34 replies to this topic

[Tmeranda]

Mercedes Benz seems to have popularized the space frame construction with their 1954 300SL. Anyone else earlier?

[Bloggsworth]

Mercedes Benz seems to have popularized the space frame construction with their 1954 300SL. Anyone else earlier?

Several aircraft manufacturers.

[uechtel]

AFM Formula 2 1949

[Tim Murray]

In the earlier thread below, the Chamberlain Special of the late '20s was the earliest spaceframe chassis anyone could suggest:

The first spaceframe chassis?

[David Birchall]

My Aston DB2 has a chassis that can be described as 'space frame'. Mercedes were certainly not pioneers in that regard.

[Allan Lupton]

My Aston DB2 has a chassis that can be described as 'space frame'. Mercedes were certainly not pioneers in that regard.

Difficult to argue with someone who's got one, but I'd always thought of the DB2 as having a normal chassis with a superleggera body.

This shows it quite well I'd say:
Link to cutaway

Edited by Allan Lupton, 01 April 2011 - 17:29.

[venator]

Around WW2 Aston Martin developed a prototype 4-door car called the Atom. It had a patented space frame. U.S. Patent 1828743 (application date 1929) by a John G. Lovell, of Spokane, Washington, shows a space frame car chassis. I do not know if it was ever built. I have seen space frame bus chassis patents going back into the first decade of the twentieth century. Space frame railway cars were patented and built from the middle of the 1850s on, though never produced in very large numbers. Bloggsworth is correct about the aircraft manufacturers, as well.

[Flathead]

To my best knowledge Derek Buckler was the first to market a space-framed car in Great Britain. His prototype Buckler was made in 1946-47 and replicas were advertised for sale in 1949.

He was unsuccessful in obtaining a patent for the idea because the Patents office considered it would infringe that of the tubular chassied De Dion Bouton around the turn of the century.

There is also a lot of pedantic debate about what exactly is a "space-frame" and when that term was first coined. A debate that is unlikeley to ever be resolved.

De Dion 1898 quadricycle "Space Frame" ? :

Edited by Flathead, 01 April 2011 - 19:22.

[David Birchall]

Difficult to argue with someone who's got one, but I'd always thought of the DB2 as having a normal chassis with a superleggera body.

This shows it quite well I'd say:
Link to cutaway

Sorry Allan but that is incorrect! The DB2 does not use a Superlegera body structure-despite the latest publication from the Aston Heritage Trust stating it does! The first Aston to use the Superleggera principle was the DB4. The DB2 has a space frame chassis-developed from the "Atom" mentioned above-with a coachbuilt body incorporated into it. I have just spent the last two hours lying under mine and I can assure you this is correct

[Sharman]

Sorry Allan but that is incorrect! The DB2 does not use a Superlegera body structure-despite the latest publication from the Aston Heritage Trust stating it does! The first Aston to use the Superleggera principle was the DB4. The DB2 has a space frame chassis-developed from the "Atom" mentioned above-with a coachbuilt body incorporated into it. I have just spent the last two hours lying under mine and I can assure you this is correct

You beat me to it david although I was going to cite the publicity brouhaha on the introduction of the DB4

[Doug Nye]

Robert Waddy's wondrous 'Fuzzi' special of the 1930s might be worth considering ... as might Count Carlo Felice Trossi's Trossi-Monaco... But then there's the 1904 100mph Gobron-Brillie, for example - and there's the multi-tubular-chassised racing car which Rudolf Uhlenhaut drew at the end of World War 2 - and there's Dante Giacosa's quantity-production 1946 Cisitalia D46 single-seater for Piero Dusio's CISItalia racing circus ... etc etc.

But to assess a true 'spaceframe' I believe that if you imagine a multi-tubular structure in which every tube junction is a multi-directional flexible joint - or perhaps a length of floppy cloth - yet the overall structure still maintains its intended formation (because every single component part resides either in tension or compression), then the design has achieved its aim.

DCN

Edited by Doug Nye, 01 April 2011 - 19:42.

[David Birchall]

But, you cannot get the engine, the driver or any other part in or out!

[David McKinney]

The DB2 appears to be a regular twin-tube chassis with some horizontal cross-bracing, surmounted by a body-framework of smaller tubes. Not a spaceframe by most definitions

[Allan Lupton]

Sorry Allan but that is incorrect! The DB2 does not use a Superlegera body structure-despite the latest publication from the Aston Heritage Trust stating it does! The first Aston to use the Superleggera principle was the DB4. The DB2 has a space frame chassis-developed from the "Atom" mentioned above-with a coachbuilt body incorporated into it. I have just spent the last two hours lying under mine and I can assure you this is correct

As I said, being up against someone who has one puts me at a disadvantage.
What about that cutaway, though - is it wrong? No sign of a spaceframe in that but one can see a very clear, diagonally-braced planeframe, kicked up at the rear to pass over the axle. The sidemembers seem to be made of two separate parallel box sections which are more of a pair of girders than anything else. There seems not to be any structural member above floor level past the doors, a sine qua non for a true spaceframe.
The front suspension towers are braced back to the firewall and forward to what one might call dumbirons but there is no crossbrace.

As Doug says, the true spaceframe would work with pin joints in place of welds, and therefore its members are not required to carry any bending moments - although the structure does do so, and very well too.

Edited to add that David McK's post appeared whilst I was tryping mine up.

Edited by Allan Lupton, 01 April 2011 - 20:46.

