Forces at rear brake caliper of motorcycle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on designing a rear brake caliper for a motorcycle, emphasizing the need for a torque arm or brake stay to prevent rotation during braking. The user seeks to understand the forces involved and whether positioning the brake stay farther from the axle is more effective than closer placement. It is suggested that the effectiveness of force application relates to where the force is applied on a lever, with optimal force occurring at the end of the lever. Additionally, modern motorcycles often utilize a tab on the swingarm instead of a long torque arm, which may simplify the design. The overall conclusion is that the angle of the torque arm relative to the mounting point and axle is crucial, regardless of its length.
jcw
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Looking for some help with a rear brake caliper design.

The rear caliper bolts to a carrier that slides onto and rotates around an axle. An torque arm (motorcycle term) or brake stay is required to prevent the caliper from rotating when the rear brake is applied.

I have to figure a way to fabricate a brake stay and was trying to determine the forces involved and whether mounting the brake stay as far from the axle as possible is better than closer to the axle. I mean does the force on the bolts holding the brake stay in place increase as the distance from the axle decreases.

torque arm.jpg


Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jcw said:
... A torque arm ... is required to prevent the caliper from rotating when the rear brake is applied.
So, how would you push something to stop it rotating?
Say, for eg, I held a stick out horizontally and tried to turn on the spot, rotating about my vertical axis. To stop me you would push the stick in the opposite direction. For most effect, where would you push on the stick? At the end, in the middle, near where I'm holding it?
In what direction would you push? Like, at 45o to the stick, perpendicular to the stick, parallel to the stick, etc.? (Rough estimates will do.)

If that tells you the optimum way to push, presumably any other way is less effective and requires more force, which has to be provided by the mounting bolt.

Edit: PS there may be another consideration - the bending of the trailing arm.
 
  • Like
Likes jcw
Thanks. I knew that was probably the answer but I wanted to make sure I wasn't completely off base.
Modern motorbikes instead of a long torque arm use a tab on the swingarm that fits in a slot on the brake stay.

http://burntrubber-burntrubbermotor.netdna-ssl.com/21100-large_default/kawasaki-zx10r-rear-brake-caliper-bracket.jpg

This is a picture of what I'm having to adapt to an older motorbike that previously used a long plate or torque arm.

I'm thinking the length of the torque arm doesn't matter as long as the angle of the arm to the mounting point and axle is the same.
And taken to the extreme, a simple tab on the swingarm is the same.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top