J.Cent.SouthUniv.

(2013) 20: 902910

DOI: 10.1007/s1177101315641

Optimizationofsuspensionsystemofoffroadvehiclefor
vehicleperformanceimprovement
M.MahmoodiKaleibar1,I.Javanshir2,K.Asadi2,A.Afkar3,A.Paykani1
1.Departmentof MechanicalEngineering,ParandBranch,IslamicAzadUniversity,Parand,Iran
2.Schoolof Mechanical Engineering,IranUniversityofScienceandTechnology,Tehran,Iran
3.Schoolof AutomotiveEngineering,IranUniversityofScienceandTechnology,Tehran,Iran
CentralSouthUniversityPressandSpringerVerlagBerlinHeidelberg2013
Abstract: Vehicle suspension design includes a number of compromises to provide good leveling of stability and ride comfort.
Optimization of offroad vehicle suspension system is one of the most effective methods, which could considerably enhance the
vehiclestabilityandcontrollability.Inthiswork,acomprehensiveoptimizationofanoffreadvehiclesuspensionsystemmodelwas
carriedoutusingsoftwareADAMS.Thegeometricparametersofsuspensionsystemwereoptimizedusinggeneticalgorithm(GA)in
awaythatridecomfort,handlingandstabilityofvehiclewereimproved.Theresultsofoptimizedsuspensionsystemandvariations
ofgeometricparametersduetoroadroughnessanddifferentsteeringangleswerepresentedinADAMSandtheresultsofoptimized
and conventional suspension systems during various driving maneuvers were compared. The simulation results indicate that the
camber angle variations decrease by the optimized suspension system, resulting in improved handling and ride comfort
characteristics.
Key words:optimizedsuspensionsystemstabilityridecomfort vehicledoublewishbonesuspensionsystemmodel

1Introduction
Vehicle ride comfort and handling stability are the
main performances for the modern offroad vehicles.
When vehicle is in motion, the vibration from the road
surface factors negatively impacts on ride comfort,
handling stability and auto speed, and consequently can
alsodamagevehiclepartsandcomponents.Thepurpose
ofavehiclessuspensionsystemistoisolatethevehicle
from the uncomfortable vibrations transmitted from the
roadthrough the tires andto transmit the control forces
back to the tires so that the driver can keep the vehicle
undercontrol.Handlingcanbeexpressedastheresponse
ofthevehicletoaninputgivenbythedriverthroughthe
steering wheel [1]. The vehicle ride comfort analysis
during different paths is done through studying of
vehicleparameterssuchasslip angle,lateralacceleration
and vehicleturning speed at transient and steady states.
Geometry of suspension system can markedly vary the
amount of role center height, camber & caster and toe
in/out angles which affects the ride and handling
characteristics. Therefore, the vehicle models including
the suspension geometry are used to investigate
dynamics of vehicle.JANSENandOOSTEN[2]useda
model with 36 degree of freedom considering the

suspension system geometry and connections.

THORESSON [3] evaluated the use of mathematical
optimization algorithm for optimization of vehicle
suspension system with respect to ride comfort and
handling.Significantimprovementintheridecomfortas
well as handling was observed. TANG and GUO [4]
developed a fivedegree of freedom half body vehicle
suspension system and modeled the road roughness
intensity as a filtered white noise stochastic process.
Geneticalgorithmandneuralnetworkcontrolwereused
to control the suspension system. They also simulated
and analyzed mechanical dynamic model of the five
degree of freedom half body of vehicle suspension
system using ADAMS. BA et al [5] improved the
performance of double wishbone (DW) suspension in
patrolling forest fire vehicle, based on advanced and
efficientfunctionalvirtualprototyping(FVP)technology
and software ADMAS. They showed that through
optimizing the suspension system, the key parameters
and total suspension performance could be improved.
KANG et al [6] investigated the robust design
optimizationprocessofsuspensionsystemforimproving
vehicle dynamic performance (ride comfort, handling
stability)using the target cascading method. The result
indicatedthatthesuggesteddesignmethodofsuspension
system is effective and systematic. NING et al [7]