[David Birchall]

The DB2 appears to be a regular twin-tube chassis with some horizontal cross-bracing, surmounted by a body-framework of smaller tubes. Not a spaceframe by most definitions

Rather more complicated than that David--it is not a space frame I am prepared to concede but it is not a conventional chassis by any means. The coupe body (I ignore the convertible as a pansy car) adds stiffness as well of course since it is attached all round the firewall, along steel sills that are not shown hear and at the rear wheel arches.



Uploaded with ImageShag.us[/ur



Uploaded with [URL=http://imageshack.us]ImageShag.us

Edited by David Birchall, 01 April 2011 - 22:26.

[fbarrett]

Friends:

OK, are we agreed that the Mercedes-Benz 300SL was the first production car with a space frame?

What was the last production, street-legal car that did so? Is there a currently produced street-legal car that uses a space frame?

Frank

[Mistron]

The Ariel Atom, and I'm sure there are others

The Ginetta G4 continuation cars also spring to mind.

[D-Type]

When did the Lotus Eleven appear? Was it ahead of the 300SL?

[David Birchall]

No. The Lotus Eight, as mentioned somewhere here, had a pure space frame but they had to dismantle the engine to get it in and out!
Chapman applied the lesson learned of course and some of his later cars had removable sections in the engine bay that triangulated the bay.

Edited by David Birchall, 01 April 2011 - 22:54.

[D-Type]

Sorry, I didn't make myself clear. I was asking whether the Lotus Eleven was offered for sale before the 300SL. If so, then it could claim to be the first spaceframe production car.
On investigation I found that as the Lotus Eleven didn't appear until 1956 the 300SL beats it anyway

Edited by D-Type, 02 April 2011 - 17:58.

[David McKinney]

But the spaceframe Lotus VI dates from 1952

[Tuboscocca]

What about the Ferraris with the famous 'Tuboscocca' spaceframe??
At least 12-15 were built (=production??). The types were 212 Tuboscocca, 225 S, 250S and 340 Mexico .
All were produced around 1951/52 and were real spaceframes ( Gilco) including roofconstructions...

Just a thought

Michael

[David McKinney]

I'm not an expert on this, but weren't they similar to the example of the DB2 as illustrated? In other words, a basic tubular chassis with smaller tubes to act as body formers

[Tuboscocca]

I'm not an expert on this, but weren't they similar to the example of the DB2 as illustrated? In other words, a basic tubular chassis with smaller tubes to act as body formers

Hi David

there is a really wonderful website on GILCO (now Trafiltubi):

http://www.gilcodesi...rrari212S_a.htm (shows one frame of the 212 S (nevera official Ferrari designation).


And the webpage of Trafiltubi

http://www.trafiltub...g/chisiamo2.htm

In my eyes a real space frame??

Regards Michael

[Tim Murray]

IMHO not nearly enough triangulation to be considered a spaceframe.

[David McKinney]

I would accept it as a spaceframe if the upper tubes connected the front to the rear (and, agreed, preferably triangulated)

[Tuboscocca]

I would accept it as a spaceframe if the upper tubes connected the front to the rear (and, agreed, preferably triangulated)

300SL chassis was well triangulated, but apart from this 'inpractical' sills--absolutely no roof (supporting)construction--opposite to the Gilco/Ferrari design...

Regards Michael

[David McKinney]

Agreed

That's why the 300SL, with upper and lower longitudinal chassis tubes of similar diameter, could be described as a spaceframe, but not the tuboscocca Ferraris (or the Aston Martin DB2), which had only lower main tubes, with smaller-diameter tubes to take the body

Edited by David McKinney, 03 April 2011 - 14:31.

[David Birchall]

Agreed

That's why the 300SL, with upper and lower longitudinal chassis tubes of similar diameter, could be described as a spaceframe, but not the tuboscocca Ferraris (or the Aston Martin DB2), which had only lower main tubes, with smaller-diameter tubes to take the body

Er, David, that is incorrect-take another look at the DB2 chassis it is not as you describe.

[David McKinney]

Nope, still can't see any evidence of a second row of chassis tubes the same diameter as the lower ones

[D-Type]

This discussion is going in circles. In the earlier The first spaceframe chassis? thread, Anders explained very well what constitutes a space frame.

If I can paraphrase what he said, the acid test is "What happens in torsion?". Clamp 3 wheels (or corners) and jack up the fourth. How does the frame resist the displacement? If the members bend or twist then it isn't a true "space frame": if, on the other hand they stretch or shorten then it is one. Both the DB2 and the Ferrari resist torsion by the main members, particularly those each side of the cockpit, bending and twisting by different amounts so neither car has a 3-dimensional space frame.

[David Birchall]

Nope, still can't see any evidence of a second row of chassis tubes the same diameter as the lower ones

How about now?


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

I have attempted to draw in the box section sills (steel) that attach to the chassis rails below the doors and act as torsion boxes much like an E Type Jag. This is not a space frame but is not a conventional chassis by any means-neither is the Ferrari chassis which lasted in modified form until the GTO

[David McKinney]

OK, I agree the engine bay approaches spaceframe requirements, and I ignored the second row in the middle section

But you said it: "This is not a spaceframe"

Edited by David McKinney, 04 April 2011 - 05:48.

[Ray Bell]

It does seem to lack triangulation...

Let's call it a complicated ladder frame?

[David Birchall]

I'm just playing devil's advocate now for the sake of discussion.
The Ferrari 250 SWB of 1961:


Uploaded with ImageShack.us

Not a space frame perhaps but by the time you add that gorgeous bodywork it must have been pretty stiff!

edit: photos from Jesse Pourret's wonderful book.

Edited by David Birchall, 04 April 2011 - 18:35.