TerraLiner:12 m Globally Mobile Beach House/Class-A Crossover w 6x6 Hybrid Drivetrain

biotect

Designer
So it's still quite easy to free camp all over Oz, not so much in the really popular places I admit, but just about everywhere else.


Hi Rob Gray (you are famous in overlanding circles, so I'll use your real name....:)),

Welcome to the thread, and your participation here would prove a blessing. It's a very long thread, and often goes on some wild tangents, many of them my fault. But please feel free to comment on anything and everything. If you've read the parts of the thread where I mention the Wothahellizat, you already know that I am a great fan. The Wothahellizat Mark 1 is actually the only vehicle that I have permanently posted to an enormous cork-board of "inspiring images". Everything else has a fairly limited cork-board-life, but Wothahellizat images are permanent.

Thanks for the very detailed info about current boondocking possibilities in Australia. And needless to say, the Kimberley is one of the most desirable destinations. The Wothahellizat is really big (10.5 m long --see http://www.robgray.com/graynomad/wothahellizat/wot1/index.php , http://www.robgray.com/graynomad/wothahellizat/wot1/specs/index.php , and http://www.robgray.com/graynomad/wothahellizat/wot1/plans/index.php ), so I was just wondering: did you access all of the desirable locations in the Kimberley that you mentioned, using the Wothahellizat Mark 1? If you did, would you be willing to post some images of the same?

Again, please feel free to post in this thread as much and as often as you like; and please feel free to post lots of images of either the Mark 1 or Mark 2 Wothahellizat. As you read through the thread, for instance, you'll see that it has lots of photographs of "Blue Thunder", the 6x6 MAN-KAT owned by egn, a regular participant.

Again, welcome to the thread. :)

All best wishes,



Biotect
 
Last edited:

biotect

Designer
...
I can't speak for the MAN-KAT 6x6 owners but for my ACCO's 1200x20 tyres (split rims) it's a simple procedure, albeit bloody had work.


Hi Greynomad
Thanks for the detailed description. I just changed 2 last weekend.
As I wanted to inverse a tube with a tubeless type.
It was my first time without help.
and it toke me some 4 hours for the 2 wheels. I dit only use te 2 smaller bars, a hammer and some Dreft.
The rim is 51kg and the tire is some 70kg. But amazing is that you can do it alone without machines.


Hi campo and Rob Gray,

So what do you both think of optimusprime's fascinating idea: hydro-pneumatic independent suspension on all wheels, the kind that could retract tires individually to make changing easier?


If you can enable all wheels to be able to be lifted individually,then changing wheels would be quicker!


For an example of hydropneumatic suspension, see post #954 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page96 .

All best wishes,


Biotect


campo: Still waiting for those Volvo independent suspension pictures and links.....:)
....
 
Last edited:

thjakits

Adventurer
Hi Bio and all,

...finally got some time to at least try to answer Bio's last patch of questions.

Also got Rob [...the guy from Wothahellizat fame] cajoled into joining the party and he already beat me to my next post!!


Alright - a few general words to the project first:

Bio, I suggest you start to hone in on the actual project - though very interesting (as always) - you keep "interrupting" your project with stuff that is OBVIOUSLY not related to the Terraliner - leading to repeat discussion to the x-ed degree, e.g.:

- you show e-motor driven city/regional buses with the ground clearance of a sports car

- you show COMMERCIAL Tour/Safari operators with their "specific need"-designed vehicles [Saw a fairly new ROTEL version in Santa Cruz, Bolivia in May, at the same hotel where I AND the Rotel guests stayed!]

I believe you would gain more advance from us [excuse the arrogance, but some pages back you included me into your defacto engineering team! :wings: ] to start to hone in on target-only discussions. City-bus e-drive has been on the thread nearly since you started it. We obviously know about e-drive and it's variations, but for the Terraliner we need to re-invent the drive configuration.

Bio - I DO understand your goal (..I think), but IF you really intend to -design- a ALL-CLIMATE-AROUND-THE-WORLD-NO-MATTER-WHICH-ROAD-ROLLING-APARTMENT and not just an concept or wishful-thinking-contraption (like the bug style OEX-B-thing - in my very opionated opinion it looks like a cockroach, even has wings!!) IN all fairness - it is just another futuristic Safari-tour vehicle, NOT something any potential ATW (AroundTheWorld)-client would ever consider.

I think you need to make a decision (for yourself), WHAT "Terraliner" really is for YOU.....:

a) an innovative, but REALISTIC proposal with commercial success in mind
or
b) a personal, custom made World Cruiser to your specs, without commercial sucess pretensions
or
c) a design study only, that can be as provocative/outrageous/off-worldly as you desire!! (The OEX is right in that catagory)

Also - I think you asked for my comment on the Safari-rigs, but I think some of the other "Engineering Team Members" [Camo, optimusprime, ENG, HAF-E, etc...] already pointed out, that commercial Safari needs are NOT the same as Explorer/Camper needs - and I believe you very well know/understand this.
To me it seems you are trying to convince the Explorer crowd (...me NOT included, as I am just a I-wish-I-was-Explorer) to come around to your big-window wishes.

