ANALYSIS OF STATIC CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPOSITE

LEAF SPRING USING CAE TOOLS

A DISSERTATION REPORT

SUBMITTED IN PARTIAL FULLFILMENT FOR THE

AWARD OF THE DEGREE OF

MASTER OF TECHNOLOGY
IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
(MACHINE DESIGN)

SUBMITTED BY

ASHOK BHATIA
ROLL NO.-3573224

UNDER THE ESTEEMED GUIDANCE OF

Mr. RAJESH KAUSHIK Mr. GAURAV KANSAL

(Associate Prof, MED, DCTM ) (Associate Prof, MED, BSAITM)

DEPARTMENT OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

DELHI COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY & MGMT.

PALWAL (HARYANA)
June 2014
 CERTIFICATE

This is to certify that the dissertation entitled “ANALYSIS OF STATIC

CHARACTERISTICS OF COMPOSITE LEAF SPRING USING CAE TOOLS”
submitted to DELHI COLLEGE OF TECHNOLOGY & MGMT Palwal
(Haryana) in partial fulfillment for the degree of MASTER Of TECHNOLOGY in
Machine Design (Mechanical Engineering) by Mr. Ashok Bhatia is an authentic record of
student’s own work carried out under my supervision and guidance.
The matter presented in this Dissertation work has not been submitted to any other University
/ Institute for the award of any other degree.

Signature of the Supervisors

Mr. RAJESH KAUSHIK Mr. GAURAV KANSAL

Associate Professor Associate Professor
Mechanical Engineering Department Mechanical Engineering Department
DCTM, Palwal BSAITM, Faridabad
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

I would like to express my deep appreciation to my supervisors “Mr. Rajesh kaushik

Associate Professor (Mech. Engg. Deptt. DCTM), and Mr. Gaurav kansal Associate
professor (Mech. Engg. Deptt. BSAITM) for being a great source of inspiration, insightful
technical advice, for their guidance, encouragement and constructive criticism throughout the
course of present investigation and drafting of this manuscript. I owe my gratitude to them
for always willing to share their time with me from their valuable schedule whenever I
knocked at their door. Without their kind heart and guidance, I would have never been able to
complete this work.

I would also like to give my sincere thanks to Dr. Pradeep Kumar, Professor and
Chairman, I am deeply obliged to Mr. Brijesh Chaurasiya, Asstt. Professeor Department
of Mechanical Engineering, for his support and coordination during the course of this work.

Place: Palwal

Date: June 2014 Ashok Bhatia

 ABSTRACT

Weight reduction has become main focus of automobile industry in present scenario. About
65% reduction in suspension weight can be obtained by replacing a steel spring with
composite spring of same function. The automobile industry has shown increased interest in
the replacement of steel leaf spring with fiber glass composite leaf spring due to high strength
to weight ratio. Therefore, the aim of present work is to make a general study on design and
analysis of composite multi leaf spring which replaces the multi leaf spring made of steel for
the same function. 3-D model of a conventional steel leaf spring of a light commercial
vehicle is prepared using Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 and static analysis is performed using Ansys
Workbench 13.0.
A study on different models of composite multi leaf spring made from fiber glass with epoxy
resin is made, taking into consideration the type of contact at the interface of different
neighboring leafs. First, a composite multi leaf spring having same dimensions as that of steel
leaf spring is modeled and analyzed with bonded contact at the interface of different
neighboring leafs. A comparison between results of steel leaf spring and composite leaf
spring is made and observed about 70% increment in stiffness. This model does not solve the
purpose of replacement of existing steel leaf spring, because it makes the spring much stiffer
that deteriorate the comfort and stability of the vehicle.
Therefore, different geometric models of composite multi leaf spring having no separation
contact at the interface of different neighboring leaf are developed changing number of leafs
and thickness of leafs keeping overall thickness (n*t=constant, n= no. of leafs, t= thickness of
leaf) of leaf spring to be constant. A comparative study of stress and deflection, developed in
different models under same statistical and boundary conditions is made. It has been observed
that multi leaf spring having 5 leafs will provide best results when compared with steel leaf
spring under given conditions. About 12% increment in stiffness and 64% decrement in
weight is observed.

1
 LIST OF CONTENTS

TITLE PAGE NO.

Certificate I
Acknowledgement II
Abstract III
List of Contents IV-V
List of Figures VI-VIII
List of Tables IX
CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1-16
1.1 Leaf Spring 1
1.1.1 Historical Background of Leaf Spring 2
1.1.2 Types of Leaf Springs 3
1.1.3 Type of Eyes of Leaf Spring 4
1.1.4 Leaf Spring According to load carrying capacity 5
1.2 Leaf Spring Terminology 6
1.3 Introduction to Composite materials 8
1.4 Computer Aided Engineering 11
1.5 List of Available CAE Software 13
1.6 Introduction to Pro-Engineer 14
1.7 Introduction to ANSYS 15
Closure 16
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW 17-21
2.1 Brief History and Literature Review 17

Closure 21
CHAPTER 3: PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION AND FORMULATION 22-46
3.1 Problem Definition 22
3.2 Objectives of Present Work 22
3.3 Methodology of Present Work 23
3.4 Mathematical Modeling of Leaf-Spring 23
3.5 Material Selection 27
 3.5.1 Layup selection 28
3.6 Part Modeling Using Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 28
3.7 Static Analysis Using ANSYS Workbench 13.0 31
3.8 Different Models of Leaf Spring Modeled for Analysis 42
Using Pro-E Wildfire 4.0
Closure 46
CHAPTER 4: ANALYSIS RESULTS USING ANSYS 47-61
WORKBENCH 13.0
4.1 Case 1: Type-1A 47
4.2 Case 1: Type 1B 51
4.3 Case 2: Type 2A: Steel Leaf spring 53
4.4 Case 2: Type 2A: FGER leaf spring 56
4.5 Case 2: Type 2B 58
Closure 61
CHAPTER 5: RESULT EVALUATION AND DISCUSSIONS 62-67
5.1 Comparing FEA and Analytical Results of Leaf Spring having 62
4 graduated leafs (including master leaf)
5.2 Comparing FEA and Analytical results of Leaf Spring having 63
3 graduated leafs (including master leaf), and 1 full length leaf
5.3 Comparing FEA and Experimental [4] results of Multi-Leaf 65
Spring (steel) having 7 leafs
5.4 Comparing FEA and Experimental [4] results of Multi-leaf 65
Spring (FGER) having 7 leafs with bonded contacts
5.5 Comparing FEA results of Steel leaf spring (with no separation 66
Contacts) with FGER leaf spring (with bonded contacts)
5.6 Comparing Results of Steel leaf spring (No-Separation contacts) 66
With FGER leaf spring having 5 leafs (No-Separation contacts)
Closure 67
CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS 68
REFERENCES 69-71
 LIST OF FIGURES

FIGURE TITL PAGE

Fig.1.1
E NO.
Fig.1.2 Multi-Leaf Spring 3
Fig.1.3 Mono-Leaf Spring 4
Fig.1.4 Parabolic-Leaf spring 4
Fig.1.5 Different Types of Eyes 5
Fig.1.6 Elliptical leaf spring 5
Fig.1.7 Semi-elliptical leaf spring 5
Fig.1.8 Quarter- elliptical leaf spring 6
Fig.1.9 Semi-Elliptical Leaf Spring 6
Fig.1.10 Stepping of Leaf-Spring with backing leafs too long 7
Fig.1.11 Nipping of Leaf-Spring 7
Fig.1.12 A Cloth of woven carbon fiber filaments 8
Fig.1.13 Topology of fiber-reinforced composite materials 9
Fig. 3.1 Multi-Leaf Spring 23
Fig. 3.2 Cantilever with Multi-leafs of Full Length 24
Fig. 3.3 Triangular Plate to form graduated length leaf spring 25
Fig. 3.4 Graduated Leaf Spring 26
Fig. 3.5 Multi-Leaf Spring having both graduated and full 26
Length Leaf’s
Fig. 3.6 Comparision of Specific Strain Energies of composite 28
materials
Fig.3.7 Sketching in Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 29
Fig.3.8 Adding Material to 2-D Sketch in Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 29
Fig.3.9 Assembly in Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 30
Fig.3.10 Drafting In Pro-E Wildfire 4.0 31
Fig. 3.11 Material Properties in ANSYS Workbench 13.0 31
Fig. 3.12 Geometry in ANSYS Workbench 13.0 32
Fig.3.13 Type of Contacts in ANSYS Workbench 13.0 33
Fig.3.14 Mesh Generation in ANSYS Workbench 13.0 35
Fig.3.15 Tetrahedron element 35
Fig.3.16 Setting Boundary Conditions in ANSYS 38
Workbench 13.0
Fig.3.17 Types of Fixed Supports 39
Fig.3.18 Types of Displacement Supports 39
Fig.3.19 Frictionless support 40
Fig.3.20 Cylindrical support 40
Fig. 3.21 Applied Boundary Conditions 41
Fig.3.22 Solution Analysis in ANSYS Workbench 13.0 41

