Hindawi Publishing Corporation

Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

Volume 2016, Article ID 3259026, 10 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2016/3259026

Research Article
Optimization of Automotive Suspension System by Design of
Experiments: A Nonderivative Method

Anirban C. Mitra, Tanushri Soni, and G. R. Kiranchand

Department of Mechanical Engineering, MES’s College of Engineering, Wadia College Campus, 19 Late Prin,
V. K. Joag Path, Pune 411001, India

Correspondence should be addressed to Anirban C. Mitra; bile007m@yahoo.com

Received 20 April 2016; Accepted 22 June 2016

Academic Editor: Marek Pawelczyk

Copyright © 2016 Anirban C. Mitra et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution
License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly
cited.

A lot of health issues like low back pain, digestive disorders, and musculoskeletal disorders are caused as a result of the whole body
vibrations induced by automobiles. This paper is concerned with the enhancement and optimization of suspension performance
by using factorial methods of Design of Experiments, a nonderivative method. It focuses on the optimization of ride comfort
and determining the parameters which affect the suspension behavior significantly as per the guidelines stated in ISO 2631-1:1997
standards. A quarter car test rig integrated with a LabVIEW based data acquisition system was developed to understand the real
time behavior of a vehicle. In the pilot experiment, only three primary suspension parameters, that is, spring-stiffness, damping, and
sprung mass, were considered and the full factorial method was implemented for the purpose of optimization. But the regression
analysis of the data obtained rendered a very low goodness of fit which indicated that other parameters are likely to influence the
response. Subsequently, steering geometry angles, camber and toe and tire pressure, were included in the design. Fractional factorial
method with six factors was implemented to optimize ride comfort. The resultant optimum combination was then verified on the
test rig with high correlation.

1. Introduction motion with respect to the body and to support loads while
allowing for that motion.
Automobiles travel at a high speed and as a consequence The RC has been shown to be affected by a variety of
experience a broad spectrum of random noncyclic vibra- suspension parameters and a variety of analytical, numeric,
tions transmitted either by tactile, visual, or aural paths. computational, and experimental methods have been exer-
The term “ride” is commonly used to represent tactile and cised for the optimization of suspension systems. Khajavi et
visual vibrations, while the audibly perceptible vibrations are al. [4] have developed a full car 8-DOF model by adopting
categorized as “noise.” As per SAE J670e [1] terminology, ride comfort, handling, and suspension travel as the main
the term ride is defined as the low frequency vibrations of criteria and using Multiobjective Programming Discipline
the sprung mass up to 5 Hz. The lower frequency ride vibra- to find the Pareto front. A 33-DOF multibody model of
tions are manifestations of dynamic behavior. The motions suspension system has been prepared by Zhang et al. [5] using
and mechanical stresses resulting from the application of ADAMS software. Even the stiffness coefficient of bushing
mechanical forces to the human body can have a variety of has been considered. Step and sinusoidal excitations are
physiobiological effects. ISO 2631-1:1997 [2] standards imply provided to the model, and RC is optimized using GA in one
that, for vertical vibrations, humans are most sensitive to of the research works by Farid et al. [6].
those in the frequency range of 4 to 8 Hz, this being the Kilian et al. [7] had worked on the optimization of torsion,
resonant frequency range for human body. In its simplest bending, and swaying of suspension designs by using finite
form, a modern road vehicle suspension has been defined by element methods like topology optimization and topography
Damian [3] as a linkage to allow the wheel to have relative optimization in Altair Opti Struct software to maximize ride
2 Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

