Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
Adam Theander
VEHICLE DYNAMICS
AERONAUTICAL AND VEHICLE ENGINEERING
ROYAL INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
TRITA-AVE-2004-26
ISSN 1651-7660
There are a few persons to whom I would like to especially express my gratitude.
Professor Annika Stensson, my examiner, who gave me the opportunity to carry out this
thesis work; research engineer Mats Beckman, my supervisor, for his engagement and
time spent helping me; Fredrik Westin, Ph.D student at Division of Internal Combustion
Engines, who has had a major role in KTH Racing as project leader and spent almost all
of his spare time working with the project; all students participating in the KTH
Formula Student project, without all of you there wouldn’t have been any KTH Racing.
Finally I would like to take the opportunity to give a special thank to the students
known as “Järngänget”, you know who you are. Without their effort the last couple of
weeks there would never have been a car to show on the 14th of May.
Adam Theander
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ..................................................................................... 12
1.1 Background..................................................................................................12
1.2 Aim of the work...........................................................................................12
1.3 Competition Objective .................................................................................12
1.3.1 Vehicle Design Objectives .......................................................................13
1.4 Competition Events and Judging of the Cars ................................................13
1.4.1 Acceleration Event...................................................................................14
1.4.2 Skid-Pad Event ........................................................................................14
1.4.3 Autocross Event .......................................................................................15
1.4.4 Endurance and Fuel Economy Event ........................................................15
1.4.5 Judging of the cars ...................................................................................16
1.5 Rules Relevant to the Chassis Design...........................................................17
1.5.1 Wheelbase and Vehicle Configuration......................................................17
1.5.2 Vehicle Track Width ................................................................................17
1.5.3 Ground Clearance ....................................................................................17
1.5.4 Wheels and Tires......................................................................................17
1.5.5 Suspension ...............................................................................................17
3 Benchmark....................................................................................... 28
4 Methods............................................................................................ 30
4.1 Track width and wheelbase ..........................................................................30
4.2 Front Suspension Design..............................................................................33
4.2.1 The Rims .................................................................................................33
4.2.2 The Brakes...............................................................................................34
4.2.3 Front View Geometry...............................................................................34
4.2.4 Side View Geometry ................................................................................35
4.2.5 Control Arm Pivot Axis ...........................................................................36
4.2.6 Tie Rod Location and Ackermann Geometry............................................38
4.3 Rear Suspension Design...............................................................................38
5 Model Building ................................................................................ 40
5.1 Front Suspension Modelling.........................................................................41
5.2 Rear Suspension Modelling..........................................................................42
5.3 Steering Modelling.......................................................................................43
5.4 Wheels Modelling........................................................................................44
5.5 Body ............................................................................................................44
5.6 Simulation ...................................................................................................44
6 Parameter Study.............................................................................. 46
6.1 The Taguchi Methods ..................................................................................46
6.2 Parameters of Interest...................................................................................47
6.2.1 Parameter Levels......................................................................................47
6.3 Results .........................................................................................................48
6.3.1 Parameter Study of Front Suspension .......................................................48
6.3.2 Parameter Study of Steering Geometry.....................................................53
6.3.3 Parameter Study of Rear Suspension ........................................................57
9 Nomenclature................................................................................... 72
10 References ........................................................................................ 74
10.1 Literature .....................................................................................................74
10.2 Oral References ...........................................................................................74
1 Introduction
1.1 Background
In the autumn of 2003 a group of students started a project at KTH. The objective of the
project was to build a race car according to the Formula Student rules and compete in
the event at Bruntingthorpe Proving Ground, Leicestershire, England, in July 2004.
There were three different courses given involved in the Formula Student project, one
project course in Internal Combustion Engines, one project course in Advanced
Machine Elements and a small project course in Machine Design. Soon there were over
70 students involved, either participating in one of the three courses or as volunteers.
The work carried out will be used by the students participating within the KTH Racing
project for year 2004 and hopefully be of much interest for upcoming years projects.
• Presentation
• Engineering Design
• Cost Analysis
A presentation is held for the imaginary manufacturing firm who ordered the prototype.
The purpose of the presentation event is to evaluate the team’s ability to sell their
product. The presentation judges evaluate the organization, content and delivery of the
presentation. An engineering design event is held to evaluate the effort put into the
design process and how the design meets the intent of the market. The purpose of the
cost analysis event is to teach the students participating that cost and budget are very
important and must be taken into account in every engineering process.
