Suspension setup using FCM Spreadsheet?
Posted: Wed Feb 12, 2014 11:54 am
Hello all,
My car (2004 SE) is essentially track use only now and I'm thinking of upgrading it's current dual road/track suspension configuration to something more suitable. Based on my car's current suspension setup and my driving ability/style, I'm fairly happy with the car's balance at track speeds (current wheel alignment notwithstanding!) so I'm aiming to aim for a similar front roll couple percentage.
I've been looking at Fat Cat Motorsport's Suspension Design Spreadsheet and working through the numbers. I have a standalone version 7.1 in Excel and have also been comparing the results with the current version online. I've noted that the online version has amended data for spring motion ratios and also has included additional data for leverage ratios.
In the V7.1 spreadsheet I've plugged in my current setup and a couple of previous set ups by way of comparison. The reason I'm using the standalone version is that it allows me to change swaybar arm length, thereby quantifying the changes in FRC due to the effect of adjustable sway bars. The changes to FRC correspond with my notes regarding the car's handling and surprisingly there only appears to be around a 1.5% variation in FRC between "unsettled" and "stable".
For my current setup, the Online spreadsheet gives me an FRC of 54.0%, with roll stiffness of 2708.9 lb-ft/deg and bounce frequencies of 1.78 Hz and 1.8 Hz front and rear respectively. (Note: this is using its fixed values for sway bar arm length).
The V7.1 spreadsheet gives me an FRC of 57.0%, with roll stiffness of 2412.5 lb-ft/deg and bounce frequencies of 1.69Hz and 1.58Hz. (also using the fixed values for sway bar arm length for comparison's sake). From a purely subjective, seat of the pants assessment I feel as though an FRC of 57% is probably closer. From what I'm lead to believe, an FRC of 54% is way too low for what is essentially a fairly neutral handling MX5, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
Based on these variations I'm not looking to either of the FCM models for absolute values, rather I intend to use V7.1 to compare the relative differences between alternative setups and to try and get something close to the indicative V7.1 FRC that I have for my existing setup.
So, here are the the questions:
* Has anyone here used the FCM spreadsheets in a similar manner?
* What results did you get?
* Did the changes in FRC, bounce frequencies etc correspond with a noticeable change to the feel or handling of the car?
* What was your ballpark variation in FRC between "good" and "not so good"?
Any feedback or input would be most welcome. Many thanks in advance... and apologies for the long winded post!
My car (2004 SE) is essentially track use only now and I'm thinking of upgrading it's current dual road/track suspension configuration to something more suitable. Based on my car's current suspension setup and my driving ability/style, I'm fairly happy with the car's balance at track speeds (current wheel alignment notwithstanding!) so I'm aiming to aim for a similar front roll couple percentage.
I've been looking at Fat Cat Motorsport's Suspension Design Spreadsheet and working through the numbers. I have a standalone version 7.1 in Excel and have also been comparing the results with the current version online. I've noted that the online version has amended data for spring motion ratios and also has included additional data for leverage ratios.
In the V7.1 spreadsheet I've plugged in my current setup and a couple of previous set ups by way of comparison. The reason I'm using the standalone version is that it allows me to change swaybar arm length, thereby quantifying the changes in FRC due to the effect of adjustable sway bars. The changes to FRC correspond with my notes regarding the car's handling and surprisingly there only appears to be around a 1.5% variation in FRC between "unsettled" and "stable".
For my current setup, the Online spreadsheet gives me an FRC of 54.0%, with roll stiffness of 2708.9 lb-ft/deg and bounce frequencies of 1.78 Hz and 1.8 Hz front and rear respectively. (Note: this is using its fixed values for sway bar arm length).
The V7.1 spreadsheet gives me an FRC of 57.0%, with roll stiffness of 2412.5 lb-ft/deg and bounce frequencies of 1.69Hz and 1.58Hz. (also using the fixed values for sway bar arm length for comparison's sake). From a purely subjective, seat of the pants assessment I feel as though an FRC of 57% is probably closer. From what I'm lead to believe, an FRC of 54% is way too low for what is essentially a fairly neutral handling MX5, but please correct me if I'm wrong.
Based on these variations I'm not looking to either of the FCM models for absolute values, rather I intend to use V7.1 to compare the relative differences between alternative setups and to try and get something close to the indicative V7.1 FRC that I have for my existing setup.
So, here are the the questions:
* Has anyone here used the FCM spreadsheets in a similar manner?
* What results did you get?
* Did the changes in FRC, bounce frequencies etc correspond with a noticeable change to the feel or handling of the car?
* What was your ballpark variation in FRC between "good" and "not so good"?
Any feedback or input would be most welcome. Many thanks in advance... and apologies for the long winded post!