Obviously, you love big windows and we accept this as a design goal, but if you want to do a a)-development, your 1st item on the list is a "potential customer wishlist inquiry" - ...and you constantly getting to hear WHY big/huge windows on a Explorer-rig are no good....
[...more to windows later]

Last but not least - you obviously can take operations and design clues from the camper (RV or trailer) crowd, but I hope you have it clear that EXPLORER rigs and CAMPER rigs have about as much to do with each other as a spoiled Chihuahua and wildroaming single Wolf - they are both canines - ....similarities OVER!!

So - Bio, I think you know what you want with your Tesis, no doubt. I just wish, that you let US in on the actual plan!

IF you go for:

a) - I am afraid it will be a painful experience for you, as you will have to kick out most of the artistic desires you want to incorporate - to make it commercially viable.
...if for b) - you STILL will have to kick out a load of it, just so you could actually survive by yourself in the middle of nowhere.

...if for c) - you probably will not need your "Engineering Team" - as most of the stuff you design (drema up) will never become reality (in a ATW-rig).

Don't get me wrong - I think your "art" is quite appealing to many - and in a regular camper-world (mostly paved roads, green/manicured camp grounds, supermarkets close by, etc...) your designs will succeed no doubt, as in this crowd you can/want to be as fashion oriented as you please...
[However then you don't have to bother with all the tech-stuff we are discussing, you wouldn't even need 4x4)

What the World Explorers care about is safety - survivability - autonomy (huge storage spaces) - comfort - ....and a long way down the list: Fashion.....
[Please correct me if I am wrong - REAL Explorers only!]
[And then - present Explorere fashion desires seem to revolve around present military/offroad/masculine design fashion - don't see that changing much in the near future...maybe less tubes and bars, smoother surfaces, but still "arms up front and fists clenched - ready to take it all on"....]

The closest to the ideal long distance traveler I saw so far is the Paradise Motorhome MAN Truck: Totally closed for travel, slide-outs, sunroof, porch!
Enough punch to trailer a small 4x4 tender and other toys....
But still a non-integrated, truck chassis based solution.

http://www.expeditionportal.com/forum/attachment.php?attachmentid=261876&d=1418837785&thumb=1


Need to run. Hope to be able to answer specific questions later!
[...Windows, Suspension, 6x6 vs. 4x4, external cage protection, etc...]

Cheers,

thjakits:coffee:
 
Last edited:

biotect

Designer
..
Greetings thjakits!

Good to hear from you; long time no talk! And as pugnacious as ever…..:sombrero:

I am just going to “riff” on what you wrote:


Also got Rob [...the guy from Wothahellizat fame] cajoled into joining the party and he already beat me to my next post!!


Many thanks for this: I've already encouraged Rob to post liberally and without restraint.


Bio, I suggest you start to hone in on the actual project - though very interesting (as always) - you keep "interrupting" your project with stuff that is OBVIOUSLY not related to the Terraliner - leading to repeat discussion to the x-ed degree, e.g.:

- you show e-motor driven city/regional buses with the ground clearance of a sports car
- you show COMMERCIAL Tour/Safari operators with their "specific need"-designed vehicles [Saw a fairly new ROTEL version in Santa Cruz, Bolivia in May, at the same hotel where I AND the Rotel guests stayed!]


I only showed the first, because what I am really hankering for is a good diagram of Oshkosh's TAK-4 system used in tandem with Oshkosh's Propulse diesel-electric drive. I need a really good diagram of how Oshkosh hub electric motors work in concert with its off-road, truck-grade, TAK-4 independent suspension system. So if anyone knows of an errant Oshkosh engineer who'd be willing to post photographs and diagrams here anonymously, please encourage them to “join the party”, too….:wavey:

I explored the second, because I wanted to make a really clear point about windows. Windows are not irrelevant to TerraLiner design, and as you know, from the very beginning I've been interested in big windows. What all those images of big windows “say”, is that it is indeed possible to have big windows in an overlanding vehicle.

But this is exactly the opposite of the message that you have been trying to hammer home. So those images (almost one hundred of them) were aimed directly at you, my friend…..:ar15: ...You need to explain those large windows, thjakits. Do you honestly think that these overlanding companies are shattering one side window every 200 km, and replacing it? And if not, then aside from thermal and security considerations, why the need for small windows in expedition motorhomes used by explorers?

dwh's post was more on the mark, because he began suggesting a way to get security and added thermal containment, via Lexan shutters.

You can continue to chant the mantra, “Small windows are best”. But I now have about 100 images permanently resident in the thread that I will ask you to look at again, and again, and again.....:victory:


…..some pages back you included me into your defacto engineering team! :wings:


Still a member! Just that I now have some wild and crazy friends nearer to home who want to learn something about overlanding, and have been trying their hand at engineering an innovative design. Reading this thread has gotten them up to “speed” very quickly, and some of my more recent posts were actually motivated by discussions I've had with them. For instance: if big windows are such a problem, then why do all the commercial overlanding trucks have them?


We obviously know about e-drive and it's variations, but for the Terraliner we need to re-invent the drive configuration.


