0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
I would think that you don't want paint in there...
not really.... just changes the exact point at which the slinky occurs. I can deminstrate MT-equipped cars doing the slinky even when all of them are equipped with drag springs.
As mentioned earlier, I found the paint just rubbed off easily. But YMMV... (Attachment Link) This is one axle before rolling back and forth a bit in a truck, and one after rolling back and forth a bit in a truck. If really concerned about gumming up in service trucks, just use one dedicated truck for this task and "clean" the axle cones. But... that would be a funny solution to the dreaded slinky!From and engineering standpoint drag springs (in the form of coil springs half wound on the axle) are only somewhat effective in reducing the slinky effect, because in reality its the wrong component to use. In a mass-spring-damper system, you dont really want to add more springs to stop the original springs from oscillating, you just end up changing the frequency at which the oscillation occurs. What you really want is a damper to do this job. The drag spring is somewhat acting as a weak friction damper in this case, but also as a torsion spring acting on the axles... In some cases, critical damping is achieved to eliminate the slinky effect (via stiff enough drag springs spread out throughout the train or short enough train for a single drag spring to be effective), but in most cases as you noted, its not enough and merely changes the rate of slinkiness. Slinkiness being the technical term
The drag spring is somewhat acting as a weak friction damper in this case ...
I'd be willing to bet that's all it was ever meant to do. Rather than any actual design, it seems more likely to me like something that someone just tried because they had a few springs lying around on the work bench. And it does mask the symptom, as least for some use cases, so so if the other side-effects are livable, then why not?Ed