Rear Axle Load

Brenda and Alan · Guru

RE: Rear Axle Load

montie · Guru

Brenda and Alan wrote:
Montie you have explained nothing same as yobarr. All you have done is parrot the same things over and over. My figures prove your assertion is incorrect. I'll also repeat what I said before that you do not grasp the physical principles involved.
Alan

Alan,

Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean it hasn't been fully explained.

yobarr · Guru

montie wrote:
Guys I have explained it all in the simplest of terms and respectfully for other posters.
Quite frankly if some of you do not have a grasp of it by now I'm afraid I can't help you.

Well said Montie, exactly echoing my thoughts. We've done everything humanly possible to convey the very simple message in the simplest terms possible, not once, but many times over the last 2 years or more. On most occasions Rote learning seems to work with most readers, but perhaps we're dealing with the simplest of minds here? Constantly arguing with those of us who know what we're talking about is an exercise in futility. Far better to READ and LEARN, surely? C'est la vie. Cheers

Brenda and Alan · Guru

Yobarr and Montie

Neither of you have given definitive evidence for your absurd claims that the weight of the van and car change to make the facts suit your beliefs

Neither of you have grasped the FACT that the car and vans individual weight contribution to the scales can NOT possibly change because their mass does not change.

I set this out point wise and asked you to comment on each point you think is incorrect, but instead you just reject everything out of hand.

Please take the time to comment with reasons on each point if you think them wrong, but give your explanation of why you think them wrong.

Brenda and Alan · Guru

yobarr wrote:

Well said Montie, exactly echoing my thoughts. We've done everything humanly possible to convey the very simple message in the simplest terms possible, not once, but many times over the last 2 years or more. On most occasions Rote learning seems to work with most readers, but perhaps we're dealing with the simplest of minds here? Constantly arguing with those of us who know what we're talking about is an exercise in futility. Far better to READ and LEARN, surely? C'est la vie. Cheers

Yobarr why do you always stoop to abuse when anyone disagrees with your assertions. Instead give me mathematical prove of your beliefs so that I can point out where your thinking is wrong

M

-- Edited by Brenda and Alan on Saturday 30th of July 2022 09:14:17 AM

montie · Guru

Brenda and Alan wrote:
Montie you have explained nothing same as yobarr. All you have done is parrot the same things over and over. My figures prove your assertion is incorrect. I'll also repeat what I said before that you do not grasp the physical principles involved.
Alan

Alan,

I know you are struggling to understand my equation and the whole WDH concept.

If you wish I can present a more simplified equation for you that will still prove the 220kg measured ball weight does not change.

Let me know if you want that and I'll happily do it for you.

Brenda and Alan · Guru

Montie go ahead give me your explanation, that is what I wanted both you and Yobarr to to in the first place

montie · Guru

Brenda and Alan wrote:
Montie go ahead give me your explanation, that is what I wanted both you and Yobarr to to in the first place

Alan, I have already provided an equation that confirms what HR says on it's website and that is ball weight does not change with the fitment of a WDH.

However, if it will help I am quite happy to provide a simpler equation with explanatory notes based on the info provided by HR in their chart.

As today is golf day, it may be tomorrow before I can do it.

Craig1 · Guru

Montie, have you got your winning Mullet on?

montie · Guru

Craig1 wrote:
Montie, have you got your winning Mullet on?

I do my best Craig!

I'll give it one more shot.

KJB · Guru

montie wrote:
Craig1 wrote:
Montie, have you got your winning Mullet on?
I do my best Craig!
I'll give it one more shot.

You must be relieved that the demand is not for the Engineering Calculations and Explanation a "Constant Velocity Joint"....... !!!

You and Yobarr have shown a lot of Patience........ (way beyond the "Call of Duty" ) !!!

Brenda and Alan · Guru

KJB wrote:

You must be relieved that the demand is not for the Engineering Calculations and Explanation a "Constant Velocity Joint"....... !!!
You and Yobarr have shown a lot of Patience........ (way beyond the "Call of Duty" ) !!!

No they haven't all they have shown is a total lack of knowledge of basic concepts

If someone is standing on a set of scales and someone grabs them around the waist and lifts a bit do they still weigh the same. Montie with his equation say no they have lost weight. Come on jenny .

