******** I think you are right, Nate. If the wheel is properly installed and clamped to the disc with the appropriate clamping force, then the moment of shear should be very very small. A vector diagram would have to show some minimal shear, but it would likely approach zero.
The argument, with me, was never about the magnitude or proportional amount of shear to overall load, it was ALWAYS that a shear component existed, which he first denied and then later admitted. Btw, fyi it's referred to as a "free body diagram" in the engineering disciplines.
And you're nothing more than a pretentious, wholly unconvincing clown.
It's is exactly such claims, stating something you COULDN'T POSSIBLY know, that proves beyond any doubt that you're nothing more than a bullshit artist.
Riiiight, thats why I've provided line, verse, examples and photos of EXACTLY what I'm refering to (which you of course either totally ignore or pretend to not be relevant) while you've provided not so much as a single quote from the onlt and difficult to access page that you falsely claim to bolster your argument.
I can nearly always discern pretetnious bullshit artist like yourself just by their supercilious demeanor and hostile attitude alone. Do you REALLY think that the act of simply making an unsupportable charge alone renders it somehow convincing?
Here's even more proof that I'm not a troll, if this is all you have, why don't you just go away. You've nothing to offer and I haven't the slightest interest in a continuance of any discussion with you.
i'm not an "expert" but i did try to stay awake in class and i know a little about stress/strain analysis. you apparently didn't and don't. just like you evidently either didn't read or didn't understand the wiki cite i gave before.
not in any terrestrial engineering sense. i can't speak for planet nate of course, but that's because i don't live there. i don't intend to either.
The cite I made was to a very specific bolting condition. You come back with something entirely different. If you did read it, you clearly didn't understand it. I apologize for giving you the benefit of the doubt.
Difficult to access? You go to the bottom and select that page. Well I guess that is too difficult for you to figure out.
Oh, you're another one of these people who expects his hostility, insults, etc to be responded to politely. Sorry, I don't play that way. You get back the same attitude you throw at me.
I was responding to Nate. You engaged me in this "discussion" and set the tone. Just because you can't figure out that two rigid bodies bolted together isn't the same as bushing mount that uses a bolt as its center member isn't my fault.
the deaf ears are yours retard. there are plenty of reasons. but you have none because you don't know what you're talking about.
the double negative meaning that it's /desirable/ to load the lugs in shear??? you really are functionally illiterate!!!
you mean relative movement? of course it doesn't. you mean strain displacement? of course it does!
not only are you clearly unaware of even rudimentary understanding of basic stress and strain concepts, you're an illiterate incoherent retard to boot. you'd have to be to keep coming back to this festering filth pile for more exposure because otherwise you'd understand what a horse's ass you're being and how you're bringing "engineering" into disrepute.
The main reason for brakes is to STOP! If you avoid an accident, you save $$$. If you avoid hitting someone or an animal, you save a life. Semi-metallic(s) stop faster w/ less travel.... period.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.