Searching \ for '[EE] Clutch actuator ideas' in subject line. ()
Make payments with PayPal - it's fast, free and secure! Help us get a faster server
FAQ page: www.piclist.com/techref/index.htm?key=clutch+actuator
Search entire site for: 'Clutch actuator ideas'.

Exact match. Not showing close matches.
PICList Thread
'[EE] Clutch actuator ideas'
2005\08\27@203445 by Denny Esterline

picon face
Ok, I'm thinking about hand controls for the clutch on a stick shift car.
Sure, you could just get an automatic and not need a clutch - but what fun
is that?

Obviously a motor, a couple limit stops and a toggle switch would engage and
disengage the clutch, but I'm thinking of something a little more refined;
at least proportional control, possibly a force feedback system.

At the moment I'm thinking of using two pots, one for the control and one
for the position sense. The electronics could be all analog, just a couple
high power op-amps driving the motor so the feedback tracks the hand control
(I'm thinking a squeeze grip on the shifter lever). Although I'd probably
reach for a PIC instead (A/D both pots and PID the motor).

I have a couple thoughts about sensing the force applied to the clutch
linkage. The mechanics could be designed with a strain gage to actually
measure the force, but measuring the actuator current could be effective
also. It might also be possible to add some software that takes the PID
values and calculates the approximate load. That load data would be
translated back to a feedback actuator on the hand controls. Though I'm not
entirely sold on the usefulness of force feedback on a clutch.

Opinions, ideas and criticisms sought.

-Denny

2005\08\27@205616 by R. I. Nelson

picon face
part 0 44 bytes
his is a multi-part message in MIME format.
part 1 1936 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed (decoded 7bit)

Denny Esterline wrote:

>Ok, I'm thinking about hand controls for the clutch on a stick shift car.
>Sure, you could just get an automatic and not need a clutch - but what fun
>is that?
>
>Obviously a motor, a couple limit stops and a toggle switch would engage and
>disengage the clutch, but I'm thinking of something a little more refined;
>at least proportional control, possibly a force feedback system.
>
>  
>
I used to drive an aircraft tow vehicle many years ago that had a manual
transmission and electric clutch. Had a push button on the gear shift.

{Quote hidden}

If this is for highway use you might want to check state laws.  My
cousin was paralyzed from the waist down.  He had to have a special
vehicle to drive that had to have inspections by a saftey inspector.  It
had a special marking on the outside to indicate his condition.  This
was 20 some years ago though.

>-Denny
>
>  
>



part 2 391 bytes content-type:text/x-vcard; charset=utf-8;
(decoded 7bit)

begin:vcard
fn:Robert I. Nelson
n:Nelson;Robert I.
org:RIN Designs
adr:;;P.O. BOX 373;RIPON;WI;54971;USA
email;internet:spam_OUTrindesignsTakeThisOuTspamcharter.net
tel;work:1-(920)-229-7152
tel;home:1-(920)-748-7443
note;quoted-printable:Custom design and building of small electro mechanical devices.=0D=0A=
       AUTOCAD work ver2002
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
version:2.1
end:vcard



part 3 35 bytes content-type:text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
(decoded 7bit)

2005\08\27@213741 by Victor Faria

picon face
Why do you need a staring gauge??
If your using a limit switch you don't need a staring gauge.
Now you mention a motor, how will you attach it ,and to what??
will you just use the motor to operate the clutch cylinder???
Or are you thinking of eliminating the clutch master and slave cylinders???
As far as a trigger you could tie a push button to the stick shift
with some sort of feed back to the operator that the clutch is fully
disengaged .
at this point the operator shifts the auto,and press the button again so the
clutch will engage.
Victor
{Original Message removed}

2005\08\27@223829 by Denny Esterline

picon face
> Why do you need a staring gauge??

The strain gauge was mentioned as one possible way of measuring the force
applied to the clutch mechanism. That measurement would be used in a
feedback mechanism so the driver can perceive the force being used (or at
least a proportion of it) like a force feedback joystick.

> If your using a limit switch you don't need a staring gauge.

Right, the limit switches and toggle switch was mentioned as an overly
simplified case.

> Now you mention a motor, how will you attach it ,and to what??
> will you just use the motor to operate the clutch cylinder???
> Or are you thinking of eliminating the clutch master and slave
cylinders???