Alan

yobarr · Guru

Couple of interesting photos? The first is of a coffee cup on display in an outback cafe that I had brekky at. The second quotation has been around for eons, but again came to mind when I re-read this thread in its entirity. Cheers

Brenda and Alan · Guru

yobarr wrote:
Couple of interesting photos? The first is of a coffee cup on display in an outback cafe that I had brekky at. The second quotation has been around for eons, but again came to mind when I re-read this thread in its entirity. Cheers

Yobarr the second one is very apt for you.

You still haven't understood that the weights of both the van and car don't and can't change. Monties statement that the car has become 60 Kg Wt lighter when the WDH is tensioned is a nonsense. The scales show a decrease in weight but the car has not changed in weight. Thereore the only thing that has changed is that from the towbar. Your thinking mirrors monties and both of you are wrong.

Alan

Gundog · Guru

Yobarr and montie, rather than being dogmatic and in some case belligerent about the subject you have failed to prove one way or the other that Alans calculations are incorrect.

I offer an olive branch to all, first off Alan derives his position from the HR document, which clearly shows 60kg returning to the Van axle group, likewise 60kg has been removed from tow vehicle.

I have gone over the numbers and they make no sense, I believe these are fictious numbers from demostration purposes only, why would a 2 axle caravan with 1450kg ATM have a ball weight of 220kg?

Which brings me to the point of Alans position that ball weight changes when the WDH is engaged, to measure the ball weight accurately when hitched is almost impossible and more difficult when the WDH is engaged, sure with a weighbridge you can mathmatically work out an approximate ball weight.

Its also my humble opinion that ball weight is fluid weight that alters while you are moving, caused by the pitch and roll of the combination on variable terrain. Would you agree if you are travelling up a steep incline that the ball weight would be less and then decending the same incline the ball weight would increase.

In conclusion I will call this a nil all draw and all combatants return to you respective corners and learn a little humility.

Magnarc · Guru

Well said Graham, an end to this thread is eminently the preferred option of many on here I suspect. Going nowhere and achieving nil outcome, surely it is time to put it to bed??????

Just sayin;

Dougwe · Chief one feather

Brenda and Alan · Guru

-- Edited by Brenda and Alan on Saturday 30th of July 2022 07:22:53 PM

Gundog · Guru

Brenda and Alan wrote:
Gundog wrote:
weight.
Its also my humble opinion that ball weight is fluid weight that alters while you are moving, caused by the pitch and roll of the combination on variable terrain. Would you agree if you are travelling up a steep incline that the ball weight would be less and then decending the same incline the ball weight would increase.
Gundog perhaps the van is loaded so as to give a high towball download to make the demo more dramatic. But this doesn't make the figures wrong and is doesn't change the conclusions of the arithmetic. Do you believe that the weights of the van and car magically because an upwards force is applied by the WDH as Montie and Yobarr seem to think.
Alan

Based on the evidence from the diagram pesented you are correct there is a 60kg swing of weight to the caravan, howerver there is no way you can prove where the is transfered from except the gross aggregate of the tow vehicle, but the numbers show clearly that 60kg from the tow vehicle and 10kg from the front axle of the caravan have been deposited on the rear axle of the caravan, thus increasing the caravan axle group by 60kg.

As I am a committed user of a WDH and the proof in point is the WDH transfers sufficient weight to my tugs from axle to return positve steering and braking to the tug, without a correctly installed weight distribution it would be more than likely my combination would have turned turtle.

As for towball weight I feel far too much emphasis is given to the subject. when you check your towball weight to garner your correct GTM, if it falls within the requirements of the towbars rating and the other patamaters like GCM then no more disscussion is required. As I said before IMO towball weight is a fluid weight that varies on movement.

Brenda and Alan · Guru

Gundog the individual weights of the car and van are fixed by their mass and no matter what, they don't change so it is very easy to see what happens.

Top row of diagram car weighs 1690 Kg Wt.

Second row it still weighs 1690 Kg Wt.

Third row it still weighs 1690 Kg Wt.

The only other weight on the scale is the towball download.

Just plain old arithmetic tells you without doubt the towball weight is reduced.

There just any other sane explanation.

Alan