Optimising the Handling

Behaviour of a Vehicle with

McPherson Front Suspension and
Twist Beam Rear Suspension
Using ADAMS/CAR
GianClaudio Travaglio
Matteo Lanzavecchia

Alfa Romeo Vehicle Dynamics Department

Arjeplog
Balocco
Nurburgring

IDIADA
Nard

New Car Development

Suspension layout:
McPherson Front Suspension
Twist Beam Rear Suspension

Handling_Ride behaviour:
ALFA Philosophy
Benchmarking

Virtual PROTOTYPE

New Car Development

Suspension Analysis
Optimization of Characteristic Curves

Steering
Wheel Travel (Parallel and Opposite)
Longitudinal and Lateral Loads

Full Vehicle Analysis

Steady state circular run
Steer wheel Step With Steering Wheel Release
Steer Frequency Response
Iso Lane Change (with ADAMS/Driver)
3D Road Simulations

Twist Beam Rear Suspension

Use of FBG (Flexible Body Generator) in ADAMS/Car environment due

to the following reasons:
Faster
User Friendly
Suitable for Vehicle Dynamics Engineers

Than any other FEM Programs

Previous Validation of the FBG-model on existing twist beams

NASTRAN Mesh Simulations

Real prototype Bench-Tests

Flexible Body Generation

FBG Parameters Setup for twist beams

Thickness
Cross Sections
Geometry
......

Twist Beam Suspension Analysis

25% 33% 50%

+/- 10mm

100%
0%

The percentage indicates the distance between the

attach to body (0%) and the wheel center (100%)

Twist Beam Suspension Analysis

0o
FRONT

FRONT

180
FRONT

90o

270o
FRONT

Suspension Analysis: Lateral Load

Lateral Force Fy
TOE_IN
0.40

toe angle [deg]

0.25

-400

0.30
0.20
0.10

0.5

Fy [kg]

0.00
-300

-200

-100

-0.10
-0.20

crosslink_0.25_0
crosslink_0.5_0

-0.30
-0.40

100

200

300

400

Lateral Force Fy
TOE_IN (crosslink 0.25)
0.50

< > v

0.40

0.30

toe angle [deg]

0.20

-400

0.10

Fy [kg]

0.00
-300

-200

-100

0
-0.10

-0.20

-0.30

-0.40

-0.50

100

200

300

400

Suspension Analysis
OppositeTravel

Opposite Travel
TOE_IN (Crosslink 0.25; 0.33; 0.5)
0.5

0.4

toe angle [deg]

0.3
0.2

< >

0.1

wheel travel [mm]

0
-50

-40

-30

-20

-10 -0.1 0
-0.2
-0.3
-0.4
-0.5

10

20

30

40

50

Suspension Analysis
OppositeTravel With Differents Vertical Loads

TOE Variation
with different loads (crosslink 0.25)

-50

TOE_IN

0.5

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

0.1

wheel travel [mm]

0
-40

-30

-20

-10 -0.1 0

10

20

30

40

50

-0.2
A_0

toe angle [deg]

toe angle [deg]

TOE_IN

0.1
0

-50

-30

-20

A_90

-0.4

0.5

0.4

0.4

0.3

0.3

0.2

0.2

wheel travel [mm]

-0.2
A_180

-0.3

A_180_F

-0.4
-0.5

10

20

30

40

50

toe angle [deg]

toe angle [deg]

0.5

-10 -0.1 0

40

50

TOE_IN

0
-20

30

wheel travel [mm]

-0.5

0.1
-30

20

-0.4

TOE_IN

-40

10

-0.3

A_90_F

-0.5

-50

-10 -0.1 0
-0.2

-0.3

A_0_F

-40

0.1
0
-50

-40

-30

-20

-10-0.1 0
-0.2

A_270
A_270_F

-0.3
-0.4
-0.5

10

20

30

40

50

wheel travel [mm]

TOE Variation With different loads

crosslink 0.25 and 0.5 (< orientation)
0.5

0.4

0.5

0.3

0.25

0.2

toe angle [deg]

0.1

-50

0
-40

-30

-20

-10

0
-0.1

-0.2

-0.3

-0.4

-0.5

10

20

30

40

wheel travel [mm]

50

Roll Center Height

200.00

180.00
160.00
140.00

>

120.00
100.00
80.00
60.00

<

>
<
v

40.00
20.00
0.00

CROSSLINK 0.25

CROSSLINK 0.5

Virtual Bench Test Sinthesys

Cross link position (0.25, 0.33, 0.5)

TOE with Lateral Load
Roll Center Height

Cross link orientation ( ^ , < , > , v )

TOE Asimetric Wheel Travel
TOE Variation Empty and Full Load

Full-Vehicle Analyses: Steering Wheel Step

Full-Vehicle Analyses: Steering Wheel Step

Steering Wheel

Roll Center
H = 80 mm
Side Slip

Roll Center
H = 150 mm

CLOSED LOOP SIMULATION

By a simple twist beam model (FBG generated) it is possible to

realize a closed loop simulation to optimize vehicle handling
behaviour

To compare different twist beam means to use the same total

Roll Stiffness and Front/Rear Roll Stifness Distribution. This
produces different TOE and Roll Center conditions and starts
the Closed Loop Simulation

The most suitable twist beam solutions found with FBG have to
be completed with CAD Design, FEM Analysis and Real
Prototype Bench Testing

CONCLUSIONS

FBG is a very powerful method to optimize Twist Beam Rear

Suspension

Easy closed loop simulation is the main advantage of the

method

With this tool in A/Car environment it has been possible to

optimize handling behaviour of a middle class car with
Mcpherson front and Twist Beam rear

Vehicle dynamics engineers have mainly worked on the project

Design engineers for CAD/FEM simulations and real prototypes

bench test have concentrated their work on the 3 best solutions