Non wishbone suspension systems?

[clausen]

Hi there,

Has anyone seen or heard of anyone using anything other than the standard wishbone setup?

I have heard of someone using struts once, apparently it was very ugly car.

Regards

Paul Clausen
Uni of Adelaide

[clausen]

Hi there,

Has anyone seen or heard of anyone using anything other than the standard wishbone setup?

I have heard of someone using struts once, apparently it was very ugly car.

Regards

Paul Clausen
Uni of Adelaide

[dancin stu]

Here in the Uk, Coventry have run some alternative suspension systems in the past. Few years back they had their two rear wheels side by side, creating an almost three wheeler, which proceeded to flip in the endurance........ hence the minimum 70% different track width rules.

The year later they ran the same car with a weird locked rear end that pivorted on a ball joint, dont think it worked cos speaking to them they had to lock it to prevent roll enabling only pitch movement, seemd to work ok iirc.

Their first year car that year ran trailing arm rear suspension, hard to tell if it worked cos they had a 92bhp turbo engine with a VERY short powerband that just caused too much wheelspin, maybe the reason of trying trailing arms, to get the power down?

Think also Georgia Tech have run with trailing arms in the past.

[Denny Trimble]

Brown has traditionally run solid axle / de-dion axle suspensions, and placed pretty well in design this year if I recall correctly.

Concordia has done a dual-rail linear bearing suspension.

I think GA-Tech's suspension is a mix between a trailing-arm and "wishbone" type suspension, but I haven't looked into it much.

University of Washington Formula SAE ('98, '99, '03)

[clausen]

Just checked out Brown's site. I didnt realise u meant solid axle at the front!

Thats pretty brave!

Regards

Paul Clausen
Uni of Adelaide

[Big Daddy]

What if you used a swingarm? May eat tires but tires are sacraficial when you can pivot on the front tire. http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

[Dominic Venieri]

a rocker setup like ca 1980 formula fords and formula continentals could be an option

www.formularpi.com (http://www.formularpi.com)
2003 Formula Student Runner-Up

[shiny side up!]

U of Michigan-Dearborn (NOT ANN ARBOR) has run struts before. Yes, it was an ugly car...

This year, lets put the engine back up front where it belongs!!

[Schumi_Jr]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><font size="-1">quote:</font><HR> This year, lets put the engine back up front where it belongs!!
<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

That's what Panoz said with their ultra-sucessful LMP http://fsae.com/groupee_common/emoticons/icon_wink.gif

I would personally stick with an SLA suspension design... ideal camber characteristics and low unsprung mass. A multi-link setup at the rear could work, but I'd stick with wishbones up front.

Aaron Johnston
University of Waterloo FSAE

www.eng.uwaterloo.ca/~fsae (http://www.eng.uwaterloo.ca/~fsae)

[clausen]

Ideal camber characteristics?

what about the conflicting goals of no camber change in squat/dive, and camber change in roll?

Regards

Paul Clausen
Uni of Adelaide

[Frank]

to be honest..

the camber change in roll is small compared with the camber gain through a chunk of castor and no KPI (in steer) .... not high speed corners.. but last time i looked there weren't any at FSAE