Fig.4.1 Stress analysis of Type -1A at F=2200N 47

Fig.4.2 Deflection Analysis of Type-1A at F = 2200N 47
Fig.4.3 Stress Analysis of Type-1B at F=2475N 51
Fig.4.4 Deflection Analysis of Type-1B at F=2475N 51
Fig.4.5 Stress Analysis of Type-2A (Steel Spring) at F=3250N 53
Fig.4.6 Deflection Analysis of Type-2A (Steel Spring) 53
at F = 3250N
Fig.4.7 Shear Stress Analysis of Type – 2A (Steel Spring) 54
at F= 3250N
Fig.4.8 Stress Analysis of Type – 2A (FGER Spring) at F=3250N 56
Fig.4.9 Deflection Analysis of Type – 2A (FGER Spring) 56
at F= 3250N
Fig.4.10 Stress Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N 58
Fig.4.11 Deflection Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N 59
Fig.4.12 Shear Stress Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N 59
Fig.5.1 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Stress w.r.t. 62
Applied Load Type 1A

Fig. 5.2 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Deflection w.r.t. 63

Applied Load Type 1A

VII
Fig. 5.3 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Stress w.r.t. 64
Applied Load Type 2A
Fig. 5.4 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Deflection w.r.t. 64
Applied Load Type 2A
Fig. 5.5 Variation of Max. Stress V/s Applied Load Type 2A 67
Fig. 5.6 Variation of Max. Deflection V/s Applied Load Type 2A 67

1
 LIST OF TABLES

TABLE TITLE PAGE NO.

Table 1.1 List of Available CAE software 12

Table 3.1 Case 1 42

Table 3.2 Case 2 42

Table 3.3 Comparative study of Different Geometric Models 45

Table 5.1 Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.1-4.2) 62
and Analytical Results

Table 5.2 Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.3-4.4) 63

and Analytical Results

Table 5.3 Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.6) 65

and Experimental Results [4]

Table 5.4 Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig.4.8-4.9) 65

and Experimental Results [4]

Table 5.5 Comparative study FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.6) 66

and FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.8-4.9)

Table 5.6 Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.7) 66

and FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.10-4.12)

1
 CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Springs are vital for suspension system of any automobile used to minimize the vertical
vibration impacts and bumps on the rough roads and provide a comfortable ride. A spring is
an elastic member used to store mechanical energy in the form of strain energy. They deflect
under load and recover their original shape when released without being distorted. Quality
versions of springs are made from high alloy spring steel. While springs can be made from
cheaper low carbon steels but they will lack their durability.

Main functions of springs are:

(a) To store or control energy due to shock, as in car spring, railway buffers, elevator
buffer springs, in aircraft landing gears etc.
(b) To maintain motion by maintaining contact between two elements such as a cam and
its follower.
(c) To store energy, as in clock motors, circuit breakers , toys etc.
(d) To measures spring forces as in spring balance, gauges etc.

Main characteristics of springs:

(a) Maximum deflection consistent with required stability.

(b) Compatibility with other vehicle components in terms of overall ride.
(c) Minimum weight.
(d) Low maintenance and operating cost.
(e) Low initial cost.

1.1 Leaf Spring

A leaf spring is one of the conventional and simple form of spring used in suspension system
of a wheeled vehicle. They are also called flat springs made from flat strips. The main
advantage of leaf spring is that its end can be guided along a definite path which enables it to
transfer the road impacts on the chassis of the vehicle uniformly instead at one point.

It is termed as elliptical spring, when it takes the shape of slender-arc shaped whereas the
cross section of the spring is rectangular along whole length. A leaf spring is used to resist
bending. It is a long, flat and flexible piece made of spring steel or composite material. Most
1
heavy duty vehicles today uses sets of leaf springs per solid axle, mounted perpendicularly to
support the weight of the vehicle.

Fig.1.1 Semi-Elliptical Multi-Leaf Spring

In our automobile vehicle a leaf spring should support various kinds of external forces but the
most important task of the leaf spring is to resist the variable vertical forces. Maximum
vertical forces act at centre of the spring that’s why it is made thicker in the middle to resist
bending and thin at the end where it attaches to the body. To fulfil this function, a leaf spring
can be made from leafs stacked on top of each other on several layers progressively longer
length on the top of each other.

Leaf springs are used in heavy duty vehicles because they have the advantage of spreading the
load uniformly over the chassis of the vehicle whereas coil spring imparts the load at a single
point. Now a day’s leaf springs are used in various types of vehicles such as vans, trucks,
SUVs and railway carriages. Leaf springs are designed to Connect the axle to the vehicle ,
transfer driving and braking forces between frame and axle , resist drive and brake torque, On
steering axles, they maintain the proper wheel caster and camber.

1.1.1 Historical Background of Leaf Spring

Springs are the oldest form of suspension known to man. In early times leather straps were
used on carriages to provide cushioning and stability. As steel manufacturing was perfected
during the Industrial Revolution it was discovered that replacing leather straps with steel leafs
provided a serious improvement in ride, comfort and life of the suspension. Hence the first
steel leaf spring suspension was manufactured. As time passed leaf spring technology
improved: coil springs were developed, torsion bars were tried, and now air suspensions are
being introduced.

There were a variety of leaf springs, usually employing the word "elliptical". "Elliptical" or
"full elliptical" leaf springs referred to two circular arcs linked at their tips. This was joined to

1
the frame at the top centre of the upper arc, the bottom centre was joined to the "live"
suspension components, such as a solid front axle. Additional suspension components, such
as trailing arms, would be needed for this design, but not for "semi-elliptical" leaf springs as
used in the Hotchkiss drive. That employed the lower arc, hence its name. "Quarter-elliptic"
springs often had the thickest part of the stack of leafs stuck into the rear end of the side
pieces of a short ladder frame, with the free end attached to the differential, as in the Austin
Seven of the 1920s. As an example of non-elliptic leaf springs, the Ford Model T had multiple
leaf springs over its differential that was curved in the shape of a yoke. As a substitute for
dampers (shock absorbers), some manufacturers laid non-metallic sheets in between the metal
leafs, such as wood.

Leaf springs were very common on automobiles, right up to the 1970s in Europe and Japan
and late 70's in America when the move to front-wheel drive, and more sophisticated
suspension designs saw automobile manufacturers use coil springs instead. Today leaf springs
are still used in heavy commercial vehicles such as vans and trucks, SUVs, and railway
carriages. A more modern implementation is the parabolic leaf spring. This design is
characterised by fewer leafs whose thickness varies from centre to ends following a parabolic
curve. In this design, inter-leaf friction is unwanted, and therefore there is only contact
between the springs at the ends and at the centre where the axle is connected. The
characteristic of parabolic springs is better riding comfort and not as "stiff" as conventional
"multi-leaf springs". It is widely used on buses for better comfort. A further development by
the British GKN company and by Chevrolet with the Corvette amongst others is the move to
composite plastic leaf springs.

1.1.2 Types of Leaf Springs

There are only three basic types of leaf springs:

Multi-Leaf springs consist of heat-treated flat steel bars of diminishing lengths formed to a
predetermined arch held together by a bolt through its centre.

Fig.1.2 Multi-Leaf Spring

Mono-Leaf springs consist of only one heat-treated plate of steel whose thickness is
uniformly tapered from the centre to each end. A tapered mono-leaf spring can equal or
exceed the strength of a multi-leaf spring.

Fig.1.3 Mono-Leaf Spring

Parabolic springs are multi-leaf versions of Mono-Leaf springs. That is, they consist of 2 or
more full tapered leafs. Load carrying capacity of this type of spring is less but these are
better in terms of space requirements. Distributed pattern of stress from centre towards eye is
obtained in this type of leaf spring.

Fig.1.4 Parabolic-Leaf spring

1.1.3 Type of Eyes of Leaf Spring

Leaf spring eyes hold the bushings through which bolts or pins pass through to attach the
spring to the vehicle. Spring eyes can be Standard, Berlin or Reverse. Each has its own
features.

Standard eyes are the most popular and easiest to make. Main plates with Standard eyes can
receive additional support by extending the second leaf or a wrap plate.

Berlin eyes places the load through the centreline of the Main Plate, which reduces lateral
deflection.

Reverse eyes will lower a vehicle while providing maximum spring travel. The disadvantage
of Berlin and Reverse eyes is that they cannot be provided additional support from the second
Leaf.
 Fig.1.5 Different Types of Eyes

1.1.4 Leaf Spring According to load carrying capacity

Three types of leaf spring based on load carrying capacity are presented here. Elliptical leaf
spring has highest load capacity whereas quarter elliptical leaf spring has least load carrying
capacity.

Fig.1.6 Elliptical leaf spring

Fig.1.7 Semi-elliptical leaf spring

 Fig.1.8 Quarter- elliptical leaf spring

1.2 Leaf Spring Terminology

RATE is the ratio of amount of load required for unit deflection. Lower the rate, softer the
spring.

LOAD is the amount of weight the spring is designed to carry at a certain height. This is also
called design load or rate load.