comfort during the design stage. In a similar work, a two-

dimensional 8-DOF model was developed by Roy and Liu Sprung mass
[8] to simulate and animate the response of a vehicle to
different road, traction, braking, and wind conditions in a 3D
VRML environment. A model validation was conducted by
comparing a 0–100 kmph acceleration run against a Honda Unsprung
mass
Accord car equipped with an accelerometer and an engine Spring and damper
rpm recorder. Gonçalves and Ambrósio [9] have proposed
a methodology for optimization of ride and stability of a
vehicle based on the use of flexible multibody model. The
ride optimization is achieved by finding the optimum of DAQ Cam
ride index by measuring acceleration in several key points
of the vehicle. Time histories of acceleration, velocities, and Controller
displacement at the center of gravity have been considered
by Naudé and Snyman [10, 11] along with the time histories
of forces, deflections, and deflection rate of wheels and sus-
pension components. The presence of noise discontinuities
presents major challenges in optimization. Multiobjective
Genetic Algorithm (MOGA) is used for Pareto optimization
of a 4-DOF vehicle vibration model by Sharifi and Shahriari Figure 1: Quarter car test rig.
[12].
Bagheri et al. [13] has used GA for Pareto optimization
of a 2-DOF vehicle vibration model considering sprung mass
acceleration and relative displacement between sprung mass
using DoE. Section 3.1 comprises the optimization using full
and tire. Evaluation of vibration transmitted from the road
factorial method; in which three fundamental suspension
profile to the driver or a passenger in a moving vehicle has
parameters, namely, the sprung mass (𝑚), spring stiffness
been done by Kuznetsov et al. [14]. The paper by Chi et al.
(ks), and damping coefficient (cs), are considered. The section
[15] presents a comparative study of three optimization algo-
also elaborates various aspects of the regression analysis used
rithms, namely, Genetic Algorithms (GAs), Pattern Search
in optimization process. The regression analysis indicates the
Algorithm (PSA), and Sequential Quadratic Program (SQP),
presence of additional influential factors which have been left
for the design optimization of vehicle suspensions based on a
uncontrolled. Hence, in Section 3.2, three more parameters
quarter-vehicle model. Uys et al. [16] generated a Land Rover
were added and the fractional factorial methodology is
Defender model in MSC ADAMS and the spring damper
used for optimizing RC, hence considering six parameters,
settings were determined which ensures optimal ride comfort
that is, the sprung mass (𝑚), spring stiffness (ks), damping
of an off-road vehicle at different speeds and over different
coefficient (cs), camber angle (cma), and toe and tire pressure
road profiles.
(typ). Then, Section 4 explains the method of response
A 7-DOF full car model has been developed and optimum
optimization and the model generated. The verification of
ride comfort has been achieved by trying out different spring
results and the concluding remarks have been mentioned in
damper setting using DoE by Mostaani et al. [17]. Road
Sections 5 and 6, respectively.
surface has been simulated using power spectral density
(PSD) and it was found that car spring stiffness is most
sensitive. RMS acceleration and pitch angle for optimum 2. Quarter Car Suspension Test Rig
setting at different speeds was generated and only ride com-
fort has been optimized. Marzbanrad et al. [18] performed In order to study the suspension behavior in controlled
optimization of passive suspension system on a 7-DOF model environment and to evaluate the influence of various factors
in MATLAB using DoE for speeds ranging from 60 kmph to and their interactions over RC, a quarter car suspension test
90 kmph. rig was designed and developed as shown in Figure 1. The
In this work, a quarter car test rig has been developed excitation source is a sinusoidal bump profile and the wheel
so as to vary the influential parameters within the prede- of quarter car model is considered as follower. The cam profile
termined sampling range. The test rig has been integrated has been actuated with a motor so as to simulate the relative
with NI LabVIEW DAQ system for evaluating and assim- motion between the road and the wheel. A provision to vary a
ilating the raw data. Subsequently, the DoE methodology multitude of parameters within the predetermined sampling
has been implemented to optimize the suspension system. range has been incorporated.
This paper has been organised in the following manner: Two highly sensitive accelerometers, of ICP (IEPE) make
a brief description of recent development in the field of (model: 351B03), have been attached to sprung mass and the
suspension performance, RC, and Optimization processes wheel assembly to measure the acceleration of the sprung
is given in Section 1. Section 2 describes the experimental mass and the unsprung mass, respectively, and, as per ISO
setup and measurement technique used for the accumulation 2631-1:1997 [2] standards, RC is expressed in terms of RMS
of raw data. Section 3 focuses on the optimization process acceleration of the sprung mass in m/s2 .
Advances in Acoustics and Vibration 3

Table 1: Full factorial design.

Design parameter Value

Accelerometer 1
Factors 3
Base design 3, 8
Accelerometer 2 Runs 16
Replicates 2
Blocks 2
Reflector

Table 2: Levels of influential parameters in full factorial design.

RPM sensor
Factors Low (−1) High (+1)
Spring stiffness (ks), N/mm 18000 26000
Damping coefficient (cs), N-s/m 418 673
Mass (𝑚), kg 41 81
Speed (𝑁), RPM 150 250
Ultrasonic sensor