I hadn't actually decided about the mechanical parts yet. The first idea
that I had was a beefy motor connected to a winch drum with a cable to the
clutch linkage (think 10-speed bicycle shifter cable, only bigger). Rough
guesstimates I'm thinking ~2 inches travel / ~100 pounds of force / <0.25
second cycle time - so it needs to be on the large side. (if memory serves 1
Hp = 550 ft*lb / sec, so 2/12 * 100 /0.25 = 66.6 ft*lb /sec or ~1/8 Hp -
doable) BTW, many vehicles have mechanically linked clutches - not
hydraulic. Master/slave cylinders aren't relevant in this case.

> As far as a trigger you could tie a push button to the stick shift
> with some sort of feed back to the operator that the clutch is fully
> disengaged .
> at this point the operator shifts the auto,and press the button again so
the
> clutch will engage.

I was thinking more along the lines of a sliding collar around the shift
lever, with about an inch of travel, spring loaded returns down. Connect a
sensor to it to provide a variable position feedback and have the actuator
"track" the position of the hand control. All the way down - clutch fully
engaged, all the way up - clutch disengaged.

-Denny


2005\08\28@095705 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Denny Esterline wrote:

> I have a couple thoughts about sensing the force applied to the clutch
> linkage. The mechanics could be designed with a strain gage to actually
> measure the force, but measuring the actuator current could be effective
> also. It might also be possible to add some software that takes the PID
> values and calculates the approximate load. That load data would be
> translated back to a feedback actuator on the hand controls. Though I'm not
> entirely sold on the usefulness of force feedback on a clutch.

I don't think a force feedback would by you much if anything. The point
where the clutch engages/disengages doesn't seem to translate into a
significant actuator force. If you want a feedback, you probably want
something related to the torque or rotational speed difference between
clutch input and output. This could also be a starting point for a semi
automatic shift.

Gerhard

2005\08\28@111918 by Denny Esterline

picon face
> > translated back to a feedback actuator on the hand controls. Though I'm
not
> > entirely sold on the usefulness of force feedback on a clutch.
>
> I don't think a force feedback would by you much if anything. The point
> where the clutch engages/disengages doesn't seem to translate into a
> significant actuator force. If you want a feedback, you probably want
> something related to the torque or rotational speed difference between
> clutch input and output. This could also be a starting point for a semi
> automatic shift.

Right, I'm not convinced force fedback is useful.

It had crossed my mind to put actuators on the shift linkage and throttle,
with computer control of those the shift proccess could be entirely
automated. Though I think that's a fair bit more than I had in mind.

-Denny

2005\08\28@113124 by Victor Faria

picon face
Here is another thought.
I 'm not sure it would work but!!
Use the power steering pump with an electric valve to control the
clutch/cylinder.
regards
victor
{Original Message removed}

2005\08\28@154202 by Denny Esterline

picon face
> Here is another thought.
> I 'm not sure it would work but!!
> Use the power steering pump with an electric valve to control the
> clutch/cylinder.
> regards
> victor


There's some possibilities there. P/S fluid is a several gallons/minute at
~900 PSI, plenty of power for this. But remember you CANNOT let the two
fluids intermix. Brake / clutch fluid is an alcohol and P/S fluid is a
petroleum oil. The seals and other rubber parts are not compatible with the
other fluid.
It would be possible to run a separate small hydraulic cylinder off the P/S
system though. Years ago a friend of mine built a dump box for his pickup
truck that used the P/S pump.

-Denny


2005\08\28@173825 by PicDude

flavicon
face
On Saturday 27 August 2005 07:16 pm, Denny Esterline scribbled:
> Ok, I'm thinking about hand controls for the clutch on a stick shift car.
> Sure, you could just get an automatic and not need a clutch - but what fun
> is that?

How about Tiptronic (a.k.a. many other things based on each manufacturer)?  
Also, many newer cars already provide "paddle shifters" on the steering
wheel.  The advantage to this system is quicker shifts, compared to any
manual system, even a powered system as you are designing.

BTW, are you also planning to power the shifter and automate the whole system?
:-)


> Obviously a motor, a couple limit stops and a toggle switch would engage
> and disengage the clutch, but I'm thinking of something a little more
> refined; at least proportional control, possibly a force feedback system.

Why force?  I would think position would be more direct.


> At the moment I'm thinking of using two pots, one for the control and one
> for the position sense.

Check out BEI and Novotechnik for pedal position sensors -- basically pots
with a lower angular range which might be more appropriate here.


