That damper mount will probably either twist the tube or shear right off.
I had an option to integrate a plate structure behind it to hold the wing and rear bumper that will double as a reinforcement. But after looking at it I will move it to the left onto the top long. beam.
Why the weird billet a-arms?
The top aluminum A arms, were mostly done for the hell of it. But I have seen them used on some Race cars before. It's about 2/3 lighter even with the bearings. If it were to be actually built though i would use the steel though.
Or the chassis tubes / roll hoops with sharp angles instead of nice bent radii?
This is just for the simulation, the model would not calculate properly when i used the radius bends. The steel angles were strong enough though.
why do you put them this way ? your bellcrank bearings fill face a lot of thrust load in extreme bump-droop positions and of course you will not direct all forces into the damper spring this way
I thought about that. The whole bell crank, push-rod and shocks are in a single plane, so when the suspension moves all the loads are in that plane just as if it were arranged in a vertical position. The effort was also made to put the line of action of the push-rod and shock close to a tangent around the bell crank. I have to post a picture of how I did it. Additionally i will get a picture of the reaction force vectors from the motion simulation to show you. (just the directions, not the magnitude because the proper forces were not put in yet)
Overall it was inspired from the Lemans cars. Something like on this page http://www.mulsannescorner.com/couragec65-4.html
The wheel movement, I don't know how much the car will experience but i chose about a max 2 inches up and 2 inches down. It does not max out the shock's extension or produce extreme bell crank rotation. Then again i have no no clue what is a good rotation range for a bell crank until i run it in the motion simulation.
The relation between the diffusers and the control arm length/chassis width? I read that the Acura ARX 02 had rear wheel sized tyres on the front and they ran into the problem of limited front diffuser area because there is a regulation that says the chassis (the area between the front wheels) has to have a minimum width at the front. To solve the problem Wirth Research had to design the car as with a zero keel and raised nose configuration. This enabled the front diffuser exit to go straight across the underside of the car from wheel to wheel, providing a bigger exit. In my case I cannot raise the front of the car but I can change the width of the chassis between the wheels to maximise the front diffuser area.http://www.mulsannescorner.com/AcuraARX-02-1a.html
This was the original concept I had, a lot has been changed though:
"I was blessed with the ability to understand how cars move," he explains. "You know how in 'The Matrix,' he can see the matrix? When I'm driving, I see the lines."