varied between 40 kg and 80 kg in the test rig. The speed of the

Figure 2: Sensors mounting. vehicle here determines the frequency with which excitations
are encountered by the vehicle body. While designing this
experiment, the speed of the vehicle was not considered as
The entire system has been integrated with NI LabVIEW a controlled variable because it depends completely on the
data acquisition system, a development environment for a user’s aspirations. But, due to its considerable impact on the
visual programming language from National Instruments. response, that is, RC, it was necessary to arrange for the
The mounting of accelerometer on control arms has been elimination of variability due to its effect. So, the rotational
done as explained by Mohan et al. [19]. Arraigada and speed of wheel in rpm was incorporated within two blocks.
Partl [20] have discussed problems involving theoretical and Mohan et al. [19] have surmised that bump traversal for a
analytical aspects of sensor calibration, data collection, and car can occur within a speed range of 10 kmph to 20 kmph.
error identification and, as per authors’ observations, the Consequently, it was decided to vary the rotary speed of the
entire system has been integrated with NI LabVIEW data cam from 150 rpm to 250 rpm. The damping of the bearings,
acquisition system and positions of sensors are shown in tires, and the body are small enough not to be considered.
Figure 2. Since only three variables have been considered for
optimization, the full factorial approach was implemented.
In this approach, no aliasing or compounding effect occur
3. Design of Experiments between the parameters. For two levels of each factor, the
DoE is a statistical technique used in this work to determine design is denoted as 2𝑘 full factorial design where 𝑘 is the
the various influential parameters affecting the response, that number of factors in the study. This method accounts for the
is, RC and the settings of those parameters in order to opti- effect of all the interactions and for reducing variability in
mize the performance. The empirical relationship between the design; all the runs were replicated twice hence resulting
the factors has also been derived in the form of equation in 16 runs. According to Montgomery [21], an obvious risk
by using the concept of regression analysis, which describes when conducting an experiment that has only one run at each
the relation between the factors and responses statistically. test combination is that the model is fitted to noise and, with
DoE quantifies the effects, variations, and uncertainty in the only one replicate in the design, the pure error and lack of
process and normalizes the data on a common scale in order fit cannot be estimated. The experiment was performed by
to assist the analysis. considering two levels for each factor along with two blocks
for speed. In a replicated blocked design, each replicate of the
3.1. Full Factorial DoE Analysis with Three Parameters. In design is considered within a block and the design features
this section, the three fundamental variables sprung mass, have been depicted in Tables 1 and 2.
spring stiffness, and the damping coefficient were considered The experimentation was performed as per the orthog-
to optimize the suspension system to enhance the RC of the onal design matrix generated in MINITAB and the corre-
vehicle. For the purpose of sampling range determination, an sponding RC values were tabulated as shown in Table 3.
SAE BAJA buggy was taken as the reference. Accordingly, the As evident from Table 3, the RMS values of sprung mass
softest and the hardest of springs and dampers as available acceleration vary from 0.285 m/s2 to 1.38 m/s2 . ISO 2631-
in the Indian market were taken to be the extremities of the 1:1997 [2] clearly specifies that the sprung mass acceleration
sampling range and the one-fourth of the total mass of a above 0.315 m/s2 is a little uncomfortable whereas that above
buggy was considered and the sprung mass was decided to be 0.5 m/s2 is fairly uncomfortable for a passenger. Hence, the
4 Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

Table 3: Observation table: full factorial design. Table 4: Effect coefficient table: full factorial design.

Run Speed 𝑚 ks cs RC Term Effect Coef SE Coef 𝑡 𝑃

order Constant 0.67438 0.03624 18.61 0.000
1 150 41 26000 418 0.35 Block −0.06437 0.03624 −1.78 0.114
2 150 81 26000 418 0.285 ks −0.10375 −0.05188 0.03624 −1.43 0.190
3 150 81 26000 673 0.87 cs 0.41250 0.20625 0.03624 5.69 0.000
4 150 81 18000 418 0.34 𝑚 0.13750 0.06875 0.03624 1.90 0.094
5 150 41 18000 673 0.535 ks ∗ cs −0.15250 −0.07625 0.03624 −2.10 0.069
6 150 81 18000 673 1.38 cs ∗ 𝑚 0.14625 0.07313 0.03624 2.02 0.078
7 150 41 26000 673 0.71 ks ∗ cs ∗ 𝑚 −0.17625 −0.08813 0.03624 −2.43 0.041
8 150 41 18000 418 0.41
9 250 81 26000 418 0.565
Pareto chart of the standardized effects
10 250 41 26000 673 0.99 (response is RC, alpha = 0.05)
11 250 81 18000 673 1.1 2.306
12 250 41 18000 418 0.66
B
13 250 41 26000 418 0.47
14 250 81 18000 418 0.665 ABC

15 250 81 26000 673 0.74 AC

16 250 41 18000 673 0.72 Term
BC

main aim of this work is to obtain the optimal combination A

of suspension parameters so as to restrict the magnitude of
the sprung mass acceleration below 0.315 m/s2 . 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Standardized effect
Factor Name
3.1.1. Regression Analysis. Regression analysis is the science of
A ks
fitting straight lines to patterns of data. In a linear regression B cs
model, the dependent variable (RC in this case) is predicted C m
from “𝑛” independent variables (here ks, cs, and 𝑚) using a
Figure 3: Pareto chart: full factorial design.
linear equation and residuals are calculated in order to get the
estimates of errors in model.
Before proceeding for the analysis, firstly the model is
reduced and the unnecessary and insignificant parameters 3.1.2. Goodness of Fit. Now, the model of RC can be analyzed
present in the model are removed. The presence of insignif- to check its adequacy and fitment. Three statistics are used
icant parameters inflates the biased error and decreases the in Ordinary Least Squares regression to evaluate model fit:
model accuracy and adequacy. The estimated coefficient 𝑅-Squared, standard error (𝑆), and the overall 𝐹-test. Hence,
tables and the Pareto charts have been generated for this the statistical terms such as standard error, coefficient of
purpose. determination, and predictability values were calculated for
The coefficient table gives the quantitative effect of each the response as shown in Table 5.
parameter on the response which is calculated by considering 𝑆 stands for standard error and is 0.145 for the model.
the average effects of the rest of the parameters. Table 4 gives It is an estimate of the standard deviation of the true noise;
the effect value of damping coefficient as 0.4125, which shows that is, the variations in the response that are not explained
that it has the highest effect on RC. Here, stiffness and sprung by the model. The smaller the value of 𝑆, the greater the
mass are individually insignificant for RC as their respective closeness of experimental responses with the fitted line and
𝑃 values are 0.190 and 0.094, which is more than 0.05. Also, the accuracy of the model. The 𝑅-Squared value (coefficient
a Pareto chart of the effects used to determine the magnitude of determination) is 87.42%, which gives an estimate of
and the importance of an effect visually is shown in Figure 3. explained variation in the model and determines how closely
There is a reference line on the chart which corresponds to a certain function fits a particular set of experimental data. 𝑅-
the critical 𝑡 value (𝑡 = 2.306) and any effect that exceeds this Squared adjusted value, 76.41%, is assessed. The perceptible
reference line is significant. difference between the values of 𝑅-Squared and 𝑅-Squared
Figure 3 shows that the damping coefficient and the adjusted here shows that some influential parameters might
interaction of the three variables are significant; hence the not have been considered for this analysis.
parameters like mass and stiffness cannot be neglected even Along with this, the PRESS value in the model is 0.672,
after being individually insignificant. which is comparatively larger than the ideal value. Similarly,
Advances in Acoustics and Vibration 5