Again, not sure that complete re-invention is required, so much as access to confidential Oshkosh photos and diagrams…..:costumed-smiley-007


Bio - I DO understand your goal (..I think), but IF you really intend to -design- an ALL-CLIMATE-AROUND-THE-WORLD-NO-MATTER-WHICH-ROAD-ROLLING-APARTMENT and not just an concept or wishful-thinking-contraption (like the bug style OEX-B-thing - in my very opionated opinion it looks like a cockroach, even has wings!!) IN all fairness - it is just another futuristic Safari-tour vehicle, NOT something any potential ATW (AroundTheWorld)-client would ever consider.

I think you need to make a decision (for yourself), WHAT "Terraliner" really is for YOU.....:

a) an innovative, but REALISTIC proposal with commercial success in mind
or
b) a personal, custom made World Cruiser to your specs, without commercial sucess pretensions
or
c) a design study only, that can be as provocative/outrageous/off-worldly as you desire!! (The OEX is right in that catagory)


I posted the OEX-B to demonstrate to some what many Art School design projects actually look like.

I am aiming for (a), not (c). Otherwise, think about it, why would I be asking such pointed questions about quantity of windowing? Why would I be asking campo about the consequences for thermal engineering?


Also - I think you asked for my comment on the Safari-rigs, but I think some of the other "Engineering Team Members" [Camo, optimusprime, ENG, HAF-E, etc...] already pointed out, that commercial Safari needs are NOT the same as Explorer/Camper needs - and I believe you very well know/understand this.
To me it seems you are trying to convince the Explorer crowd (...me NOT included, as I am just a I-wish-I-was-Explorer) to come around to your big-window wishes.

Obviously, you love big windows and we accept this as a design goal, but if you want to do a a)-development, your 1st item on the list is a "potential customer wishlist inquiry" - ...and you constantly getting to hear WHY big/huge windows on a Explorer-rig are no good....


Sure, you are right, I want a light-filled vehicle. Stated that from the start. I have a "let the sunshine in" sort of design agenda. But I really need convincing that big windows are de-facto incompatible with the Explorer agenda. Haf-E summed up the possible compromise very nicely when he wrote:


I agree with the idea of lots of windows for the passenger areas - and for part of the living quarters - but I think the shutters over some windows is a nice feature.


*******************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

..
 
Last edited:

biotect

Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

..
*******************************************



Last but not least - you obviously can take operations and design clues from the camper (RV or trailer) crowd, but I hope you have it clear that EXPLORER rigs and CAMPER rigs have about as much to do with each other as a spoiled Chihuahua and wildroaming single Wolf - they are both canines - ....similarities OVER!!


Don't agree; that's the whole point to the thesis!!

Miscegenate or die.

You liked the Paradise Motorhomes expedition vehicle very much, but in terms of design, it's a total genetic cross-breed. It was not built by ActionMobil or UniCat, but rather, it was built by an Australian company that otherwise builds more conventional campers. That in itself says something, don't you think?

Miscegenation is the future of explorer/overlanding/expedition motorhomes.


IF you go for:

a) - I am afraid it will be a painful experience for you, as you will have to kick out most of the artistic desires you want to incorporate - to make it commercially viable.

...if for b) - you STILL will have to kick out a load of it, just so you could actually survive by yourself in the middle of nowhere.

...if for c) - you probably will not need your "Engineering Team" - as most of the stuff you design (drema up) will never become reality (in a ATW-rig).


Again, I don't agree with (a). That's exactly the challenge: to make the thing seem “realistic” and “interesting” to an overlander/explorer, and yet artistically breathtaking, too.

You say that Art and practical engineering cannot go together. My profession -- transportation design -- is founded on the premise that they can.


Don't get me wrong - I think your "art" is quite appealing to many - and in a regular camper-world (mostly paved roads, green/manicured camp grounds, supermarkets close by, etc...) your designs will succeed no doubt, as in this crowd you can/want to be as fashion oriented as you please...
[However then you don't have to bother with all the tech-stuff we are discussing, you wouldn't even need 4x4)

Around the World Explores care about safety - survivability - autonomy (huge storage spaces) - comfort - ....and a long way down the list: Fashion.....
[Please correct me if I am wrong - REAL Explorers only!]


Again, I think it's possible to have it all. That's what my profession is dedicated to, as a basic premise. Functional beauty.


[And then - present Explorere fashion desires seem to revolve around present military/offroad/masculine design fashion - don't see that changing much in the near future...maybe less tubes and bars, smoother surfaces, but still "arms up front and fists clenched - ready to take it all on"....]


Agreed, many explorers are enthusiasts for the “Kombat Kamping” aesthetic. But not all. And the latest product from Kimberley Karavans proves that even seasoned Aussie wilderness explorers are now wanting more curvilinear designs.

Here is the final visual hammer-blow: the latest S-class Karavan from Kimberley. Even more curvilinear both inside and outside than the original model – see http://www.kimberleykruiser.com/offroad-caravans-kruiser-series-2 , http://www.kimberleykruiser.com , http://www.kimberleykruiser.com/offroad-caravan-model-summary-3-models , http://www.kimberleykruiser.com/single-axle-luxury-offroad-fibreglass-caravan , http://www.kimberleykruiser.com/s3-single-axle-offroad-caravan-pricing , http://www.kimberleykruiser.com/offroad-caravan-single-axle-photos-video :



kruiser-offroad-caravan-series2e.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5831.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan-05-380.jpg
kruiser-offroad-caravan-profile-980W.jpg kruiser-offroad-caravan-profile-980W-highlight.jpg kruiser-offroad-caravan-air-flow.jpg
Kimberley-Kruiser-S-Class-off-road-caravan-behind-a-Mitsubishi-Triton.jpg off-road-caravan-Kruiser-Series-2-cut-away.jpg S-Class-offroad-caravan-Layout-2015.jpg



*******************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

..
 
