DirtRider . Net MX, SX, Arena Cross, Off-Road Community

This is the text version of DirtRider.Net
Click Here for the Full Version

Pages: 1

How subtanks really work..
(Click here to view the original thread with full colors/images)

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

Good question and well your the inspiration to finally put this one to the key pad.. So here goes.. Heres one for DRN as well as your reading...

As many of you have seen I've been a proponent of the Ross Maeda designed subtank system, and as anyone I know of who has asked my personal feeling everyone will hear.. "I won't ride a bike without a subtank system".. Yes I believe it does that much for a front suspension system.. So what's really going on.. Ross posted some stuff up for me on my web site a long time ago and I was excited to post it up.. It was a begging of a great friendship, that has made me a better tuner regardless of a few differences in approach.. But something was always a little off about what was going on inside the subtanks and that has left me uncomfortable.. Well one day, quite a while back it came to me as I was working on a Interceptor gas shock with my 12 ton press.....

So the subtanks work by regulating air through the restrictive barrier... Ok.. We run more oil which means that the fork will have a higher compression ratio and that will allow us to regulate the additional flow.. No worries.. But how does the system work as an advantage when we brake?(The subtanks feel much plusher than non-subtank fork when braking.) Like any fork with a higher oil level we should see more resistance to compression as we get deeper in the stroke..Interestingly enough many have said well its simple really the fork is not moving fast enough so the air can go through the restrictive barrier without much resistance.. And reason number two air is compressible and acts as a buffer...Humm.. This never set well with me.. Bottoming resistance is clearly slower in shaft speed than the huge (high speed) bumps at the bottom of the Reb-Bud ski jump, that you hit taped, before you brake.. That should spell death for the rider with a ultra high fork oil, and unlike a damping issue only that might help this is an ugly position sensitive... (this is not a prevention of packing going on..) Well I accepted common perspective till the VFR revealed something stupidly simple.

The tanks work because the forks are not fully extended for any length of time before the impact, and then have time to distribute a significant volume to the subtank without having time to refill the main chamber.(so it gets better the more bumps you hit if they are spaced closely and you've been in a wheelie for instance) So the pressure rise from static is not as nearly as significant as when we ride off into the air allowing the tanks to equalize and then land and force the almost complete volume into the tank..Its just a time delay.. The subtanks allow for a buffering, and bottoming resistance is increased because the forks fully extend and we are in the air long enough to empty any positive pressure back into the main fork volume.. How cool is that? So what else should this tell you? Don't buy anything with a check valve.. It will give the same bottoming effect, but you're not going to get the same plushness factor as the tanks will equalize more quickly and if your in big bumps, or you carry your wheel in the air too long your going to have issues.. It amazes me how designs can be so much more than they where intended for by chance alone..

BR,
Jer

Posted by: bclapham---------------------

so how do they work with a showa twin chamber fork? i am not convinced the subtank the mutts nuts in this application

The chamber is sealed and the volume displaced by the damper rod is controlled by the ICS spring- thus, i dont understand that oil level (outer chamber) on a showa fork has any effect on damping rates. If we are slowing for a corner with the brake on and the fornt fork is compressed to the first 1/3 of the stroke- when we hit them braking bumps, we still have the 2nd third of the stroke to absorb them before we hit the 3rd third that is controlled by the airspring/oil level.

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by bclapham
so how do they work with a showa twin chamber fork?

The chamber is sealed and the volume displaced by the damper rod is controlled by the ICS spring- thus, i dont understand that oil level (outer chamber) on a showa fork has any effect on damping rates.

Bruce,
Wether open or closed cartridge how do you invison the air spring having anything to do with damping rates?

BR,
Jer

Posted by: bclapham---------------------

this is where i am confused about the whole deal, and all the hype and mis information only makes matters worse- i was led to beleive that the whole point of the airtanks was that on say a KYB fork (Enzos most popular fork) they enabled the user to run high oil levels without the harshness that would be assoicated with such a small airgap.

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

BC,
Thats good! So lets get this cleared up.. Go back and read the string..Or the article on my web site, then look at the above post.. Then ponder it, then lets talk.. There is no such thing as hype here.. We are unhypeing it, once you see the big picture the benfits will become aparent without the hype..

The above is true but some logical questions should come up? How? Why? this is a controdiction to everything we know..