Table 5: Regression statistics: full factorial design. Table 6: Fractional factorial design.

Term Value Design parameter Value

𝑆 Standard error 0.145 Factors 6
PRESS Prediction sum of squares 0.672 Base design 6, 16
𝑅-Squared Coeff of multiple determination 87.42% Runs 32
𝑅-Squared Replicates 2
Predicted coeff of determination 49.68%
(pred) Blocks 2
𝑅-Squared 76.41%
Resolution IV
Adjusted coeff of determination
(adj)

Table 7: Levels of influential parameters in fractional factorial

the 𝑅-Squared predicted value is 49.68% which depicts a very design.
low predictability and that the model is unable to account
Factors Low (−1) High (+1)
for the variability in the model. Hence, it was surmised
that, apart from the primary parameters, other factors are Speed (𝑁), RPM 150 250
likely to influence the response and can be included in Tire pressure (typ), psi 35 40
the design. Consequently, it was decided to take steering Camber (cma), degree 1 3
geometry parameters into consideration along with the tire Spring stiffness (ks), N/mm 18000 26000
pressure and obtain a setting of all the parameters in order to Damping coefficient (cs), N-s/m 418 673
minimize the RC. toe, mm 10 20
Mass (𝑚), kg 41 81
3.2. Fractional Factorial DoE Analysis with Six Parameters.
This section deals with identifying the other influential
parameters and then optimizing the RC using fractional in the design depending upon the resolution chosen. Here, to
factorial method. The process comprises extensive literature obtain a 26−2 fractional factorial design, (1/4)th fraction of 26
survey and study of vehicle dynamics. Study of steering design requires 2 design generators to be defined which are
geometry reveals that the alignment and orientation of the 𝐸 = 𝐴𝐵𝐶 and 𝐹 = 𝐵𝐶𝐷. Now, those runs are selected which
wheels and the suspension linkages also play a nodal role in give same sign for the generators and the identity column.
altering the area of contact at the tire-road interface. One such Hence, the defining relation, which is the total collection of
parameter is tire camber which determines the orientation all the design generators, can be given as
along which the normal reaction generated at the tire-road
interface is transferred to the vehicle body. Another aspect 𝐼 + 𝐴𝐵𝐶𝐸 + 𝐴𝐷𝐸𝐹 + 𝐵𝐶𝐷𝐹, (1)
of the steering geometry, namely, the toe, is also said to
have a profound impact on the directional stability and the where 𝐴, 𝐵, 𝐶, 𝐷, 𝐸, and 𝐹 are parameters and 𝐼 indicates the
self-straightening ability of the general passenger car. It has identity column.
been mentioned in SAE J670e [1] that the toe determines Based on the defining relation, the alias structure is
the magnitude and orientation of lateral forces acting on the obtained which describes the confounded effects in a design.
wheel assembly under dynamic conditions. Aliasing or confounding in a design occurs when the estimate
The generation of the forces necessary to initiate the turn, of an effect includes the influence of one or more other effects.
to constrain the vehicle at the correct sideslip angle, and to The alias structures of this design show that all the main
return it to the straight-running condition is the role of the effects are confounded with third- and fifth-order effects
tires. Moreover, as the tire is made of rubber, which is partially but no main effect is aliased with any other main effect.
elastic, the tire is analogous to a spring. Pillai [22] has stated The second-order effects are confounded with second- as
that the stiffness of the tire is likely to affect the nature of the well as fourth- and sixth-order effect and all the third order
vibrations transmitted to the vehicle and as the tire stiffness effects are confounded with each other. Consequently, the
is said to be a direct function of tire pressure, it was decided Resolution IV design was chosen as it does not confound the
to incorporate camber angle, toe, and tire inflation pressure main effects with the two factor interactions.
among the parameters. Table 6 shows the overall summary of the fractional
factorial design obtained as per the above discussion and the
3.2.1. Fractional Factorial Design. As the number of param- two levels of all the 6 factors have been shown in Table 7.
eters increases to 6, in the subsequent section of this paper, A Randomized Complete Block Design was formulated
fractional factorial methodology has been implemented to with two replicates and blocks, and the experimentation was
create and analyze the design by considering the 2 levels of performed accordingly as shown in Table 8.
six influential parameters. Fractional factorial design is an
efficient alternative for full factorial design. 3.2.2. Regression Analysis. To evaluate the nature of influence
Here, the fractional factorial design is selected by defining of each parameter over the response, the effects coefficient
the design generator such that it minimizes the aliasing effect table was generated as shown in Table 9.
6 Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

Table 8: DoE matrix: fractional factorial design. Table 10: Regression statistics: fractional factorial design.