The dynamic events are:
• Acceleration
• Skid-Pad
• Autocross
• Endurance and Fuel Economy
1.4.1 Acceleration Event
The objective of the acceleration event is to evaluate the car’s acceleration in a straight
line on flat pavement. The cars will be staged 0.3m behind the starting line and when
the cars cross the starting line the time will start. The goal is located 75m ahead of the
starting line. Each team will have two drivers, who can do two runs each, a total of four
runs. This is the event were the suspension design is of least importance among the
dynamic events, but not negligible.
Finish
3m
5m
.2
15
18.25m
Start
The procedure of the event is as follows: the cars will start by entering the right circle
completing one lap. Next lap will be timed and immediately after the left circle is
entered for the third lap. The fourth lap will be timed. Then the driver has the option to
make a second run immediately after the first. Each team will have two drivers who can
do two runs each. The design of the suspension and steering geometry will influence the
performance much.
1.4.3 Autocross Event
The objective of the autocross event is to evaluate the car’s manoeuvrability and
handling qualities on a tight course. The autocross course will combine the performance
features of acceleration, braking and cornering. The layout of the autocross track is
made to keep the speeds from being dangerously high, average speeds should be
between 40km/h and 48km/h. The layout is specified as follows:
• Straights – No longer than 60m with hairpins at both ends or no longer than 45m
with wide turns on the ends.
• Constant Turns – 23m to 45m in diameter.
• Hairpin Turns – Minimum of 9m outside diameter.
• Slaloms – Cones in a straight line with 7.62m to 12.19m spacing.
• Miscellaneous – Chicanes, multiple turns, decreasing radius turns, etc. The
minimum track width will be 3.5m
• Length – Approximately 0.805km.
Each team will have two drivers entering the event. Each driver will drive two timed
laps and the best time for each driver will stand as the time for that heat.
• Straights – No longer than 77m with hairpins at both ends or no longer than 61m
with wide turns on the ends. There will be passing zones at several locations.
• Constant Turns – 30m to 54m in diameter.
• Hairpin Turns – Minimum of 9m outside diameter.
• Slaloms – Cones in a straight line with 9m to 15m spacing.
• Miscellaneous – Chicanes, multiple turns, decreasing radius turns etc. The
minimum track width will be 4.5m.
In both the autocross event and the endurance event the suspension design and steering
geometry is of major importance. A well working design helps the drivers perform at
the edge of their capacity. The layout of the 2003 event endurance track can be viewed
in Figure 1.2.
Figure 1.2. GPS plot of the 2003 endurance track.
[Courtesy of Honda Research and Development Europe Ltd.]
Static Events
Presentation 75
Engineering Design 150
Cost Analysis 100
Dynamic Events
Acceleration 75
Skid-Pad 50
Autocross 150
Fuel Economy 50
Endurance 350
Total Points 1000
1.5.5 Suspension
Rule 3.2.3: “The car must be equipped with a fully operational suspension system with
shock absorbers, front and rear, with usable wheel travel of at least 50.8mm (2 inches),
25.4mm (1 inch) jounce and 25.4mm (1 inch) rebound, with driver seated” [1].
2 Suspension Design Aspects
The purpose of the suspension is to make the job easier for the tires and give a
predictable behaviour so that the driver will have control of the car. The suspension
shall help to keep the tires in constant contact with the ground so that the tires can be
used to the limit of their capacity. When designing a suspension there are a number of
factors that influence the behaviour of the suspension and a lot of these factors also
interacts in one way or another. Therefore much work is put into making a compromise
that will function well in all the driving events at the competition. The factors taken into
this work are as follows below.
2.1 Wheelbase
The wheelbase, l, is the distance between the centre of the front axle and the centre of
the rear axle. The wheelbase has a big influence on the axle load distribution. A long
wheelbase will give less load transfers between the front and rear axles than a shorter
wheelbase during acceleration and braking according to Equation 2.1 and Figure 2.1.
Figure 2.1. Side view parameters for longitudinal load transfer calculations.
Fz1 = (1 − λ ) ⋅ mg + κ ⋅ a x ⋅ m
Fz 2 = λ ⋅ mg + κ ⋅ a x ⋅ m (2.1)
A longer wheelbase will therefore be able to be fitted with softer springs and will
increase the level of comfort for the driver. On the other hand a shorter wheelbase have
the advantages of smaller turning radius for the same steering input, see section 2.8 [3].
A car with too short wheelbase may act nervously on corner exits and in straight line
driving. Anti features can be built into a suspension and these will also affect the
longitudinal load transfer, see section 2.7.