Thats my point, how? and why?.. Its a strange twist of luck maybe.. thats what I find intresting, and secondly, why the attempts to logically improve it have really sucked.. To me thats fun stuff... And whats best its a case where the practical types go well all your science does not work.When in reality its just the wrong scinece being applyed beacuse the question is not understood fully... I like that alot.. Unasnerable questions don't disprove science, they are only beckoning us farther down the trail to truth one small understanding at a time..

BR,
Jer

Posted by: Yz426King---------------------

A revolution is upon us!
Is there any chance that we will see these things on factory(stock) bikes sometime in the future? I think that the sub tanks are a really good thing; however, they could be considerd a "band-aid" fix for poor suspension tuning. Wouldnt dialing in the valving BEFORE attaching the subtanks be more beneficial? At least then you would know that the tanks are in addition to good valving, instead of the tanks "fixing" valving that is inferior. A couple more questions to ponder...

Posted by: Yz426King---------------------

Lets make sure that we are all on the same page as far as tank construction and plumbing is concerned. Jer, feel free to correct me if I am wrong.
The fork caps are tapped to accept a male-male fitting. A piece of SS braided hose with a female fitting is attached to the male-male fork cap fitting. The hose is then connected to the restrictive barrier valve. The other end of the valve(which is actually integral to the top of the tank) opens into the subtank. The tanks do not have a check valve type restrictive barrier; therefore, the air coming FROM the tanks back into the forks must pass through the same restrictions that the air coming form the forks into the tanks does. (the barrier restricts both ways)

Another thing:
When the shocks are in use some of the oil will accumulate in the sub tanks, correct? Does this affect the way that the tanks will work, or will feel?(not practically, but in theory) Or, since the oil is still contained in the system, does the system still remain the same? I would think that the smaller the tanks become(because of oil ingestion) the LESS effective the would become because of their decreased volume of air past the restrictive barrier.

Well, thats all for now, but I'll be back for more...

Posted by: bedell99---------------------

Hey Jer,

I was checking out Too Tech Suspension website and his tanks include a Check Valve design to regulate the air flowing in and out of the chamber. What is your opinion of this design??

http://www.tootechracing.com/Too%20...0Advantages.htm

Erik

Posted by: KTM-Lew---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeremy Wilkey
Good question and well your the inspiration to finally put this one to the key pad.. So here goes.. Heres one for DRN as well as your reading...

So what else should this tell you? Don't buy anything with a check valve.. It will give the same bottoming effect, but you're not going to get the same plushness factor as the tanks will equalize more quickly and if your in big bumps, or you carry your wheel in the air too long your going to have issues.. It amazes me how designs can be so much more than they where intended for by chance alone..

BR,
Jer

I think this is an interesting opinion.....a friend has bought the TooTech set-up, so I guess I'll get to see how it works.

Posted by: Rcannon---------------------

Do the subranks work anythign like the forks Yamaha used in the late 70's? Remember the canisters that sat on top of the fork leg?

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

I was very interrested in Bruce's question about wether or not the sub tanks will work on a Showa fork. If I understand right, the article on Mx-tech web site says: the goal of the sub tank is to make the air spring speed sensitive. Since the Showa TC fork has a air spring in the spring chamber and is affected by oil volume in the spring chamber, does it mean the sub tank would be useful on the showa? I'm really wondering about this because I hate the fork on my stock 03cr250, so bad you have no idea. In the ads for the sub tank we always see it on kayaba and never on Showa.

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeremy Wilkey

Bruce,
Wether open or closed cartridge how do you invison the air spring having anything to do with damping rates?

BR,
Jer

My first thought was that the damping rate was changed by the air spring because the oil is under more pressure as the fork compress. I was thinking that pressure is passed on the open cartridge but not to the closed one. But then, I don't know if the oil has a different damping curve when it is under pressure. If the oil has the same damping characteristics under whatever pressure. That would mean that open or closed cartridge would not make any difference when tuning the air spring?

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

I did a search on these air tanks and there are quit a few different brands on the market, some as low as 150$ Does anyone know if say for example the tech-care tanks are as good as the ones from enzo. I even found a post on a forum where they explained how to make your own, the guy used pvc and plumbing availlable locally. Is it that easy? I guess the tanks must be made to hold a precise volume of air. Another thing I came accross is that some companies claim the normal tank such the one from enzo would have issues with oil accumulation. Is that true?

It seems the too-tech model has overcome the oil accumulation by having the air inlet lower on the tank, but the design is flawed with the check-valve(as Jeremy explained). Anyway, the too-tech tank looks so ugly on a bike I doubt anyone would buy the product anyway. I'm thinking the best design would be two air tanks with the hose mounted on the bottom as to pull back the oil in the fork when it is extended. And also one without the check-valve. I haven't seen one like this.