FREE ARCH is how much arch is in a leaf spring when there is no load on the spring. Refer
to Fig. 1.9

LOADED HEIGHT is measured the same as Free Arch except the spring is under load.
Refer to Fig. 1.9

DIVISION LENGTH is what the (A) and (B) dimensions on the diagram below are called.
Typically the front (A) is the Short End (SE) and the rear (B) is called the Long End (LE).

Measuring the Length of Leaf-Springs

The most popular method used to measure the length of a leaf spring is eye to eye. As a spring
flexes up and down the eye to eye length changes. The correct way to measure a spring is to
measure as though the spring was flat. Following the curve of the spring, measure from the
centre of the front eye back to the centre bolt (A), then measure from the centre bolt back to
the centre of the other eye (B), again following the curve of the spring.

Fig.1.9 Semi-Elliptical Leaf Spring

Here, C= Free Arc under no Load, Loaded height under load

A=Short End B= Long End

Measuring Free Arch

Free Arch is how much arch is in a leaf spring when there is no load on the spring. To check
the Free Arch draws a line through the centre of the spring eyes. Then measure from that line
to the top of the main plate (the leaf with the eyes) next to the centre bolt. (C) This
measurement can be positive or negative.

Stepping is the distance from the end of one leaf to the end of the adjoining leaf. Stepping is
very important. Stepping controls the shape and strength of a spring when under load. Too
short of distance between the ends of the leaf will cause the upper leafs to bend downward at
the ends and upwards toward the centre, too long will give the spring a wavy look. Both
conditions produce an ineffective spring. Stepping is critical; a correctly stepped spring can
support nearly double the amount of weight than an incorrectly stepped spring.

Fig.1.10 Stepping of Leaf-Spring with backing leafs too long

Nipping of leaf springs

Stresses in extra full length leafs are 50% more than the stresses in graduated length leafs.
One of the methods of equalising the stresses in different leafs is to pre-stressing the leafs.
The pre-stressing is achieved by bending the leafs to different radii of curvature, before they
are assembled with the centre clip.

Fig.1.11 Nipping of Leaf-Spring

As shown in figure, the full length leafs are given a greater radius of curvature than the
adjacent leafs. The initial gap c between the extra full lengths leafs before assembly is called a
nip.

Now a day, weight reduction becomes a main aspect of automobile industry. To full fill this
they require materials, those can be replaced with existing steel materials without being any
comprised with material properties. So the material required should be light in weight, have
high strength to weight ratio, compared mechanical and other properties to steel and a higher
fatigue life. Unfortunately composites have all these properties.

1.3 Introduction to Composite materials

Composite materials, called composites in short, are engineered or naturally occurring

material made from two or more individual materials having different properties (physical or
chemical), which remain separate and distinct within the final structure. Example: A common
form of composite is disc brake pads, consists of ceramics particles reinforced in a soft
material matrix.

Individual materials of which composites are made called its constituent materials. Its
constituent materials can be classified into two categories: matrix and reinforcements, one
portion of each constituent is required for composites.

Fig. 1.12 A Cloth of woven carbon fibre filaments

The matrix material surrounds and supports the reinforced material by maintaining their
relative positions. Matrix properties are enhanced by special physical or mechanical
properties of reinforced materials. The principal factors affecting the methodology are the
nature of chosen matrix and reinforced materials. Another important affecting factor is the
gross quantity of the material to be produced.
Many of the commercially made composites use a polymer matrix material which is often
called a resin solution. There are many different polymers available, which can be classified
into broad categories, depending upon the starting raw ingredients. The most common of
which are polyster, vineyl ester, epoxy, phenolic polyamide and others. The reinforcement
materials are often fibres but also commonly ground materials. As a rule of thumb, layup
results in a product containing 60% resin and 40% fibre, whereas vacuum infusion gives a
final product with 40% resin and 60% fibre content. The strength of the product greatly
depends upon this ratio.

Topology

Topology of fibre-reinforced composite materials:

Fig. 1.13 Topology of fibre-reinforced composite materials

a) Continuous aligned fibre-reinforced

b) Discontinuous aligned fibre-reinforced

c) Discontinuous random-oriented fibre-reinforced.

Mechanics

The physical properties of composite materials are generally anisotropic (different depending
upon the applied force or load). Thus the stiffness of a composite structure often varies with
the applied forces and moments. Composite stiffness also depends upon the design of the
composite. For ex.: the fibre reinforcement and the matrix method, the method of structure
build, and the orientation of fibre axis to primary forces.
Failures

Delamination is the main type of failure in composites. Separation of laminates at the

interface between two layers is known as delamination. Shock, impact or a repeated cyclic
stresses are main cause of delamination. Individual fibre will separate from the matrix e.g.
Fibre pullout. Compression failure can occurs in compression buckling at both macro and
micro scale at each individual reinforcing fibre. Tension failure can be net section failure of
the part or degradation of the composites at a microscopic scale, where one or more of the
layers in the composites fail in the tension of the matrix or failure the bond between matrix
and fibre.

Applications

Composites are strong enough to take harsh loading conditions such as aerospace components
(tails, wings, fuselages, propellers), boat and scull hulls, bicycle frames and racing car bodies,
disk brake systems of airplanes and racing cars are using carbon/carbon material, and the
composite material with carbon fibres and silicon carbide matrix has been introduced in
luxury vehicles and sports cars. In 2007, an all-composite military Humvee was introduced by
TPI Composites Inc and Armor Holdings Inc, the first all-composite military vehicle. By
using composites the vehicle is lighter, allowing higher payloads. Pipes and fittings for
various purposes like transportation of potable water, fire-fighting, irrigation, seawater,
desalinated water, chemical and industrial waste, and sewage are now manufactured in glass
reinforced plastics.

CAE tools are widely used in automobile industry now a day’s. In fact, their use has enabled
the automakers to reduce the product development cost and time while improving safety,
comfort and durability of vehicles they produce. The predictive capability of CAE tools has
progressed to the point where much of the design verification is now done using computer
simulations rather than physical prototyping.

1.4 Computer Aided Engineering

Computer aided engineering is a technology concerned with the use of digital computers to
perform functions like analysis, simulation, design, manufacturing, planning, diagnosis and
repair in design and production. This technology is moving in the direction of greater
1
integration of design and manufacturing. Software tools that have been developed to provide
solution to these activities are known as CAE tools. CAE tools are being used to analyze the
pre manufacturing performance of any engineering component. At present CAE tools became
the major tools in any engineering work to support the design tools in terms of information
and decision making. CAE will provide the technology base for the computer integrated
factory for the future.

CAE encompasses the application of computers from preliminary design (CAD) through
manufacturing (CAM). Computer aided design generally associated with the computer
systems to assist in creation (computer aided drawing and drafting), modification, analysis
and optimization of a design. Whereas Computer aided manufacturing (CAM) uses the
computer systems to plan, manage and control the operations of manufacturing plant through
either direct or indirect interface with the plant production resources. It includes programs for
generating the instructions computer numerically controlled machine (CNC) to production
and process scheduling and inventory control. Studies conclude that design engineer can save
approx. 40% of time and cost using CAE tools.

Areas Covered By CAE Tools

 Static analysis of components and assemblies using FEA (finite element analysis)
 Thermal and fluid flow analysis by computational fluid dynamics
 Dynamic and kinematic response of mechanisms
 Shape optimization of components
 Mechanical event simulation
 Analysis tools for process simulation for operations such as casting, moulding and die
press forming
 Optimization of the product and process

In general there are three phases in any computer aided engineering task:

Pre-processing – define the model and environmental factors to be applied to it

Analysis solver

Post-processing of results
 Application Area

 Aerospace
 Automobile
 Metal forming
 Sheet metal forming
 Drop testing
 Can and shipping container design
 Electronic component design
 Glass forming
 Plastic, mould and blow forming
 Biomedical
 Metal cutting
 Earthquake engineering
 Failure analysis
 Sports equipment
 Civil engineering

1.5 List of Available CAE Software

For the purpose of CAD model generation and finite element analysis, there are many
software packages available in market. List of such software and names of company
providing the software are given below in table:

TABLE 1.1 LIST OF AVAILABLE CAE SOFTWARE

Sr. No. Software Company

1 Abaqus Dassult system

2 Abaqus Explicit Dassult system

3 Adams MSC software corporation

4 Ansys Ansys Inc.

5 Cast Flow Walkingtone Engg. Inc.

6 CATIA Dassult system
7 CFX Ansys Inc.

8 FE-Safe Safe Technology Ltd.

9 Fluent Ansys Inc.

10 Hyperview Player Altair Eng. Inc.

11 Hypermash Altair Eng. Inc.

12 Ls-Dyna Liver more software tech. Group

13 MATLAB The Mathworks

14 Motion-Solve Altair Engg. Inc.

15 MSC-Fatigue MSC Software Corporation

16 MSC Nastran MSC Software Corporation

17 NX-Ideas UGC Plan Software

18 Nx-Nastran UGC Plan Software

19 Optistruct Altair Engg. Inc.

20 Pam Crash ESE Group

21 Pro-e PTC

22 Radioss Altair Engg. Inc.

23 Solid Works 3D Vision Technologies

24 Star-CD CD-Adapco

25 Unigraphics UGC Plam Software

CAE software we have used:

- Pro-Engineer Wildfire 4.0

- ANSYS WORKBENCH 13.0
1.6 Introduction to Pro-Engineer

Pro/Engineer is a parametric, integrated 3D CAD/CAM/CAE solution created by Parametric

Technology Corporation (PTC). It was the first to market with parametric, feature-based,
associative solid modelling software. The application runs on Microsoft Windows platform,
and provides solid modelling, assembly modelling and drafting, finite element analysis, and
NC and tooling functionality for mechanical engineers. The Pro/ENGINEER name was
changed to Creo Elements/Pro on October 28, 2010, coinciding with PTC’s announcement of
Creo, a new design software application suite. Creo Elements/Pro will be discontinued after
version 2 in favour of the Creo design suite. Creo Elements/Pro competes in the market with
CATIA and NX (Unigraphics).

