FSAE Suspension
FSAE Suspension
FSAE Suspension
FSAE
The Formula SAE Series competitions challenge
teams of university undergraduate and graduate students to conceive, design, fabricate and compete with small, formula style, autocross racing cars Over the course of three days, the cars are judged in a series of static and dynamic events including: technical inspection, cost, presentation, and engineering design, solo performance trials, and high performance track endurance.1
1 http://students.sae.org/competitions/formulaseries/west/eventguide.pdf
Sponsor
Mike Hawley Employed by W. L. Gore Former UD FSAE member, designed the suspension system for two consecutive years Resource of much valuable information on suspension
lower a-arm
pushrod
Sway Bar
Key Terms: Camber: The angle of the wheel with respect to vertical. Kingpin Angle: The angle measured between the steering axis and vertical. Scrub Radius: The distance between the steering axis and the wheels contact patch.
car from diving during braking Anti-Squat: A suspension geometry setup that resists the diving action of the tail of the car from diving during acceleration
Center of Gravity
A-arms
The closer the convergence points are to the height of the center of gravity, the more anti-
Project Scope
Determination of most efficient suspension configuration and
geometry Determination of spring and damper requirements Determination of anti-dive/anti-squat requirements Determination of optimal values for camber, caster, and kingpin angles as well as scrub radius Determination of attachment points at wheel, brake, steering rack, axle, and chassis interfaces Design based off of existing wheels and tires Design synthesis and real-time simulation of complete and functional suspension system Output a working, useable suspension system for the 2010-2011 UD FSAE car Maintain a high level of easy adjustability for further tuning of the suspension system
track must be at least 75% of larger track Minimum of 2 useable wheel travel Minimum of 1 jounce Minimum of 1 rebound
Additional Constraints
Budget of $1000 Constraints imposed by other teams Drivetrain axles and rear hubs Driver controls - steering rack location Chassis construction of chassis Cooperative brake rotor and caliper selection
Wheelbase: 61 Front Track: 50 Rear Track: 2 less than front Adjustable Anti-Dive and Anti-Dive: 1 vertically on specific pickup points Roll Center: Stable, < 1 vertical movement over 1.5 deflection in roll, < 1 horizontal movement Scrub Radius: < 1 Camber: -2 static camber, maintained over deflection in roll Kingpin Angle: 0-5 Caster Angle: 0-5 # Tools to Adjust and Tune Suspension: 3 tools Adjustments easy to access: Yes Camber and toe adjustment without disconnection of parts: Yes Material Strength: Factor of safety for range of normal operation: > 2 Material Machinability: Maximize Material Weight: Minimize
Locknut Threaded A-arm To adjust, bolt is removed, Locknut loosened, and rod end turned
Camber Adjustability
Shims at upright Particular shim thicknesses can be correlated to specific camber changes
Easily adjustable: loosen bolts
shim
upright
a-arm clevis
bushing
bushing
Adjustment is achieved by switching out different sets of bushings. Bushings are cheap and easy to manufacture.
Kinematic Design
Body Roll Simulation
30 25 20 15
Excel spreadsheets and dynamic CAD models to simulate suspension and achieve desired performance characteristics. Two Dimensional Simulation of Suspension in Roll
Neutral
10
Y (in) 5 0 -30 -25 -20 -15 -10 -5 -5 -10 -15 -20 X (in) 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Lower A-arms
Dimensions determined by kinematic and force
analyses. Design based on vehicle dynamics theory and research of previously successful designs.
Upper A-arms
Dimensions determined by kinematic and force
analyses. Design based on vehicle dynamics theory and research of previously successful designs.
Rocker Design
Determines ratio of pushrod motion to spring
assigned to Seth Beckley Typical FSAE design style Stiffness adjustability achieved by changing lever arm length
Force Analysis
The force analysis on the final design centered around
maximum cornering and braking forces estimated during competition. The team decided upon a goal of structural integrity through a 5g vertical impact. The estimated braking and turning values were conservative, and surpassed the benchmarked 1.4 g expected in competition. The rockers were designed to optimize the travel of the shock absorbers.
Force Analysis
Factor of Safety The factor of safety for the suspension components under normal turning and breaking is over 5. Failure of Components The rod ends are the weakest members of the suspension structure, and have an estimated failure rating of 4500 lbf. Rod ends are expensive and not as easy to replace as other hardware so the mounting bolts have been undersized to provide a factor of safety less than the components themselves. Finite Element Analysis A finite element analysis was conducted using solid modeling tools as well as manual calculations to ensure each components performance
bump and cornering conditions, desired ride and roll rates were determined:
Ride Rate: Front: 148.4 lb/in Rear: 146 lb/in Roll Rate: Front: 18750 lbft/rad total, 15483 lbft/rad contributed by springs, 3267 lbft/rad contributed by sway bars Rear: 20875 lbft/rad total, 14016 lbft/rad contributed by springs, 6859 lbft/rad contributed by sway bars
roll rate, and the ratio between pushrod movement and spring compression. Damping can be guessed at, but not dialed in until car is driven and tested. From spring stiffness calculations, the target suspension frequency was estimated to be 3 3.5 Hz which can be achieved through shock adjustability.
Final Product
To determine the achievement of the geometric target
values the suspension was assembled onto the partially completed frame and measured. Assembly will continue throughout the final week of Phase 4. The final assembly of the suspension will then be presented to the sponsor on December 17th 2010.
Performance Evaluation/Validation
Chromoly tubing and welded connections will be tested to
failure and compared to force analysis during the final week of the Fall 2010 semester. The car will not be completed until the very end of senior design, and thus testing of the effectiveness of the system will have to be postponed until winter session. A test plan has been developed to analyze the performance under driving conditions. Once the car is built, the UD FSAE club will take over testing and tuning of the suspension using methods outlined by Team Suspension
after test runs Load Transfer: G force measurements from onboard data acquisition Jounce, Body Roll & Anti Squat/Anti-Dive: onboard measurement and tuning All evaluated performance measurements can be adjusted through adjustability in the suspension and will be tuned to optimal properties.
Camber Effectiveness
The efficiency of the camber, ride, and roll rates can be
measured by analyzing tire temperature distribution after 5-10 laps around the track. Each tires temperature will be measured at three locations on the tire
1 from the outside shoulder
Load Transfer
G-force analysis will be completed through the cars
onboard computer. Acceleration measurements will be recorded at every point along the line the car travels around the track. The data extracted from the computer will enable the team to calculate resultant G-forces.
directly measuring them as the car is put through testing on the track. Under maximum braking, accelerating, and cornering conditions, these properties will be measured. From this analysis the car will be finely tuned to achieve the set target values.
Budget
Materials Cost = $322 Aluminum, Steel, Chromoly Tubing Parts Cost = $550 Bearings, Rod Ends, Spherical Joints, hardware Miscellaneous Costs = $100
Manufacturing Cost = ~$0.00 All fabricating was done by team in FSAE shop and student shop at no charge Total Cost = $972
Project Management
The design of each component in the suspension
assembly have been completed and optimized. All geometrical target values have been met. The suspension will be tuned after testing is completed in order to satisfy performance metrics. Budget has been reduced and falls within the constraint. Team is on schedule to finish project and present results to the sponsor on December 17th 2010.
Questions?