2.2 Track Width
The track width is of major importance when designing a vehicle. It has influence on the
vehicle cornering behaviour and tendency to roll. The larger the track width is the
smaller the lateral load transfer is when cornering and vice versa according to Equation
2.2 that shows the load transfer for a rear axle [3].
µ lat ⋅ hCG
∆Fz 2 = (2.2)
tw2
A larger track width has the disadvantage that more lateral movement of the vehicle is
needed to avoid obstacles. According to the regulations the smallest section of the Skip-
Pad may not be smaller than 3m and the Autocross and Endurance tracks no smaller
than 3.5m [1]. The amount of lateral load transfer wanted depends on tires fitted on the
car, see section 2.9. If the car has anti-roll bars these will also affect the load transfer.
Kingpin Inclination
Kingpin Axis Wheel Offset
UBJ UBJ
Wheel Flange Plane
+ Side View
+
Kingpin Offset
LBJ LBJ
Caster (+)
FORWARD
• If the spindle length is positive the car will be raised up as the wheels are turned
and this results in a increase of the steering moment at the steering wheel. The
larger the kingpin inclination angle is the more the car will be raised regardless
of which way the front wheels are turned. If there is no caster present this effect
is symmetrical from side to side. The raise of the car has a self-aligning effect of
the steering at low speeds.
• Kingpin inclination affects the Steer camber. When a wheel is steered it will
lean out at the top, towards positive camber if the kingpin inclination angle is
positive. The amount of this is small but not to neglect if the track includes tight
turns.
• If the driving or braking force is different on the left and right side this will
introduce a steering torque proportional to the scrub radius, which will be felt by
the driver at the steering wheel.
2.4 Caster and Trail
In the side view the kingpin inclination is called Caster angle. If the kingpin axis
doesn’t pass through the centre of the wheel then there is a side view Kingpin offset
present. The distance from the kingpin axis to the centre of the tire print on the ground
is called Trail or Caster offset. See Figure 2.2 for the side view geometry. The caster
angle and trail is of importance when designing the suspension geometry. The effects
considered in this work are [2], [3]:
Another factor is the horizontal-vertical coupling effect. If the roll centre is located
above the ground the lateral force generated by the tire generates a moment about the
instant centre, which pushes the wheel down and lifts the sprung mass. This effect is
called Jacking. If the roll centre is below the ground level the force will push the sprung
mass down. The lateral force will, regarding the position of the roll centre, imply a
vertical deflection. If the roll centre passes through the ground level when the car is
rolling there will be a change in the movement direction of the sprung mass.
Centre of Car
Instant Centre
+
Roll Centre
The camber change rate is a function only of the front view swing arm length, fvsa
length. Front view swing arm length is the length of the line from the wheel centre to
the instant centre when viewed from front. The amount of camber change achieved per
mm of ride travel would be as described in Equation 2.3 and Figure 2.3.
degrees 1
= arctan
mm fvsa length (2.3)
The camber change is not constant throughout the whole ride travel since the instant
centre also moves with wheel travel.
CG
l
+ ∆FZ − ∆FZ
Braking Force=
W(ax/g)
CG
svsa length
Moment=
W(ax/g)(% front braking)(svsa height)
IC
svsa
height
φF
By substituting % front braking with % rear braking and tan φF tan with φR in Equation
2.4 the amount of anti lift can be calculated. The way that brake and drive torque is
reacted by the suspension alters the way to calculate the amount of anti present. If the
control arms react torque, either from the brakes or from drive torque, the anti’s are
calculated by the IC location relative to the ground contact point. If the suspension
doesn’t react drive or brake torque, but only the forward or rearward force, then the
“anti’s” are calculated by the IC location relative to the wheel centre. For a rear-wheel
driven car there are 3 different types of anti features:
• Anti dive, which reduces the bump deflection during forward braking.
• Anti lift, which reduces the droop travel in forward braking.
• Anti squat, which reduces the bump travel during forward acceleration.
Figure 2.5 shows the configuration for calculating the anti features for a car with
outboard front brakes and inboard rear brakes.
CG
l
IC
h IC
φR
svsa
φF heights
svsa length
Figure 2.5. Anti features during braking with outboard front brakes and inboard rear brakes.