Run 𝑁 typ cma ks cs toe 𝑚 RC Term Value

1 155 35 3 18000 418 10 41 0.48 𝑆 Standard error 0.093
2 155 35 3 26000 673 20 81 0.67 PRESS Prediction sum of squares 0.0403
3 155 35 1 26000 673 10 41 0.8 𝑅-Squared Coeff of multiple determination 96.21%
4 155 35 1 26000 673 10 41 0.72 𝑅-Squared (pred) Predicted coeff of determination 91.98%
5 155 35 1 18000 418 20 81 1.24 𝑅-Squared (adj) Adjusted coeff of determination 94.66%
6 155 35 3 18000 418 10 41 0.45
7 155 35 3 26000 673 20 81 0.65 Pareto chart of the standardized effects
8 155 35 1 18000 418 20 81 1.3 (response is RC_ms (m/s2 ), alpha = 0.05)
2.07
9 250 35 3 18000 673 10 81 0.54
10 250 35 3 26000 418 20 41 1.2 D
11 250 35 3 26000 418 20 41 1.06 F
12 250 35 1 26000 418 10 81 1.7 AB
13 250 35 1 26000 418 10 81 1.5
E

Term
14 250 35 1 18000 673 20 41 1.15
B
15 250 35 1 18000 673 20 41 1.2
16 250 35 3 18000 673 10 81 0.62 AF
17 155 40 3 26000 418 10 81 1.12 C
18 155 40 1 18000 673 10 81 0.55 A
19 155 40 1 26000 418 20 41 0.9
20 155 40 3 18000 673 20 41 0.54 0 2 4 6 8 10 12
Standardized effect
21 155 40 1 26000 418 20 41 0.82
22 155 40 1 18000 673 10 81 0.57 Factor Name
A typ (psi)
23 155 40 3 26000 418 10 81 1.17
B cma (deg)
24 155 40 3 18000 673 20 41 0.44 C ks (N/m)
25 250 40 1 18000 418 10 41 0.97 D cs (N-s/m)
26 250 40 1 26000 673 20 81 1.6 E toe (mm)
F m (kg)
27 250 40 3 26000 673 10 41 0.61
28 250 40 3 18000 418 20 81 1.75 Figure 4: Pareto chart: fractional factorial design.
29 250 40 1 18000 418 10 41 0.91
30 250 40 3 18000 418 20 81 1.75
31 250 40 1 26000 673 20 81 1.25
residual error in evaluating the system has been minimized
32 250 40 3 26000 673 10 41 0.69 after considering additional parameters. Moreover, all the
individual parameters other than the tire pressure are found
to be significant. In the previous instance, while taking three
Table 9: Effects and coefficients for RC: fractional factorial. factors, the effect of the noise factors caused the individual
influence of parameters like mass and spring stiffness to be
Term Effect Coef SE Coef 𝑡 𝑃 clouded. This further emphasizes the importance of selection
Const 0.9663 0.01647 58.67 0 of influential variables in a DoE optimization procedure.
Blocks −0.19 0.01647 −11.54 0 A visual perception of the same can be derived from the
typ (psi) 0.0225 0.0113 0.01647 0.68 0.502 Pareto charts which clearly demarcate the significant and
cma (deg) −0.215 −0.1075 0.01647 −6.53 0.029 insignificant influences, as shown in Figure 4.
ks (N/m) 0.125 0.0625 0.01647 3.79 0 The critical 𝑡 value is 2.07. Tire pressure is insignificant
cs (N-s/m) −0.3575 −0.1787 0.01647 −10.85 0 individually but it cannot be neglected as its interactions are
toe (mm) 0.2575 0.1288 0.01647 7.82 0
significant. The Pareto chart obtained also conforms to the
Effect-Heredity principle, which states that, for an interaction
𝑚 0.315 0.1575 0.01647 9.56 0
to be significant, at least one of its parent factors should be
typ (psi) ∗ cma (deg) 0.2775 0.1388 0.01647 8.42 0
significant. After reducing the model of RC to its significant
typ (psi) ∗ 𝑚 0.17 0.085 0.01647 5.16 0 variables, the model was checked for goodness of fit by
evaluating the 𝑅 sq statistics shown in Table 10.
The 𝑆 value obtained here is 0.093 which is relatively
It can be observed from Table 9 that the SE Coef value of smaller and accounts for greater accuracy of the resulting
0.01647 is much lower than that obtained when three param- model. The high value of 𝑅-Squared, that is, 96.21%, and
eters were considered. This is a direct indication that the the closeness of 𝑅-Squared and adjusted 𝑅-Squared (94.66%)
Advances in Acoustics and Vibration 7