Last edited:

biotect

Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

..
*******************************************


single-axle-offroad-caravan--5793.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5795.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan-unit2-1920W-5976-cut.jpg
Kruiser-S-Class-off-road-caravan-inside-view.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5851.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5882.jpg
single-axle-offroad-caravan--5840.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5847.jpg
single-axle-offroad-caravan--5843.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5873.jpg



*******************************************

CONTINUED IN NEXT POST

..


 
Last edited:

biotect

Designer
..
CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS POST

..
*******************************************


Inside-Kruiser-S-Class-off-road-caravan-with-View-to-Bedroom-Suite-900px.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5834.jpg single-axle-offroad-caravan--5866.jpg
kruiser-offroad-caravan-chassis-68-1920.jpg



thjakits: functional beauty is possible. And functional beauty is never the product of a design process as simplistic as "form follows function." Only aesthetically lazy designers and design cultures settle for that, and many desolate and inhuman 20th century cityscapes are direct products of this kind of aesthetic laziness. In architecture "form follows function" died as a design mantra when Robert Venturi wrote his seminal books way back in the 1960's and early 1970's: "Complexity and Contradiction in Architecture" and "Learning from Las Vegas" -- see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Venturi , http://www.amazon.co.uk/Complexity-Contradiction-Architecture-Museum-Modern/dp/0870702823 , http://www.designersandbooks.com/book/complexity-and-contradiction-architecture , http://mitpress.mit.edu/books/learning-las-vegas , http://www.mariabuszek.com/kcai/Design History/Design_readings/VenturiComplexity.pdf , and http://www.vsba.com . Venturi's book is now viewed as the opening salvo of postmodernism in Architecture, a design movement that explicitly rejects "form follows function" in principle.

I am not a postmodernist, and my own predilections tend to run in the direction of British Hi-Tech and Organi-Tech. These are modernist traditions that have continued modernism's enthusiasm for new technologies, but they are happy to use new technologies in expressionistic, curvilinear, organic, experimental, and not-strictly-functional ways. I am a big fan of the curvilinear work of European architects like Jean Nouvel, Renzo Piano, Richard Rogers, and Nick Grimshaw. They've all jettisoned another modernist shibboleth coined by Mies Van Der Rohe, "Less is more". To which Venturi replied, "Less is a bore."

Good to have you "back in the game" once again, thjakits! Keep shootin' from the hip: it really sharpens design thinking!

All best wishes,



Biotect

 
Last edited:

NeverEnough

Adventurer
Changing tires

I've never had to change a tire in the field- yet- but have done it several times at home to rotate positions. It's pretty easy because I have 6 leveling jacks that can lift the entire truck into the air, even with front suspension sag. There hasn't been much talk about leveling jacks, which I consider mission critical, and they are easily dual-tasked for service purposes, i.e. tires. Granted, an IS would have more sag, but a bottle jack, or even some blocks, under the bottom A-arm could take care of that. My auxiliary air tank can drive an impact wrench for the lugs, but I also carry a torque-multiplier lug remover. I use pieces of paralam beam (2X14x18) under the feet of the leveling jacks or bottle jacks, and also carry a variety of blocks for cribbing.

Anyway, the point is that leveling jacks, which I think are very important to comfortable camping, can be dual-tasked for tire and suspension service if appropriately engineered. Glad I did it with my rig.
 

thjakits

Adventurer
Hi Bio!

pugnatious
.....remember I am the DA of the team! :sombrero:

Okay lets get started:

Solid Axle vs. IS:

Check this MAN/KAT:
attachment.php


Although this was about Hydro-Pneumatic Suspension (essentially KINETIC, which in turn was a souped up Citroen system), but it perfectly showcases my insistance on a solid axle for "my" overlander. A IS would have the center of the truck-chassis still little more than a tire-width of the ground. Whereas this solid axle diff is already higher than the center of the right wheel.

You insist on 6 wheels to reduce break-over angle, but also want IS to get a lower ground clearance right back into your rig?? Doesn't make sense to me.

a] For ground clearance desirability regarding Explorer/Overlander designs - I ALWAYS would insist on Solid Axles
a1] If possible Portal axles
a2] In a Serial-Hybrid configuration both are easily do-able

b] IS is hugely more complex than you ever could make your solid axle. No matter what spring/damping system you use - your join/link count on any IS will always be more than double vs. any Solid Axle

c] Ridequality - which I assume is the most likely item on the list why you want an IS. Now I tell you that you will not feel ANY difference on your rig if you compare apples to apples. I believe Campos would like an IS for ride-comfort reasons. IIRC - his rig has Solid Axles on Leaf springs.
Even if the weight-differences between the lightest possible configuration and the max weight are never that far apart like on a commercial truck, it still will be impossible to find the perfect leaf-combo for all situations.
I think Camo never drove a commercial rig, so he might have no idea how a air-suspended solid axle feels on a full-size rig.
I do - frankly it is about as close to floating as you get!
Furthermore your air-suspension WILL adjust perfectly to all load situations within the design parameter.....