Receiveddate:2012-05-02Accepteddate:2012-10-07
Correspondingauthor:M.MohmoodiKaleybar,PhDCandidate Tel:+98-9397905698Email:paykani@iust.ac.ir

J. Cent.SouthUniv. (2013)20: 902910

analyzed kinematics and dynamic of suspension ride

comfort on adaptability to different vehicles using
ADAMS.UYSetal[8]investigatedthatthedetermined
spring and damper settings will ensure optimal ride
comfortofanoffroadvehicle,ondifferentroadprofiles
andatdifferentspeeds.Afull3DmodelofaLandRover
Defender was developed in ADAMS. ELS et al [9]
investigated the suspension requirements for good ride
comfort and good handling, respectively. They focused
on vehicles that require both good onroad handling as
well as good offroad ride comfort. PANG et al [10]
established a timedomain virtual prototyping model of
the 84 heavy vehicle based on dynamic software
ADAMS in order to match suspension stiffness and
realizetheoptimizationofvehicleridecomfort.
Motion control, stability maintenance and ride
comfort are important issues in design of offroad
vehicles. In offroad vehicles unlike passenger vehicles
inwhichridecomfortisofthefirstimportance,themain
objective of suspension system design is stability
maintenance, improving handling and ride comfort in
highlybumpedroads. In previous research, just theride
comfortimprovementwasconsidered[11],orthe control
systems such as applying direct torque and active
steering system were used to improve vehicle stability
andhandling[12].Moreover,theeffectofgeometryand
type of suspension system on the stability and ride
comfort were not considered [13]. AFKAR et al [14]
modeledtheDWsuspensionsysteminADAMSandthen
optimized mechanism and geometry of suspension
system by studying geometric parameters and angles of
wheel and suspension system in different vehicle
maneuversduringbumpandrollinputs.Theyfoundthat
by optimizing geometric parameters of suspension
system, the vehicle can follow the objective path with
minimumdeviationalongwithstabilitymaintenanceand
improvementinridecomfortconditions.
A comparative investigation between DW and
MacPherson suspension systems was studiedin order to
enhance the ride and handling level during various
maneuvers. The DW system was selected due to the
desirable advantages of it over the MacPherson system.
Furthermore,theeffectsofgeometricparametersofDW
suspensionsystemonhandlingstabilityandridecomfort
of offroad vehicles in order were investigated through
the optimization of geometric parameters with GA.
Finally, the simulation of vehicle dynamic behavior
during Jturn and lanechange maneuversis was carried
out using comprehensive modeling of vehicle in
ADAMS.

2Suspensionsystemgeometry
Suspension system geometry in DW system has
significant effect on vehicle handling and ride comfort
compared to other systems like MacPherson and

903

Pendulum systems [14]. Therefore, the effect of

geometric parameters of DW suspension system mostly
used in offroad vehicles on handling and ride comfort
was investigated here. Another important issue which
canaffectthegeometricparametersofsuspensionsystem
andvehiclebehaviorissuspensionsystemtype.Inorder
to investigate the effect of suspension system type on
ridecomfortandhandlingofvehicle,theperformanceof
both conventional DW and MacPherson suspension
systems are compared. Figure 1 illustrates the studied
suspensionsystems.
The MacPherson system is the simpler of the two
suspension designs, and as such, there are fewer things
that can go wrong with this type suspension. Also, the
MacPhersonsystemtakesupalittlelessroomhorizontally,
which allows for more room for the front drive axle to

Fig. 1Mechanisms of DW and Macpherson suspension systems

passthrough the front, and itallows formore passenger

compartment space. The MacPherson system is also
relatively inexpensive compared to any of the other
independent suspension types. Another big advantage to
the MacPherson design is the reduced unsprung mass,
whichnotonlyreducesthetotalmassofthecar,butalso
has a bigger effect on acceleration than mass inside the
car. Although it is a popular choice, due to its