Pro/ENGINEER was the industry's first successful rule-based constraint (sometimes called
"parametric" or "variation") 3D CAD modelling system. The parametric modelling approach
uses parameters, dimensions, features, and relationships to capture intended product
behaviour and create a recipe which enables design automation and the optimization of design
and product development processes. This design approach is used by companies whose
product strategy is family-based or platform-driven, where a prescriptive design strategy is
fundamental to the success of the design process by embedding engineering constraints and
relationships to quickly optimize the design, or where the resulting geometry may be complex
or based upon equations.

Capabilities

Creo Elements/Pro is a parametric, feature-based modelling architecture incorporated into a

single database philosophy with advanced rule-based design capabilities. The capabilities of
the product can be split into the three main headings of Engineering Design, Analysis and
Manufacturing.

Engineering Design

Creo Elements/Pro offers a range of tools to enable the generation of a complete digital
representation of the product being designed. In addition to the general geometry tools there is
also the ability to generate geometry of other integrated design disciplines such as industrial
and standard pipe work and complete wiring definitions. Tools are also available to support
collaborative development.
Analysis

Creo Elements/Pro has numerous analysis tools available and covers thermal, static, dynamic
and fatigue finite element analysis along with other tools all designed to help with the
development of the product. These tools include human factors, manufacturing tolerance,
mould flow and design optimization. The design optimization can be used at a geometry level
to obtain the optimum design dimensions and in conjunction with the finite element analysis.

Manufacturing

By using the fundamental abilities of the software with regards to the single data source
principle, it provides a rich set of tools in the manufacturing environment in the form of
tooling design and simulated CNC machining and output.

1.7 Introduction to ANSYS

ANSYS, developed by ANSYS INC. USA, is a dedicated computer aided finite element
modelling and finite element analysis tool. Ansys is known as the standard in the field of
computer aided engineering. The graphical user interface (GUI) of ANSYS enables the user
to work with 3-dimensional (3D) models and also generate the results from them. ANSYS
offers engineering simulation solution sets in engineering simulation that a design process
requires. Companies in a wide variety of industries use ANSYS software. The tools put a
virtual product through a rigorous testing procedure before it becomes a physical object. We
can perform a variety of tasks ranging from finite element analysis to complete product
optimization using ANSYS.

Getting started with ANSYS

There are two modes to run ANSYS programs: interactive mode and batch mode

Interactive mode

This is the default mode in ANSYS. It allows us to work with menu and dialog boxes
(Graphical User Interface), online help and tools to create modes in the graphical window.
Batch Mode

In batch mode we can execute a file of commands in the ANSYS program. It is useful when
we do want to interact with program such as during the solution phase of an analysis.

Simulation environment

The drop down list id used to specify whether we want to run the interactive or the batch
interface. The options available in this drop down list are:

 ANSYS Workbench
 ANSYS
 ANSYS Batch
 MFX-ANSYS/CFX
 LS-DYNA Solver

Types of Analysis

The following are types of analysis that can be performed in ANSYS software

1. Structural analysis
2. Thermal analysis
3. Fluid flow analysis
4. Electromagnetic field analysis
5. Coupled field analysis

Closure: Introductive information to make a general understanding of leaf spring, composite

material and CAE tools has been given in this chapter.

In next chapter various research papers related to these concepts has been studied.
 CHAPTER-2

LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Brief History and Literature Review

Leaf Spring plays a important role in suspension system of automobiles since it provide ride
comfort and vehicle dynamics. They accounts for 10-20% of unsprung weight of the vehicle.
Since the weight reduction became the main focus of automobile industry, thus it is achieved
by replacement of steel parts with parts made of composite materials. Several papers were
devoted to the application of composite materials for automobiles out of which some papers
are reviewed here with emphasis on those papers that involve composite leaf spring.

Mahmood M. Shokrieh , Davood Rezaei [1] carried out their work on multi-leaf spring
having four leafs used in rear suspension system of light vehicles. Their work was aimed to
replace the existing leaf spring with composite spring made of glass and epoxy. Composite
spring was modelled, analyzed and optimized using commercial FEM software ANSYS.
Optimization was done, keeping a constant cross-section in spring geometry, stable under
static external forces without failure, and main consideration was given to the minimum
weight of the composite spring. Experimental and finite element method results were obtained
and compared for maximum stress and maximum deflection along with first natural
frequencies of the composite leaf spring. They concluded that composite spring has much
lower stresses, much lower weight and higher natural frequencies compared to steel spring to
avoid failure.

J.P. Hou , J.Y. Cherruault , I. Nairne , G. Jeronimidis , R.M. Mayer [2] in their work
they evaluate the eye end design of a composite leaf spring of heavy axle loads. During they
work they evaluate the three types of eye end designs of composite leaf spring. Static testing
and FINITE ELEMENT analysis was done using FEM software MSC-Marc. Their design
constraints were load deflections curve and strain measurement as a function of load. In their
first two designs the delamination failure of the fibres takes place. Their third design with
open eye end overcomes the problem by ending the fibre at the end of the eye section.

Gulur Siddaramanna, SHIVA SHANKAR , Sambagam VIJAYARANGAN [3] in their

work , they evaluate mono composite leaf spring, with and without bonded end joints with
multi leaf steel spring. They validate their results by comparing the finite element analysis
results and experimental results. Mono composite leaf spring was made and optimized to
replace multi leaf steel spring. Modelling and analysis of all the springs was done using Finite
Element Analysis software ANSYS. Optimization of shape of mono-composite leaf spring
was done using C language for the design of constant cross section leaf spring, with width
decreasing and thickness increasing towards axle seat. Layup selection of composite fibres
was given main consideration during fabrication process. Their design constraints were
stresses, deflection and frequencies, and they conclude that mono composite leaf spring has
lesser weight, low stresses and high natural frequency.

Mouleeswaran SENTHIL KUMAR, Sabapathy VIJAYARANGAN [4] during their

work they compare the results of static analysis of two types of multi leaf spring, one of steel
and other being composite multi-leaf. CAD model of conventional multi-leaf steel spring is
modelled and analyzed in ANSYS 7.1 software. FEA results were compared with
experimental results. With same dimensions, the composite multi-leaf spring of e-glass/epoxy
is modelled and analyzed using fea software. The design constraints were stresses and
deflection. Fatigue life and natural frequencies of both type of springs was also compared.
They found that composite spring has lesser stresses, higher stiffness, and higher natural
frequencies. About 70% of weight reduction was also achieved in their work. . They also
conclude that fatigue life of composite leaf spring was more than conventional steel one.

Muhammad Ashiqur Rahman, Muhammad Tareq Siddiqui and Muhammad Arefin

Kowser [5] carried out their work on the theory that tapered cantilever beams traditionally
known as leaf spring, undergoes much larger deflections in comparison to a beam of constant
cross section that takes their study in the domain of geometric non linearity. Significant effect
of beam’s response under a tip load for a traditional leaf spring and an end shortened, non
linearly optimized parabolic leaf spring was evaluated. They carried out numerical simulation
to calculate the stress and deflection of the beam, using both the small and the large deflection
theories. They conclude that no such significant change is obtained in analyzed results in
terms of stress and deflection, of the parabolic leaf spring from that of traditional leaf spring.
They justify the use of such a parabolic leaf spring, in terms of economy and light weight.
They also verify the soundness of the numerical solution for the proposed parabolic leaf
spring.

F. N. Ahmad Refngah, S. Abdullah, A. Jalar1 and L. B. Chua [6] compared the fatigue
life of two types of leaf springs, parabolic leaf spring and multi-leaf spring. Their aim was to
replace the multi-leaf spring with parabolic spring. Material used for multi-leaf spring was
SAE5160H and for parabolic leaf spring SAE6150 was used. For experimental results they
attach the strain gauges on parabolic leaf spring of a heavy truck and data was collected at
17000 discrete points. Finite element analysis was done to analyse the stress distribution of
both springs. They made a comparative study between simulation and experimental results.
They conclude that outcome from study will help for future development of suspension
systems.