You see - you need to get your head around to some physical realities around suspensions:

You are NOT suspending the axle and wheel - you are suspending the body of the truck!
[Wheels and axles are unsprung items, save for the bounce of the tires] So you are actually damping/suspending the body above the axles.
Unless you get speeds that will start to take the wheels of the ground, like in "jump" - it doesn't really matter what the wheel/axle combo weighs.
You will only jump when you get to drive rather fast - faster than you ever will want to go in your rolling apartment!
Remember - you have an Overlander, NOT a TRIAL truck, NOT a RALLY truck, NOT a ROCKCRAWLER.
[I can see IS as an advantage on Rally Trucks and Military applications, that also will mostly be on roads, but then both have back-ups and support teams]

As long as your speeds keep the wheels on the ground - driving comfort depends mostly on your springing and damping system.

A basic engineering doctrine says: Keep it simple! No need to make something more complex and therefor failure-prone than necessary.
For an Overlander of 10-tons or more, my exclusive choice will always be a solid axle, preferable Portal.....

IF you want to restrict your excursions to roads that can be handled by a IS-Truck, you won't need your 6-wheel layout (other than for weight considerations) - there is no roads out there, that you would travel, that would have that much of a break-over angle.....
[That's mainly a feature for military proving grounds and truck trials...]
What you might get though is plenty of deep ruts - again a solid axle will ALWAYS be better in that case!


Windows:

Okay - here we go again.

First, I have nothing against big windows - unless it is on my Overlander!!
Mostly for already stated reasons.....

[BTW, the Kimberly trailer is awesome, like it a lot - please observe that their windows are rather narrow, flat, small - they have plenty of them, so the total area is quite big]

IF you incorporate big windows, I'd say you should definitely do it so, that when you are driving, that they are covered for all non-passenger positions, like Wothahellizat or this guy...

attachment.php


BTW - just because this rig was built by a company that normally does "regular" campers, doesn't put them into the same league.
I never said that a camper builder cannot build an Overlander - However a regular RV and/or Camper ARE lightyears away from an Overlander!!
They have completely different purposes.
[Never mind that certain ingenious individuals make do with a camper where an Overlander would be called for! .....or the other way around....]

You say you want ot combine them - what you actually mean (I believe...) is that you are talking about "creature comfort" - which might be just the same for both - still the "underlying engineering" is lightyears apart...

Now - obviously Safari-tour operators NEED big windows - that's part of the game! As I said, passenger position!!
I never was against big side-windows because of danger of debris damage.
As mentioned before you also will need a fair amount of storage space - which is hard to come by on a big glass wall!
Have another look at your Tourist-Safari-Tour Rigs - MANY have a stone-guard in front of the front windows - so this IS a problem for them.
On side-windows less so, though.....
And a final time - an Overlander is NOT a Safari-tour vehicle!!

And another one for smaller windows or at least "covered while driving"-reasons - go back through all the pics you have from "vehicles on tour" - look at them from behind - most are covered in thick dust!! Do you want to have to clean 20 m2 of glass EVERYTIME you park somewhere, just so you can look out?

Realise ONE thing, MOST of the big screen samples you have shown are from perfect showroom or photoshot sessions - very few from a "on the road"-setting [of the brochure and catalog samples!!] Look closer on the Safari rigs nad you will see loads of dirt on the windows - but here it can't be helped, tourists want to see something!

attachment.php


ALL that dust in the air will settle on any window behind the driver cab!!

Just think of what a pain it is just to keep your existing windows clean (... and I HATE any even small spec with a vengeance!)
Don't even want to think about of having to keep a really big window clean to enjoy the scenery....especially once they get so big, that you cannot reach all of it from the ground!


Bio - split your window-needs into 2 catagories:

- NEEDED FOR DRIVING
- NOT NEEDED FOR DRIVING

For driving you do NOT need a huge expanse of glass - cover up and protect the rest!

e.g. - My all time favorite truck was the discontinued Renault Magnum series - absolutely fantastic visibility!!
However their huge windshield was useless for at least some 30-35 cm from the bottom - from the driver position you could NEVER see that part!!
They could have used a way smaller windshield and have the 30-35cm part designed differently - paint it - whatever!!

I certainly like the Nomad's ideas about his veranda and bedroom - have glass where it makes sense, NOT everywhere, just for art-design reasons!

Same here:

attachment.php


I do agree that functionality and art can work fine together, but at least on my Overlander I will NEVER compromise functionality for art!

You will NEVER get around another engineering doctrine: Form follows function!! ...and generally if it looks good it works good.
Sometimes it will not look too great, but it can't be helped if it has to perform a function!

I read somewhere that "something" is only ART, if it has no other purpose, than to look at it (....and provoke whatever you feel or whatever statement one wants to make). I don't fully agree with this - as e.g. a custom made stainless exhaust system for any engine looks for all purpose like a sexy art piece and would "work" just as well in a show case or on the wall - as on the motor it was welded up for! BUT - it certainly follows FORM FOLLOWS FUNCTION!

VELAMV12HeadersSS-3.jpg


VELAMV12HeadersSS-2.jpg


parts_place_4.jpg


parts_place_5.jpg


functional beauty is possible. And functional beauty is never the product of a design process as simplistic as "form follows function."

