As long as the additional force required is directly proportional to the deflection, that is linear. F=kx. Spring rate k is constant.Bryanccfshr said:Not by definition. Of course spring rate is not linear anyway so as the spring compresses it takes increasingly more force to continue the compression.
You are correct on the constant22RToy said:As long as the additional force required is directly proportional to the deflection, that is linear. F=kx. Spring rate k is constant.
In a progressive spring, the rate is a function of the deflection, say F=(k+.1x)x. As the deflection increases, the spring rate increases.
Of course, this is all in theory.
You could not have said it any better. I'm an engineer and I can tell you first hand that there can be a huge difference between theory and reality! On the other hand, sometimes you calculate something and it works out perfect. Who knows.22RToy said:Yeah, theory looks nice on paper, but doesn't reflect reality.
Ah, but can you safely assume that a linear spring and a progressive spring can have the same spring rate? By definition, I don't think you can. However, I would agree that a progressive spring would feel more comfortable than a linear one. With less weight, the rate is lower, and can soak up little bumps more effectively yet handle larger bumps as the weight increases.P1michaud said:Assuming they are both of the same lenght, #/in rating the only difference being progressive or not, I would think that the progressive springs would give a much nicer ride.