J.P. Meijaard , D.M. Brouwer , J.B. Jonker [7] carried out their investigation on the
changes of the static and dynamic system behaviour of misalignment in an over constrained
direction in a parallel leaf spring guidance. In their study they use compliant mechanism for
precision manipulation of object. They analyze a multi-body program using flexible beam
theory to determine the change in vibration mode frequencies and stiffness due to
misalignment. They consider two versions of leaf spring mechanism. They also carried out
buckling analysis of the system. They simplified their model to obtain analytic solution, by
neglecting certain constrained and by employing standard Euler-Bernoulli beam theory. The
computer program SPACER was used for numerical analysis, because they found this
program suitable for calculation of mechanical system with interconnected rigid and flexible
elements. They also fabricate the instruments to measure the change of vibration mode
frequencies due to a rotational misalignment in over constrained direction. On the basis of
experimental and calculated results, they conclude that a small misalignment cause strong
change of static and dynamic system behaviour.

Myeong-Gyu Song, No-Cheol Park, Kyoung-Su Park, and Young-Pil Park [8] proposed a
design of a leaf spring using genetic algorithm. A novel genetic representation which contains
travel points and their order was proposed to avoid a disconnected shape. A single stage
research and a two stage research, to improve the convergence is proposed and compared.
They apply their proposed method to an optical disc drive (ODD) actuator. They use the
manual mending process to remove the unnecessary parts present in the final results and thus
their mended design of leaf spring satisfies the required specification. They found that the
proposed design method is very simple and they expect that the proposed methods can be
used for other applications also.

Ahmet Kanbolat , Murathan Soner, Mustafa Karaagaç, Tolga Erdogus [9] carried out
their work on two layered parabolic leaf spring. In their work they validate the finite element
analysis with experimental results. Road load data was taken, with a vehicle used in fully
loaded conditions on bad roads. They evaluate the fatigue strength of the leaf spring on the
base of road load data, endurance rig. test and non linear finite element analysis. After certain
deformation, two layers touches each other hence requires contact, due to that non-linear
finite element solution become necessary. They describe it as a hybrid design between the
traditional one and the recent ones, which correlates the real life condition and the results of
computer aided engineering. They optimize the results to reach the load deflection diagram
with required fatigue life.

Vinkel Arora, Dr. M.L Aggarwal, Dr. Gian Bhushan [10] In their work, they carried out
the stress and deflection analysis on the front end leaf spring of a commercial vehicle. The cad
model of the multi-leaf spring having nine leafs was prepared in CATIA and analysis work
was done using ANSYS software. Material used for the steel leaf spring was 65si7.
Experimental work was done at leaf spring test rig that can measure vertical static deflection
of leaf spring and bending stress under static loading condition. For Validation, they compare
the experimental and CAE. They conclude that CAD model can be used for static loading
under defined boundary conditions.

Vinkel Arora, Gian Bhushan and M.L. Aggarwal [11] carried out their work on analysis
of single leaf with eye end and casted eye end design used in light motor vehicle. CAD model
was modelled in CATIA and analyzed in ANSYS software’s under same boundary conditions
and design constraints of stress and deflections.

Kumar Krishan and Aggarwal M. L. [12] describe the finite element analysis of multi leaf
spring having nine leafs. Experimental work has been carried out on full scale load testing
machine. Axial load is applied at the centre of the leaf spring till maximum deflection.
Material taken for leaf spring is su99. Cad model was prepared in CATIA V5 R17 (CAE
tools) software and for analysis purpose model was imported in ANSYS 11.A comparative
study between experimental and CAE was made and concluded that the design was safe
from failure.

Joo-teck Jeffrey Kueh, Tarlochan FARIS [13] carried out their work on the static and
fatigue behaviour of multi-leaf spring. Steel leaf spring of a light commercial vehicle was
taken with same dimension that of multi-leaf spring of composite materials. Composite
materials like e-glass/epoxy and e-glass fibre/vinyl ester were used for modelling of leaf
spring in CAD software. Material composition and fibre orientation were considered mainly

1
for static and fatigue behaviour of leaf spring. Bending stress, deflection and fatigue life was
found using ANSYS V12 software. Comparing the results with the steel leaf spring, they
conclude that composite material spring has lower bending stress and deflection, and higher
fatigue life cycles.

Thippeswamy Ekbote, K.S.Sadashivappa, D. Abdul budan [14] they execute their work
to replace the existing multi-leaf steel spring with mono composite leaf spring to reduce the
weight of the spring and space requirements. They analyzed the strain characteristics of multi-
leaf steel spring used in the rear suspension of light duty vehicle ambassador classic car and
compared it with results obtained from mono composite leaf spring made up of e-glass/epoxy
composite. Modelling and analysis was done using ANSYS software. Optimization is done
using same software keeping uniform cross section of the geometry. They conclude that
composite spring has much lower stresses than multi leaf spring and a weight reduction of
about 65% was achieved.

R. B. Charde , Dr. D.V. Bhope [15] consider master leaf of a leaf spring as main component,
which is subjected to cyclic loading. They carried out their work on rear leaf spring of a
commercial vehicle and their approach of analysis was based on cantilever beam theory.
Analysis was carried on leaf spring with and without extra full length leaf. Experimental work
was done on actual prototype using strain gauge technique. CAD models of both types of
springs were developed using commercial CAE software. Their Analytical analysis was also
carried out. Maximum stress and maximum strain were considered as design parameters.
Comparison was made between analytical results, finite element method results and
experimental results. They conclude why one or extra full length leaf is used with master leaf
of a multi-leaf spring.

Closure: Various research papers based on multi-leaf spring made of steel and composite
materials published in different journals by professionals from different countries has been
studied in this chapter and it has been observed that still there is need to work on type of
contacts at the interface of different neighbouring leafs of composite multi leaf spring.

In next chapter we are going to indentify and formulate our problem based on this study.
 CHAPTER 3

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION & FORMULATION

Literature review suggests that weight reduction is an important design parameter in

automobile industry. It is found that the suspension system accounts to about 15% of weight
of vehicle. Therefore it is important to design light suspension system without being
compromising desirable performance characteristics. To overcome this problem various
professionals from different countries worked on Composite materials to replace the steel in
leaf springs. Various theoretical designs are explained in many literatures. In some designs
multi-leaf steel spring has been replaced with mono composite leaf spring but it lead to the
catastrophic failure [4].

To overcome this multi-leaf composite spring was developed, in which bonded contacts at
interface of different leafs were used. But the bonded contacts are found to increase the
stiffness as it prevents the sliding between the leaf in contact. It is for the reason that leaf
together act as a single part, which reduces the strain energy storing capacity of the leaf spring
and thus increases the stiffness of the leaf spring.

Therefore we require a composite multi leaf spring which will not increase the stiffness with
reduction in weight of leaf spring and will provide good riding comfort. Thus we are required
to develop a geometric model having no-Separation contacts at the interface of different
neighbouring leaf of multi-leaf spring. These no-separation contacts allows frictionless sliding
between different leafs, thus increasing the strain energy storing capacity of leaf spring.
Which means stiffness of the leaf spring does not decreases.

Based on this research gap we identified our problem and suitable methodology as under:-

3.1 Problem Definition

To analyse the static characteristics (Bending stress & deflection) incorporating the effect of
No-Separation contacts at the interface of different neighbouring leafs of multi leaf spring
made of composite material using CAE Tools.

3.2 Objectives of Present Work

1) To do the Literature Review on Static Characteristics of leaf spring and Composite

Material Suitable for Leaf Spring.

 LOAD (F)

Applied Boundary conditions:-

FIXED
Fig. 3.21 Applied Boundary Conditions

 Considering as cantilever beam

Solution Analysis

Different type of solution tools like deflection, stress etc. that can be used in solution analysis
are represented below

Fig.3.22 Solution Analysis in ANSYS Workbench 13.0

3.8.1 Geometric Modelling
Geometric modelling has been done changing only number of leafs and thickness of leafs
keeping n*t= const. (overall thickness of leaf spring). Length of the leaf spring has not been
changed. Different models of leafs spring taking n*t=const., for a max permissible deflection
of 175mm has been evaluated as under:

Table 3.3 Comparative study of Different Geometric Models

No. of leafs Thickness of leaf Max. Stress Max. Deflection (Mpa)

(mm) (Mpa)

7 5.5 635.8 356.82

6 6.4 545.62 256.2

5 7.7 421.23 144.77

4 9.62 365.05 113.05

3 12.83 271.365 62.365

2 19.25 179.08 29.136

From the table it has been evaluated that geometric model having 5 leafs with thickness of
7.7mm provides the Max. Deflection of 144mm which is within the permissible range of
175mm. Max. Stress evaluated is also under safe limit.
 CHAPTER 4

ANALYSIS RESULTS USING ANSYS WORKBENCH 13.0

Static analysis (Stress & Deflection) of different geometric models (Ref. Table3.1-3.2)
developed using Pro-E wildfire 4.0 has been evaluated using Ansys Workbench 13.0 as
under:

4.1) CASE 1: Type-1A – Multi-leaf spring having 4 graduated leaf’s (including master
leaf).