2.8 Ackerman steering
At low speed turns, where external forces due to accelerations are negligible, the
steering angle needed to make a turn with radius R is called the Ackermann steering
angle, δa, and can be calculated by using Equation 2.5.
l
δa = (2.5)
R
If both front wheels are tangents to concentric circles about the same turning centre,
which lays on a line trough the rear axle, the vehicle is said to have Ackermann steering.
This results in the outer wheel having a smaller steering angle than the inner. If both
wheels have the same steering angle the vehicle is said to have Parallel steer and if the
outer wheel has a larger steering angle than the inner it is called Reverse Ackermann.
Passenger cars have a steering geometry somewhere between Ackermann steering and
parallel steering while it’s common among race cars to use reverse Ackermann. By
using Ackermann steering on passenger cars, or other vehicles only exposed to low
lateral accelerations, it is ensured that all wheels roll freely with no slip angles because
the wheels are steered to track a common turn centre. Race cars are often operated at
high lateral accelerations and therefore all tires operate at significant slip angles and the
loads on the curve inner wheels are much less than the curve outer wheels due to the
lateral load transfer. Tires under low loads require less slip angle to reach the peak of
the cornering force. Using a low speed steering geometry on a race car would cause the
curve inner tire to be dragged along at much higher slip angles than needed and this
would only result in raises in tire temperature and slowing down the car due to the slip
angle induced drag. Therefore race cars often use parallel steer or even reverse
Ackermann. The different types of Ackerman are shown in Figure 2.6.
l l l
Negative Cambered
No Roll-Off
Negative Cambered
Lateral Force
With Roll-Off
0° Camber
Camber Thrust
Slip Angle
Car Nr. Wheelbase Track Width Track Width Axle Weight Axle Weight Result
[mm] front [mm] Rear [mm] Front [kg] Rear [kg] 2003
11 1650 1260 1200 140 157 6
26 1920 1360 1360 139 157 35
17 1670 1280 1200 98 120 8
4 1750 1290 1240 99 121 19
35 1730 1320 1240 108 162 7
21 1620 1250 1060 114 176 30
16 1560 1250 1200 95 116 21
14 1600 1219 1194 141 147 17
33 1610 1200 1000 120 130 10
12 1760 1080 1160 90 110 20
Average 1687 1250,9 1185,4 114,4 139,6
Table 3.1. Average dimensions and weights of Formula Student race cars at the 2003 event.
A major part of the cars participating in the 2003 event didn’t have all data available so
the data listed in Table 3.1 are only from the cars where all dimensions and weights
where available.
Based on the literature survey, knowledge about the cars from the 2003 event and
discussions with persons with good knowledge in vehicle dynamics and racing a
guideline for the race car was set up. The purpose of this guideline is to have a defined
goal for the work. The guidelines set up was:
Figure 4.2. Lateral weight transfer as a function of track width and lateral acceleration.
Figure 4.3. Lateral force as a function of tire load and slip angle
for a 20x8-13” Goodyear racing tire for light vehicles [6].
Another factor that will determine the track width is the size of the race track.
According to the regulations no part of the race track may be smaller than 3.5m and the
tightest hairpin may not have an outside diamter smaller than 9m. The track will be 3m
wide in the Skid-Pad event but here the track width is of less importance. The turning
radius for a car having ackermann steering geometry is at low speed proportional to the
wheelbase and the steering angle. To make a hairpin that have an outside diameter of
9m the turning radius of the cars centerline need to be 9m minus half the trackwidth.
This results in an Ackermann angle of:
l
δa =
r− 1
2 ⋅ tw (4.1)
A larger trackwidth will have the disadvantage of a narrower A-arm angle to allow the
required wheel angle, causing the A-arm taking up more forces in the longitudinal
directions.
4.2 Front Suspension Design
The design of the front suspension is primary based on packaging. Track width, wheel
size, tyre size, the brakes, the dampers, etc., will all have to be kept in mind when
determine the locations available for the lower ball joint. The front suspension type
designed is an SLA suspension. SLA stands for Short-Long Arm and refers to the
different length of the upper and lower control arms.
tw 2 tw 2
fvsa = =
1 − roll camber 1 − wheel camber angle chassis roll angle (4.2)
A line is projected from the ground contact patch through the wanted roll centre and to
the instant centre located at the desired fvsa length distance from the ground contact
patch. From the instant centre one line is projected back to the location of the lower ball
joint and one line to the location of the upper ball joint.