904

simplicity andlow manufacturing cost, thedesignhasa

fewdisadvantagesinthequalityofrideandthehandling
ofthecar.Geometricanalysisshowsthatitcannotallow
verticalmovement of the wheel without somedegree of
either camber angle change, sideways movement, or
both. It is not generally considered to give as good
handling as a DW suspension, because it allows the
engineerslessfreedomtochoosecamberchangeandroll
center. Anotherdrawbackisthatittendstotransmitnoise
and vibration from theroad directly intothe body shell,
givinghighernoiselevelsandaharshfeelingtotheride
compared with DWs, requiring manufacturers to add
extra noise reduction or cancellation and isolation
mechanisms.
There are quite a few advantages to the DW
suspension design. First of all, because of the length of
theupperandlowerarms,verticalsuspensionmovement
resultsinanincreaseinnegative camber.Thismeansthat
the tires on the outside of a turn stay in better contact
with the road, because the negative camber gain that
occursas the body rollhelpsmake sure that the contact
patchofthetireisaslargeaspossible.Also,thisallows
the car to keep a larger contact patch (the exact lengths
of the upper and lower arms determine how much
cambergainthereis)duringallconditions(exceptforthe
tiresontheinsideofaturn,butsincetheydontprovide
asmuchcorneringforceastheoutsidetires,thistradeoff
still ends up with an overall gain in handling
performance).Becausethecamberchangeswhenthereis
vertical suspensionmovement,it is possible to have the
propernegativecamberduringaturnwithouthavingthat
the same amount of camber when the car is going in a
straight line, whereas, with other systems you would
havetodialinacertainamountofnegativecamberthat
would always be there even when the car is going
straightwhichwouldleadtothe increasedtirewear.Also,
the rigidity of the system prevents deflections during
hard cornering, which keeps the steering and wheel
alignmentbeconstant,evenunderstresses[15].Thus,in
this work the performance of DW and optimized DW
suspension systems regarding geometric paramters and
dynamicvariablesofvehice were compared.
One of the main kinematic factors influencing
vehicle guidenace is camberangle. Camberangle isthe
anglemadebythewheels ofavehicle.Specifically,itis
theanglebetweentheverticalaxisofthewheelsusedfor
steeringandtheverticalaxisofthevehiclewhenviewed
fromthefrontorrear.Itisusedinthedesignof steering
andsuspension.Ifthetopofthewheelisfartheroutthan
the bottom (that is, away from the axle), it is called
positivecamber,andifthebottomofthewheelisfarther
out than the top, it is called negative camber. Camber
angle alters the handling qualities of a particular
suspension design. In particular, negative camber
improves grip when cornering. This is because it places
the tire at a better angle to the road, transmitting the

J. Cent. South Univ. (2013) 20: 902910

forces through the vertical plane of the tire rather than

through a shear force across it. In cars with DW
suspensions, camber angle may be fixed or adjustable,
butinMacPherson suspensions,itisnormallyfixed.
Caster angle is the angular displacement from the
vertical axis of the suspension of a steered wheel in a
vehicle, measured in thelongitudinal direction. It isthe
anglebetweenthe pivotline(inacar,animaginaryline
thatrunsthroughthecenteroftheupper balljoint tothe
centerofthelowerballjoint)and verticalline.
Toe is the symmetric angle that each wheel makes
withthelongitudinalaxisofthevehicle,asafunctionof
static geometry, and kinematic and compliant effects.
This can be contrasted with steer, which is the
antisymmetricangle,i.e.bothwheelspointtotheleftor
right, in parallel (roughly). Positive toe, or toe in, isthe
front of the wheel pointing intowards the centreline of
the vehicle. Negative toe, or toe out, is the front of the
wheel pointing away from the centreline of the vehicle
[16].Toecanbemeasuredinlinearunits,atthefrontof
the tire, oras an angular deflection. Figure2 shows the
geometric parameters of vehicle for DW suspension
system.

Fig.2 GeometricparametersofDWsuspensionsystem

Alteringeachofgeometricparametersofsuspension
system would affect other parameters. For step function
input, it is shown that the created forces in tire due to
steering and camber angles may adversely affect the
stability of the vehicle [17]. Figure 3 schematically
depicts the camber angle variations due to wheel
oscillationsatthreedifferentconditions.

