Fat Tad Clone.

Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
439
Location
Wakefield, UK
A pivoting front end is exactly what you are trying to avoid with front suspension on a tadpole though.
The only way I can see a reclined sprung seat acting as suspension without robbing effort from pedalling is if the cord is sufficiently tightly laced to prevent your legs from moving it as you pedal and therefore only acting as "suspension" on the bigger bumps, effectively pre-loading the system. Quite how any cornering would feel on a sprung seat I have no idea.
 
Joined
Feb 7, 2008
Messages
2,095
Location
Nottinghamshire England
Hi there

No one has asked ' why ' do you want suspension ?

If you are looking at ' adding ' it to a kingpin style trike you will be lucky to get more than 1" of movement ?

So do you really want so little movement for so much added complexity ?

Maybe this can be retro fitted ?

http://www.recumbents.com/mars/pages/proj/tetz/TFVM/TFVMp2.html



Whole article is a good read , very sensible and minimal power assist....
 

SirJoey

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
4,657
Location
My cozy little nook in the corner!
A pivoting front end is exactly what you are trying to avoid with front suspension on a tadpole though.
Yeah, you're exactly right. I get that. :)
Just thought it would be interesting to post since the problem of keeping all 4 wheels of a
quad on the ground was mentioned. Normally, that's one of a quad's biggest drawbacks.

***
 

SirJoey

Super Moderator
Joined
Feb 8, 2008
Messages
4,657
Location
My cozy little nook in the corner!
Oh man, Ed. That's just wrong on so many levels,
it's difficult to explain without charts & graphs. o_O
***
 
Joined
Sep 12, 2012
Messages
2,467
Location
Apple Valley, California, USA
Oh man, Ed. That's just wrong on so many levels,
it's difficult to explain without charts & graphs. o_O
***
What ever do you mean? 😲

Those are bonafide posterior protective foam pads, commonly used by snowboarders. No engineering involved.
One size fits all rides. Just slip'em on and ride.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Oct 19, 2012
Messages
439
Location
Wakefield, UK
As I suspected my dear Watson. The cause of the slight twist in the example shown is, I believe, a product of the length of their fore / aft rods and their very thin 0.9mm wall construction.
I've had to make a few assumptions and guesses here:-

  1. The length of the rods is 24" - must be somewhere near.
  2. They state the main chassis was 0.9mm thick tubing so I have assumed the rods are too. Given their weight claim for the entire structure that's probably an accurate guess.
  3. I've guestimated the rods at 1" diameter from comparison to the handlebars which are usually 22mm.
  4. In hard cornering where the inside wheel is just lifting the rider and chassis extert a force of 150lb across the two rods. This can't be far off based on observing their video and the deflection of their system assuming points 1-3 are somewhere near.
Their long thin rods deflect 1.9" but reducing them to 12" and upping them to 1.5mm wall gives a deflection of just 0.15". Using 12" of 40x20x1.5 rectangular box deflects just 0.03" or as near as damn it no twist worth mentioning. Reducing to 12" means the axle does proscribe a tighter arc but the numbers are utterly minuscule and eminently ignorable.

Now up that force to a more porky 225lb as many of us do not appear to be as svelte as others, myself absolutely included, and you go from 2.8" deflection with the example to 0.05" with the shorter rectangular versions. Or put another way from almost 7 degrees of lean to almost none.

There will be some flex in any unsuspended tadpole trike caused as a function of main beam twist. Even using 40x20x1.5mm box in the vertical which of all the usual materials for a trike is the least able to resist twist I have found any such twist to be undetectable in use. My calculations above are designed to be in addition to any such chassis twist.

The weight you'll add to a tadpole trike to add suspension of this design are 2 foot of 40x20x1.5mm for the fore and aft rods. The weight of any pivoting parts plus the shock absorber and mounts - around 4LBS. I think that, unlike the example, you could get away with just the one central shock absorber as you'd then have removed most of the twist (famous last words!).
 
Last edited:
Top