> The electronics could be all analog, just a couple
> high power op-amps driving the motor so the feedback tracks the hand
> control (I'm thinking a squeeze grip on the shifter lever). Although I'd
> probably reach for a PIC instead (A/D both pots and PID the motor).

Will any reasonable-sized motor be fast enough for this?  Especially if you're
using a manual (non-hydraulic) clutch.  If you don't need to feather the
clutch, perhaps you might want to use a hydraulic cylinder/actuator.  The
necessary pieces (plumbing, valves, etc) should be available easily from the
low-rider crowd.


> I have a couple thoughts about sensing the force applied to the clutch
> linkage. The mechanics could be designed with a strain gage to actually
> measure the force, but measuring the actuator current could be effective
> also. It might also be possible to add some software that takes the PID
> values and calculates the approximate load. That load data would be
> translated back to a feedback actuator on the hand controls. Though I'm not
> entirely sold on the usefulness of force feedback on a clutch.

I still think position woule be more useful for this.  But I can't see
position feedback/PID making much of a difference -- once setup properly, a
pot-directly controlling the clutch position should be all you need.  But
position feedback could be good for a safety mechanism.  Without the cable,
etc, a clutch is normally engaged, so any failure with the motor/system and
it will default to the "unsafe" position.


> Opinions, ideas and criticisms sought.
>
> -Denny


2005\08\28@180200 by Victor Faria

picon face
Yes  , you are right you would need to replace the clutch cylinder with a
small hydraulic cylinder .
But the clutch cylinder is already hydraulic, perhaps just eliminate the top
clutch master cylinder,
and keep the clutch slave cylinder, you may be able to run it with the
steering fluid .
regards
victor


{Original Message removed}

2005\08\29@062357 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Gerhard,

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 10:57:00 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> I don't think a force feedback would by you much if anything. The point
> where the clutch engages/disengages doesn't seem to translate into a
> significant actuator force.

That really depends on the clutch!  Most cars have some sort of "hiatus" that you can feel as the bite-point
comes in - makes it much easier to drive something you haven't driven before, compared to trying to remember
the position of the pedal.  My first car had a competition clutch, and the amount of force taught you not to
sit with your foot on the clutch, and gave the thigh muscles a good workout!  The increase in force at the
bite point on that was so obvious that anyone could drive it easily first time.  The most difficult to drive
are those with constant force through the whole movement, with no clue at all from the force.

> If you want a feedback, you probably want
> something related to the torque or rotational speed difference between
> clutch input and output.

But you need to feel where it's *about to* bite, when there is no transmission of movement - once it's started
transmitting movement you can tell that by the car itself moving.

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\29@063120 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Denny,

On Sun, 28 Aug 2005 11:19:36 -0400, Denny Esterline wrote:

>...<
> Right, I'm not convinced force fedback is useful.

I think you're wrong - don't forget that it's not changing gear in motion that's tricky, it's moving off from
a stop, close-in maneuvers like parking, and hill-starts.  I once had a clutch haydraulic line melt (it was
plastic and somehow touched the exhaust) on a 100 mile journey to visit a client.  Most of it was on motorway
and I managed gearchanges without a clutch on there - it was in traffic at the destination, especially at
traffic lights, that things got interesting!

> It had crossed my mind to put actuators on the shift linkage and throttle,
> with computer control of those the shift proccess could be entirely
> automated.

Then what do you do when starting and stopping?  If you want an automatic box, just get one - there's lots of
reasons why automatics aren't just a manual box with actuators!  :-)

Cheers,



Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\29@065520 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
> Then what do you do when starting and stopping?  If you want an
> automatic box, just get one - there's lots of
> reasons why automatics aren't just a manual box with actuators!  :-)

But the "best" ones are. ie when "real" people (red cars with 12 or
more cylinders and images of prancing horses come to mind *) make auto
changing or tip-tronic style systems they add actuators (usually
hydraulic) to a manual box. The principle advantage of an automatic
system is arguably the torque converter which allows the engine to
"reach below" the road speed range in a given gear which it otherwise
would be able to. This is also in many ways its prime disadvantage -
engine and wheels aren't totally talking to each other. The power loss
in a modern auto transmission is not a major factor unless you want
every ounce of power from a given engine. (An interesting unit of
power, the ounce ;-) ).

Long long long ago Renault equipped the Renault Dauphine with an
electromagnetically operated clutch which was gear lever activated -
touch the gear lever and it would declutch. They had a manual** pedal
operation as well AIR. I think the electric declutch was mainly
intended for on the go changing. Used this way along with a manual
change the operation could probably be on/off without too much
disadvantage.



