Rear axle location--WOBLINK design

[iamuwere]

I am considering implementing a woblink to replace the panhard rod on my SCCA F500 car. Yes, those cars that really don't have much in the way of a real suspension, but I do get close to three inches of travel at all corners. It really works well, despite the lack of real springs or shocks.

The problem:
Susp3D calculations put my front roll center at close to 5 inches below ground. The rear with a panhard rod is at about five-six inches above ground, depending on wheel, tire, and ride height changes. That is a big roll inclination.

I think a Woblink would work to better balance the car with a lower rear roll center. I would like to try to run some tests with a Woblink, but I cannot find construction info on one. The only online diagram I have found seems to be incorret, as the formula provided does not match the design in the picture.

http://www.rx7.se/Bilder/snordatorn/Woblink.jpg

Anyone with construction advice?
jim

 

[GregLocock]

What's wrong with the picture?



Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[iamuwere]

the upper diagrams show lengths that are really not proportional as the formula would show. I wanted to be sure that there is not some other bits that they were not including.

jim

 

[GregLocock]

Looks fine to me.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[GregLocock]

Incidentally why not use a Mumford linkage instead? It would be much easier to package I think. It is more complex, but there is a great deal to be said for symmetry in suspension designs.

Cheers

Greg Locock

 

[iamuwere]

not enough room for a mumford link. I will barely have room for a woblink. The panhard rod barely fits as it is. I do agree that it is a superior design.

jim