Broken Spring Hanger!

[Gyro Gearloose]

Also some kind of bearing/bushing with the Watts. Just thinking maybe it would allow the elimination of the extra cross frame brace. I'm still in favor of the 4 link/airbag/track bar setup like on that Chevy pickup.

Jim,

Was thinking of Delrin or oil impregnated Bronze for a bearing. Will take a look at a Watts kits and see how they do it. Looks like Urethane bushings with grease on a Mustang install I looked at.

pat

[Gyro Gearloose]

Ok, time for some show and tell for Panhard Bar...

Basic conceptual drawing of Panhard Bar done for for my Reflection 303RLS with no 2"x2" lift. Design will work for units with 2"x2" lift with the addition of some angle brackets for the main brackets. I can post some pics of those at another time. I haven't done a BOM (Bill Of Materials) yet but hoping less than putting X-Factor braces on.

What I like about this concept is, it gets rid of the lateral forces at the source. A Watts link is an alternative to this but is more complex and potential heavier (may draw this later).

Compatibility:

• 71" Outside to Outside frame spacing
• 2.5"x8" I-Beam Frame
• 5" tall spring hangers (Correct Track)
• Will work with or without 2"x2" suspension lift (this is nice if you upgrade from no 2"x2" lift to a 2"x2" lift)
• Should work with 5.2K or 6K axles
• Attachments for Brackets to frame can be modified as needed for extra support if desired.
• Have not modeled it to see if it will work with shorter spring hangers.
• Could be fairly easily modified for other trailer applications

There is one area that Rob and I agree on that may be a bit weak and that is where the Bracket that attaches to the Axle.

Rob Quote: "My only “design" comment is the attachment to the axle tube. This tube is really thin wall. Data I got from LCI a while ago . . . LCI52 AXLE TUBE - 3.00" DIA X 0.150" WALL, 70 KSI MIN YLD 4.3"

There are a few reasons for where this is attached.

1. Trying to keep "Rotational Center of Axis" low. Kind of like Center of Gravity
2. Don’t PHB want over axle for clearance purposes
3. Trying to keep force more in alignment with the counter force. Less twist etc.? Keeping force as lateral and parallel as possible.
4. Bracket was off the shelf except for the stuff attaching the Heim Joint.
5. Tube clamp virtually doubles the thickness of the axle where it attaches
6. Tube Clamp mounts against the spring U-Bolt to help take up load at least in one direction

I’m looking at adding a second tube clamp (with bracing) to help distribute the load. Or figuring out a way to reinforce the tube bracket by adding a piece that also gets bolted down by the U-Bolts.

More thought on this?


I'm thinking I will try to make this and install it before Vegas Rally.



Pat

[minnow101]

Pat, what really irritates me about you is how little thought you put into these projects.

Outstanding! Looking forward to the fitting and testing phase!

[Gyro Gearloose]

Pat, what really irritates me about you is how little thought you put into these projects.

Outstanding! Looking forward to the fitting and testing phase!

Minnow101,

You just made my skin crawl for a second... I thought I really pissed someone off again

[minnow101]

No worries, my wife says the same thing about me.

[Country Campers]

Pat

I would be curious with the attachment point on the I-beam.
The narrow attachment point would possibly cause a weak point onto the I-beam flange but also can not make a very wide mount for the space available.
No engineering reason here just experiences have me questioning.

Brian

[Cate&Rob]

Pat

I would be curious with the attachment point on the I-beam.
The narrow attachment point would possibly cause a weak point onto the I-beam flange but also can not make a very wide mount for the space available.
No engineering reason here just experiences have me questioning.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Pat & I have talked about whether there would be a need to reinforce the I Beam flange-to-web as is done by LCI above the spring hangers. I think taking part of the load back to the other frame rail with the upper fixed link cross brace would be sufficient. This is essentially what the aftermarket hanger cross braces do. Note that Pat’s proposal is a “clamp on” design so that there are no holes to weaken the I beam flange and no welding required.

Rob

[Country Campers]

Rob

The "clamp on" is my questionable area.

Brian

[Gyro Gearloose]

Pat

I would be curious with the attachment point on the I-beam.
The narrow attachment point would possibly cause a weak point onto the I-beam flange but also can not make a very wide mount for the space available.
No engineering reason here just experiences have me questioning.

Brian

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, struggling with space, strength, cost and keeping it simple is a struggle. But gotta attach it somewhere. I have considered making the brackets wider or the mounting wider.

Check out the PDF and it may explain how I plan to attach better that should not affect the integrity of the I-Beam as much.



Pat

[MidwestCamper]

Hi Brian,

Thanks for the feedback. Yes, struggling with space, strength, cost and keeping it simple is a struggle. But gotta attach it somewhere. I have considered making the brackets wider or the mounting wider.

Check out the PDF and it may explain how I plan to attach better that should not affect the integrity of the I-Beam as much.



Pat

Really nice design, but I'm concerned with the clamping surface area to counter the lateral forces from the entire axle. A design that would trap the web solidly on one side and to use the clamp on the other with more surface area would help to distribute these loads. Maybe have the clamp on opposite sides of the left and right beams.