Russell McMahon

* There's a trap in there for the unwary ;-)

** Jinx and other linquistic pedants amongst us may conjure up
interesting images of performing manual changes with a floor mounted
clutch pedal.





2005\08\29@074701 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Howard Winter wrote:

> That really depends on the clutch!  Most cars have some sort of "hiatus"
> that you can feel as the bite-point comes in - makes it much easier to
> drive something you haven't driven before, compared to trying to
> remember the position of the pedal.  

I know what you mean; I missed that. However, I think it's not the point
where it is about to 'bite' that you feel, it's the point where it's about
to 'unbite' -- you feel the lever starting to separate the clutch disks,
not it starting to engage them. We put that together in our head,
remembering the position. That's why it usually takes a few shifts in a
different car until the position you feel when disengaging the clutch is
stored well enough so that your motoric control remembers it when engaging
the clutch.

>> If you want a feedback, you probably want something related to the
>> torque or rotational speed difference between clutch input and output.
>
> But you need to feel where it's *about to* bite, when there is no
> transmission of movement - once it's started transmitting movement you
> can tell that by the car itself moving.

Not necessarily. With just a button on the shift stick, I'm not sure this
is easy to realize. It may be easier to have the button be just a button,
and have a controller handle the details of engaging (with the help of rpm
and torque). Or having the button be some sort of 'analog button' and at
least maintaining the engage point automatically always in the same
position (possibly with the help of the force measurement, or with rpm
which might be easier to measure).

Gerhard

2005\08\29@080558 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Russell,

(Rolls sleeves up, as this looks like a long-runner in the making... :-)

On Mon, 29 Aug 2005 22:55:20 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:

{Quote hidden}

Well yes and no - a friend of mine has spent several years designing racing-car gearboxes, and although they
aren't automatic, they are electrically actuated.  They don't use a torque convertor because they need all the
power they can get at the wheels, and they don't use epicyclic gears because they lose some power and are less
strong for a given size/weight.  What they have is a sequential change mechanism, like a motorcycle, which is
much easier to automate - just a solenoid for each change-direction.  Manual H-like gate patterns using two
dimensional movements are easy for a human, difficult for electrics, and you wouldn't automate that if a
built-automatic box was available.  Incidentally, a lot of television driving-programme presenters (Jeremy
Clarkson for one) hate "flappy-paddle gearboxes" because the clutch-release is in the hands of the designer,
and may not be to the driver's liking - in fact they almost always aren't! :-)

> The principle advantage of an automatic
> system is arguably the torque converter which allows the engine to
> "reach below" the road speed range in a given gear which it otherwise
> would be able to. This is also in many ways its prime disadvantage -
> engine and wheels aren't totally talking to each other.

Most modern automatics have a clutch that clamps the drive through the torque-convertor when it's not needed,
to obviate the power loss.

> The power loss
> in a modern auto transmission is not a major factor unless you want
> every ounce of power from a given engine. (An interesting unit of
> power, the ounce ;-) ).

Quite!  However it isn't negligible - I looked hard at the figures for the range of Saab 9-3s a couple of
years ago, and it seemed that automatics reduce performance by 5 to 10% and increase fuel consumption (and
thus pollution) by 10-20%.

> Long long long ago Renault equipped the Renault Dauphine with an
> electromagnetically operated clutch which was gear lever activated -
> touch the gear lever and it would declutch. They had a manual** pedal
> operation as well AIR. I think the electric declutch was mainly
> intended for on the go changing. Used this way along with a manual
> change the operation could probably be on/off without too much
> disadvantage.

Porsche did the same, probably about the same time (1970s?). but they didn't last long.  You are making my
point - an automated clutch for changing gear is fairly easy - for starting, stopping and maneuvering, it
certainly isn't (problems include running into the car in front, rolling back on a hill-start, inch-by-inch
movements when parking etc).

> Russell McMahon
>
> * There's a trap in there for the unwary ;-)

I didn't spot it, so I may have fallen for it...

> ** Jinx and other linquistic pedants amongst us may conjure up
> interesting images of performing manual changes with a floor mounted
> clutch pedal.