Normal probability plot Versus fits

99
0.2
90
0.1

Residual
Percent

50
0.0

10
−0.1
1
−0.2 −0.1 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.5 1.0 1.5
Residual Fitted value
(a) (b)
Histogram Versus order
8 0.2

6 0.1

Residual
Frequency

4
0.0

2
−0.1
0
−0.15 −0.10 −0.05 0.00 0.05 0.10 0.15 0.20 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32
Residual Observation order
(c) (d)

Figure 5: Residual plots for RC: fractional factorial design. Residual plots for RC ms (m/s2 ).

depicted in Table 10 confirm the fitment of model. PRESS and residuals, taking into account the degree of freedom for each
predicted 𝑅-squared values give an idea about the model’s variable. The ANOVA table generated for RC is shown in
predictability and the value of PRESS here is smaller, that is, Table 11. In ANOVA, the total sum of squares quantifies the
0.0403, compared to that when three factors were considered. total variation in the data and is divided into two parts, Seq
Similarly, predicted 𝑅-Squared is 91.98%. The higher value SS (sequential sum of squares) and Adj SS (adjusted sum
of predicted 𝑅-Squared shows better predictability and the of squares). The equality of both these terms confirms the
negligible difference between adjusted 𝑅-Squared and 𝑅- orthogonality of the design. The residual mean square (MS)
Squared indicates that the model is not overfit. of treatments is an unbiased estimator of variance.
The normal probability plot for RC, at Figure 5(a), Lower 𝑃 values provide stronger evidence against the null
indicates the presence of one outlier which can be neglected, hypothesis; that is, for 𝑃 value less than 0.05, the effect of the
as far as its impact on the model is concerned. In this analysis, factor is termed significant and the null hypothesis can be
the distribution of residuals over the zero line follows a rejected. As suggested by the 𝐹-value and 𝑃 value in Table 9,
bell shaped curve, but the presence of some outlier points rotational speed, which was considered within a block, is
on extreme left and right makes it slightly skewed. The significantly influential.
versus-fit plots, at Figure 5(b), show a random and equal The lack of fit for the model is also tested by using 𝐹-test.
distribution without any usual patterns for both the responses To obtain the lack of fit estimation, replication of the model is
which shows that the residuals possess a constant variance mandatory. There are two parts of the error term in the model,
throughout the data. The graph at Figure 5(d) is the versus pure error and the bias error. The error due to variations in the
order plot which is the plot of residuals in time sequence. The replications around their mean value is called pure error; on
plot is used to detect the correlation between the residuals. the other hand bias error is due to the variation of mean values
Ideally, the residuals on the plot should fall randomly around around the model prediction. Ideally, the 𝐹-ratio of lack of
the center line. There is no strong pattern observed in the fit should not be significant for the model to describe the
versus order plots for RC which indicate the random variation functional relationship between the experimental factors and
in experimental data. Hence, the residuals are deemed time the response. For the model, in Table 11, the 𝑃 value of lack of
independent and uncorrelated in the analysis. fit is 0.178, which is greater than the significance level of 0.05.
This shows its insignificance which in turn depicts the fitment
3.2.3. ANOVA. ANOVA, that is, Analysis of Variance, and credibility of the model generated. Also the variance of
explains the variability in the mean and variance of the model error, that is, lack of fit and replicate error, that is,
8 Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

Table 11: ANOVA analysis: fractional factorial design.

Source DF Seq SS Adj SS Adj MS 𝐹 𝑃

Blocks 1 1.1552 1.1552 1.1552 133.09 0
Main effects 6 2.84555 2.84555 0.47426 54.64 0
typ (psi) 1 0.00405 0.00405 0.00405 0.47 0.502
cma (degree) 1 0.3698 0.3698 0.3698 42.61 0
ks (N/m) 1 0.125 0.125 0.125 14.4 0.001
cs (N-s/m) 1 1.02245 1.02245 1.02245 117.8 0
toe (mm) 1 0.53045 0.53045 0.53045 61.11 0
𝑚 1 0.7938 0.7938 0.7938 91.46 0
Two-way interactions 2 0.84725 0.84725 0.42363 48.81 0
typ (psi) ∗ cma (deg) 1 0.61605 0.61605 0.61605 70.98 0
typ (psi) ∗ 𝑚 1 0.2312 0.2312 0.2312 26.64 0
Residual error 22 0.19095 0.19095 0.00868
Lack of fit 6 0.07515 0.07515 0.01253 1.73 0.178
Pure error 16 0.1158 0.1158 0.00724
Total 31 5.03895

