jlparsons
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 01:29 AM |
|
|
Dax Camber Compensation/Anti-Roll system
This looks interesting. --> link!
If it works you've got no camber change like DeDion with lower unsprung weight and better performance over the bumps like IRS.
If it doesn't, or if it makes bugger all difference, then it's just something else to go wrong.
Suspension breakthrough, or marketting breakthrough?
Opinions, people?
Any resemblance to real persons, living or dead is purely coincidental. Some assembly required. Batteries not included. Contents may settle during
shipment. Use only as directed. No other warranty expressed or implied. Do not use while operating a motor vehicle or heavy equipment. Subject to
approval, terms and conditions apply. Apply only to affected area. For recreational use only. All models over 18 years of age. No user-serviceable
parts inside. Subject to change. As seen on TV. One size fits all. May contain nuts. Slippery when wet. For office use only. Edited for television.
Keep cool; process promptly.
|
|
|
|
|
DavidM
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 01:56 AM |
|
|
It's been around for quite a while now. From what I've heard, those in the know rate it as effective. I think the uptake as an option on
Dax kits has been quite low, mainly because of the additional expense. Others manufacturers haven't followed suit because I believe Dax have a
Patent.
David
|
|
|
C10CoryM
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 03:09 AM |
|
|
It also has some tradeoffs. Mainly in one-wheel bump if I remember right. Gets a little sketchy on bumpy roads. No personal experience with it
though.
"Our watchword evermore shall be: The Maple Leaf Forever!"
|
|
|
bimbleuk
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 03:47 AM |
|
|
If you watch the Ultimate Kit Car DVD then its clearly demonstrated working on track. Bill Sollis the test driver does give it some posative feedback
if i remember correctly.
|
|
|
adampage
|
 posted on 5/1/07 at 08:28 AM |
|
|
Looks very clever, but...
... in Autocar they said while it's good for grip, the lack of camber change reduced the feedback and feel in the steering, so it was harder to
push to the limit.
I've never driven it so can't comment personally.
Adam
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 09:09 AM |
|
|
If it is so fantastic, you'd see it on topend racecars, ..........and you don't! Nuff said. Patent or not.
Cheers,
Syd.
|
|
|
liam.mccaffrey
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 09:16 AM |
|
|
i agree with syd, by now *most* things have been invented or tried, and the things that really worked or made a difference will either be in use in
F1, rally or top motorsport
OR
will have been banned from racing
[Edited on 5/1/07 by liam.mccaffrey]
Build Blog
Build Photo Album
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 09:21 AM |
|
|
what does work, in a similar fashion, but less drastically, is the nik-link used on Radicals
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
designer
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 09:28 AM |
|
|
This is a modification of a system designed over 20 years ago by, I think, a Canadian chap called Tebron, or something like that.
I have it in a book somewhere.
|
|
|
TheGecko
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 10:06 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by designer
This is a modification of a system designed over 20 years ago by, I think, a Canadian chap called Tebron, or something like that.
That would be
the Trebron DRC Suspension, designed by Canadian architect Norbert Hamy in the late '60s. The DRC stands for Double Roll-Centre; I'll
leave the derivation of Trebron as an exercise for the reader
The Trebron is a somewhat more complicated animal than the Dax. It has the wishbones, springs and rack all mounted to a separate sprung bulkhead,
which is then attached to the main chassis partly by an extension of the upper wishbone pivots and partly by leading radius arms. The end result is
that the suspension has a low roll centre (for good camber control etc) and the body has a very high roll centre (which causes it to bank inwards in
corners). The pendulum upper wishbone pivots are similar to the Dax but the end result is different. It also looks complex and heavy.
At this point, Syd should weigh in and remind us that roll centres are all crap Actually, I don't really disagree with him. Think about it
for a bit and consider what point a chassis is really rolling about. It's probably not the theorectical RC which is dancing about up,
down, left, and right as the suspension travels.
Anyhoo, that's enough pot stirring for now 
Dominic
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 5/1/07 at 11:01 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
what does work, in a similar fashion, but less drastically, is the nik-link used on Radicals
Do you know where I can find any details on this Nat?
|
|
|
Uphill Racer
|
| posted on 6/1/07 at 12:14 AM |
|
|
Isnt the nik-link a negative anti roll bar?
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 6/1/07 at 08:25 PM |
|
|
I think it's too complex.
If it is the camberchange then make equal lenght wishbones.
If it is the body-roll then make an anti-roll bar.
Live is easy, keep it that way for us simple people.
Maybe you could use the five link system as mercedes benz does..... Or the audi with 2 balljoints low and 2 in top.....
All too complex, so why make the dax-system?
BTW: what happens if both wheels are in droop or bump in the dax-system?
[Edited on 6/1/07 by t.j.]
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 7/1/07 at 09:40 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Uphill Racer
Isnt the nik-link a negative anti roll bar?
No, one of its functions is an anti roll bar as normal, except that its stiffness in roll is governed by it actually bending in compression at the
elbow in the bar where it comes over the rocker linkage.