3 Geometric model of double wishbone

suspensionsystem
The dynamic motions of the vehicle in the
rollplane aregenerally described by a 4DOF modelas
shown in Fig. 4. The roll angle () and vertical
displacement (z)are considered asinputs.WhereIeq and
Mare vehicle inertia and mass,respectively. Keq and Ceq

J. Cent.SouthUniv. (2013)20: 902910

905

Fig. 5 Double wishbone suspension system and its geometric

parameters[20]
Fig. 3 Different types of camber angle resulted from wheel
oscillations

arethelengthsofdoublewishbonesuspensionlinks,and
q4, q3, q2 specify their orientation locations. Also, a is
coupler angle. According to Fig. 5, the suspension
systemisinadynamicstateofbalancewhenthearmsof
DWsuspensionsystemmakeinitialanglesof q40, q30 abd
q20. The camber angle (g) is defined as (q30-q3).
According to Fig. 5, q3 can be obtained based on wheel
displacementheightas
3 = 2 tan -1(

- E E 2 - 4DF
)
2D

(1)

where
D=

c 2 - d 2 - a 2 - b 2 d
d
- + (1 + ) cos2
2ab
a
b

Fig.4 Halfcarvehiclemodel[18]

E = -2sin2

aretheequivalentspring anddampingrates,respectively,
whichareobtainedfromthekinematicandforceanalysis
of the double wishbone suspension system. r, l indices
indicateleftandrightinthehalfcarmodel,respectively.
Also, t and s indices specify tyre and suspension,
respectively.
In order to investigate effect of geometric
parameters on the vehicle ride comfort, variation of
camber angles due to vehicle roll and tire vertical
deflection (bump) are taken into account for DW
suspensionsystemwithshort-longarmsuspension(SLA)
accordingtoFig.3.Thedesiredandoptimalconditionof
it is when the upper arm is shorter than the lower arm
and the camberangleisnegative [19].To determinethe
camber angle during the fluctuation of the wheel, we
shoulddeterminethevariationofthecouplerangle,asa
function of vertical motion z of the coupler point C.
Suspensiongeometryparametersare showninFig.5.
Figure 5 shows the double wishbone suspension
system and its geometric parameters, where a, b and c

F =

c 2 - d 2 - a 2 - b 2 d
d
+ - (1 - ) cos2
2ab
a
b

(2)
(3)
(4)

By combiningEqs. (1)to (4), variations of camber

angles based on wheel geometry and suspension system
areacquired.Figure6illustratesfrontandsideviews of
DW suspension system for caster angle (j) and
steeringangledeviation(q).

Fig.6 Frontandsideviewsofwheelgeometry[21]

906

J. Cent. South Univ. (2013) 20: 902910

As shown in Fig. 6, along of steer axis cuts the

contactsurfaceofwheelwithgroundatpoint(sa,sb, -Rw)
aspresentedin Eqs.(5)to(7).
cos sinj

sa =

(5)

cos j + cos 2 sin2j

- cos sin

sb =

(6)

cos + cos 2 sin2

Rw =

cos cos
2

(7)

cos + cos sin

Thus, it can be possible to obtain caster angle

variations, steering angle deviation and tire scrub based
onsuspensiongeometricspecificationsrelatedtocamber
angle.

4 Optimization of geometric parameters of

DWsuspensionsystemusingGA
Ageneticalgorithm(GA)isa searchheuristic that
mimicstheprocessofnaturalevolution.Thisheuristicis
routinely used to generate useful solutions to
optimization and search problems. Genetic algorithms
belong to the larger class of evolutionary algorithms
(EA),whichgeneratesolutionstooptimizationproblems
using techniques inspired by natural evolution, such as
inheritance, mutation, selection,andcrossover.Genetic
algorithms find application in bioinformatics,
phylogenetics, computational science, engineering,
economics, chemistry, manufacturing, mathematics,
physics and other fields. A typical genetic algorithm
requiresa geneticrepresentationofthesolutiondomain
anda fitnessfunction toevaluatethesolutiondomain.
The GA parameters for optimizing geometric
parameters of DW suspension system are considered,as
listedinTable1.Inordertoperformoptimizationusing
GA, objective function, variables and objective function
constraints should be defined. Camber angles variations
duetowheeloscillationscanbeoptimizedinawaythat
scrubisreducedanditisminimizedataspecifiedheight.
Forthispurpose,cambervariationandvariationrangeof
suspension geometric parameters are considered as
objective function and constraint in GA, respectively.
Optimizationresultsofgeometricparametersofoffroad
vehiclesuspensionsystemaregiveninTable2.
Table1GAparameters
Parameter
Populationfunction