pure error values for the RC model, is 0.01253 and 0.00724, RMS acceleration of sprung mass and improves as its value
respectively, which was very negligible and it indicates that decreases; hence the response is to be minimized to obtain a
the experimentation is having good reproducibility. high degree of comfort.
As recommended by ISO 2631-1:1997 [2] standards, RC
3.2.4. Model with Six Variables. Once all the assumptions should be less than 0.5 m/s2 , so the target value for RC
were verified and consolidated and the fit of model is was 0.3 m/s2 and upper value was 0.6 m/s2 . An interactive
obtained, an experimental model explaining the behavioral optimizer plot in Figure 6 is also provided by the response
relationship between all the selected suspension and steering optimizer which shows the optimum factor settings (values
geometry parameters is shown in in red) and the response values (in blue) along with their
RC = −0.210200 × typ − 2.18875 × cma + 1.56250𝐸 respective desirabilities.
The predicted value(s) of response(s) can be calculated at
− 05 × ks − 0.00140196 × cs − 0.0257500 × toe a particular setting of interest for one or more factors and sen-
(2) sitivity of factors can be determined. When one or more input
− 0.0558750 × 𝑚 + 0.05550 × typ × cma factors are changed to a new level, the graphs of desirabilities
are redrawn and the predicted responses and desirabilities are
+ 0.001700 × typ × 𝑚 − 0.1900 × 𝑁 + 8.61814.
recalculated. The model gives an optimum RMS acceleration
of 0.2663 m/s2 at the optimum combination of tire pressure of
4. Response Optimization 35 psi, camber angle of 3 degree, toe of 10 mm, spring stiffness
of 18000 N/m, and damper of damping coefficient 673 N-s/m
After the experimentation and the statistical analysis, the
with mass of 41 kg.
regression models for the desired responses are generated in
terms of the influential parameters, which produce a value of
response as per the given set of the factors. When the value 5. Results and Verification
of response is desired around a user-specified range and the
combination of various influencing factors is required to yield The optimum setting for all the factors which minimizes the
the optimal response accordingly, the method of response RMS acceleration, that is, improves the RC to the optimum
optimization is applied. In this, the most desirable value of level, is shown in Table 12. This optimum setting obtained is
response possible under all the restrictions or conditions is again verified by executing the combination on the test rig
achieved. and the experimental value of RC was found to be 0.302 m/s2
To serve the purpose, response optimizer, a software against the theoretical value of 0.2663 m/s2 .
function in MINITAB, is used. It generates a combination of
the variables which gives the optimal solution, based on the 6. Conclusion
goal of optimization, range, weight, and relative importance
as specified by the user. The model must fit all the responses In this work, the experimentation was accomplished by
separately, to be implemented in the response optimizer. The incorporating various combinations of the parameters on the
response can be minimized, maximized, or targeted as per test rig developed, for the simulation of real time behavior
the objective of optimization. RC is measured in terms of of suspension system of a vehicle. It can be concluded
Advances in Acoustics and Vibration 9

Optimal typ (psi) cma (deg) ks (N/m) cs (N-s/m) toe (mm) m

D High 40.0 3.0 26000.0 673.0 20.0 81.0
Cur [35.0] [3.0] [18000.0] [673.0] [10.0] [41.0]
1.0000 Low 35.0 1.0 18000.0 418.0 10.0 41.0

Composite
desirability
1.0000

rms_accl
Minimum
y = 0.2663
d = 1.0000

Figure 6: Response optimization plot.

Table 12: Results and verification. MES’s College of Engineering, Pune, India, for providing the
Factors Optimum level
necessary testing facilities.
Tire pressure 35 psi
Camber 3 degrees References
Spring stiffness 18000 N/m [1] SAE J670e, Vehicle Dynamics Terminology. Standard, Society
Damping coefficient 673 Ns/m of Automotive Engineers, 1976.
toe 10 mm [2] ISO, “Mechanical vibration and shock evaluation of human
Mass 41 kg exposure to whole body vibration. Part 1: general requirements,”
Verification ISO Standard 2631-1:1997, International Organization for Stan-
dardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 1997.
RC (response optimization) RC [experimental value (test rig)]
[3] H. Damian, Multibody Systems Approach to Vehicle Dynamics,
0.2663 m/s2 0.302 m/s2 Butterworth-Heinemann, Oxford, UK, 2004.
[4] M. N. Khajavi, B. Notghi, and G. Paygane, “Multi objective
optimization approach to optimize vehicle ride and handling
from the aforementioned work that the RC, measured in characteristics,” World Academy of Science, Engineering and
terms of RMS acceleration of sprung mass in a vehicle, Technology, vol. 62, pp. 580–584, 2010.
cannot be successfully optimized by controlling only spring [5] J. Zhang, Y. Zhang, and R. Gao, “Genetic algorithms for optimal
stiffness, damping coefficient, and the sprung mass. The design of vehicle suspensions,” in Proceedings of the IEEE
steering geometry angles, that is, camber and toe with the International Conference on Engineering of Intelligent Systems
tire pressure, significantly affect the ride behavior of a vehicle (ICEIS ’06), pp. 1–6, IEEE, Islamabad, Pakistan, April 2006.
along with the primary suspension parameters. [6] T. M. Farid, A. Salah, and W. Abbas, “Design of optimal linear
Also, it was found that the fractional factorial method of suspension for quarter car with human model using genetic
algorithms,” Journal of Applied Sciences Research, vol. 7, no. 11,
optimization reduces the number of runs significantly with
pp. 1709–1720, 2011.
the negligible compromise in the result, as the application of
[7] S. Kilian, U. Zander, and F. E. Talke, “Suspension modeling and
full factorial method is only limited to the experimentations
optimization using finite element analysis,” Tribology Interna-
where number of runs is small. tional, vol. 36, no. 4–6, pp. 317–324, 2003.
Later, the experimental model for RC and the optimized
[8] S. Roy and Z. Liu, “Road vehicle suspension and performance
combination of six influential parameters were obtained after evaluation using a two-dimensional vehicle model,” Interna-
the regression analysis of data acquired, which was again tional Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, vol. 3,
verified on the test rig. As the responses have been treated no. 1-2, pp. 68–93, 2008.
with the road profile of a bump, it can be deemed that the [9] J. P. C. Gonçalves and J. A. C. Ambrósio, “Road vehicle modeling
optimized set of values will render a very comfortable ride as requirements for optimization of ride and handling,” Multibody
far as normal roads are considered. System Dynamics, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3–23, 2005.
[10] A. F. Naudé and J. A. Snyman, “Optimisation of road vehicle
passive suspension systems—part 1. Optimisation algorithm
Competing Interests and vehicle model,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 27, no.
4, pp. 249–261, 2003.
The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
[11] A. F. Naudé and J. A. Snyman, “Optimisation of road vehicle
passive suspension systems. Part 2. Qualification and case
Acknowledgments study,” Applied Mathematical Modelling, vol. 27, no. 4, pp. 263–
274, 2003.
The authors are thankful to the MESCOE-NI LabVIEW [12] M. Sharifi and B. Shahriari, “Pareto optimization of vehicle
Academy Lab, Department of Mechanical Engineering, suspension vibration for a nonlinear halfcar model using a
10 Advances in Acoustics and Vibration

