Strut Brace

[Dammmittt]

Originally Posted by imz4n

It would seem to me that two points of contact to the strut tower would be stronger than just one. The ring that is attached to the top of the strut tower looks beefie to me. Just the way I look at things is the bolts do not carry the entire load, but would be shared equally by all bolts. I might just need to put my hands on one. This place is not far from where I live. I think I will put this on my to do list. I am all about function. I know what you say about the hinged ones. One piece is the way to go in my book.

It has to do with stress concentration. For a beam bending, the maximum stress is always at root, or in this case the towers. So the bolts holding the thing on are dealing with the greatest load. It doesn't take too much to sheer a bolt in half compared to bending a beam with any decent moment of inertia.

[imz4n]

Assuming that you are correct, that the bolts would sheer first, using a stronger strut brace built from tubing, I should never need to worry about replacing the strut brace.

Perhaps the point you are tring to make is that any strut brace is only as good as the the studs on the struts that you have on the car?

[caseysc]

Originally Posted by imz4n

Assuming that you are correct, that the bolts would sheer first, using a stronger strut brace built from tubing, I should never need to worry about replacing the strut brace.

Perhaps the point you are tring to make is that any strut brace is only as good as the the studs on the struts that you have on the car?

What I THOUGHT he was trying to says is, the strut bar shown in the OP is only as stong as the bolts holding it to the strut towers. Dammmittt, please excuse me if I have misinterpted your post.

As someone else noted, competition on these parts is a good thing. Some want a simple, elegant brace (BMW OEM), some want a beast of a strut (MASON), and some want something in between these two. To each, their own.

When we post here we all know that readers may agree or disagree with our post and/or opinions, and then post their own. That's the beauty of these forums.

[rc'Z]

I've been enjoying the arugment over the strut brace versus the strut bolts, especially the part about breaking the strut bolts. Short of destroying the front end in a wreck, when is the last time one of our members broke a set if strut bolts on a race course? Or for that matter, boke the struts bolts in any way but a wreck?

[imz4n]

caseysc
What I THOUGHT he was trying to says is, the strut bar shown in the OP is only as stong as the bolts holding it to the strut towers. Dammmittt, please excuse me if I have misinterpted your post.

Perhaps I took what he was saying the wrong way. If so I'm sorry.

I am under the impression that the bolts that the strut bars attach to are the bolts on the shock (struts), hence my statement. I was totally agreeing with that thought.

Not many of us here are structional engineers and I do not believe he is either, or he would be more helpful and supply forum members with the information that is in question.

Most of my statements were in the form of a question as to expand the thought process here. I'm not tring to create an issue here, I was just tring to look at all pieces of the pie. Not everyone will take a thought in the same direction. IMHO that is what makes the forums so great. Different people bring different thought processes to the table.

Live long and prosper.

[imz4n]

Originally Posted by rc'Z

I've been enjoying the arugment over the strut brace versus the strut bolts, especially the part about breaking the strut bolts. Short of destroying the front end in a wreck, when is the last time one of our members broke a set if strut bolts on a race course? Or for that matter, boke the struts bolts in any way but a wreck?

rc'Z

: Discussion

[imz4n]

caseysc
What I THOUGHT he was trying to says is, the strut bar shown in the OP is only as stong as the bolts holding it to the strut towers. Dammmittt, please excuse me if I have misinterpted your post.

Perhaps I took what he was saying the wrong way. If so I'm sorry.

I am under the impression that the bolts that the strut bars attach to are the bolts on the shock (struts), hence my statement. I was totally agreeing with that thought.

Not many of us here are structional engineers and I do not believe he is either, or he would be more helpful and supply forum members with the information that is in question.

Most of my statements were in the form of a question as to expand the thought process here. I'm not tring to create an issue here, I was just tring to look at all pieces of the pie. Not everyone will take a thought in the same direction. IMHO that is what makes the forums so great. Different people bring different thought processes to the table.

Live long and prosper.

[Dammmittt]

Originally Posted by caseysc

What I THOUGHT he was trying to says is, the strut bar shown in the OP is only as stong as the bolts holding it to the strut towers. Dammmittt, please excuse me if I have misinterpted your post.

As someone else noted, competition on these parts is a good thing. Some want a simple, elegant brace (BMW OEM), some want a beast of a strut (MASON), and some want something in between these two. To each, their own.

When we post here we all know that readers may agree or disagree with our post and/or opinions, and then post their own. That's the beauty of these forums.

Correct, just looking at the MASON strut, it's clear that it's much stronger than the bolts holding it on to the towers, and I was trying to say that the welds are much stronger than the bolts.

Now, I wouldn't say that any strut brace is as good as the bolts holding it on. What you gotta look at is the failure load case. What's gonna fail first, the strut or the bolts? Most struts are gonna outlast the bolts, just cuz of the stress concentrations, but what you want to look at is, how much the strut deflects at the bolt failure? The stiffer the strut the less flexure you're going to have, which is better.

Now, the Dinan hinged strut is going to "cheat" cuz the hinge will allow the towers to rotate, while the strut itself doesn't deflect, so it's not helping your front end stiffness as much as it could/should.

Sorry if that's confusing...I'm in a bit of a hurry.

[Spartiati]

Originally Posted by Dammmittt

It has to do with stress concentration. For a beam bending, the maximum stress is always at root, or in this case the towers. So the bolts holding the thing on are dealing with the greatest load. It doesn't take too much to sheer a bolt in half compared to bending a beam with any decent moment of inertia.

If the beam is being load perpendicular to it length and is "fixed" at the ends (as it is in this case, by the strut tower bolts), I agree the maximum stress occurs at the supports (Because this area has the highest bending i.e. "moment" as well as it having the lowest section modulus as is evident by the pictures). Now I've never done a proper analysis on a strut bar, but it seems by inspection the beam is also being loaded axially and if it goes into compression (as opposed to tension it will also act like a column and we need to be concerned with column buckling and sometimes it doesn't take much to buckle the column (dependant on mode of failure and how many nodes set up). Again haven't done a proper structural analysis, but just some food for thought on developing the cross section of the member. The stiffer the brace i.e. less deflection, the better it transmits force from one strut to another and the better the handling repsonse.

[Dammmittt]

Originally Posted by Spartiati

If the beam is being load perpendicular to it length and is "fixed" at the ends (as it is in this case, by the strut tower bolts), I agree the maximum stress occurs at the supports (Because this area has the highest bending i.e. "moment" as well as it having the lowest section modulus as is evident by the pictures). Now I've never done a proper analysis on a strut bar, but it seems by inspection the beam is also being loaded axially and if it goes into compression (as opposed to tension it will also act like a column and we need to be concerned with column buckling and sometimes it doesn't take much to buckle the column (dependant on mode of failure and how many nodes set up). Again haven't done a proper structural analysis, but just some food for thought on developing the cross section of the member. The stiffer the brace i.e. less deflection, the better it transmits force from one strut to another and the better the handling repsonse.

I agree, you'd have to find a way to characterize the load case be applying moments and directional forces on the supports of the beam. It's interesting in that it applies to our vehicles, but kinda boring in that it's not an overly difficult problem to figure out if you have the time (which I don't ).

[Starscream]

I like your carbon engine cover,

Could you tell me where you got it and how much?

[caseysc]

Originally Posted by imz4n

IMHO that is what makes the forums so great. Different people bring different thought processes to the table.

+1!