The length of the lower control arm shall be made as long as possible but is limited by
packaging. The driver’s legs will have to be fitted in between the lower control arms in
order to keep the centre of gravity height as low as possible. The length of the upper
control arm will determine the curvature of the camber curve. If upper and lower control
arms are of the same length the camber curve will be a straight vertical line and if the
upper arm is shorter than the upper the curve will be concave toward negative camber
which is preferable. The shorter the upper arm is the more concave the camber curve
will be. It is possible to design geometry that will have progressive camber in bump
with much less in drop.
tw/2
fvsa length
Figure 4.5. Front view swing arm geometry for establishing locations of ball joints.
4.2.4 Side View Geometry
The design of the side view geometry is based on the desired anti-features. For the front
suspension of a rear wheel driven car the only anti feature is anti dive. The amount of
anti feature is calculated with Equation 2.4.
This gives the wanted angle of the side view swing arm, φF. The length of the arm, svsa
length, determines the amount of longitudinal wheel travel during bump and drop. The
geometries for establishing anti features are seen in Figure 4.6.
ax CG
IC
h
svsa
φF height
svsa length
l
Figure 4.6. The side view swing arm geometry for establishing wanted amount of ant -
feature.
4.2.5 Control Arm Pivot Axis
The locations of the inner ball joints, the ball joints located on the frame, are also
geometrically designed. The method used is the one described in Race Car Vehicle
Dynamics written by Milliken/Milliken. The method is a projection technique that can
be used for SLA and other suspension types.
See Figure 4.7. First, in the front view, the upper control arm inner pivot point is
marked as point #1 and the upper ball joint as point #2. Point #2 projection onto the
longitudinal plane is marked as point #3. Corresponding points for the lower control
arm is #11, #12 and #13. These points are then transferred into the side view. A line is
drawn from the side view instant centre and through point #3 and a bit further. This
arbitrary point is marked as point #4. The same procedure is made for point #13 giving
the location of point #14. These points are then projected into the front view. In both the
front view and the side view a line is drawn from point #4 through point #2 and beyond
point #1. This is repeated for the lower control arm using points #14, #12 and #11. The
inner pivot points are wanted to be parallel with the car’s centreline. This is made by
drawing a vertical line from point #1. This line’s intersection with the line from point #4
through point #2 is the desired location of point #5 in the front view. This is repeated
for the lower control arm with the corresponding points, #11, #14, #12, giving point
#15. Points #5 and #15 are then projected into the side view and lines are drawn trough
point #1 and #5 and #11 and #15 giving the axis of the inner pivot points. The points
can be placed anywhere wanted as long as they still are on the lines.
IC
IC
15 15
5 5
13 2 11,12
11 1 2 12 3 3 1 13
Car Centreline
14 14
UCA axis
xis
UCA axis
LCA axis
a
4 4
LCA
3 13
4 13
14
12
2
UCA axis 1 5
LCA axis 15 11
Car Centreline
Forward
Tie Rod UCA
axis
Control
Arms
If a more detailed model is wanted, powertrains, brakes, anti-roll bars, and differentials
etc. can be added to the vehicle model. There are several pre-made subsystems included
and the opportunity to build your own subsystems. The subsystems interact with each
other via communicators. There are input communicators that read information into a
subsystem with data and output communicators that send information from a subsystem
to another.
5.1 Front Suspension Modelling
Front suspension design is of SLA type. The model used is obtained from MSC
Software, the company who develop ADAMS, and is modified to fit the purpose of the
modelling. The wheel is connected to the upright via a hub bearing which is a revolute
joint. On the upright four control arms are connected with spherical joints, two lower
ones and two upper ones. The other ends of these control arms are connected to the cars
frame via revolute joints. On each upright there also is a tie rod connected with a
spherical joint. The other end of the tie rod is to be connected to the steering rack via a
spherical joint. Springs and dampers are connected to the uprights via pull-rods with
spherical joints. The pull-rods are connected to the rockers with hooke joints. The
rockers are connected to the chassis with revolute joints and to the dampers with hooke
joints. The communicators in the front suspension act between the front suspension and
the body, the steering, the front anti-roll bar and the front wheels.
5.5 Body
The body subsystem used consists only of a point mass in the centre of gravity.
Communicators act between the body subsystem and steering subsystem, front
suspension subsystem and rear suspension subsystem.
5.6 Simulation
A simulation is very easily done with ADAMS. There are a number of different pre-set
simulation modes that can be used such as a suspension analyser where different kinds
of wheel travel and steering simulations can be run. There are also full vehicle
simulation models available such as ISO lane change and steady state cornering. A
problem when simulating with ADAMS is the sensitivity for equilibrium problems with
ill-defined models.