multi-objective genetic algorithm,” Research Journal of Recent

Sciences, vol. 1, no. 8, pp. 17–22, 2012.
[13] A. Bagheri, M. J. Mahmoodabadi, H. Rostami, and S. Kheybari,
“Pareto optimization of a two-degree of freedom passive linear
suspension using a new multiobjective genetic algorithm,”
International Journal of Engineering, Transactions A: Basics, vol.
24, no. 3, pp. 291–299, 2011.
[14] A. Kuznetsov, M. Mammadov, I. Sultan, and E. Hajilarov, “Opti-
mization of a quarter-car suspension model coupled with the
driver biomechanical effects,” Journal of Sound and Vibration,
vol. 330, no. 12, pp. 2937–2946, 2011.
[15] Z. Chi, Y. He, and G. F. Naterer, “Design optimization of vehicle
suspensions with a quarter-vehicle model,” CSME Transactions,
vol. 32, no. 2, pp. 297–312, 2008.
[16] P. E. Uys, P. S. Els, and M. Thoresson, “Suspension settings for
optimal ride comfort of off-road vehicles travelling on roads
with different roughness and speeds,” Journal of Terramechanics,
vol. 44, no. 2, pp. 163–175, 2007.
[17] S. Mostaani, D. Singh, K. Firouzbakhsh, and M. T. Ahmadian,
“Optimization of a passive vehicle suspension system for ride
comfort enhancement with different speeds based on DOE
method,” in Proceedings of the International Joint Colloquiums
on Computer Electronics Electrical Mechanical and Civil (CEMC
’11), Kerala, India, September 2011.
[18] J. Marzbanrad, M. Mohammadi, and S. Mostaani, “Optimiza-
tion of a passive vehicle suspension system for ride com-
fort enhancement with different speeds based on design of
experiment method (DOE) method,” Journal of Mechanical
Engineering Research, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 50–59, 2013.
[19] P. Mohan, D. Marzougui, E. Arispe, and C. Story, “Component
and full-scale tests of the 2007 chevrolet silverado suspension
system,” NCAC Test Report, The George Washington Univer-
sity, Washington, DC, USA, 2009.
[20] M. Arraigada and M. Partl, “Calculation of displacements of
measured accelerations, analysis of two accelerometers and
application in road engineering,” in Proceedings of the 6th Swiss
Transport Research Conference, vol. 1517, Ascona, Switzerland,
2006.
[21] D. C. Montgomery, Design and Analysis of Experiments, John
Wiley & Sons, Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009.
[22] P. S. Pillai, “Inflation pressure effect on whole tyre hysteresis
ratio and radial spring constant,” Indian Journal of Engineering
and Materials Sciences, vol. 13, no. 2, pp. 110–116, 2006.
 International Journal of

Rotating
Machinery

International Journal of
The Scientific
Engineering Distributed
Journal of
Journal of

Hindawi Publishing Corporation

World Journal
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Sensors
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Sensor Networks
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Journal of

Control Science
and Engineering

Advances in
Civil Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

Submit your manuscripts at

http://www.hindawi.com

Journal of
Journal of Electrical and Computer
Robotics
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

VLSI Design
Advances in
OptoElectronics
International Journal of

International Journal of
Modelling &
Simulation
Aerospace
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Volume 2014
Navigation and
Observation
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
in Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
Engineering
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014
Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014

International Journal of
International Journal of Antennas and Active and Passive Advances in
Chemical Engineering Propagation Electronic Components Shock and Vibration Acoustics and Vibration
Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation Hindawi Publishing Corporation
http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014 http://www.hindawi.com Volume 2014