It is complicated however, by the fact that the radical uses coilovers with rockers and pullrods (coilovers outboard and pullrods inboard) and the
niklink basically goes from the inboard side of one rocker to the outboard side of the other rocker.
really tired now, you'll have to sketch it all up yourself, but it basically lets you set spring preload seperately from ride height, while the
thickness and dia of the link sets roll stiffness.
the real plus when racing is unbolting the niklink simultaneously removes the rollbar and removes the shock preload, giving a quick wet setup!
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
Uphill Racer
|
| posted on 7/1/07 at 10:20 PM |
|
|
By negative I was trying to say that as the outer wheel loads up in a corner the nik-link forces the inner wheel down unlike a conventional arb
unloading inner wheel.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 08:19 AM |
|
|
are you sure? I haven't got the car in front of me now, but that's not how I remember it working.
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
Syd Bridge
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 09:39 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by TheGecko
At this point, Syd should weigh in and remind us that roll centres are all crap
No, no, no, no, no!!!!!!! You lot believe what you want. It's much more peaceful that way.
quote:
Actually, I don't really disagree with him.
Dominic
Hallelujah and praise the Lord!!! Someone has actually used their brain and thought about this.
How long has this taken?
Regards,
Syd.
|
|
|
MikeRJ
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 10:37 AM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by Uphill Racer
By negative I was trying to say that as the outer wheel loads up in a corner the nik-link forces the inner wheel down unlike a conventional arb
unloading inner wheel.
I suspect you are thinking of a Z link (or Z bar maybe). It's purpose is to remove roll stiffness rather than add it.
quote:
TheGecko
At this point, Syd should weigh in and remind us that roll centres are all crap Actually, I don't really disagree with him. Think about it for
a bit and consider what point a chassis is really rolling about. It's probably not the theorectical RC which is dancing about up, down, left,
and right as the suspension travels.
By it's very definition it is rolling about the theoretical roll center. It just so happens that the roll center can move, which is why
designers try to locate it as well as they can.
[Edited on 8/1/07 by MikeRJ]
|
|
|
bimbleuk
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 11:02 AM |
|
|
On our Radical Clubsport we removed the Nick link and used stiffer springs instead. The driver was much happier with the feedback and stabilty of the
setup afterwards. You can't do this in the Radical championships but we can in the Castle Combe Special GT championship.
Quote from Rob's diary on www.mtcracing.co.uk
"I’ve never been a great fan of the Nik-Link suspension on the front of my car and as luck would have it one of the American guys mentioned that
he removed his and upped the front spring rate to compensate. I thought this sounded like a great idea, it would hopefully remove the odd preloading
feeling you get with the Nik-Link which would make me a lot happier."
Then from one of the race reports.
"I came into the pits and we checked over the car. I decided to leave the setting as is until I’ve done another session. One thing I did notice
was how well the car rides the bumps now I’ve removed the Nik-Link bar so that was a positive."
Maybe with more time/money we could get it to work but why bother if his times improved after removing it!
|
|
|
Fred W B
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 11:11 AM |
|
|
I can't comment on the subject, but i do have a pic of the niklink
Cheers
Fred W B
 
niklink
|
|
|
Fred W B
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 11:16 AM |
|
|
 
radical
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 11:58 AM |
|
|
Now i've seen Nik i'm sure i don't want it.
It will give the movement of the spring to the otherside of the car. This causes unwanted feel of bumps in the car.
A bump right gives you a bump left??
This can't be a normal feeling if you're driving.
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 12:12 PM |
|
|
errr, well that is exactly what all antiroll bars do.......so you say all anti roll bars are a bad idea????
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
NS Dev
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 12:20 PM |
|
|
as I pointed out, that suspension design is FAR from dead simple.
If you take a look you will see that the upper coilover mounts are rockers, and each rocker has a pullrod back to the lower wishbone, thus increasing
shocker movement for given wishbone movement.
The niklink then joins these rockers as an antiroll mechanism (not a solid one, the bar actaully flexes at the bend in it) , but also in setting shock
preload, due to the geometry with the pullrods.
As I said, I have spannered for a radical team for a while, but even now I can't describe how it all works without the car in front of me!!!!
Needless to say, it works, very well, and there are not many cars quicker round a track than an SR3 or SR8.
[Edited on 8/1/07 by NS Dev]
Retro RWD is the way forward...........automotive fabrication, car restoration, sheetmetal work, engine conversion
retro car restoration and tuning
|
|
|
t.j.
|
| posted on 8/1/07 at 06:22 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by NS Dev
errr, well that is exactly what all antiroll bars do.......so you say all anti roll bars are a bad idea????
No anti-roll bars are fitted to the wishbones which "give" the movement to the otherside. As they are "static" fitted on the
chassis it gives less body-roll.
I can't give you the logic movement of the nik but it looks not logic to me.
It will sure work. But def not on a car with a lot of travel.
The bodyroll is not compensated by Nik.
And if you're cornering the otherside wheel will be pulled towards the chassis.
It just don't sounds right.
If your chassis is really hard to bent it could work. At cornering your roll-centre will drop. Maybe that's the clue?
Grtz Theo
[Edited on 8/1/07 by t.j.]
|
|
|
