camp-n-family wrote:
I'm no scientist but wouldn't under sized bars mean less bar stiffness and more flex. Weak bars would lead to increased bar curvature (flex)before sufficient weight could be transferred.---
A more flexible (less stiff) bar is not necessarily "weaker".
For example two bars of the same length -- one with constant cross-section and one with tapered cross-section -- could withstand the same tip force.
The bar with constant cross-section will have maximum bending stress at the front end, and the stress will vary linearly to zero at the rear end.
The bar with tapered cross-section can be designed for constant bending stress over the length of the bar.
The bar with tapered cross-section can be lighter and more flexible while having the same design load -- as with airplane wings.
---Therefor weaker bars would require more head tilt to achieve the same weight transfer, due to the increased flex, than a stiffer bar would.
In general, a
more flexible bar would require more rearward tilt to achieve the same load transfer.
The Blue Ox Sway Pro is a good example of this.
A major advantage to a more flexible bar is that there is less change in bar load when the rear tires of the TV go through a dip or over a hump.
With a relatively stiff bar such as used in the Equal-I-zer WDH, there will be a relatively large increase in bar load (hence, load transfer) when the rear of the TV goes down.
With a relatively flexible bar such as used in the Blue Ox Sway Pro, the load increase would be relatively small.
The load on the more flexible bar would remain closer to its "static load".
Another advantage to a more flexible bar is that it is easier to "fine tune" the load transfer.
Adding one washer or decreasing by one link under tension will not cause such a large change in load transfer as with a stiffer bar.
Ron
