the letter.  I suppose we could go where you want to with this (and
I'm not sure I'm disagreeing with you), but simplistically speaking with the
same road cf, 1:1 BR is correct.  at 1lb/ft traction front, you have 1lb/ft
traction rear.  Speaking in one wheel up vs one wheel down, gets us further
mired in a traction issue that is really irrelevent for this discussion.  For
slip angle to a turn, and BR f/r traction differentials assumed to be the same
(cfrf = cfrr = cflf = cflr).  I like making simple models, you are
complicating it unecessarily.  Given where we are with this whole torsen
discussion, I'd prefer to stay really simple.  What you are proposing is
jumping ahead to post f/r diff, we haven't gotten there yet.  We can have max
Tshift in a torsen car without going there, and no Tshift in a Gen I without
going there, T1 + T2 = maxTrg.  Go there, we are in really deep, beyond simple
chassis dynamics too.  Your call I suppose.  I argue at that point, we all

Scott Justusson