Posted by: bedell99---------------------

If I'm right the check valve's purpose in the too-tech design is to allow the rebound to not be affected. I think that would work better than a none check valve design. Either way the carbon fiber look of the enzo's do look the best.

Erik

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by bedell99
If I'm right the check valve's purpose in the too-tech design is to allow the rebound to not be affected. I think that would work better than a none check valve design. Either way the carbon fiber look of the enzo's do look the best.

Erik

The first post of this thread from Jeremy explains how the restriction is also helpful on the rebound stroke because it allows a delay before the tanks empty. This allows the fork to be softer on braking bumps; one thing the check valve equiped air tank won't be able to do as well.

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

Ok guys couple of things.. I see some things to comment on..

It is a speed sensitive air spring.. and it is true that the "rod charge" will be effected and that will impact the effective spring rate, but much less overall than the effect of the air chamber (air spring), so its a small factor overall whether showa or KYB.. Even though the Showa is separated it also is adding to the pressure... To the internal piston..

So beyond that influence the subtanks really have no oil damping influence...

As for the other types, all the imitations suck from a cosmetic standpoint, and I can only speculate on the function..

BR,
Jer

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Is there any oil accumulation in the tanks. How bad is it?

Posted by: mxbundy---------------------

Guess what?

This has been around before. I was reading through an old DIRT BIKE mag. from 81 and it had a story about a new TERRYCABLE fork kit that was basically the same thing as the new tanks. The only thing different was that there was only one tank with both fork caps plummed to it.
The article pointed out the same bennefits as the current systems.
So who coppied who here? FYI, that was not a flame. Just goes to show that in this day and age hardly any idea is breaking new ground, but usually just a new and improved version of an old idea.

bundy

Posted by: Jaybird---------------------

I think you are correct, Bundy.
It looks like the tanks are becoming quite popular too.
If I am not mistaken, the most important factor is the flow control valve, and not the volume of the tanks themselves. Though the tank, or tanks, need to have enough volume to allow for additional spring area, the flow both into and out of seems to be where the tuning ability lies. Also, am I correct in thinkng that it matters not if there are one or two tanks, as long as there is sufficient volume to allow spring?
I wondering, has Ross or any of the others, decided to make their own flow controls? Perhaps ones that have a click detent for a more precise setting?

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Jaybird
IIf I am not mistaken, the most important factor is the flow control valve, and not the volume of the tanks themselves.

I wondering, has Ross or any of the others, decided to make their own flow controls? Perhaps ones that have a click detent for a more precise setting?

Jaybird,

While I've not come up with anyway other than percanetge of volume changes the volume of the tank determines the rise of the internal presure, which determines how quickly the tank backfills wich is a critcal variable..So presure and volume eqauations would matter very much in the proper sizing of such a system..

As for the clicker that would be nice, but I think weight is allso a concearn and that would mean a lot more parts etc.. Ross designed a adjuster that he feels maximizes tunning range, although I think on most forks they really don't work nicely until about 2-3 out...

BR,
Jer

Posted by: Jaybird---------------------

OK, so now you've gone and blown my visual as to how they work, Jeremy.

I can understand if the tanks have too little volume that there would be a point where the air flowing into the tank would meet early resistance, past the flow valve.
But, are we relying on the tank actually being filled with the air being transfered from top of fork to canister? Or are we simply controlling that air flow for the desired effect?
In other words, I can see where too little would be bad, but I can't see the too big having an effect.
Maybe I still don't get it.

If I understand what you are saying...then would it be correct to have a subtank that holds equal volume to what is present on top of the oil in the fork?

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeremy Wilkey
...the tank determines the rise of the internal presure, which determines how quickly the tank backfills wich is a critcal variable..So presure and volume eqauations would matter very much in the proper sizing of such a system...

OK, that would make sense, pretty much like when you put air in a flat tire; at first you hear the high pitch air transfer because the pressure difference is big and the pitch lowers as the pressure in the tire rise, and the bigger the tire the longer it takes before the pitch drops. So, the volume will determine at what rate the pressure already in the tire will start to fight back the air flow and slow down the air transfer?
And so, this would be only one of the variables because the restrictive barrier (clicker) would have another damping curve of its own under pressure variation? The two together have to be a good match for the system to work I guess...lots of testing!

