|
Welcome to the Australian Ford Forums forum. You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and inserts advertising. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members, respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features without post based advertising banners. Registration is simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. Please Note: All new registrations go through a manual approval queue to keep spammers out. This is checked twice each day so there will be a delay before your registration is activated. |
|
The Pub For General Automotive Related Talk |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
04-06-2009, 05:28 PM | #1 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,848
|
When a car is released there is often a claim of say 15% greater 'torsional stiffness'.
The press often uses this expression or 'torsional rigidity' Noticeably at time the FG release reviews the press said the VE had greater torsional stiffness. What I would like to know is, since it is quoted in % gains it must be measurable - not just based on the driver impression. Does anyone know of a source of data for 'torsional Stiffness' or 'rigidity'. Some kind of competitive comparison. thanks |
||
04-06-2009, 06:05 PM | #2 | ||
Ich bin ein auslander
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Loving the Endorphine Machine
Posts: 7,453
|
Do not know of a source giving hard data that can be used as a comparison between manufacturers. It is more of a subjective observation that can be made in the handling characteristics of a vehicle.
A dead give away is opening a door when one wheel is jacked off the ground. Do this on a VN commodore and the door will not close again without misalignment causing it to strike on the opening. Do this on a BF and it closes easy, showing much less distortion of the body structure. They do torsional rigidity testing in the design process which involves placing a measured amount of torsional force on the body and measuring the amount of deformation. Done with hydraulic rams and very sensitive measuring equipment.
__________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional! |
||
04-06-2009, 08:41 PM | #3 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Canberra Region
Posts: 9,058
|
__________________
2016 FGX XR8 Sprint, 6speed manual, Kinetic Blue #170 2004 BA wagon RTV project. 1998 EL XR8, Auto, Hot Chilli Red 1993 ED XR6, 5speed, Polynesian Green. 1 of 329. Retired 1968 XT Falcon 500 wagon, 3 on the tree, 3.6L. Patina project. |
||
04-06-2009, 08:53 PM | #4 | ||
Ich bin ein auslander
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Loving the Endorphine Machine
Posts: 7,453
|
Awesome demonstration of the concept, thanks
__________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional! |
||
04-06-2009, 08:54 PM | #5 | ||
Petro-sexual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,527
|
Nice comparison, but that guy has sweet FA of an idea of what he is talking about.
I hate when sales people interview an engineer, have no idea what they are talking about, then try to replicate the information to the public. Torsional stiffnes is a measurable unit, but it's effects on handling and are not so much. Many many factors come in to play when 'handling' is 'measured'. |
||
04-06-2009, 08:55 PM | #6 | |||
Ich bin ein auslander
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Loving the Endorphine Machine
Posts: 7,453
|
Quote:
__________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional! |
|||
04-06-2009, 09:07 PM | #7 | |||
Petro-sexual
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Melbourne
Posts: 4,527
|
Quote:
I never heard that reference or anything like it while at uni, so it sounds out of place to me. Maybe I judged too quickly, maybe he was not very used to public speaking and got some of his words tied. The whole experiment seemed like a very good example of what torsional stiffness is and how it can be measured. |
|||
04-06-2009, 09:11 PM | #8 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,245
|
The way we do it on race cars is to attach a 10+ foot pole and start putting you back in.
Its still a rough measurement but you know which car is stiffer because one is being twisted with the longer pole. |
||
04-06-2009, 09:16 PM | #9 | |||
Ich bin ein auslander
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Loving the Endorphine Machine
Posts: 7,453
|
Quote:
Yes his public speaking was off and obviously not his forte. A lot of his theory when (you get past the terminology) was quite sound and the demonstration was good.
__________________
Growing old is compulsory, growing up is optional! |
|||
04-06-2009, 11:11 PM | #10 | ||
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Foothills of the Macedon Ranges
Posts: 18,606
|
The demonstration and explanations of closed (boxed) section chassis vs. open (C) section chassis was quite sound, as geckoGT said.