It certainly is in the above samples - it may look like not so, but the sexy curves are a result to have to fit same length tubes into a very confined space....
Just so happens that the "resulting form to provide the desired function" is a sexy piece of art - and a major bi*ch to weld up!! (...not easy to get to all the welds!)

As long as you can make the FORM not prejudice the FUNCTION, you are good - if you start to impose art for art's sake you are on a losing track with your project.....
(Same goes for trying to incorporate systems that are not preferred for the task, just because they sound good and techy - e.g. Solid Axle vs. IS)

....continued on the next installment....
 
Last edited:

dwh

Tail-End Charlie

Solid Axle vs. IS:

Check this MAN/KAT:
attachment.php


Although this was about Hydro-Pneumatic Suspension (essentially KINETIC, which in turn was a souped up Citroen system), but it perfectly showcases my insistance on a solid axle for "my" overlander. A IS would have the center of the truck-chassis still little more than a tire-width of the ground. Whereas this solid axle diff is already higher than the center of the right wheel.

You insist on 6 wheels to reduce break-over angle, but also want IS to get a lower ground clearance right back into your rig?? Doesn't make sense to me.


It doesn't make sense because you insist on starting from the assumption that an IS *must* have a lower center than a solid axle. That's a false assumption - there is no reason why an IS must have a lower center. It could in fact start out with a center that is *already* higher than the wheel centerline:



td_tire_up.sized.jpg



http://gocms.com/products.html




Late 80s, early 90s GM light duty truck 4x4 IFS - center about the same as wheel centerline:


4x4-ifs-suspension.jpg
 

dwh

Tail-End Charlie
I have another definition of art. I don't know if I heard it as a boy, or if I invented it myself...

"Art is the practice and refinement of technique, to achieve the goal of expressing the artist's inner vision."


By that definition, *any* human endeavor can be elevated to an art form. :)
 

dwh

Tail-End Charlie
And regards portals, I'll quote Bill Caid (when talking about his Mog, he calls portals "hubs"):


"Hubs are my favorite topic. Not. Actually, hubs were the eventual reason for us selling our 1300 and going to the 1017. It was not because the 1017 was a better truck, but the "driving reason" (pun intended) was that it did not have hubs.

I guess I have some strong opinions, but 5 hub failures in 100K miles in 15 years at $1800 in parts per hub can cause that to happen. On one road trip we had 2 hubs fail. On that trip I had a whole set of spare parts with me. But not two sets.
"

And...

"I have introspected about my hub failures and have come up with several theories. First, the initial hubs that were changed were damaged before I bought the truck. I suspected that the truck was "submarined" and then left to sit. So, to be fair, 2 of the 5 failures were due to unknown causes. But, the following 3 were during my ownership. I changed the oil regularly and after deep water crossings. But they failed anyway. The reason I believe is that the Unimog was never designed for sustained high speed road travel. In that usage scenario, hubs are a liability. Of course, the exact opposite is true when you are operating off road which is the Unimog's reason for existence. I believe that when I changed the differential ratio to give us a higher top speed on the highway the increased speed combined with high mileage was the straw that broke the camel's back."


http://www.billcaid.com/UnimogRepair/Hubs.html
 

thjakits

Adventurer
...and on we rage!! :wings:

Suspension, again:

4x4 vs. 6x6, steering axles, lift axles, etc.....


Okay - you want a 6x6 to avoid shallow break-over angles. Fine - why not!

To get that idea maxed out, you need to get the middle axle ********** in the center between the front and rear axle.
This also means you need at least 2 steering axles or you will start to rip things apart in short order.
Even if you have a tight rear tandem axle it will put a major strain on the front wheels when steeering in tight quarters, unless you have a steerable (or passively tracking) tag axle, these are mostly NOT powered ones - though this configuration is not really on purpose for your application.

So, the question remains WHICH 2 axles should steer or should all of them steer??

For the purpose of your rig, I suggest to have the rear axle fix and the center and front steer.
That will keep the rig stable at high speeds and the turning sensation similar to what you are used from cars.
I doubt you will ever encounter a situation where you need to have the "pivot around the center axle"-feature....or the need to "crab walk"
Remember, we decided that Terraliner would mostly stay on roads, bad roads, but ON roads.....

Though I brought it up, I would have to really think hard about Air-suspension vs. KINETIC suspension.
[Though no doubt - one of the two would be on my rig! For your info, Air-suspension parts can be bought off the shelf in an amazing amount of variations, KINETIC like systems need ot be custom designed.....there is nothing of the shelf - basic components could be adapted though - e.g. hydraulic cylinders]

[Also - as you asked somewhere recently - to my knowledge, a UNIMOG was the biggest vehicle KINETIC tried out with their system - I don't know if they tried anything bigger, but this kind of system scales up rather nicely! Choosing the UNIMOG was also a great oportunity to showcase how the KINETIC system takes out a lot of the articualtion/flex stress usually experienced by by heavy articulation work off road......
as posted before - look at the LACK of the typical Unimog chassis-flex at 2:10!