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

What do you guys think! I read on some forum how to use your handlebars to make a subtank. It sounded easy. You tap and deburr a hole in the center. second, you just had to measure the volume and then insert cork or neoprene plugs with jb weld to the set depth (you had found the volume needed before), and then set the wiring. It may sound very stupid but maybe it is worth giving it a shot. That way you are 100% sure not to have bottles flogging around. Perhaps a whole set of other problems... I don't know, but I sure have a couple handlebars to spare. Hmm...

Posted by: marcusgunby---------------------

How would you drain back any fluid that accumulated in the bars?would it drain back ok because the bars are higher? would it be possible that one leg would get more oil back than another? and so eventually you get very different air gaps? these are my initial thoughts.

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Good point! I wonder if those who have installed the Too-Tech system (one big tank in front of handlebars) have encountered the same problem. That would be a common problem for them too. Oh, and that's not all, I was told the Too-tech system is actually from Bimba air cylinders. I did a search on ebay for bimba and came up with many tanks that look just alike. Marcus do you have info on how much oil collects after x amount of riding time for the enzo type tanks? Perhaps the fact that on a system that lies above the fork (one big tank), the oil doesn't have time to collect much before being drained back down. I really wonder because the handlebar idea makes it cheap to try.

Posted by: marcusgunby---------------------

From that post on thumpertalk it looks like the whole bimba setup is cheap to copy and try out,someone posted all the part nos etc.

Ive have never rode with a set of tanks but want to try a set out, they will however interfer with my quick adjusters on the showas so i have held off at present.

Posted by: NO HAND---------------------

Yeah, on the post you see some pictures of hand made projects that look more like hot water tanks. I'm pretty sure the volume must be way too big. The bad thing about those projects is that if you don't like it you are left with butchered fork caps. As soon as I can get the precise volume of the too-tech unit (supposedly around 50cc), I'm gonna start working on some spare renthal handlebars. Figuring out the wiring and finding the right clicker adjuster will be next. I hope I can find some trick aluminum couplers and adjuster. I'd hate to have to carry big industrial plumbing.

Posted by: marcusgunby---------------------

thats the thing that has put me off so far-the plumbing etc.Trouble is anything too small might be too weak for mx and woods riding.Those nylon tubes look to weak IMO.As for the caps i dont think they are that expensive to replace and you can get a new plug made the same thread as the adapter.

Posted by: russ17---------------------

The thing that concerns me, even with the too tech or bimba is, from my understanding is that it is a single cylinder. As Marcus pointed out on the bars, how can you be assured that there will be equal disburstment back into the forks. It seems to me just leaning the bike in a turn could possibly allow more oil to drain back into one fork then the other. Now if there is separate chambers with in the tank, then I can see equal fork oil being returned to both sides.

Russ

Posted by: Jeremy Wilkey---------------------

Guys I know I can take a little flack for this... But in the name of improvements, and mad science, I can respect all your efforts.. And I really mean that..

However IMO if you want to experience the best, quickest, most safe way to do this, buy some REAL sub tanks, designed BY the MAN himself.. Ross MAEDA.. Besides you need something to compare it too...

If your after the grail, well search on, but I get really upset about about people wanting to make "cheap" copies... There is so much piracy in this business its sick... Have some respect.. This is one more example for most people about how not to do something..

But If you really wanted to make a better sub... The restrictive barrier should be a variable orifice, not a fixed orifice variable orifice.. Also its possible to design a system that has a highly tunable position aspect as well.. But I'm working, on those improvments with with Ross and a Much respected forum member.. I'm sure you guys could come up with some good ideas too, and then they are yours!

So guys work on something better... Not cheaper.....

BR,
Jer

Posted by: svi---------------------

Quote:

Originally posted by Jeremy Wilkey

So guys work on something better... Not cheaper.....

BR,
Jer

LMAO...The most awesome quote of the year!