Put simply, open (C) sectioned beams will twist (deflect) much more under torsion than similar dimensioned closed section beams. Get a short square section hollow tube in a vice at one end and a spanner at the other, and it will be quite stiff under torsion. Cut a slit along its length then see how much easier it is to twist it. In the chassis demonstration, due to the cross members there is bending involved as well as torsion. The deeper section will be much stiffer in bending, especially so also being a box section. The torsional load applied at the rear is reacted by the various chassis members and finally at the anchor points (restraints). This is what is termed a 'load path'. Last edited by Silver Ghia; 04-06-2009 at 11:17 PM. |
||
04-06-2009, 11:17 PM | #11 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,334
|
Torsional stiffness is measured in Nm/degree. The aim is pretty much always for infinite but in reality it's a bit different. I think the alloy/carbon chassis Astons are somewhere around 30,000Nm/degree. Formula SAE racing cars (university students design and build) generally aim for about 1500Nm/degree. There are a large number of factors which determine how stiff you can make a chassis, including if you can put structural members through the cockpit (ie, roll cage/hoops/bars/etc).
|
||
04-06-2009, 11:43 PM | #12 | |||
Moderator
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Foothills of the Macedon Ranges
Posts: 18,606
|
Quote:
|
|||
05-06-2009, 12:16 AM | #13 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 510
|
Here's a video that really shows how sloppy the Toyota frame is next to the F-truck.
Youtube - Silver Creek
__________________
Daily: AU1 Fairmont Ghia - 380,000 km (still going strong)
Weekender: 2009 G6ETurbo - 21,656 km - Seduce/Cashmere (The only shopping list I need: 4 Litres and a hairdryer) Daily: SZII - 56,000 km - converted to Tezza |
||
05-06-2009, 08:40 AM | #14 | |||
XP Coupe
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 2,098
|
Quote:
Just like when you size valve springs, you should find the natural resonant frequency to figure out best shape, mass, dampening, etc . To do this on structural frames you attach a shaker; on a car I suspect the frame is put in a jig of some sought with a shaker attached and some sought of accelerometer measures the natural resonant frequency at various points. I would guess the modal frequency where the maxiumum compliance occurs, becomes a yardstick, the higher the frequency the less dynamically compliant. If you added up the side to side, end to end, diagonal to diagonal, etc compliances at various frequencies you'd get an overall cumulative compliance figure in radians per Nm, which that little video XR6 Martin's doesn't demonstrate . The mean or median frequency where the majority of cumulative compliance occurs would become another yardstick. Last edited by Wally; 05-06-2009 at 08:59 AM. |
|||
05-06-2009, 09:11 AM | #15 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,245
|
Quote:
On the other hand the formula sae is quiet low, but i guess they don't have much weight behind them My hyundai's TS is about 20,000-23,000Nm |
|||
05-06-2009, 10:07 AM | #16 | ||||
Force Fed Fords
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Enroute
Posts: 4,050
|
Quote:
__________________
If brains were gasoline, you wouldn't have enough to power an ants go-cart a half a lap around a Cheerio - Ron Shirley Quote:
|
||||
05-06-2009, 11:35 AM | #17 | ||||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 1,848
|
This is all good stuff.
The press has said VE has better torsional stiffness - how do we know they are correct. These are the best comments I have been able to dredge up. http://www.goauto.com.au/mellor/mell...1?OpenDocument Quote:
http://www.drive.com.au/Editorial/Ar...rticleID=48306 Quote:
But this is opinion - not something with figures that we can see and take into account. |
||||
05-06-2009, 11:51 AM | #19 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,504
|
Ego
FG hasn't gone backwards in terms of Rigidity when compared to BF. They are just saying that the gains in rigidity from AU to BA in % terms is greater than BF-FG. The FG is still more rigid than BF, just not as much an improvement in % terms. The structure is pretty optimised with current materials. And the statement about the VE being more rigid is correct. Partly because its BIW is all new and it doesn't have to contend with the vulnerable split fold rear seat. The numbers themselves are kept very close to their chest though for obvious reasons. |
||
05-06-2009, 07:07 PM | #20 | |||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Adelaide
Posts: 2,343
|
Quote:
I want my 5 minutes back..... But as said, yes jacking up one corner of a vehicle and seeing which doors open and which don't is an easy way to tell. then again, torsional ridgity dosn't mean alot when subframe mounts are soft as buggery (VE commodore) |
|||
13-06-2009, 07:45 PM | #21 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,245
|
Gave my hyundai race car the torsional stiffness test tonight, from what i worked out the x brace in the roof ties the whole car together. Most important bars in the cage after seeing all the affects of forces in different areas.
Had a problem at first, the 500kg chassis jig was lifting with the chassis. chassis had 3 points of connection so it can twist. few bolts into the shed floor fixed that, then my bar wasnt long enough to twist it in the end i had a 10ft bar with 100kg's on it, faintest sight of movement was visible. once i weld the roof bars in it will be perfect. : : : : |
||
09-11-2009, 01:16 AM | #22 | ||
FF.Com.Au Hardcore
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Sydney
Posts: 1,334
|
I have to correct myself on what I posted before. The Formula SAE team I'm involved with aims for about 5000Nm/degree not 1500. Gets close too.
|
||
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|