6 Parameter Study
Studies were made to investigate the influences of different settings of system
parameters such as kingpin inclination angle, caster angle, roll centre height. Knowing
how these parameters influences and interacts made it possible to improve the models
until the guidelines were fulfilled. The parameter study also reveals the interactions
between parameters. This information is lost when performing tests using the “one
parameter at the time” approach. This kind of information is very useful when changing
one parameter as this can lead to unexpected effects on other parameters.
• V: All main effects are isolated and two factor interactions are isolated from
other two factor interactions.
• IV: All main effects are isolated from two factor interactions, but two factor
interactions can be mixed with other two factor interactions.
• III: Main effects and two factor interactions can be mixed.
The size of the orthogonal matrix to obtain a certain resolution can be viewed in Table
6.1.
Resolution
Matrix III IV V
L8 7 4 3
L16 15 8 5
L32 31 16 6
Table 6.1. Maximum of two level factors as a function of resolution and matrix size.
Parameters
Trial no. A B AxB C AxC BxC
1 -1 -1 1 -1 1 1
2 1 -1 -1 -1 -1 1
3 -1 1 -1 -1 1 -1
4 1 1 1 -1 -1 -1
5 -1 -1 1 1 -1 -1
6 1 -1 -1 1 1 -1
7 -1 1 -1 1 -1 1
8 1 1 1 1 1 1
The orthogonal matrix should be filled with low levels replacing the minus signs and
high levels replacing the plus signs. Trials are then performed with accurate settings for
the parameters of each row in the orthogonal matrix. The desired quantify is measured
for every attempt. When all trials are performed the column for each parameter is
multiplied with the result column and then divided by the number of plus signs. This
gives the influence of the parameter. The influence is a measure of the product of the
selected parameter interval and the quantity measured in the trials. Table 6.2 shows the
L8 matrix with resolution V which were used for most of parameter studies conducted.
The Taguchi methods are often used in tests generating one result per trial. It is possible
to use the Taguchi method in tests generating more than one result per trial such as time
dependent tests. This gives the possibility to study how the parameters influence the
sought variable over a specified interval. This approach is presented by Beckman and
Agebro in their thesis work, “A Study of Vehicle Related Parameters Influencing the
Initial Phase of Ramp Rollovers”, and is called “the Continuous Taguchi Method” [5].
By using the Taguchi method the design parameters are investigated to find important
interactions and which parameters that influences on the behaviour of the system
analyzed.
Parameter Explanation
A Height to the inner joints for the upper control arms [mm]
B Height to the inner joints for the lower control arms [mm]
C Anti-Dive adjustment of the rear lower control arm [mm]
+
C
A
B
Figure 6.1. Parameters used in the parameter study of the front suspension.
In Table 6.4 the chosen low and high levels of the parameters are shown. The mounts
on the frame will also have levels between the low and high levels used in the parameter
study.
Table 6.4. Levels used in the parameter study of the front suspension.
Figure 6.2. Results from parameter study of Anti Dive characteristics during roll.
Figure 6.3. Results from parameter study of the camber angle of left wheel during roll.
Figure 6.4. Results from parameter study of roll centre vertical travel during roll.
Figure 6.5. Results from parameter study of the lateral travel of roll centre during roll.
Figure 6.6. Results from the parameter study of toe angle variation during roll.
Figure 6.7.Results from parameter study of lateral wheel travel at track during roll.
Figure 6.8. Results from parameter study of scrub radius variation during roll.
A
Parameter Explanation
A Location of outer tie rod end in Y-direction [mm]
B Location of inner tie rod end in X-direction [mm]
C Location of inner tie rod end in Z-direction [mm]
Table 6.6. Levels used in the parameter study of the front suspension.
Figure 6.10. Results from parameter study showing camber as function of wheel travel.
Figure 6.11. Results from parameter study of toe angle variations as function of wheel travel.
Figure 6.12. Results from parameter study of camber characteristics for curve outer wheel as function
of steering rack displacement.
Figure 6.13. Results from parameter study of camber characteristics for curve inner wheel as function
of steering rack displacement.
Figure 6.14. Results from parameter study of outside turn diameter as function of steering rack
displacement.
Figure 6.15. Result from parameter study of percent Ackerman as function of steering rack
displacement.