Posted by: DEANSFASTWAY---------------------

Heres a laugh for you . the first chamber project I had was a woodsies 00 CR250 that he was running one summer . We were trying to get a real supple fork with good bottoming resistance . We took the CRs triple clamp off and sealed off the front of each frame spar and then plumbed the fork caps to the spars. We used firm plastic hospital type tubing . We purchased in line filters like the kind your dentist has on his air powered dental tools and thought that we could keep the oil out of the spars . We ran like 420ml oil or so and ended up with a really nice fork after we tried tuning the lines with ground down main jets pushed inside the tubing . We thought about using a check valve but never followed up. The forks seemed way plusher but seemed rather McGuyver in retrospect. I think the chamber was too big actually. I guess we also indirectly did it on a KTM (ZOKES)once to try and stop the seals leaking We plumbed the fork tops into the frame instead of adding bleeders on the caps. Those enduro bikes handlebars can be so busy that you cant find the bleeders very easily.We thought the forks were pumping up so bad We even tried a automotive PCV valve inline on the KTMS ,It actually worked really good in rocks and roots.The PCV valve was a good idea except that I though maybe The forks actually Sucked dirt in the seals upon rebounding. Actually those seals probably worked better with a bit of pressure on the pushing them against the tubes. I guess it was mainly dirt in the seals that was the worst thing . One Husky guy would get sprayed with oil when he rode a longer event and the seals blew out and sprayed oil all over his jersey. We were trying alot of things like double stacked seals. Double springs on the seals etc.First the blue seals then the black seals.Nobody really liked the looks of fork boots until they tried them and the forks stayed clean and didnt leak much. P.S. I know someone will read this post and say what a jackass, but at least I can say is I learned something. CHEERS DEAN

Posted by: marcusgunby---------------------

If you dont try, you dont learn-quote for today.

Posted by: bclapham---------------------

and just remember, the most important discovery known to man was found by growing some mould on a saucer and forgetting about it and leaving it on the window ledge for a few weeks- ive seen a couple of noble prizes get given from people messing up- one guy didnt bother doing his chemistry the right way (ie being lazy and not purifying things properply). something went wrong, he looked into it and opened up a whole new branch of science!

Posted by: DEANSFASTWAY---------------------

One time I had some science growing between my toes , does that count?

Posted by: SuperPro---------------------

As far as I know, the bimba tanks come with a piston in them, people were discussing pulling out the rod and just jbwleding the piston in the center of the tank, which would create a 'perfect' seal inbetween your new individual fork based tank. You'd have to add two bleeders, and if I was going to try it I'd try adding a slight angle to the inside of the tanks(lose some cc's, gain possibly more oil coming back in?). I'd try it but I don't want to rape the fork caps on my xr4 just yet.

Posted by: ShawnMc---------------------

The system I built uses a single bimba reservior/tank in the center. I cross plumbed the forks and ran them both into one side of the tank and mounted a bleeder in the other side.

For metering, I used the bimba flow control valves that do "freeflow" back.

Here is what you have to know about the bimba valve. While it does have a "check" in it, it doesnt "free" flow back. There is some resistance in the backflow because the check valve is an elastomer type, almost like fork seal, type seal.

When you take this into consideration, you have a static adjustment for the "rebound" airflow. Probably not ideal, but Im still experimenting.

As far as sizing of the tank goes; I had played with the oil voume trying to dial the bottoming and plushness. I found my best plushness at 350cc (03 CR450F) but the bit hit/bottoming resistance was almost zero. At 400cc the bottoming resistance was spectacular. So I figured I wanted to add roughly 50-60cc of air volume to each fork with a valve. My tank measures 106cc, then ya got the lines. So Ive probably got a total of 120cc of volume.

After riding my system which is basically a TooTech style setup, the only thing I encountered that I hadnt anticipated was it seems to work best with one extra click in the rebound.

I share the opinion of Mr. Wilkey on the plastic tubing aspect. It cant, and isnt very durable. Although, it does and can work. My first system used this, while I was still undecided on how I would plumb my set up. I rode it with the plastic tubing once, and it worked fine.

One thing I would like to address is oil migration or the lack of the tank setups on the Showa fork. I rode my plastic tubed set up for an entire day and had zero oil migration. I think this will be unique to the Showa because of the route the air has to take to get out of the outer chamber. It vents through the blowout holes in the inner damber which works like a baffle apparently. As most tuners will tell you, when you do the oil change on a Showa you dont get much out of the holes in the inner damper and the volume of air passing through those holes is significant when your changing the compression ratio, but not in terms of volume that could be carrying an oil mist.

I've got some experience with the Enzo setup. I had it on a 426 prior to me picking up the CRF. I didnt play with the Enzo set up as much as I should have. I also think that they may have gotten the oil level too high on mine simply because I couldn't tell the difference in the fork at all, or the valves were closed too far or something. I wasnt happy.

At any rate, the "damping spike" that I experienced on the CRF with the oil level at 400cc is gone. Bottoming is gone and it seems to work great.

Also much of the sub-tank hackery that NoHand is/was refering to is on Thumpertalk, and I'll agree there are some really ugly things happening over there

Text Version Home

This is the text version of DirtRider.Net Click Here for the Full Version

How subtanks really work..

This is the text version of DirtRider.Net
Click Here for the Full Version