There are quite few tricks you can do with the KINETIC, if you exploit the possibilities to the max., but there is a lot you can do with a Air-suspension too, but Air is a lot simpler to build and maintain.
Either way you go, have a "manual back-up" available!!: If you get fancy with the KINETIC system you will have loads of electric valves and loads of hydraulic and pneumatic hoses and all over the place - all controlled - no doubt - by a computer of some form. IF the computer should go on the fritz someday, you need a way to get to still drive your truck. No problem if you have a manual way to switch and lock valves into place.
"Fancy" is then gone from the suspension, but you still will have a superior suspension to regular leaf or coil springs....
With a normal Air-Suspension set up, you can still build in a lot of off-road trickery, but the whole system will be easier to run....

With either one it is easy to rig it to have any wheel or axle raise individually and I certainly would do that!

a) Certainly will help with tire/wheel changes
b) Sometimes, many wheels are not the best solution for traction! If you get into such a situation, it is easy to lift a wheel/axle and provide more weight on the remaining axles/wheels!!
c) Raising wheels is mainly a way to save a few bucks on tire wear in the trucking industry and may also improve the ride when empty.

On the Terraliner with evenly spaced axles it might help with tire wear (....IF your MVGW comes in under the 2-axle limit), but it will certainly look funky with the middle axle in the air! (Though keep the ability! If you have some damage at the axle/wheel/tire you can get it off the ground and the rig rolling until you get to a place where you can fix things!)


External protection:

We are talking about all the tubing around the truck!!

1st you need to decide what you need/want:

a) A protective cage

b) A Brushguard

c) Roll-guards

d) Bullbar

e) Sliders

I call Roll-Guards what you find on a TRIAL Truck - you KNOW that you will use this a LOT and might actually use it as part of your obstacle negotiation plan. Most TRIAL rigs get rid of any weight not needed. ....then they put it right back in with a super-strong (...and heavy) Roll-Guard, which essentially becomes part of the chassis. Roll it, slide it, push with it, pull on it - whatever......
Mostly NOT practical for an Overlander.....

Now it becomes interesting:

Do you need a Protective/Roll-Cage? One of these will most definitely deform when called upon it's task - partially it will absorb impact forces while protecting the individuals inside the vehicle from getting crushed by avoiding that the truck structure itself gets deformed too much.
Anyway - after the matter it won't be pretty - NOTHING will be pretty ...anymore, BUT you and your gang is alive - that's all that counts and that's all the guard is for!! So - as long as you don't need it, it will look the part and do the show. When you call on its reason to be there, you most likely will NOT be driving anymore anytime soon.....
IF the partyline holds, I believe you will incorporate the Roll-cage into the truck structure - so, no external roll-cage needed for the Terraliner!

Brushguard? Could look much the same as a Roll-Cage, but would be "lite duty" in construction in comparison.
Main task - keep brush off parts of the truck where it could do damage: Lights, Mirrors, Windows
[You also should incorporate a "Powerline"-brush guard - you have no idea how many local powerlines are hanging ridiculously low!!]
A brush guard might not be able though to prevent the damage suffered by a recent poster - backing up the truck into a tree....

Sliders? DEFINITELY! Basically a strong, mostly steel construction along the sides just at/below the side panels.
Rigidly connected to the chassis and intended to be used as a protection for the truck body, but allowing to slide along or over rocks!
So they have to be EXTRA-HD, they need to be able to support the weight of the truck and can be used to recover or jack up the rig as well.
Don't make the mistake to get them too low below the side body panels or they will become a hindrance.
On a rig the size of the Terraliner I would aim to have them about 25-30 mm below the lowest panel - this should allow for enough flex without damaging the body....
Slider need to be "slippery" on all sides so they don't become spikes and hook up instead of deflecting and sliding off....
I suggesto to have these on the Terraliner - they are also a great defense against side-impacts by other vehicles!
However you should NOT incorporate these into the truck structure - make them easily replaceable, these are a "wear item"...

Bullbar/ DEFINITELY!! In other parts also called a Roobar (....many a Kanga-roo ended on a roobar! better the roo than my radiator or worse!)
Even though you can place your power plant ANYWHERE you like - by far the most side for traffic "incidents" is the FRONT side!
If you don't want a big cattle catcher on the front, at least incorporate some solid mounting points, so that a client can do his own thing there!
IF the Terraliner has no facility to mount a Bullbar AND winch up front - I don't want one!

NOT exactly what I would want my bus to look like, but you get the idea!
[I would build mine with a little more ground clearance.....]

Penfold-Motorhome-Landseer-Update-bullbar.jpg



"Kneeling" - for easier access for passengers....

DohertyCoaches.jpg


StonestreetsScania2.jpg


CavanaghsDenningLandseer.jpg


BCIRayCla57a_500.jpg


This one should be up your alley - all round, incl. the bullbar!!
SB50-Curvaceous-Bull-Bar.jpg


SB40-Bull-Bar-with-Full-Mesh.jpg


SB400-4-poster.jpg


Hopkinsons%20Denning%20Landseer%20doubledeck.JPG



....as a side observation: MOST of these buses also have a stone guard for the windshield!!
LOADS of window on these!!





Another one to the "Powerline"-Brushguards:

It is curious to look through the Explorer-rigs show in this thread - some are perfect to slip under a powerline and lift it up, others would just catch it and rip it apart!