Table 2 Optimized geometric parameters of offroad vehicle

suspensionsystem
Parameter
Value
Parameter
Value
a/mm
222
q0
25.3
b/mm
220
q2
132.4
c/mm
364
q3
18.1
d/mm
250
q4
111.2
rw/mm
365
a
61.6

5Resultsanddiscussion
In order to investigate the performance of the
designedoptimized/vibrationsystem,asshowninFig.7,
a DW suspension system is modeledin ADAMS.Then,
the equivalent mechanisms of suspension system with
bumpand rollinputsfortireverticaldeflectionof40mm
and roll are depicted in Fig. 8 in order to aeusitively
measure the geometric parameters of the optimized
suspensionsystemonvehiclerideandhandling.

Fig.7 DWsuspensionsystemmodeling

Type/value
Doublevector

Numberofgeneration

10000

Scalingfunction

Propotional

Selectionfunction

Roulette

Mutation

Adaptivefeasible/0.2%

Crossover

Singlepoint

Fig. 8 Equivalent mechanisms of DW suspension system in

ADAMS: (a) Bump (b)Roll inputs

J. Cent.SouthUniv. (2013)20: 902910

The variation of optimized camber angle is

illustratedinFig.9.Itisevidentthatthecamberangleis
negative when the wheel gets height during passing the
bump or increasing ofroll angle which shows the trend
ofwheeltowardstheoutsideofvehicleanditsinstability.
As can be seen, the camber angle variation is lower in
offroad vehicles compared to onroad vehicles which
indicates a better handling and stability of the vehicle
withoptimizedDWsuspensionsystem.
AsshowninFig.9,camberanglevariationispartly
symmetrytothecoordinateaxes.Also,itisobviousthat
withincreasingbumpheightorrollangle,camberangle
increases, which results in to tendency of wheel to
outside and its instability. The optimization method
proposed here resulted in a slight increment in the
camberresponses,withbeneficialeffectsonvehicleride
and handling. Also, due to reduction of camber angle
range in optimal suspension, variation of tire forces
reduced.Therefore,vehiclecontrollabilityimprovedand
tirewearreduced.

907

Fig. 10 Displacement of lower control arm along three

directionsduringpathingbump

Fig. 11 Displacement of upper control arms along three

directionsdueto roll

Due to roll input, upper and lower arms of DW

suspensionmoveinx,yandzdirection.Figure11shows
that, in the roll condition, upper and lower arms in x
direction were remained fixed. Figure 12 depicts the
camberanglevariationatdifferent vehiclerolls based on
vehicle longitudinal dynamics (acceleration and braking)
for front left and right hand side suspensions. In other
words,itshowstheeffectofcamberanglevariationdue

Fig.9 Camberanglevariationduetobump (a)and vehicle roll (b)

Thevariationsandsensitivityofsuspensionsystem
control arms due to bump and vehicle roll inputs are
representedinFigs.10and11,respectively.
In Fig. 10, movements of DW suspension upper
(PART2) and lower (PART4) arms during bump input
arecomparedinxandydirections.Inthiscondition,itis
obviousthatlowerarmhasnodisplacementin y direction.

Fig.12Variationsofcamberangles dueto rollandlongitudinal

dynamic

908

torollinput,inacceleratingorbrakingconditionswhich
vehicle dives out and dives in through longitudinal
direction,respectively.Inthecasethatthevehiclediveis
low, camber angle for left and right hand side
suspensions has minimum and maximum amount,
respectively. Furthermore, it can be observed that by
increasing rollangleorbumpheight,cambervariations
forbothleftandrighthandsidesuspensionsincreaseasa
same rate and by enhancing vehicle dive angle in
longitudinal dynamics, the camber increases but its
variations remain constant. As shown in Fig. 12,
variation of camberangle versusroll degree forall dive
anglesisapproximatelylinear.
Inthissection,simulationsofthevehicledynamics