** Somehow you managed to perpetrate an oxymoron and a tautology at the same time!  "pedal" suffices without
any qualification :-)  Oh, and "linguistic pedant" is tautological too!  :-)))

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\29@092635 by Russell McMahon

face
flavicon
face
Howard, who seems to want me to mention his name :-), wrote

> Russell,
> (Rolls sleeves up, as this looks like a long-runner in the making...
> :-)

Nolo contendere.

>> I previously wrote:  (Aside:  why do you never attribute quotes,
>> Russell?)

I do if the identity of the writer seems especially pertinent to the
thread. I hadn't noticed that it was the norm to do so, although a
quick look at a few recent posts show that it is more common than I
had realised, although by no means universal. Quite often when quotes
are attributed they are mis-attributed. This is OK if you are
lavishing praise (people tend not to complain) but can be a problem if
doing otherwise :-)


       RM

2005\08\29@142659 by Herbert Graf

flavicon
face
On Mon, 2005-08-29 at 22:55 +1200, Russell McMahon wrote:
> > Then what do you do when starting and stopping?  If you want an
> > automatic box, just get one - there's lots of
> > reasons why automatics aren't just a manual box with actuators!  :-)
>
> But the "best" ones are. ie when "real" people (red cars with 12 or
> more cylinders and images of prancing horses come to mind *) make auto
> changing or tip-tronic style systems they add actuators (usually
> hydraulic) to a manual box. The principle advantage of an automatic
> system is arguably the torque converter which allows the engine to
> "reach below" the road speed range in a given gear which it otherwise
> would be able to. This is also in many ways its prime disadvantage -
> engine and wheels aren't totally talking to each other. The power loss
> in a modern auto transmission is not a major factor unless you want
> every ounce of power from a given engine. (An interesting unit of
> power, the ounce ;-) ).

Actually with most modern automatics there is practically no more power
loss, at speed.

Many automatic transmissions have something called "torque converter
lockup", which essentially is a hydraulically activated clutch (usually
controlled with an electrical solenoid by the computer). The only
difference is this clutch is only designed to engage at "cruising"
speeds, it is not designed to bring you off the line. With this clutch
engaged the torque converter is completely bypassed, mating the engine
directly to the transmission. You get the benefit of easy starts at
lower speeds, and no power loss in the torque converter at cruising
speeds.

As further proof of this, most of the new cars in North America that
have standard transmissions as an option (which is pretty rare outside
of sports cars) have fuel mileage ratings that are the same for either
automatic transmissions or standard. There are even a few cases where
the automatic transmission equipped car has BETTER fuel economy (which
used to be unheard of).

Of course, with all this said, my next car will likely be equipped with
a standard transmission, just like the feeling of control it gives you.
Plus, it's doubtful a car thief would be interested in it, few can drive
stick! :)

TTYL


-----------------------------
Herbert's PIC Stuff:
http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/

2005\08\29@155601 by PicDude

flavicon
face
On Monday 29 August 2005 01:26 pm, Herbert Graf scribbled:
> Actually with most modern automatics there is practically no more power
> loss, at speed.

True.

> ...
> As further proof of this, most of the new cars in North America that
> have standard transmissions as an option (which is pretty rare outside
> of sports cars) have fuel mileage ratings that are the same for either
> automatic transmissions or standard. There are even a few cases where
> the automatic transmission equipped car has BETTER fuel economy (which
> used to be unheard of).

Could probably be different gear ratios -- automatics may be geared for less
torque as the target market would be less performance-oriented --- Just a
guess though.


> Of course, with all this said, my next car will likely be equipped with
> a standard transmission, just like the feeling of control it gives you.

Same here!


> Plus, it's doubtful a car thief would be interested in it, few can drive
> stick! :)

3 car thefts to date, and all were stick. :-(  All when I was living in Miami
though, so perhaps the demographic there is different that your data.

Cheers,
-Neil.



2005\08\30@020525 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
PicDude wrote:

>> As further proof of this, most of the new cars in North America that
>> have standard transmissions as an option (which is pretty rare outside
>> of sports cars) have fuel mileage ratings that are the same for either
>> automatic transmissions or standard. There are even a few cases where
>> the automatic transmission equipped car has BETTER fuel economy (which
>> used to be unheard of).
>
> Could probably be different gear ratios -- automatics may be geared for
> less torque as the target market would be less performance-oriented ---
> Just a guess though.

I think the type of gearing (planetary) combined with the gear sizes they
use in common automatic transmissions has higher losses than the gears they
use in standard transmissions. High-end automatic transmissions use gearing
like in standard transmissions.