At least in the countries I saw this problem a lot, most local powerlines will have a max of 400V. Most lines will actually be a cable (with plenty of isolation), hardly ever a bare steel or alu wire....

All it takes is a guard that lets the powerline slide up in front of the truck, slide along the top and fall off clean at the back - should be too hard to incorporate into a new design.

Still I would alway make myself a telescoping and insolated "powerline lifter" - worse case I can prop up any line enough to pass the truck and then retrieve the prop-ups..... - 4.5m should do the trick......

A 2nd one to backing up into a tree:

Probably impossible to protect EVERY part of the truck from damage like that.
The only way to avoid is, to make sure you are clear BEFORE you back up!

On my rig, I just would mount cameras all over the rig and plenty of lights - especially at the back!!
[AND these lights WILL have a manual switch!! Maybe illegal, but NOTHING backs off a tailgater faster than a short, bright flash from your back-up light canon!! ...which reminds me, that I need to fix that "dark situation" on my Amarok - great truck, but probably the lousiest back-up light on the planet...]

3rd one .....for now:
Mirrors! DON'T skimp on mirrors!! I want loads of them! Talk to any commercial driver and they will confirm that you never have enough field of view!
Generally this would be 2 on the driver side and 3/4 on the passenger side - This will cover everything but the rear of the truck!
[Even the front should be on one of the mirrors, which means the mirrors will actually be in front of the windshield - unless you have a camera showing the front of the truck]
For the rear -as stated above, NOTHING beats a good set of cameras on a good size screen!


....Later :coffee:
 

biotect

Designer
..
I've never had to change a tire in the field- yet- but have done it several times at home to rotate positions. It's pretty easy because I have 6 leveling jacks that can lift the entire truck into the air, even with front suspension sag. There hasn't been much talk about leveling jacks, which I consider mission critical, and they are easily dual-tasked for service purposes, i.e. tires. Granted, an IS would have more sag, but a bottle jack, or even some blocks, under the bottom A-arm could take care of that. My auxiliary air tank can drive an impact wrench for the lugs, but I also carry a torque-multiplier lug remover. I use pieces of paralam beam (2X14x18) under the feet of the leveling jacks or bottle jacks, and also carry a variety of blocks for cribbing.

Anyway, the point is that leveling jacks, which I think are very important to comfortable camping, can be dual-tasked for tire and suspension service if appropriately engineered. Glad I did it with my rig.


Great post!

Yes, I had quite forgotten about that.... I have a whole file of information about different companies offering leveling jack systems -- see for instance http://www.powergearus.com/products/leveling-systems .

Because the pop-up that I am imagining will be so tall, I am a bit worried about wind: don't want the motorhome to blow down in a gust. I suspect that this is one of the reasons why the vertical travel in UniCat's pop-ups is so relatively short, about 1.5 to 1.7 m: so that the expedition vehicle's camper box does not become too high, and too much of a "sail" that catches the wind. The net result is that UniCat bedrooms on the "second floor", although they look nice, are really just crawl-spaces that do not have standing room height. So as already written, I have incorporated the idea of retractable stabilizer outriggers into the design, the kind used by firetrucks -- see post #878 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page88 :




And for an example of such stabilizers in an expedition motorhome, see posts #333 and #334 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page34 . This is a converted Oshkosh ARFF, which is why it has such heavy-duty, visible leveling jacks:


3708_12.jpg 3708_11.jpg 3708_16.jpg
3708_13.jpg 02130810132sn0.jpg


So a leveling system like yours is already in the design. Just a pair of overlapping outrigger stabilizers, however, for a total of 4 points of ground contact. Would you recommend a total of 6 instead? If so, why?

In any case, very much agreed, leveling jacks are mission-critical. And they then nicely take care of optimusprime's suggestion about finding a "built in" way to raise wheels more easily than with a standard single jack. Agreed, however, suspension sag would probably still have to be addressed by a bottle jack.

As you no doubt already know, the latest thing in both the conventional and off-road market is air-suspension that also handles leveling -- see for instance http://actionmobil.com/images/pdf/journal/Actionmobil-Journal-2010-3-En.pdf , http://www.hwhcorp.com/activeaircontrol3.html , http://www.hwhcorp.com/ml35458.pdf , http://www.hwhcorp.com/ml45343.pdf , http://www.hwhcorp.com/ml39976r.pdf , and http://www.hwhcorp.com/activeaircontrol3.html . But agreed, air-levelling is really no substitute for leveling jacks that can lift the entire vehicle.

Note that the SX-45 brochure advertises "optional hydro-pneumatic suspension with integrated, regulated load-dependent shock absorbers and extremely long spring travel for top driving stability under thetoughest conditions. It is equipped with a height adjustment and can be locked in any position" -- see http://www.scribd.com/doc/17296072/The-Mobility-Elite :


The_Mobility_Elite7.jpg The_Mobility_Elite8.jpg


I don't know if this means that each wheel can be retracted individually; perhaps egn might know?

But the dancing red MAN KAT suggests that this is exactly what it does mean....:) ...See post #954 at http://www.expeditionportal.com/for...pedition-RV-w-Rigid-Torsion-Free-Frame/page96 .

All best wishes,


Biotect
 
Last edited:

Forum statistics

Threads
185,816
Messages
2,878,501
Members
225,378
Latest member
norcalmaier
Top