An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Secrets, tips, tools, design considerations, materials, the "science" behind it all, and other topics related to building the cars and semi-trucks.
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

Well, a lot of "grunt work" is left to be done, but I need to let this free to the sunlight and to whatever "boos and hisses" it may attract. http://www.stanpope.net/camalign.htm is posted! Turns out that it applies to level rear axles as well. But it probably only works well for 3-wheelers and for Rail Guided (RR) cars, although I suspect that one could "back into" 4-wheelers and straight runners if that were desired.

The main improvement is the major reduction is the amount of weight needed to make severe changes in rear wheel weight distribution by employing cantilevered weights. Weight is literally transferred from one rear wheel to the other!

There are several experiments described that are left to be performed. Anyone interested may perform such as they wish and post results with my blessing. I will pick up these experiments as time and facilities are available.

Direct feedback regarding errors, typos, and muddled explanations are welcome via email.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
Kenny
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 292
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:19 pm
Location: Houston (Tomball), TX

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Kenny »

Nice job Stan. It's getting better.

I would suggest wringing it out on a few newbies with a video cam running. I believe you'll uncover a few more important improvements. ;)

You've never claimed to be going for pretty - referring to those cantilever weight assemblies :) Mine isn't much to look at either, as I adapted a saltwater fishing weight used for surf fishing for aligning my rears (1 through 10 ozs!). NEW PRODUCT ALERT: The all new articulating weight accessory :)

The benefit of correctly identifying presence, and the source, of differential friction between wheels is key. Me thinks this is an issue that confounds parents and Scouts alike who have a well aligned car that misbehaves inexplicably.

K
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

Kenny wrote: Nice job Stan. It's getting better.
Thank you. :) But, pick holes in it, please!
Kenny wrote:I would suggest wringing it out on a few newbies with a video cam running. I believe you'll uncover a few more important improvements. ;)
Ummm... While I'm not averse to rediscovery, please know that coauthorships are available (you can guess the price of admission.) :)
Kenny wrote:You've never claimed to be going for pretty - referring to those cantilever weight assemblies :) Mine isn't much to look at either, as I adapted a saltwater fishing weight used for surf fishing for aligning my rears (1 through 10 ozs!). NEW PRODUCT ALERT: The all new articulating weight accessory :)
1 ounce is enough to get a 5:1 weight dist onto the lesser loaded wheel! Do you think that more than 5:1 is needed? Or is it to shorten the hanger wire?

As for pretty ... I'm more looking for something that folks can replicate for pennies and that they can adapt to their car without an engineering degree! I do like the one that uses the three holes, though! I'm thinking that perhaps make two, one for each side so that the distribution doesn't have to be reset for each iteration.
Kenny wrote:The benefit of correctly identifying presence, and the source, of differential friction between wheels is key. Me thinks this is an issue that confounds parents and Scouts alike who have a well aligned car that misbehaves inexplicably.
Agreed! Perhaps with some more work with this thing, I can start to differentiate sources, although I might be faced with the realization that "friction" is "friction" and, like gravity being indistinguishable from acceleration, I may just have to say, "There's something wrong there!" OTOH, maybe there are some patterns typical of differing camber or typical of different bore frictions or typical of different tread dia to bore dia ratios or different "edge" shapes or different hub clearances, etc.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
Jeff Piazza
Pine Head
Pine Head
Posts: 83
Joined: Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:49 pm
Location: Wellesley, Massachusetts

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Jeff Piazza »

A picture of the cantilever jig in use on the car would go a long way here. I had trouble understanding how the jig attached until I watched the video.

I'm excited to try this out as we prepare for our pack race in a couple weeks!

/JEP
User avatar
sporty
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:00 am
Location: rockfalls, Illinois

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by sporty »

I want to make sure here, that what we are talking about, is something that has been talked about before in the past elsewhere here on the forum.

Are we basically talking about, offset weight to equalize the weight load on the rear wheels ? or are we talking about the triangle theory of equalizing all three wheels for a three car ? Or both ?


If so, I will chime in here again on this.

While the scales work great to check for unequal weight loads. I have never agreed that offsetting the weight is a solution that works for resolving this issue.

I do think you mentioned, something that I have suggested in the past. Which is using the axle rotational adjustment process to equalize the rear wheels.

While offset weight can show the car weight load equal on the wheels, I tend to feel that this is creating more friction, even if the offset weight is showing on the scales equal load. I believe it's icnreasing friction.

i also tend to think that on a track and a typical track, where the pack has not spent the time to level check the track. That you can also as in any typical track situation. Face even great un equal weight loads on the wheel or wheels during the run.

Thats why I also feel center weight or equal distrubution of the weight spread out and not concentrated is the more typical and safer route to go. As it will have less impact on the car during the race on a more common track that has not been leveled on all the lanes. Or tracks that are old and in a ruffer shape than a more standard newer track. Which still depends on the surface on which it was placed and set up.

I may not have taken the time to document and save all my data. But my testing was done on my track and timer and the results showed for me, offset weights to equalize the rear wheels or all three wheels were giving me slower track times.

I tried a few different process. But none worked the best for me, other than spread out weight or very accurate concentrated weight.