Fig 4.1 Stress analysis of Type -1A at F=2200N

Fig 4.2 Deflection Analysis of Type-1A at F = 2200N

 Model (1A) >
Geometry
Object Name Geometry
State Fully Defined
Definition
Source C:\Users\Ashok Bhatia\Desktop\m.tech work\asm00012.x_t
Type Parasolid
Length Unit Meters
Element Control Program Controlled
Display Style Part Color
Bounding Box
Length X 457.5 mm
Length Y 104. mm
Length Z 60. mm
Properties
Volume 5.0147e+005 mm³
Mass 3.9365 kg
Scale Factor Value 1.
Statistics
Bodies 4
Active Bodies 4
Nodes 23123
Elements 11431

Model (1A) > Geometry >

Parts
Object Name A C D E
State Meshed
Graphics Properties
Visible Yes
Transparency 1
Definition
Suppressed No
Stiffness Behavior Flexible
Coordinate System Default Coordinate System
Reference Temperature By Environment
Material
Assignment steel (55Si2Mn90)
Nonlinear Effects Yes
Thermal Strain Effects Yes
Bounding Box
Length X 457.5 mm 330. mm 220. mm 110. mm
Length Y 83. mm 33.859 mm 18.894 mm 9.9669 mm
Length Z 60. mm
Properties
Volume 2.2088e+005 mm³ 1.4089e+005 mm³ 93299 mm³ 46396 mm³
 Moment of Inertia Ip1 649.97 kg·mm² 340.91 kg·mm² 223.35 kg·mm² 110.79 kg·mm²
Moment of Inertia Ip2 35300 kg·mm² 10447 kg·mm² 3183.9 kg·mm² 476.84 kg·mm²
Moment of Inertia Ip3 34912 kg·mm² 10124 kg·mm² 2967.7 kg·mm² 369.09 kg·mm²
Statistics
Nodes 10173 6366 4311 2273
Elements 5052 3109 2124 1146
Mesh Metric None

Model (1A) > Coordinate Systems > Coordinate System

Object Name Global Coordinate System

State Fully Defined
Definition
Type Cartesian
Ansys System Number 0.
Origin
Origin X 0. mm
Origin Y 0. mm
Origin Z 0. mm
Directional Vectors
X Axis Data [ 1. 0. 0. ]
Y Axis Data [ 0. 1. 0. ]
Z Axis Data [ 0. 0. 1. ]

Model (1A) > Connections > Contact Regions Model (1A) > Mesh > Mesh Controls

Object No No No
Name Separation - Separation - Separation - Patch Conforming Method Body
Sizing
A To C C To D D To E
State Fully Defined State Fully Defined
Scope Scope
Scoping Geometry Selection Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Method Geometry 4 Bodies
Contact 1 Face Object Name
Target 1 Face Suppressed No
Contact A C D Method Tetrahedrons
Bodies Algorithm Patch Conforming
Target C D E Element Midside Use Global Setting
Bodies Nodes
Definition Type Element
Type No Separation Size
Scope Mode Automatic Element Size 7. mm
Behavior Asymmetric Behavior Soft
Suppressed No
Advanced
Formulation Pure Penalty
Normal Program Controlled
Stiffness
Update Never
Stiffness
Pinball Program Controlled
Region
 Model (1A) > Static Structural > Solution > Results

Object Name Total Equivalent

Model (1A) > Static Structural > Loads Deformation Stress
Object Name Force Fixed State Solved
Support Scope
State Fully Defined Scoping Geometry Selection
Scope Method
Scoping Method Geometry Selection Geometry All Bodies
Geometry 1 Face 4 Faces Definition
Definition Type Total Equivalent (von-
Type Force Fixed Support Deformation Mises) Stress
Define By Components By Time
Coordinate Global Coordinate Display Time Last
System System Calculate Yes
X Component 0. N (ramped) Time History
Y Component -2200. N (ramped) Identifier
Z Component 0. N (ramped)
Use Average Yes
Suppressed No
Results
Minimum 0. mm 9.2508e-002 MPa
Maximum 61.56 mm 506.83 MPa

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Constants

Density 7.85e-006 kg mm^-3

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Isotropic Elasticity

Temperature C Young's Modulus MPa Poisson's Ratio
2.1e+005 0.27

steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Yield Strength

Tensile Yield Strength MPa
1470

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Ultimate Strength

Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa
1962
4.2 CASE 1: TYPE 1B - Multi-leaf spring having 3 graduated leaf’s (including master
leaf) & one full length leaf.

Fig. 4.3 Stress Analysis of Type-1B at F=2475N

Fig. 4.4 Deflection Analysis of Type-1B at F=2475N

Model (1B) > Geometry

Object Name Geometry
State Fully Defined
Definition
Source C:\Users\Ashok Bhatia\Desktop\m.tech work\65.5\New folder\asm00011.x_t
Type Parasolid
Length Unit Meters
Element Control Program Controlled
Display Style Part Color
Bounding Box
Length X 457.5 mm
Length Y 104. mm
Length Z 60. mm
Properties
 Volume 5.9714e+005 mm³
Mass 4.6875 kg
Model (1B) > Mesh > Mesh Control
Object Name Patch Conforming Method Body Sizing
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 4 Bodies
Definition
Suppressed No
Method Tetrahedrons
Algorithm Patch Conforming
Element Midside Nodes Use Global Setting
Type Element Size
Element Size 7. mm
Behavior Soft

Model (1B) > Static Structural > Loads

Object Name Fixed Support Force
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 4 Faces 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support Force
Suppressed No
Define By Components
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System
X Component 0. N (ramped)
Y Component -2475. N (ramped)
Z Component 0. N (ramped)

Model (1B) > Static Structural > Solution > Results

Object Name Equivalent Stress Total Deformation
State Solved
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Total Deformation
By Time
Display Time Last
Calculate Time History Yes
Use Average Yes
Identifier
Results
Minimum 0.20105 MPa 0. mm
Maximum 547.06 MPa 61.315 mm

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Constants

Density 7.85e-006 kg mm^-3

 Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Isotropic Elasticity

Temperature C Young's Modulus MPa Poisson's Ratio

2.1e+005 0.27

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Yield Strength

Tensile Yield Strength MPa

1470

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Ultimate Strength

Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa

1962

4.3) CASE 2: TYPE-2A: Multi-leaf spring (7 leafs) made of steel having no

separation contacts between different leafs.

Fig. 4.5 Stress Analysis of Type-2A (Steel Spring) at F=3250N

Fig. 4.6 Deflection Analysis of Type-2A (Steel Spring) at F = 3250N

 Fig. 4.7 Shear Stress Analysis of Type – 2A (Steel Spring) at F= 3250N

Model (2A-Steel Spring) > Geometry

Object Name Geometry
State Fully Defined
Definition
Source C:\Users\Ashok Bhatia\Desktop\m.tech work\validtion\asm0001.x_t
Type Parasolid
Length Unit Meters
Element Control Program Controlled
Display Style Part Color
Bounding Box
Length X 575. mm
Length Y 211.85 mm
Length Z 34. mm
Properties
Volume 5.0255e+005 mm³
Mass 3.945 kg
Scale Factor Value 1.
Statistics
Bodies 7
Active Bodies 7
Nodes 26038
Elements 11797

Model (2A Steel Spring) > Mesh > Mesh Controls

Object Name Patch Conforming Method Body Sizing
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 7 Bodies
Definition
Suppressed No
Method Tetrahedrons
Algorithm Patch Conforming
 Element Midside Nodes Use Global Setting
Type Element Size
Element Size 7. mm
Behavior Soft

Model (2A Steel Spring) > Static Structural > Loads

Object Name Fixed Support Force
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 7 Faces 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support Force
Suppressed No
Define By Components
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System
X Component 0. N (ramped)
Y Component -3250. N (ramped)
Z Component 0. N (ramped)

Model (2A Steel Spring) > Static Structural > Solution > Results
Object Name Total Deformation Equivalent Stress Shear Stress

State Solved
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Total Deformation Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Shear Stress

By Time
Display Time Last
Calculate Time Yes
History
Identifier
Use Average Yes
Orientation XY Plane
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System

Results
Minimum 0. mm 0.24000 MPa -115.54 MPa
Maximum 162.44 mm 819.31 MPa 145.55 MPa

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Constants

Density 7.85e-006 kg mm^-3

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Isotropic Elasticity

Temperature C Young's Modulus MPa Poisson's Ratio
2.1e+005 0.27
 Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Yield Strength
Tensile Yield Strength MPa
1462

Steel (55Si2Mn90) > Tensile Ultimate Strength

Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa
1970

4.4 CASE 2 TYPE 2A: Multi-leaf spring (7 leafs) made of FGER (Fibre Glass
Epoxy Resin) having bonded contacts between different leafs.

Fig. 4.8 Stress Analysis of Type – 2A (FGER Spring) at F=3250N

Fig. 4.9 Deflection Analysis of Type – 2A (FGER Spring) at F= 3250N

Model (2A-FGER Spring) > Geometry

Object Name Geometry
State Fully Defined
Definition
Source C:\Users\Ashok Bhatia\Desktop\1.x_t
Type Parasolid
Length Unit Meters
Element Control Program Controlled
Display Style Part Color
Bounding Box
Length X 575. mm
 Length Y 225. mm
Length Z 34. mm
Properties
Volume 5.0606e+005 mm³
Mass 1.3158 kg
Scale Factor Value 1.

