Author Topic: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build  (Read 291005 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #90 on: September 24, 2009, 05:19:25 PM »
Took the day off from work and worked on rebuilding the air jacks for the car.    Since there are no scatter shields available for this transaxle and engine combination.  The next steps will be to design the scatter shield and input shaft for the transaxle in the next few weeks.

“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

Offline jb2

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 69
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #91 on: September 24, 2009, 06:41:29 PM »
Tony
Grant King air jacks.  So cool,  Good Job
Same as I have on the liner.  Got any spares?
Or rebuild kits?
I have only the 4 well used units that I traded for 8 years ago.
They work extremely well.
When I had the car on the salt in 04 it made working so much easier, sure surprised a lot of folks.

Rick Byrnes

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #92 on: September 24, 2009, 10:42:12 PM »
Rick,
I don’t have any more of the Grant King air jacks, but you might want to check with AJ Watson at Indy.  He ended up with a lot of the stuff from Grant’s estate.  I might be able to help you with the rebuild kits though.  We made them up, and if I can remember I will check the next time I am in the shop.   You are right, life is a lot easier with the air jacks.  Tony
“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #93 on: September 25, 2009, 01:00:24 AM »
Tony,
Can't tell the scale very well from the pic. What is the total lift of the air jacks?
TIA  :-)

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #94 on: September 25, 2009, 02:27:21 PM »
Tony,
Can't tell the scale very well from the pic. What is the total lift of the air jacks?
TIA  :-)



The body is 16” tall and has a lift range of 11” and  I believe each jack is rated for about 1600lbs. These were on my IMSA car and could lift a 3000lbs car with ease.  Tony
“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #95 on: September 25, 2009, 04:37:45 PM »
Thanks, Tony:
I'm assuming about a 4.5" diameter piston giving you the 1600 lbs at 100psi air pressure? I have been considering a ground-based system rather than the in-car scenario. 

I sure do appreciate all the drawings and engineering you are sharing with us. Hope to come by the shop sometime.   :-) :-)

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #96 on: September 25, 2009, 06:00:26 PM »
We thought of building some external jacks, but we couldn’t figure out how to lift the front without taking the nose off.  The other option was to build four jacks and lift from the sides. The thought of packing them in the trailer and unpacking them made for an easy choice.  Besides most of this car is built from parts off other cars and I had the Grant King air jacks on the shelf.

But if you have a roadster other than a modified, and have some steel to grab, you could build something like these air jacks.  They pick up the car in the front and back, and shouldn't be that hard to build. Do drop by the shop sometime.  :-) Tony

“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #97 on: September 25, 2009, 07:14:47 PM »
Hmmmm. . . good point about packaging them for the trip  :-D

Do the jacks have a secondary safety to prevent contraction, like a pin through the shaft or a latch? Or do you use jack stands or?

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #98 on: September 25, 2009, 07:31:31 PM »
There are no pins or latches for a safety.  I use an elephant foot to slide on to the jack and then let the air pressure out. There are two pieces, depending on the desired height.   I have also seen them with wheels so you can roll them around in the garage. Tony

« Last Edit: September 25, 2009, 07:36:35 PM by maguromic »
“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #99 on: October 14, 2009, 06:33:27 PM »
With some of the shapes of cars in LSR, sometimes they don’t roll and end up horizontal and sliding.  To simulate that we did some simulations of events on the fuel cell and vent and found a flaw in the ATL style ball valve.  On some occasions it didn’t close at near horizontal angles.  The new design we came up with uses a puck to push against the ball to consistently close it at near horizontal angles.

If anyone cares to know more I can post a better drawing comparing both the ball system and our puck system type valves with  better explanations.  Tony


Normal Level

Near horizontal level with the puck pushing against the ball closing the valve shut.
“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

saltfever

  • Guest
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #100 on: October 15, 2009, 03:12:52 AM »
Very interesting, Tony. Yes, please post additional dwg or explanation. I had to save those pics and them zoom 2x to see the detail clearly. In both cases it looks like the ball is seated. However, without your puck design, I can see in the bottom pic how the ball could possibly not seat, if your dimensions and scale are the actual ATL device.  Floating on the fluid, it looks like the ball could be too far from the seat to seal effectively. Or, has the added feature to incorporate your puck moved the ball farther away from the seat than the actual ATL device?

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #101 on: October 16, 2009, 12:44:30 AM »
My drawing is not a modified ATL unit, but a design of my own.  It is to scale and the cage for the puck and ball bolt in from the bottom.  Fuel Safe does make a unit that is spring loaded, but it did not work in my application.

The issue with the ATL type float- and-steel-ball type roll over valves and discriminators is that they are particularly ineffective at near horizontal angles.  At angles approaching 90 degrees from vertical, the lift from the fluid is acting to pry the ball away from the lower part of the sealing seat and the steel weight ball is doing nothing. At horizontal, the only sealing action is if the fluid escaping carries the float ball with it.  There is no effective force for a sealing action.  At past horizontal, the steel ball eventually is heavy enough to "sink" the float ball and create a seal.

I have redesign my valve with a puck and by using a "puck" instead of a steel weight ball, the center of gravity of the weight can be off center from the center of rotation so the force is applied to the float ball at lower rollover angles.  In effect, the weight is made to fall "uphill" about 30 degrees before a ball would even start to move.  At horizontal, the puck is exerting force on the sealing ball even when it is in its least advantageous position.  In actual inversion, the puck serves as a dead weight in the same fashion as the ball.

If any one want, PM me there email address and I can send a pdf of this chart for better viewing.  Tony


“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

Offline SPARKY

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 6912
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #102 on: October 16, 2009, 01:33:20 AM »
Why no just a proper vent?  They can be made to not LEAK in any roll over.
« Last Edit: October 25, 2009, 07:52:07 AM by SPARKY »
Miss LIBERTY,  changing T.K.I.  to noise, dust, rust, BLUE HATS & hopefully not scrap!!

"Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing."   Helen Keller

We are going to explore the racing N words NITROUS & NITRO!

Offline maguromic

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1736
    • http://www.barringtontea.com
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #103 on: October 16, 2009, 02:22:06 AM »
Why no just a proper vent?  They can made to not LEAK in any roll over.

The problem is that most vents use some sort of ball system. They all close well in a roll over.  But the issue is when the car is at angles approaching 90 degrees from vertical and sometimes sliding on its side without rolling over.  Then you have a potential problem of fuel leakage.  We ran some tests up to 80 mph with a fuel cell and a ball type vent valve at different angles and found fuel leakage in some instance.

Yes, maybe the ball type valve will work 95 percent of time (this is why Fuel Safe also has a spring loaded valve).  But we didn’t like the 5 percent possibility.  So we eliminated that 5 percent from the equation. Tony
« Last Edit: October 16, 2009, 02:52:17 AM by maguromic »
“If you haven’t seen the future, you are not going fast enough”

Offline Rick Byrnes

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 436
Re: Rear Engine Modified Roadster Build
« Reply #104 on: October 16, 2009, 09:47:58 AM »
Tony, Thanks for sharing the closure valve.  In re plumbing my Fuel Safe Bladder/cell, I am using an ATL 1" valve.  I hadn't thought of the "on your side" failure, but sure will look at using your idea.  Even a little force to help the ball is a great idea.
Keep it coming.
I'm back out in the shop cuttin & weldin
Rick