But the spread out weight yielded the best results for me and thats why for the most part I have not been a person sold on tungsten rounds.

But I still tinker with them and have made some progress with them. I really would like to have a template for them. This is where I see a important part of installing them.

more concentrated weight can be a good thing, if done right, but many of us, do not easily get them dead center. I know even with my scroll saw. I tend to run into cutting out the whole issues. I need to try a bit for that size and a jig to ensure that It is placed dead center of the car width.


So I would be very excited to see video clips of the testing and theory process in track times.

sporty
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

Jeff Piazza wrote:A picture of the cantilever jig in use on the car would go a long way here. I had trouble understanding how the jig attached until I watched the video.

I'm excited to try this out as we prepare for our pack race in a couple weeks!

/JEP
You're right! And there are some other illustrations/pics/videos that should be included as well.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

sporty wrote: I want to make sure here, that what we are talking about, is something that has been talked about before in the past elsewhere here on the forum.

Are we basically talking about, offset weight to equalize the weight load on the rear wheels ? or are we talking about the triangle theory of equalizing all three wheels for a three car ? Or both ?
No. The weight is added temporarily for purposes of a run down the alignment board! The CM is shifted temporarily and weight is shifted from one rear wheel to the other temporarily.
sporty wrote:If so, I will chime in here again on this
Not!
sporty wrote:So I would be very excited to see video clips of the testing and theory process in track times.

sporty
So far, only a couple video clips included, and they discuss the alignment process.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
User avatar
sporty
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:00 am
Location: rockfalls, Illinois

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by sporty »

You will have to better explain to me, on why you would want to offset the weight for alignment tuning ?

I gathered that you were doing this to check and ensure the weight of the wheel while canted can effect the cars performance.

but why would off set weight on alignment board and tuning process be something one would want to use and do ?

would it not be easier to use the scale to check the weight and adjust the axle to equalize the weight load ? Then also to check toe in and toe out, with a fine marked ruler and fence ?

I check toe in and cant with the base of the car flat and level on a steel plate. then with a mm ruler check in different locations of the axle for the cant to be even on both sides of the axles from left to right wheels for the rear.


Then I can take a strait peice of steel 3 to 4 inches tall and place the back of the car against it and ensureing the block of wood is square before I check measurements for toe in or toe out on the rear axles.

Now naturally this is only checking the axles, but a good place to start. The wheel factor can come into play with different diameter axles and wheel bores or non trued o.d. wheels or one a little wider than the other.

those can be checked with a micrometer fairly easily, except you would have to use pin guages to check the bores.

So check me if I am incorrect here or not ? If you're info in not in relationship or correlation to what i am prefering to on what you are trying to achieve.

Can you post the video link, I seem to be having difficulty locating it.
thanks


Sporty
User avatar
Darin McGrew
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 1825
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 1:23 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Darin McGrew »

sporty wrote:You will have to better explain to me, on why you would want to offset the weight for alignment tuning ?

I gathered that you were doing this to check and ensure the weight of the wheel while canted can effect the cars performance.

but why would off set weight on alignment board and tuning process be something one would want to use and do ?
My understanding is that the process attempts to simplify alignment by concentrating weight on one wheel at a time. That way, most of the car's observed behavior can be attributed to the alignment of the wheel bearing most of the weight.

Perhaps an example will help. Start with a typical rail-rider with the front left wheel dominant. The weight on each wheel is:
front left: 1oz
rear left: 1.5oz
rear right: 2.5oz

If you add another 3oz weight on the right, positioned directly above the rear right wheel, then you could end up with:
front left: 1oz
rear left: 1.5oz
rear right: 5.5oz

If you take that additional 3oz weight and support it with a cantilever system so it is on the other side of the wheel from the car body, then you offset the COM even further and you could end up with something like this:
front left: 1oz
rear left: 0.5oz
rear right: 6.5oz

And that's the goal. The front left wheel is steering gently into the rail, and the behavior of the rear of the car is almost completely determined by the rear right wheel. You can align the rear right wheel without worrying (much) about the rear left wheel.

Once you have the rear right wheel aligned well, then you can switch the additional weight and the cantilever system to the other side, and get something like this:
front left: 1oz
rear left: 6.5oz
rear right: 0.5oz

Now you can align the rear left wheel, since it will control the behavior of the rear of the car.

Wash, rinse, repeat until you have the rear wheels aligned as nearly perfectly as you can get them. Then you can remove the additional weight and fine-tune the front wheel alignment.
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

Thank you, Darin. I left the explanation ("How/Why it works") way down near the bottom of the page! And it was not as specific as your nice explanation.

The videos are under the "Weight Assembly" page, along with pix of the ugly weight assemblies! Thy show attachment, but not running on the board.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
User avatar
sporty
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 3344
Joined: Sun Feb 13, 2005 1:00 am
Location: rockfalls, Illinois

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by sporty »

Darin,

yeps that's what I was gathering. So I'll stand with my reply.

