Howdy,
well now lets see..............
ifn you take a long narrow streamliner with the front wheel drive
non steering, and put the driver behind the engine, and then behind him the
staggered rear steering wheels with only about 8 inches track, you would
use a mustang steering rack(#1) between the two rear wheels, and then take
two mustang steering racks and weld them together so the driver input would
go forwards, then backwards to the actual steering rack (#1),( which would
reverse the steering, the steered wheels would turn left as the driver
turned his wheel right, making the car GO right. )
The kicker is that there is a delay between what the driver feels,
and his input, which can produce a pilot induced oscillation as he tries to
catch up to the actual motion of the car. This motion is considered to be
at about 1 Hz (the driver makes a correction, the car SLOWLY begins to
respond, the driver inputs additional steering,because he "feels" that the
car is not responding correctly, then he finds the car to be correcting too
quickly and he reverses his inputs, always chasing the vehicle, and causing
finally an out of control situation. This can be seen when watching a
single engined taildragger pilot learning to taxi the airplane for the
first time.
However, I believe a disciplined driver CAN control a vehicle
designed with rear steer. I think that if the driver is in the middle of
the car, rather than the end, he would feel less steering input from the
motion of the car, thereby would not feel the need to input corrections,
and would not begin the PIO described above.
Wasn't the car Beckett drove a sports car of some sort? a short
wheel base, wide track, mid engine something? I think this would be very
difficult to try to rear steer, VERY little visual input available to the
driver for corrections, which is why I thought the driver positioned in the
middle of a streamliner would be advantageous, lots of car left in front of
him for visual reference, and less "feel" inputed to his butt than if he
were in the tail of the car.
The reference to Thrust' $2 million computer was to the body
positioning for aerodynamics, rather than controlling the actual steering,
this is information from the magazine articles I have seen.
At 12:06 PM 5/24/00 , you wrote:
>Now there is a Kernal of knowledge from Left Field.... Hey John... tell us
>about this.... sounds interesting.. K
>----- Original Message -----
>From: John Beckett <landspeedracer@email.msn.com>
>To: john robinson <john@engr.wisc.edu>; <land-speed@autox.team.net>
>Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 12:08 PM
>Subject: Re: Fuel and Gas Class
>
>
> > John
> >
> > I think what Dan was trying to say is the rear steer has been tried
> > before mostly unsuccessfully. I know cause I was one that tried it. The
>only
> > high speed success that I am aware off was the Thrust project, but they
>had
> > a $2,000,000. computer making the necessary corrections for the "pilot".
>If
> > you asked Andy Green today about rear steer I don't think he would offer
>any
> > encouragement for the concept.
> > Another point I would like to make however, is that none of the
> > governing bodies need to worry about adding rules to ban rear steer
> > vehicles. It just doesn't work at speed and I don't believe you'll ever
>get
> > it going fast enough to get into trouble. And if you do somehow manage to
> > make it work, well God bless you, innovation is what it's all about.
> >
> > John Beckett, LSR #79
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "john robinson" <john@engr.wisc.edu>
> > To: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 9:57 AM
> > Subject: Re: Fuel and Gas Class
> >
> >
> > > Howdy,
> > > ohhhh yeah, Definitions section IV-2 Automobile.(some snipping) ....at
> > > least 4 wheels not aligned....(snip).. steering assured by at least (2)
> > > front wheels, .(snip) .....One pair must be on the same transverse
> > centerline.
> > > OK, then the Special Construction Category statement "Innovation is
> > > unlimited." is governed by the definitions sec IV?
> > > John still looking at rear steer concept Robinson
> > >
> > > At 08:22 AM 5/24/00 , you wrote:
> > > John,
> > >
> > > Also look at the portion defining automobile which indicates that at
>least
> > > two wheels must be on the same axle. There is a statement that requires
> > the
> > > steering to be by the front wheels as our friends with the rear steer MR
> > > found out a few years ago. Sorry I am unable to quote chapter and verse
>on
> > > this one as my books are in my race day brief case.
> > >
> > > Dan (you can lose pistons without NOS too) Warner
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: john robinson <john@engr.wisc.edu>
> > > To: <land-speed@autox.team.net>
> > > Sent: Wednesday, May 24, 2000 5:42 AM
> > > Subject: Re: Fuel and Gas Class
> > >
> > >
> > > > howdy,
> > > > Andy Green did it like that, only cost 30 million $ or so and took
> > what,
> > > > 6-7 years..........
> > > > I think you >can< run in line wheels, just need to have four of
>them(or
> > > > more) ifn I remember the rule book on this one....looking it up now,
> > aha!
> > > > ...."must have at least four wheels, but they need not be arranged in
>a
> > > > rectangular configuration" , Streamliner section V page 41....is what
> > the
> > > > '00 rules say...
> > > >
> > > > At 10:13 AM 5/23/00 , you wrote:
> > > > Should still work, maybe? Per the rule book the wheels must be
>offset,
> > > > cannot be inline. See Al teagues car. Otherwise isnit it classified
>as
> > a
> > > > "ahem" motorcycle or some such? But, adding the stagger control to
>the
> > > rear
> > > > does indeed work same as front stagger. Wow, what a concept!!!
> > Shouldn't
> > > > take more'n ten years to sort it out...
> > > >
> > > > mayf
> > > > At 02:39 PM 5/23/00 EDT, V4GR@aol.com wrote:
> > > > >Won't work in Jacks car. Front wheels are inline. Have to switch
> > system
> > > to
> > > > >rear wheels. Should work than. Rich Fox
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > L.E. Mayfield
> > > > 124 Maximillion Drive
> > > > Madison, Al. 35758-8171
> > > > ph: 1-256-837-1051
> > > >
> > > > http://home.hiwaay.net/~lemay
> > > >
> > > > lemay@hiwaay.net
> > > >
> > > > Sunbeam Tiger, B9471136
> > > > Sunbeam Alpine Bonneville Land Speed Racer,
> > > > '66 Hydroplane Drag Boat (390 FE)
> > >
> > >
> > > John Robinson, Mechanician
> > > Mechanical Engineering University of Wisconsin
> > > 1513 University Ave.
> > > Madison, Wi. 53706
> > > 608-262-3606
> > > FAX 608-265-2316
> > > Current World Land Speed Record Holder
> > > Bonneville Salt Flats
> > > H/GCC 92 cu.in. 1980 Dodge Colt
> > > 131.333 MPH set 1995
> > > 136.666 MPH set 1996
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
John Robinson, Mechanician
Mechanical Engineering University of Wisconsin
1513 University Ave.
Madison, Wi. 53706
608-262-3606
FAX 608-265-2316
Current World Land Speed Record Holder
Bonneville Salt Flats
H/GCC 92 cu.in. 1980 Dodge Colt
131.333 MPH set 1995
136.666 MPH set 1996
|