|
|
Great point!!!! I think counter weight spring is a good
name. In my case I only have one stage. There is nothing to
counter ballance the weights I put onto the arms, like how a slider
would work. The spring / weight combination would set the RPM
that the overall pressure would be added to the stack. This
way you can step in the pressure.
If I ever decide to add another variable to my already total loss of
being able to set my own bike up, I will update the program. Or,
if anyone out there wants the source to add what ever features you
want, just ask and I will post it. Should not be too much
of a problem to add.
When I look at some of the TF bikes that don't use a transmission I
wonder how they make it all work. There must be some "real"
software out there to help these guys.
So no counter weight at all That's an interesting tune-up [img]smileys/smiley2.gif[/img] What is your gearing Tire sizeOriginally Posted by geek
That's how your program is set up too
Isn't the application point of the lockup really dictated by rear wheel speed, not engine rpm
--jack
Edited by: TriRyche
I have no springs to counter balance the weights, not no weights.[img]smileys/smiley4.gif[/img] Even the arms have an amount of weight.
Yes you are correct, the outer basket turns with the crank, not the
center hub when the clutch is disengaged. Until the center hub
starts to turn the weights don't come into play.
The program I wrote was just to calculate the total force on the pack
with weighted arms only. There is no support for what you are
calling a counter weight springs because I don't use them.
I just got around to playing with your lockup estimating app. Nice job. I am wondinering how you interpret the x-axis. Is that rear wheel speed in rpm
--jack
Jack,
Sorry, I forgot all about this stuff. Glad to help out.
The program was assuming that the clutch was 100% locked. The x-axis is crank speed. The crank to basket ratio is entered in the center two boxes. Does not tell you a whole lot, but will give you an idea about what sort of force you will get on the pack.
In another group we were talking about the MTC multi-stage units and a datalogger was mentioned as a way to tune the clutch. So I wrote a little blurb. Just keep in mind that I really don't know what I am doing and am trying to learn more about it myself for the fun of it.
*********************************************
I agree with you. A logger is the only way to go. I saw that one MPS has, one with just the two speed inputs for under $600.
http://www.mpsracing.com/products/RPM/datalogger.asp
This is about all you would need to set one up.
I'm sticking with my home made logger from hell. I need to shrink it
down and make it open design. Without the sensors, I think I could make
a kit available for under $100. Let people do their own thing with it.
http://dickey.intell-a-sys.com/logger3.html
</span></font><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><t><tr><td></span></font></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">I
would love a logger that just did rpm. Really see what the clutch is
doing. Would make tuning really easy. The mps unit is way too rich for
my blood.</font></td> </tr></t></table>
My first goal of this was to make something that people could use as a
real tool and change it to fit their needs. Not like all the $1000 -
$10000
systems I was looking at, most with 10Hz sample rates and 8 bits of
resolution. My second goal was to make it so most people could afford
it.
Sort of like the whole MegaSquirt EFI project. The nice thing is
that the logger is VERY VERY simple compared to an EFI. I think the
program that runs it is maybe 50 lines of C code right now. Because I
used all open sourced tools to develop the unit, anyone can download
them and make changes.
There was not much interest in it. So for now I am spending time making my prototype better.
</span></font><table align="center" border="0" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1" width="90%"><t><tr> <td></span></font></td> </tr> <tr> <td class="quote">Could
you set up your data logger to do rpm using the tach output from the
schnitz box. You can set the output to either 1 or 2 output signals per
revolution.</font></td> </tr></t></table>
It seems that if the ignition guys did one thing right, it was the tach
signal. The Dyna SP 4000, MC-2 and my MC-4 all work the same. Because
they need to work with other equipment like RPM switches, tachometers,
shift lights and such they all seem to follow a standard. So, yes it
will work.
To give you an idea of what you could see using a simple two channel
logger, this first graph is the clutch slippage in percent. The logger
knows the crank speed from the tach and measures the output shaft speed
using a sensor. You enter all of your data about your engine and the
program then knows what the ratio of the two should be. If the engine
is spining at 1000 RPM and the output shaft is not moving, it's a good
indication tha
Lots of good info there. Thanks for posting it. I like the idea of making your own data logger and it looks like you already have a very good prototype.
Seems like a really fun project. I would be interested if you decide to make it open source/design.
--jack
Jack, happy to post what little bits I can. It would be
great to spend some time on a T/F team seeing how they set the clutch.
That has to be a nightmare.
A couple of people have asked about the progress of the logger. I
think if I could figure out what a good price / perfomance / feature
list would be I would go ahead with it. But I really don't have
any idea of what people want. I just know I wasn't seeing much
point in buying a cheap unit that wouldn't do what I
wanted. The one that I built is a bit overkill in some
areas, but lacking in others. Everyone that has seen it
like that playback screen for some reason. To me it was not very
useful, so it shows what I know.
I see that Atmel has a new Arm9 part they are sampling that looks like
it could do just about the whole thing. You could get the price
under $100 and get the size and weight down to next to
nothing.
I am helping setup a Dyna logger for a friend of mine. It's not
too bad of a unit, but they no longer produce them. I have not
actually been able to run any tests with it yet to see what sort of
perfomance it has, but if they sold a lot of them it may be a
good place to start feature wise.
Are you interesting in helping, or just want to get your hands on
one If your interested in helping out send me a PM.
WOW man great thread. keep it going...... lots of eye opening info.
I have been setting my clutch for years to do just what the graph shows. I have had numerous racers tell me that it leaves like a station wagon and sounds way to soft on the line. But the 60' has been consistant and I don't burn up any plates. Rather than load up the static and shock the crap out of everything, I let the lock up do the work once the bike is moving. The other theory is to hit it hard and turn the tireat the launch and then have the lockup come in, I don't like that idea.
Sounds like we are doing about the same thing Crunch, right or wrong. I don't like the "other theory" for E/T. It seems like it would require that the tire / track never changes.
This picture was when I was not running enough weight on the arms. Rather than the hot spots, they would turn a nice golden brown from all the heat. I lost a couple of packs before getting enough weight on it.
I tried a few different plates. The top is OEM. Right is from FBG, Left is APE and bottom was Barnett. I have settled on the FBG plate for now.
Side view, left to right, APE, Barnett, FBG and OEM
Edited by: geek
| « Previous Thread | Next Thread » |
| Bookmarks |
Bookmarks |