Thanks

Sporty
*5 J's*
Master Pine Head
Master Pine Head
Posts: 755
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2009 8:55 am
Location: Norway, Maine

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by *5 J's* »

But it probably only works well for 3-wheelers and for Rail Guided (RR) cars, although I suspect that one could "back into" 4-wheelers and straight runners if that were desired.
Why is it that this process “probably only works well for 3-wheelers and for Rail Guided (RR) cars”. The answer to this might help answer my next question – how might one "back into" 4-wheelers?

I suspect the purpose of using the RR and starting the car on the rail is to remove any influence this wheel has on car tracking such that you are able to see the influence of the cantilever weighted wheel on the steering, correct? (as long as the DFW doesn’t have any gross alignment issues).

If one were to align a 4-wheeler – would you just remove the non-DFW during this alignment. Then once you feel you have good alignment on the rears – remove the DFW and reinstall the non-DFW and check alignment conventionally (that’s is normal IN/OUT and tracking, pending on the desired alignment).

If you were aligning a straight runner – couldn’t you install an axle with toe in on the DFW to align the rears – then reinstall the straigt axle and check the front alignment conventionally?

One last question on a “conventional” straight runner. If one verified good neutral toe and camber by verifying wheels stayed on the axle when placed on the axle both for and aft – and stayed on the body when placed on the body both for and aft – then one verified straight tracking – could one then assume there no (or minimal) differential friction in the car?
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

sporty wrote:Darin,

yeps that's what I was gathering. So I'll stand with my reply.

Thanks

Sporty
Okay, much of what you said in your replies is only obliquely related to the process described. Rather than try to detail the differences, I'll just wait for you to experience that "Aha!" moment.

Perhaps rereading the page will help, even if reading my technical prose is painful. Or wait for the next rewrite, which is likely to occur within the next few weeks, as I notice some details that need fixing. I also see need for some pix at places to help with comprehension.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
User avatar
Darin McGrew
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 1825
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2003 1:23 pm
Location: Knoxville, TN
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Darin McGrew »

Ah, there the videos are! I was looking for a still image with a "play" icon on it. I wasn't looking for a normal link.

BTW, here's an ASCII art version of the weight arrangements:

Code: Select all

Original configuration:

(front left) 1.0oz  +#+
                     #
(rear left)  1.5oz  +#+  2.5oz (rear right)

Additional 3oz over rear right wheel:

(front left) 1.0oz  +#+
                     #
(rear left)  1.5oz  +#+  5.5oz (rear right)

Additional 3oz cantilevered to right of car:

(front left) 1.0oz  +#+
                     #
(rear left)  0.5oz  +#+  6.5oz (rear right)

Additional 3oz cantilevered to left of car:

(front left) 1.0oz  +#+
                     #
(rear left)  6.5oz  +#+  0.5oz (rear right)
Stan, if you think any of my explanations here are helpful, then feel free to adapt them and incorporate them into your page.
User avatar
Stan Pope
Pine Head Legend
Pine Head Legend
Posts: 6856
Joined: Sat Jul 05, 2003 7:01 pm
Location: Morton, Illinois
Contact:

Re: An Alternative Rail Guiding Alignment Process

Post by Stan Pope »

*5 J's* wrote:
But it probably only works well for 3-wheelers and for Rail Guided (RR) cars, although I suspect that one could "back into" 4-wheelers and straight runners if that were desired.
Why is it that this process “probably only works well for 3-wheelers and for Rail Guided (RR) cars”. The answer to this might help answer my next question – how might one "back into" 4-wheelers?

I suspect the purpose of using the RR and starting the car on the rail is to remove any influence this wheel has on car tracking such that you are able to see the influence of the cantilever weighted wheel on the steering, correct? (as long as the DFW doesn’t have any gross alignment issues).

If one were to align a 4-wheeler – would you just remove the non-DFW during this alignment. Then once you feel you have good alignment on the rears – remove the DFW and reinstall the non-DFW and check alignment conventionally (that’s is normal IN/OUT and tracking, pending on the desired alignment).

If you were aligning a straight runner – couldn’t you install an axle with toe in on the DFW to align the rears – then reinstall the straigt axle and check the front alignment conventionally?.
"Yes, by George, you've got it!" Just like you were reading my mind! :)

In your last sentence, you would only be adjusting the front wheel. The rears are already where you want them. With the DFW removed, there might be some slight deformation of the entire system. No evidence here as to whether or how much, but I suspect that it will be very small and the effects on time are probably "lost in the noise."
*5 J's* wrote:One last question on a “conventional” straight runner. If one verified good neutral toe and camber by verifying wheels stayed on the axle when placed on the axle both for and aft – and stayed on the body when placed on the body both for and aft – then one verified straight tracking – could one then assume there no (or minimal) differential friction in the car?
That is a really tough qustion! I suspect that the assumption would be unfounded, since the LBW alignment process adapts the alignment to "what the car is" rather than "what the car would be if perfect." I don't know that I could prove it either way, though. One thing that I know is that if the wheels are inhibited from sliding in and out on the axles by friction or irregularities in the bore and axle, then the process looses accuracy. The process is intended to be sensitive to free motion along the axle, and any inhibition to that free motion would affect the process adversely.
Stan
"If it's not for the boys, it's for the birds!"
Post Reply