6.3.3 Parameter Study of Rear Suspension
The design of the rear suspension is made in similar way as the front suspension, the
joints at the frame can be changed in Z-direction to make it possible to change the
camber gain characteristics and add anti features. The influences of this can be read out
from Figures 6.17 to 6.24. The parameters used in the studies can be viewed in Table
6.7 and in Figure 6.1. Table 6.8 shows the parameter levels used.
Parameter Explanation
A Height to the inner joints for the upper control arms [mm]
B Height to the inner joints for the lower control arms [mm]
C Anti-Dive adjustment of the rear lower control arm [mm]
Table 6.8. Levels used in the parameter study of the rear suspension.
Figure 6.17. Result from parameter study of anti-squat as function of roll angle.
Figure 6.18. Result from parameter study of camber for curve inner wheel during roll.
Figure 6.19. Results of parameter study of camber for curve outer wheel during roll.
Figure 6.20. Result from parameter study of roll centre vertical travel during roll.
Figure 6.21. Result from parameter study of roll centre lateral travel during roll.
Figure 6.22. Result from parameter study of toe angle variation of curve inner wheel during roll.
Figure 6.23. Result from parameter study of toe angle variation of curve outer wheel during roll.
Figure 6.24. Result from parameter study of lateral wheel travel at wheel centres.
7 Discussion and Design Results
7.1 Track Width and Wheelbase
The load transfer is a linear function of the wheelbase. Different static axle load
distributions will only shift the result in Y-direction. The differences between having a
wheelbase of 1525mm, the smallest allowed by the rules, and a wheelbase of 1700mm
are very small as seen in Figure 3.1. A longer wheelbase results in less longitudinal load
transfer. Therefore the wheelbase of the car will be set by the packaging conditions but
are to be kept as small as possible to make the race car react quicker on steering. This
will result in a wheelbase around 1700mm. The drawbacks of having a short wheelbase
is that it may lead to an unstable car at high speeds. But since the speeds are fairly low,
average speeds are around 45 km/h, this is considered not to be a problem.
The lateral load transfer as function of track width is also a linear functions as seen in
Figure 3.2. The results from tests investigating the influences on the ackermann angle
when the trackwidth is changed showed that the effects were small as seen in Equation
7.1, which shows the effects for two different track widths, 1250mm and 1350mm, at a
hairpin with an outer diameter of 9m.
l 1700
δ= = = 0.439 rad = 25.14°
r − 2 ⋅ tw 4500 − 12 ⋅1250
1
(7.1)
l 1700
δ= = = 0.444 rad = 25.46°
r − 2 ⋅ tw 4500 − 12 ⋅1350
1
During a 1G turn the change in vertical force on the curve inner wheel is 275N with a
trackwidth of 1250 mm and 254N with a trackwidth of 1350mm, in kilograms 28kg and
26kg. The difference may not be big but since a tyres ability to produce lateral force is,
among other parameters, a function of the tyre load a few kilos can be enough to pass
beyond the peak of the tyre force curve, the tyre will be overloaded. Since the very low
weight of a formula student car there are no tyres avivible developt especially for this
kind of light weight vehicles, therefore the risk of overloading a tyre due to lateral load
transfer is very low. The problem for this kind of light weight vehicle is the other way
around, the load transfer may lead to loss in lateral force on the curve inner wheel due to
underload.
In Figure 3.3 it can be seen that an increase in tyre load from 125lbs to 250lbs, an
increase of 100%, results in an 115% increase of the lateral force at 10 slip angle for a
20x8-13” Goodyear racing slick. The reason to use a wider trackwidth will not be to
eliminate the risks for a tyre overload, it is to prevent a tyre underload to happen.
The trackwidth is choosen to 1250mm in the front and 1200mm at the rear. The main
reason for having a smaller rear trackwidth is that wider tyres are fitted in the rear than
the front, the front tyres will be 20x6.2-13” and the rear tyres 20x7.2-13”, a difference
of 1.0” or 25.4mm. Having the same trackwidth front and rear would cause the rear
tyre’s inner line to be closer to the inside of the curve than the front tyre’s. This could
lead to the driver knocking down the cones that marks the track with his rear tyres
trying to take the shortest way possible only looking on his front wheels. Having a
bigger front trackwidth will also have the advantage of letting the frontaxle taking up a
bigger part of the rolling moment. The effect of this is that softer springs can be used at
the rear optimizing the rear traction and allowing more and earlier throttle on corner
exits.
7.2 Front Suspension Geometry
The final design of the front uprights was set in cooperation with the MME-students
designing the uprights and the Vehicle Dynamics-students designing the brake system
due to the packaging issues. The locations of the joints at the uprights can be found in
Table 7.1 and joints on the frame in Table 7.2. Figure 7.4 shows a model with the joints
marked.