Model (2A-FGER Spring)) > Mesh > Mesh Controls

Object Name Patch Conforming Method Body Sizing
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 7 Bodies
Definition
Suppressed No
Method Tetrahedrons
Algorithm Patch Conforming
Element Midside Nodes Use Global Setting
Type Element Size
Element Size 7. mm
Behavior Soft

Model (2A-FGER Spring)) > Static Structural > Loads

Object Name Fixed Support Force
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 7 Faces 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support Force
Suppressed No
Define By Components
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System
X Component 0. N (ramped)
Y Component -3250. N (ramped)
Z Component 0. N (ramped)

Model (2A-FGER Spring)) > Static Structural > Solution > Results
Object Name Total Deformation Equivalent Stress
State Solved
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Total Deformation Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress
By Time
Display Time Last
Calculate Time History Yes
Identifier
Use Average Yes
Results
 Minimum 0. mm 0.18895 MPa
Maximum 94.646 mm 229.61 MPa

E-GLASS/ EPOXY > Constants

Density 2.6e-006 kg mm^-3

E-GLASS/ EPOXY > Orthotropic Elasticity

Temperatur Young's Young's Young's Poisson' Poisson' Poisson' Shear Shear Shear
eC Modulu Modulu Modulu s Ratio s Ratio s Ratio Modulu Modulu Modulu
sX sY sZ XY YZ XZ s XY s YZ s XZ
directio directio directio MPa MPa MPa
n MPa n MPa n MPa
38600 8270 8270 0.26 .36 .26 4140 1698 2433

Strength E-GLASS/ EPOXY > Tensile Ultimate Strength

Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa
1062

E-GLASS/ EPOXY > Compressive Yield

Compressive Yield Strength MPa

610

4.5 CASE 2: TYPE 2B- Multi-Leaf (5 Leaf) spring made of FGER having no separation
contacts between different leafs.

Fig. 4.10 Stress Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N

 Fig. 4.11 Deflection Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N

Fig. 4.12 Shear Stress Analysis of Type 2B at F= 3250N

Model (2B) > Geometry

Object Name Geometry
State Fully Defined
Definition
Source C:\Users\Ashok Bhatia\Desktop\conclusion\5 leafs\asm0003.x_t
Type Parasolid
Length Unit Meters
Element Control Program Controlled
Display Style Part Color
Bounding Box
Length X 575. mm
Length Y 213.5 mm
Length Z 34. mm
Properties
Volume 5.4964e+005 mm³
Mass 1.4291 kg
Scale Factor Value 1.
Statistics
 Bodies 5
Active Bodies 5

Nodes 28454
Elements 15047
Mesh Metric None

Model (2B) > Mesh > Mesh Controls

Object Name Patch Conforming Method Body Sizing
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 5 Bodies
Definition
Suppressed No
Method Tetrahedrons
Algorithm Patch Conforming
Element Midside Nodes Use Global Setting
Type Element Size
Element Size 7. mm
Behavior Soft

Model (2B) > Static Structural > Loads

Object Name Fixed Support Force
State Fully Defined
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry 5 Faces 1 Face
Definition
Type Fixed Support Force
Suppressed No
Define By Components
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System
X Component 0. N (ramped)
Y Component -3250. N (ramped)
Z Component 0. N (ramped)

Model (2B) > Static Structural > Solution > Results

Object Name Total Deformation Equivalent Stress Shear Stress

State Solved
Scope
Scoping Method Geometry Selection
Geometry All Bodies
Definition
Type Total Deformation Equivalent (von-Mises) Stress Shear Stress

By Time
Display Time Last
Calculate Time Yes
History
Identifier
Use Average Yes
Orientation XY Plane
Coordinate System Global Coordinate System

Results
Minimum 0. mm 0.14786 MPa -29.985 MPa
Maximum 144.77 mm 421.23 MPa 27.762 MPa

E-Glass/epoxy > Constants

Density 2.6e-006 kg mm^-3

E-Glass/epoxy > Orthotropic Elasticity

Temperat Young Young Young Poisso Poisso Poisso Shear Shear Shear
ure C 's 's 's n's n's n's Modul Modul Modul
Modul Modul Modul Ratio Ratio Ratio us XY us YZ us XZ
us X us Y us Z XY YZ XZ MPa MPa MPa
directi directi directi
on on on
MPa MPa MPa
38600 8270 8270 0.26 .36 .26 4140 1698 2433

E-Glass/epoxy > Compressive Yield Strength

Compressive Yield Strength MPa
610

E-Glass/epoxy > Tensile Ultimate Strength

Tensile Ultimate Strength MPa
1062

Closure: Static analysis of various 3-D CAD models developed using Pro-E Wildfire 4.0
has been presented in this chapter.

In next chapter we are going to discuss the comparison between FEA results and analytical
results.
 CHAPTER 5

RESULT EVALUATION AND DISCUSSIONS

A comparative study of results of stress, deflection & weight for different models of leaf
springs made of Steel and FGER(fibre glass epoxy resin) has been evaluated as under:-

5.1) Comparing FEA and Analytical Results of Leaf Spring having 4 Graduated Leafs
(including master leaf)

TABLE 5.1: Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.1-4.2) and Analytical Results

Max. Stress Max. Deflection Stiffness

Parameters Load(N)
(Mpa) (Mpa) (N/mm)

Analytical 2200 493.88 65.04 33.83

FEA 2200 506.83 61.56 35.74

Variation (%) Nil 2.5 -5.6 5.6

From the above table, it has been observed, that there is small variation of 2.5% in Max.
Stress and of 5.6% in Max. Deflection and stiffness, when comparing FEA and Analytical
Results, which validates our CAD model.

600

500
M
ax. 400
Str
ess 300
(M Analytical
pa) 200
FEA

100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Load (N)

Fig.5.1 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Stress w.r.t. Applied Load Type 1A
 70

60
K=35.74 N/mm
M 50
ax.
De
40
fle
cti
on 30 FEA
(m Analytical
m) 20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500
Load (N)

Fig. 5.2 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Deflection w.r.t. Applied Load Type 1A

From the graphs it has been observed that Max. Stress and Max. Deflection increases linearly
w.r.t. increased applied load in both FEA and Analytical Results.

5.2 Comparing FEA and Analytical results of Leaf Spring having 3 graduated leafs
(including master leaf), and 1 full length leaf

TABLE 5.2: Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.3-4.4) and Analytical Results

Max. Stiffness
Parameter Load (N) Max. Stress(Mpa)
Deflection(mm) (N/mm)

Analytical 2475 556.20 68.05 38.05

FEA 2475 547.06 61.315 40.36

Variation
Nil -1.2 -5.8 -5.8
(%)

From the above table, it has been observed, that there is small variation of 1.2% in Max.
Stress and of 5.8% in Max. Deflection and stiffness, when comparing FEA and Analytical
Results, which validates our CAD model.
 600

500

M 400
ax.
Str
ess 300
(M FEA
pa)
Analytical
200

100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Load (N)

Fig. 5.3 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Stress w.r.t. Applied Load Type 2A

70
K=40.36 N/mm
60

M 50
ax.
De
40
fle
cti
on 30 FEA
(m Analytical
m) 20

10

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000
Load (N)

Fig. 5.4 FEA and Analytical Variation of Max. Deflection w.r.t. Applied Load Type 2A

From the graphs it is observed that Max. Stress and Max. Deflection increases linearly w.r.t.
Increased applied load in both FEA and Analytical Results.
5.3 Comparing FEA and Experimental [4] results of Multi-Leaf Spring (steel) having 7
leafs

TABLE 5.3: Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.6) and Experimental Results
[4]

Max. Stress Stiffness

Parameter Load (N) Deflection (mm)
(Mpa) (N/mm)

Experimental 3250 680.05 155 20.97

FEA 3250 819.31 162.44 20.01

Variation (%) Nil 20.47 4.8 4.8

Evaluating results a variation of 4.8% in deflection is observed which validates our CAD
model.

5.4 Comparing FEA and Experimental [4] results of Multi-leaf spring(FGER) having 7
leafs with bonded contacts

TABLE 5.4: Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.8-4.9) and Experimental Results
[4]

Max. Deflection Stiffness

Parameter Load (N) Max. Stress (Mpa)
(mm) (N/mm)

Experimental 3250 222 94 34.57

FEA 3250 229.61 94.646 34.33

Variation (%) Nil 3.4 .7 -.99

From table, it has been observed that when static analysis of FGER leaf spring (Bonded
Contacts) is carried out using FEA software and compared with experimental results, for the
same static loading and boundary conditions, a slight variation about 1%is evaluated, which
validates our CAD model of FGER leaf spring.
5.5 Comparing FEA results of Steel leaf spring (with no separation contacts) with FGER
leaf spring (with bonded contacts)

TABLE 5.5: Comparative study FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.6) and FEA Results (Ref. Fig.
4.8-4.9)

Max. Stress Max. Stiffness

Parameter Load (N) Weight (kg)
(Mpa) Deflection(mm) (N/mm)

Steel Leaf
3250 819.31 162.44 3.945 20.01
spring

FGER leaf
3250 229.61 94.646 1.316 34.34
Spring

Variation
Nil -72 -41.76 -66.64 71.61
(%)

From the above table, it has been observed that when steel leaf spring (no-separation) contacts
is replaced with FGER leaf spring (Bonded contacts), under same static loading and boundary
conditions, Max. Stress in leaf spring decreases by 72%. Max. Deflection decreases about
42%, and about 66% reduction in weight has been observed. Whereas about 72% increment in
stiffness is observed.