> 3 car thefts to date, and all were stick. :-(  All when I was living in
> Miami though, so perhaps the demographic there is different that your
> data.

Seems there are a lot of people from Latin America. Outside of the USA,
automatic transmissions are as much the exception as stick shift is in the
USA.

Gerhard

2005\08\30@030802 by Electron

flavicon
face
At 14.26 2005.08.29 -0400, you wrote:
{Quote hidden}

Let away that "Real Men Use Manual Transmission Gearboxes" (tm) just like
"Real Men Code Directly In Binary" (tm) ;D

>
>TTYL
>
>
>-----------------------------
>Herbert's PIC Stuff:
>http://repatch.dyndns.org:8383/pic_stuff/
>
>-

2005\08\30@031806 by Marcel Birthelmer

flavicon
face

>>Of course, with all this said, my next car will likely be equipped with
>>a standard transmission, just like the feeling of control it gives you.
>>Plus, it's doubtful a car thief would be interested in it, few can drive
>>stick! :)
>
>
> Let away that "Real Men Use Manual Transmission Gearboxes" (tm) just like
> "Real Men Code Directly In Binary" (tm) ;D

A magnetized needle and a steady hand!!!

2005\08\30@063111 by Howard Winter

face
flavicon
picon face
Gerhard,

On Tue, 30 Aug 2005 03:05:11 -0300, Gerhard Fiedler wrote:

> Outside of the USA, automatic transmissions are as much the exception as stick shift is in the USA.

Maybe moreso!  :-)

These days in the UK if you pass your driving test in an automatic, it qualifies you to drive only automatics.  
If you pass it in a vehicle with manual transmission, you can drive anything (and have to tuck your left foot
away when driving an automatic so you don't accidentally put everyone through the windscreen the first time
you try to declutch! :-)

I am pretty used to driving anything anywhere nowadays, but when I'm driving a left-hand-drive manual gearbox,
I still have a tendency to bang my hand on the door when I go to change gear...

Cheers,


Howard Winter
St.Albans, England


2005\08\30@192743 by Gerhard Fiedler

picon face
Howard Winter wrote:

> These days in the UK if you pass your driving test in an automatic, it
> qualifies you to drive only automatics. If you pass it in a vehicle with
> manual transmission, you can drive anything

I think this has been that way in Germany for ages (at least it was when I
made the test a couple decades ago :)

> I am pretty used to driving anything anywhere nowadays,

Me too, but it's still a strange feeling when I'm arriving in the States
and pick up a rental and make my first automatic start of the season :)

> but when I'm driving a left-hand-drive manual gearbox, I still have a
> tendency to bang my hand on the door when I go to change gear...

Ouch... I can't even imagine that. It's frightening enough just thinking of
driving on the wrong side of the street, let alone shifting with the wrong
side! (Well, yes, you read that right... it /is/ the wrong side! -- Just
teasing, but it's a bit like the USA with their King's Toenails measures --
that's how someone called the inch recently, maybe even here on this list
:)

Gerhard


'[EE] Clutch actuator ideas'
2005\09\01@041518 by Alan B. Pearce
face picon face
>I once had a clutch haydraulic line melt (it was plastic and somehow
>touched the exhaust) on a 100 mile journey to visit a client.  Most
>of it was on motorway and I managed gearchanges without a clutch on
>there - it was in traffic at the destination, especially at traffic
>lights, that things got interesting!

Memories of having an Austin 1300GT with a failed clutch thrust bearing ;))
Starting with the car in gear. Once you were moving everything was fine. You
soon went into defensive driving mode so were anticipating how long traffic
lights might take to change, and slowly ambling up to them so you didn't
have to stop ;))

2005\09\01@044818 by Alan B. Pearce

face picon face
>I am pretty used to driving anything anywhere nowadays,

Me too, people do a bit of a double take when I claim to have done all four
possible variations of cars and driving on left or right roads.

>but when
>I'm driving a left-hand-drive manual gearbox, I still have a
>tendency to bang my hand on the door when I go to change gear...

heh heh, I learnt to drive on a 1958 Wolsley 6/90. It had a stubby floor
shift beside the drivers door - in this case on the RHS as it was a RH drive
car. They used a column change box with a different linkage to get to the
stick. I believe the Morris Isis of the same vintage used the same
arrangement.

More... (looser matching)
- Last day of these posts
- In 2005 , 2006 only
- Today
- New search...