New Andersen WD hitch
A fellow camper bud showed me this. It's new and different. Anyone using one? Andersen WD hitches A U-tube video with the factory guy explaining it. You have to get past MR Truck doing his...
Forum Discussion
Maybe an oblique direction into a necessary rat hole...how does a
coupler work and the metrics there of
As for visualization in the mind vs seeing a video, not everyone can
decipher whatever from eyeballing it either
By visualization, I mean to be able to 'see' in ones mind what computer
simulation does. Of course not the depths that a computer can, nor
have the DB that a computer has...but...some folks DB is deeper than
a computer's DB in some areas. Nor is the programer of that simulation
all that well versed in that design 'enough'...garbage in...garbage out
Actually, in order to fully 'see' a ball inside a coupler, the coupler
either has to be transparent and/or instrumented to simulate a visualization
of it in a dynamic situation
This is where computer simulation and/or a persons ability to mentally
do a similar simulation.
Like the wiper arm analogy. Yes it is a good one and has differences
on how those moments are imparted on the end components. Main difference
is that it is an over center mechanism. Whereas the Anderson is not,
that is the elegance of their design, but, they are now placing
the forces on a component that 'I' think a weak link in their design
The Anderson design imparts the moment on the TV using the same moment
on the hitch ball/shank. Whereas a traditional WD system does not
place any WD forces on the ball nor the coupler...other than moves
some of the tongue weight back onto the tongue. Also, the force
vector is 90* from a traditional WD Hitch Spring Bars vector
Couplers were/are not designed for that and why my first sentence
Reference to getting at that weak link of the Anderson food chain
In order to get past that weak link (some don't think so), one must
understand how it works both in a static condition and in 'ALL' dynamic
conditions
The margins of that component/system must be known and understood
in reference to the specification (it's application...the bigge
question is whether they spec'd it out for the kind of loads the
Anderson Hitch system imparts on it)
Then come to a resolution whether those forces are detrimental or not
coupler work and the metrics there of
As for visualization in the mind vs seeing a video, not everyone can
decipher whatever from eyeballing it either
By visualization, I mean to be able to 'see' in ones mind what computer
simulation does. Of course not the depths that a computer can, nor
have the DB that a computer has...but...some folks DB is deeper than
a computer's DB in some areas. Nor is the programer of that simulation
all that well versed in that design 'enough'...garbage in...garbage out
Actually, in order to fully 'see' a ball inside a coupler, the coupler
either has to be transparent and/or instrumented to simulate a visualization
of it in a dynamic situation
This is where computer simulation and/or a persons ability to mentally
do a similar simulation.
Like the wiper arm analogy. Yes it is a good one and has differences
on how those moments are imparted on the end components. Main difference
is that it is an over center mechanism. Whereas the Anderson is not,
that is the elegance of their design, but, they are now placing
the forces on a component that 'I' think a weak link in their design
The Anderson design imparts the moment on the TV using the same moment
on the hitch ball/shank. Whereas a traditional WD system does not
place any WD forces on the ball nor the coupler...other than moves
some of the tongue weight back onto the tongue. Also, the force
vector is 90* from a traditional WD Hitch Spring Bars vector
Couplers were/are not designed for that and why my first sentence
Reference to getting at that weak link of the Anderson food chain
In order to get past that weak link (some don't think so), one must
understand how it works both in a static condition and in 'ALL' dynamic
conditions
The margins of that component/system must be known and understood
in reference to the specification (it's application...the bigge
question is whether they spec'd it out for the kind of loads the
Anderson Hitch system imparts on it)
Then come to a resolution whether those forces are detrimental or not