J. Cent. South Univ. (2013) 20: 902910

response during two maneuvers are carried out. In the

secondstage,bymodelingofwholevehicleinADAMS,
simulation results with initial longitudinal speed of
30m/sinadryroadduringJturnand lanechange lateral
deviation from objective lane, acceleration, lateral and
turning velocity (yaw rate) are shown in Fig. 13 for
optimized with GA, trial and error method, and
unmodifiedsuspensionsystems.
It is clear that the vehicle with unmodified
suspension system leads to higher lateral velocity and
accelerationwhichresultsininstabilityandconsiderable
error during path. However, by improving suspension
systemandoptimizingitbyGA,vehiclelateraldynamic
is improved and objective pathis followed successfully.

Fig.13Simulationresultsindryloadduring
Jturn and lanechange
maneuvers
conditions: (a) Jturn maneuver path (b)
Vehicle lateral deviation variations during
Jturn maneuver (c) Lateral velocity
variations during Jturn maneuver (d)
Lateral accelaration variations during Jturn
maneuver(e)Turning velocity variations in
Jturnmaneuver

J. Cent.SouthUniv. (2013)20: 902910

909

Fig.14Simulationresultsoflanechangemaneuver:(a)Lanechangemaneuverpath(b)Vehiclelateraldeviationvariationsduring
lanechange (c)Lateralvelocityvariationsduringlanechange (d) Lateralaccelarationvariationsduringlanechange

By comparing vehiclelateral dynamics including lateral

acceleration, velocity and yaw rate in optimized
suspension system with modified and GA methods,
handling and ride comfort characteristics are
significantly improved by optimized suspension system
with GA. In addition, simulation results of lanechange
maneuver is illustrated in Fig. 14 for path, lateral
deviation,lateralvelocityandacceleration.
As the results show, the optimized suspension
systemwithGArepresentsthebestresponsewithrespect
to vehicle performance and follows the objective path
withminimumdeviationalongwithstability maintenance.
Furthermore, the oscillations of dynamic variables
of the vehicle are reduced. The maximum speed and
lateral deviation which should be minimized as vehicle
stability variables are less than 1 m/s and 0.06 m,
respectively. Also, maximum lateral acceleration is
always lower than 0.4g, indicating suitable ride and
steeringcomfortofvehicleduringintensivemaneuvers.
In addition, according to Fig. 7, two equivalent
mechanisms with bump androll inputs are modeled for
optimizedDWsuspensionsysteminordertosensitively
measuregeometricparameters.Thesimulationresultsfor
state variables of vehicle suchas yaw rate,lateral speed
and acceleration show that the optimized suspension

system with GA gives the best response regarding

vehicle performance. The maximum speed and lateral
deviationwhichshouldbeminimizedasvehiclestability
variablesarelessthan1m/sand0.06m,respectively.In
addition, the yaw rate and lateral speed responses of an
optimizedvehicleshowinstabilitycharacteristics.

6Conclusions
1)Theworkpresentsoneofthepossibleextensions
of features offered by optimization of offroad vehicle
suspension system to improve vehicle performance.
Dynamics and stability of an offroad vehicle in the
double lane change maneuver are examined through
analysis and simulations. Lateral and longitudinal
dynamic modeling of an offroad vehicle is performed
usingADAMS.Geneticalgorithmisusedforsuspension
system optimization aiming at minimizing lateral force
variations.
2) The simulation results are compared in three
stages for unmodified suspension system, modified
suspension system with trial and error method and
optimized suspension system with GA. The results
indicate that the vehicle equipped optimized suspension
with appropriate parameters could decrease the camber

910

J. Cent. South Univ. (2013) 20: 902910

and roll angle variations. It means that the vehicle has

higher critical velocity with regard to instability and
rollover in such an emergency Jturn and lane change
maneuvers.

comfort optimization of heavy vehicles suspension based on

ADAMS [J]. Applied Mechanics and Materials, 2011, 44-47:
1734-1738.
[11] CHEN S, WANG D, ZAN J. Vehicle ride comfort analysis and
optimization using design of experiment [C]// IEEE, Intelligent

References

HumanMachineSystemsandCybernetics(IHMSC),Nanjing,China:
IEEEPress,2010:14-18.

