Quote:
Originally Posted by travisjb
Phim, your logic is sound... I've made that same argument on this board... It's called an asymmetric setup, and it is used on occasion... whiteline has collected data on it here http://www.whiteline.com.au/articles...metric_adj.pdf ... they concluded that using an asymmetric setting will result in asymmetric anti-sway forces (go figure!)... it's a nuance |
The asymmetry is really only in the position where the end links are bolted to the sway bar, not in the forces applied to the end links. Because the sway bar and end links are gliding in lubricated bushings, the forces applied to each end link at the sway bar end of the end link are equal. To get to the really technical nitty gritty, the force applied to the sway bar end of the end links will be equal, but because the end links will be at a slightly different angles to the lower control arm, the forces are slightly asymmetric based on the angle of the end link in relation to the lower control arm. Ideally, the end link will be perpendicular (90 degrees) to the lower control arm and the control arm will see 100% of the force that the sway bar applies on the end link. If the end link is not perpendicular to the lower control arm, the force on the lower control arm will be (force applied to end link) X (sin theta angle). So if one end link is perpendicular to the lower control arm on the "long setting" and applying 1000kg force, and the other end link is on the "short setting" at theta angle 88 degrees, it will be applying 999.3908 kg force, or 99.94% as much as at the other end, which I believe is negligible.
If that difference is not negligible due to the asymmetry, then the Stillen bar actually has 4 different settings, not 3 as they claim. I would go with calling it a "3 setting" sway bar.
With my usual disclaimer, I have taken calculus based physics, but I was a biology major. If any engineers want to correct my math, please do. It's been 15 years since I have done these types of calculations.
-Phim