Table 7.2. Location of front suspension joints at the frame. * for Anti Dive adjustment
UCA outer
Tie Rod outer
UCA rear
Wheel Centre
LCA outer
Z
LCA rear
X
LCA front Y
UCA front
Tie Rod inner
By using the adjustment levels some parameters can be changed inside the intervals
listed in Table 7.4.
The final design of the front suspension is a trade of between performance and
manufacturability. The hardest and most time-consuming part has been the design of the
front uprights. Due to lack of space available in the front rims the final design is a little
bit off from the design wanted. This mostly affects the kingpin inclination angle and the
scrub radius. It was desired to keep the kingpin inclination angle below 8.0 degrees but
the final design has a kingpin inclination angle of 9.2 degrees and this leads to a scrub
radius of 4.6mm.
7.3 Steering
The purpose of the steering geometry design was to minimize bump steer and have the
possibility to adjust toe angles and the Ackermann geometry. Adjustable outer tie rod
joints make the adjustability of Ackermann geometry possible. Another criterion that
the steering system had to fulfil was that the car had to manage a hairpin with an outer
diameter of 9m. Table 7.1 and Table 7.2 show the locations of the joints in the steering
system and the adjustability levels wanted. Table 7.5 shows the corresponding levels of
adjustability for Ackerman geometry and toe angles.
Figure 7.5. At big steering angles both curve inner and curve outer wheel leans into the curve.
7.4 Rear Suspension Geometry
The designs of the rear uprights are not the same as the design of the front uprights,
since inboard brakes are used. The operation conditions for the rear suspension are
slightly different since no steering is applied here. The locations of the joints at the
uprights can be found in Table 7.6.
The locations of the joints on the frame can be read in Table 7.7. The toe link
configuration at the rear suspension is a so-called ungrounded toe link; it is connected to
the lower control arm instead of connected to the frame.
The corresponding geometries of the rear suspension can be viewed in Table 7.8, which
shows the parameters at the unchanged set up.
“Camber Gain positive Roll” refers to the curve outer wheel measured at 0.5 degrees
roll angle at contact patches and “Camber Gain negative Roll” refers to the curve inner
wheel.
By using the adjustment levels in Table 7.7 some parameters can be changed inside the
intervals listed in Table 7.9, which also shows the adjustment levels for static camber,
toe angles and ride height.
Note that anti squat and anti lift can’t be changed independently of each other. The
parameters characteristics during operation of the car can be viewed in section 4.4.
One important parameter, not so much discussed in this thesis work, is the tires. As the
tires are the part of the race car having the biggest dynamic influence a lot of work can
be carried out investigating how different tires would affect the handling qualities of the
race car. Different sizes, brands and rubber compounds are available at the market.
Testing different tires against each other to find out which tires fits the race car best
could be of bigger importance than improving the design of the suspension. Especially
since the car is raced under such conditions that the wheel travel is very small and not
affecting the suspension geometry much.
If KTH decides to develop a new car for the 2005 Formula Student event the 2004 car is
a very useful tool in the engineering process. The car can be used in different tests and
evaluated to become base to start the new development process from. The computer
model of the car can be updated with drivetrain and brakes and used for evaluation of
the car’s dynamic behaviour. By using the computer model unwanted behaviours on the
2004 car can be prevented from appear on the 2005 car as well.
9 Nomenclature
Fzi Vertical axle load, i=1 for front axle and i=2 for rear axle
l Wheelbase
Length from front axle to centre of gravity
ax Acceleration in X-direction
Length from ground up to centre of gravity
Fz i Lateral load transfer, i=1 for front axle and i=2 for rear axle
lat Lateral acceleration
hCG Height to centre of gravity
twi Track width, i=1 for front axle and i=2 for rear axle
10 References
10.1 Literature
[2] Milliken, William F. & Milliken, Douglas L. (1995), Race Car Vehicle
Dynamics, SAE Inc, USA
[3] Reimpell, J. & Stoll, H. & Betzler, J.W. (2001), The Automotive Chassis:
Engineering Principles 2nd Edition, Butterworth-Heinemann, England
[6] Race Tire Analysis and Plotting Toolbox Open Wheel Release version 7.2
(2001), The Goodyear Tire and Rubber Company
[7] BOSCH Automotive Handbook 5th Edition (2000), Robert Bosch GmbH,
Germany