[1]

CRONJEPH,ELSS.Improving offroadvehiclehandlingusingan

[12] MASHADI B, MAJIDI M, POURABDOLLAH H. Optimal vehicle

active antiroll bar [J]. Journal of Terramechanics, 2010, 47:

dynamics controller design using a fourdegreesoffreedom model

179189.
[2]

[13] MASHADI B, MAHMOODIKALEIBAR M. Control of vehicle

simulation models for a 4ws application [J]. Vehicle System

path by simulation of driver model [C]// National Conference of

Dynamics,1995, 24(4/5):343-363.
[3]

[4]

[5]

[6]

[14] AFKAR A, MAHMOODIKALEIBAR M,PAYKANI A. Geometry

system of an offroad vehicle for ride comfort and handling [D].

optimization of double wishbone suspension system via genetic

FacultyofEngineering,UniversityofPretoria,2003.

algorithmforhandlingimprovement[J].JournalofVibroengineering,

TANG C Y, GUO L X. Research on suspension system based on

[15] DELANEY M. Double Wishbone vs. MacPherson Strut II:

Computation Technology and Automation, Changsha, Hunan: IEEE

Compared [EB/OL]. [2002-02-12]. http://www.teamintegra.net/

Press,2009:468-471.

forum/blogs/michaeldelaney/154doublewishbonevsmacphersonst

BA X, YU J, CHANG C, LI Y, LI J. Motion characteristics

rutiicompared.html.

simulationandoptimizationofsuspensionsysteminpatrollingforest

[16] BALIKA K P. Kinetodynamic analyses of vehicle suspension for

fire vehicle [C]// Vehicle Power and Propulsion Conference,

optimal synthesis [D]. Concordia University Montreal, Quebec,

VPPC'09, Michigan,USA:IEEE,2009:134-137.

DepartmentofMechanicalandIndustrialEngineering,2010.

KANG D O, HEO, S J, KIM M S. Robust design optimization of

[17] Toeout and Handling, steering geometry & front end alignment".

suspension system by using target cascading method [J].

autoware.com.[EB/OL].[2002-02-12].http://www.autoware.com/

International Journal of Automotive Technology, 2011, 13(1):

setup/toe_hand.htm.

NING X, ZHAO C, SHEN J. Dynamic analysis of car suspension

optimization [J].ProcediaEngineering,2011, 16: 333-341.

[18] WANG C F. Design and synthesis of active and passive vehicle

suspensions [D]. Department of Engineering, University of
Cambridge,2001.
[19] CHENYC,HUANGHH, HSIEHCH,LINJB.Determination of

UYS P E, ELS P S, THORESSON M. Suspension settings for

kingpin axis from wheel points using dual quaternion analysis[C]//

optimal ride comfort of offroad vehicles travelling on roads with

Proceedings of the World Congress on Engineering,Vol. III WCE

differentroughnessandspeeds[J].JournalofTerramechanics,2007,

London,U.K.2011:977-988.

44: 163175.
[9]

2012,14(2):827-837.

geneticalgorithmandneural networkcontrol[C]// IEEE Intelligent

using ADAMS/car for development of a software interface for

[8]

MechanicalEngineering,Birjand,Iran,2011:455-499.(inPersian)

THORESSON M J. Mathematical optimization of the suspension

109122.
[7]

[J].JournalofAutomobileEngineering,2010,224(5):645-659.

JANSEN S, OOSTEN J. Development and evaluation of vehicle

ELS P S, THERON N J, UYS P E, THORESSON M J. The ride

comfortvs.handlingcompromiseforoffroadvehicles [J].Journalof
Terramechanics,2007,44: 303317.

[10] PANGH,LIHY,FANGZ,WANGJF.Stiffness matchingandride

[20] DIXONJC.Suspensiongeometryandcomputation[M].JohnWiley
&SonsLtd,2009.
[21] REIMPELL J, STOLL H, BETZLER J W. The automotive chassis
engineering principles [M]. Reed: Elsevier and Professional
PublishingLtd,2001.
(EditedbyDENGLxiang)