04-15-2008, 05:34 PM
|
|
Registered User
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: Coffs Harb, Australia.
Posts: 5,032
|
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by b3lha
Good thinking. I hope it is a linear relationship, but LAN said in another thread that it is not.
If it is a linear relationship I have a doubt about your maths. Or maybe mine. It's late (here) and one or both of us is wrong. 
Your x coefficient "5/9" is positive therefore your graph will slope upwards.
But I think it should slope downwards, from (0,50) to (95,0). So the coefficient should be negative. By my reckoning the equation would be y=(-5/9)x + (475/9). Your x=65 would give y=17, therefore 83:17 torque split.
Or, if the known points are actually (0,50) and (100,0) [which makes more sense, 100% duty = FWD] it becomes easier y=(-1/2)x + 50. Then x=65 gives y=18, therefore 82:18 torque split. |
Phil you can't have a Duty cycle of 0% or 100%, or it is not a Duty cycle it is DC. It is usually quoted as 5% to 95%.
Harvey.
__________________
One Arm Bloke.
Tell it like it is!
95 Lsi. Bordeaux Pearl, Aust. RHD.149,000Kls Subaru BBS wheels.
97 Liberty GX Auto sedan. 320,000Kls.
04 Liberty 30R Auto Premium. 92.000kls.
|