5.6 Comparing FEA Results of Steel leaf spring having 7 leaf’s (No-Separation contacts)
with FGER leaf spring having 5 leafs (No-Separation contacts)

TABLE 5.6: Comparative study of FEA Results (Ref. Fig. 4.5-4.7) and FEA Results (Ref.
Fig. 4.10-4.12)

Max. Max. Shear

Weight Stiffness
Parameter Load (N) Stress Deflection Stress
(Mpa) (mm) (Mpa) (Kg) (N/mm)

Steel leaf
3250 819.31 162.44 145.55 3.945 20.01
spring

FGER
3250 421.23 144.77 27.762 1.429 22.45
Leaf spring

Variation
Nil -48.58 -10.88 -80.87 -63.75 12.19
(%)
From table it has been observed that when steel leaf spring having 7 leafs(No-Separation
Contacts) and FGER leaf spring having 5 leafs (No-Separation contacts) were analyzed under
same static conditions and boundary conditions using FEA software Ansys Workbench 13.0
there was decrement of about 48% in Max. Stress, about 11% in Max. Deflection and 81% in
shear stress. Stiffness of the leaf spring increases about 12%, whereas FGER leaf spring is
about 64% lighter that Steel leaf spring.

600
500
M
ax. 400
Str
ess300
(M
pa 200
)
100

0
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Load (N)

Fig. 5.5 Variation of Max. Stress V/s Applied Load Type 2A

180
M 160
ax. 140
De 120
fle
cti 100 K=22.45 N/mm
on 80
(m 60
m)
40
20
0 0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500 4000
Load (N)

Fig.5.6 Variation of Max. Deflection V/s Applied Load Type 2A

From the graphs it has been observed that Max. Stress and Max. Deflection increases
linearly w.r.t. increase in applied load for FGER leaf spring.

Closure: Comparative study of FEA and Analytical results has been made in this chapter
and conclusions drawn from this comparative study will be presented in next chapter.
 CHAPTER 6

CONCLUSIONS

A comparative study of results of stress, deflection & weight for different models of leaf
springs made of Steel and FGER (fibre glass epoxy resin) has been made and concluded as
under:

1 ) About 70% increment in stiffness(20-34N/mm) is observed when steel leaf spring having
7 leafs with no separation contacts is replaced with FGER leaf spring having 7 leafs with
bonded contacts. Also about 66% decrement in weight is observed, which is the main concern
of automobile industry to use composites.

2 ) An increment of about 12% in stiffness(20 -22 N/mm) is observed when steel leaf spring
having 7 leafs with no separation contacts is compared with FGER leaf spring having 5 leafs
with no separation contacts, which has been developed by changing number of leafs &
thickness keeping n*t=const. Also a decrement of about 64% in weight and 80% in shear
stress is observed.

3) Linear variation of stress and deflection has been observed w.r.t. applied varying load,
whether it is steel leaf spring or FGER leaf spring.
 REFERENCES

[1] Mahmood M.Shokrieh, Davood Rezaei (2003), “Analysis and optimization of a composite
leaf spring”. Composite Structures 60 (2003) 317-325 Doi: 10.1016/S0263-8223(02)00349-5.

[2] J.P. Hou , J.Y. Cherruault , I. Nairne , G. Jeronimidis , R.M. Mayer (2006) “Evolution of
the eye-end design of a composite leaf spring for heavy axle loads” Composite Structures 78
(2007) 351–358 Doi:10.1016/j.compstruct.2005.10.008.

[3] Gulur Siddaramanna Shiva Shankar, Sambagam Vijyarangan (2006) “Mono Composite
Leaf Spring for Light Weight Vehicle – Design, End Joint Analysis and Testing” ISSN 1392–
1320 MATERIALS SCIENCE (MEDŽIAGOTYRA). Vol. 12, No. 3, 220-225.

[4] Mouleeswaran Senthil Kumar, Sabapathy Vijyarangan (2007) “Analytical and

Experimental Studies on Fatigue Life Prediction of Steel and Composite Multi-leaf Spring for
Light Passenger Vehicles Using Life Data Analysis” ISSN 1392–1320 MATERIALS
SCIENCE (MEDZIAGOTYRA). Vol. 13, No. 2, 141-146.

[5] Muhammad Ashiqur Rahman, Muhammad Tareq Siddiqui and Muhammad Arefin
Kowser (June 2007) “Design and Non-Linear Analysis of A Parabolic Leaf Spring” Journal of
Mechanical Engineering, vol. ME37, 47-51.

[6] F. N. Ahmad Refngah, S. Abdullah, A. Jalar1 and L. B. Chua (2009), “Fatigue life
evaluation of two types of steel leaf springs” International Journal of Mechanical and
Materials Engineering (IJMME), Vol. 4, No. 2, 136-140.

[7] J.P. Meijaard , D.M. Brouwer , J.B. Jonker (2009) “Analytical and experimental
investigation of a parallel leaf spring guidance” Multi-body System Dynamics (2010) 23: 77–
97 , DOI 10.1007/s11044-009-9172-4.

[8] Myeong-Gyu Song, No-Cheol Park, Kyoung-Su Park, and Young-Pil Park(March 2011)
“Design of a Leaf Spring Using a Genetic Algorithm” IEEE Transactions on Magnetics, Vol.
47, No. 3, 590-593.

[9] Ahmet Kanbolat , Murathan Soner, Mustafa Karaagaç, Tolga Erdogus (2011) “Parabolic
Leaf Spring Optimization And Fatigue Strength Evaluation on The Base of Road Load Data,
Endurance Rig. Tests And Non Linear Finite Element Analysis” 11M-0069 SAE
international .
[10] Vinkel Arora, Dr. M.L Aggarwal, Dr. Gian Bhushan (2011) , “A Comparative Study of
CAE and Experimental Results of Leaf Springs in Automotive Vehicles “ ISSN : 0975-5462,
Vol. 3 No. 2,6856,6866.

[11] Vinkel Arora, Gian Bhushan and M.L. Aggarwal “Eye Design Analysis of Single Leaf
Spring in Automotive Vehicles Using CAE Tools” International Journal of Applied
Engineering and Technology ISSN: 2277-212X, Vol. 1 (1),88-97.

[12] Kumar Krishan and Aggarwal M.L.(2012),” A Finite Element Approach for Analysis of
a Multi Leaf Spring using CAE Tools” Research Journal of Recent Sciences. ISSN 2277-
2502, Vol. 1(2),92-96.

[13] Joo-teck Jeffrey Kueh, Tarlochan Faris (2012), “Finite element analysis on the static and
fatigue characteristics of composite multi-leaf spring” Journal of Zhejiang University-
SCIENCE A (Applied Physics & Engineering). doi:10.1631/jzus.A1100212, Kueh et al. / J
Zhejiang Univ-Sci A (Appl Phys & Eng) 2012 13(3):159-164.

[14] Thippeswamy Ekbote, K.S.Sadashivappa, D. Abdul budan (2012) “Optimal design and
analysis of mono leaf composite spring by finite element analysis” ISBN: 978-81-909042-2-3,
41-46.

[15] R. B. Charde , Dr. D.V. Bhope (2012), “Investigation of stresses in master leaf of leaf
spring by finite element method and its experimental verification” International Journal of
Engineering Science and Technology (IJEST). ISSN : 0975-5462, Vol. 4 No.02, 633-640.

[16] www.nptel.iitm.ac.in/courses/IIT-Madras/Machine_Design_II/pdf/4_5.pdf.

th
[17] A Text of Machine Design by Dr. P.C. Sharma and Dr. D.K.. Aggarwal, 9 edition, 357-
367, S.K. Kataraia & Sons publications.

rd
[18] Introduction to Machine Design by V. B. Bhandari,3 edition 2010, TMH Publication,
437-439.

th
[19] Text Book of Machine Design by S.G. Kulkarni,7 reprint 2006, TMH Publication, 115-
116

th
[20] Finite Element Method in Engineering By Singiresu S. Rao, 5 edition, 401-403,
Elsevier Inc.
[21] Pro-E wildfire 4.0, Manual/ Users help.

[22] Ansys workbench 13 .0, Manual/ Users help.

[23] CAD Modelling Analysis of a Leaf Spring, M.Tech Dissertation (M-1636), NIT
Kurukshetra.