981 with PDK still need DMFW

[stephen wilson]

The clutch is completely different on the PDK, and there's 2 of them , so they would have to find a different solution than the DMF.
2009 Porsche Panamera Gets Techy With Dual-Clutch Gearbox, Active Aerodynamics - Motor Trend WOT
( the Panamera is the first pic. I found )

[sb01box]

where I'm going with this is to link PDK mechanical design to DMFW - LWFW discussion where using LWFW will disrupt (alter) the harmonics of the crank and result in breakage.

[stephen wilson]

You're trying to make a connection where there is none.

[sb01box]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

You're trying to make a connection where there is none.

I thought there's two features to DMFW.
1) decouples the trans from the engine when the clutch is fully engaged so as not to have two resonance beat on each other. didn't think that the difference in the clutch (wet or dry or "other") had any impact.
2) easier clutch engagement by not transferring the engine power pulse directly to the wheel.

my car has 137K miles, clutch is still good but it's getting there. so I am thinking about the LWFW path as an alternative to DMFW

[stephen wilson]

LWFW's have been discussed a ton here, some experts like JFP says it's a very bad idea, but others have run them for years with no issues. Do a search, read up, and make your decision. The PDK solution does not apply.

[sb01box]

Originally Posted by stephen wilson

LWFW's have been discussed a ton here, some experts like JFP says it's a very bad idea, but others have run them for years with no issues. Do a search, read up, and make your decision. The PDK solution does not apply.

I am not trying to be argumentative. I have looked up DMFW and in Luk's web site, there is fair amount of engineering articles on DMFW.
my question is this. two different, but basically manual transmission. one, the clutch is controlled by the driver uses DMFW, the other is computer controlled.does not appear to have such resonance isolator.
the same fundamental engine and transmission resonances exists.
so WHY "the PDK solution does not apply"? just asking a technical question.

[stephen wilson]

The PDK does not have a traditional flywheel like the 986. From what I've read, the DMFW dampens crankshaft harmonics, like old V8's have a harmonic balancer on the front. I honestly don't know what they use to counter harmonics on the PDK, or the Tiptronic for that matter. You may want to add a dampened underdrive pulley in addition to the LWFW. I'll be the first to admit I don't have all the answers.

[Cloudsurfer]

Originally Posted by sb01box

I am not trying to be argumentative. I have looked up DMFW and in Luk's web site, there is fair amount of engineering articles on DMFW.
my question is this. two different, but basically manual transmission. one, the clutch is controlled by the driver uses DMFW, the other is computer controlled.does not appear to have such resonance isolator.
the same fundamental engine and transmission resonances exists.
so WHY "the PDK solution does not apply"? just asking a technical question.

The DMFW is there to both dampen harmonics of the crank (the same way that many engines use a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley, while all but the M97 do not) AND to provide some "squish" from driveline shock getting transmitted to the crank (the alternative here being a sprung clutch friction disk).

The latter part of this is why the PDK cars do not need a DMFW. Due to the nature of being computer controlled (i.e. smooth, perfectly rev matched shifts EVERY time) and the fact that there are two clutches, one between the engine and gearbox/ one between the gearbox to the halfshafts, the "squish" factor is not needed.

Now, I'm not sure if the DFI motors are running a harmonic damper on the front crank pulley or not (haven't gotten to play with one of these yet), but I imagine they have to be damping harmonics somewhere.