TEAM ID- IGC13L101

Team MECHASONICS Final Design Report

Abhishek Mittal
Design
Praveen Sharma & Rajat Gite
Design Analysis and Power-Train


ABSTRACT

INTERNATIONAL GO KART CHAMPIONSHIP is an
intercollegiate engineering competition. The objectives of
this competition are to design, build, test & promote a Go
Kart which must be safe, powerful, easy to maintain, fun
to drive, easy in mass production and aesthetically
appealing. The aim of this report is to highlight the key
features of the go kart that is being built by Team
Mechasonics for the 2014 event. This report is a preview
of how we have proceeded to design the prototype and
analyze the same to maximize performance, safety and
comfort. Team Mechasonics has created this report to
describe their design.


INTRODUCTION

The purpose of creating a Go Kart is to create a prototype
recreational vehicle which could provide a fun, safe and
reliable experience to a weekend enthusiast. In order to
achieve this, various aspects of the Go Kart were analysed
and certain elements were selected for specific focus.
There are many facets for a Go Kart such as the roll-cage,
steering, drive-train, braking,all of which require thorough
design concentration. For the 2014 edition of the
INTERNATIONAL GO KART CHAMPIONSHIP, Team
Mechasonics has extensively focussed on drive-train and
steering systems. Most time and effort were dedicated
into developing these components as it was felt that they





have a significant impact on the on-road performance.
Through the entire process, consumer interest through
the use of innovative, inexpensive and effective methods
was the primary goal.

FRAME DESIGN

The main objective of a roll-cage is to encapsulate all the
components of the vehicle along with a driver and provide
a safe and reliable structure. Principal aspects focussed on
the design process included induced driver safety
drive-train and structural rigidity and operator

Ergonomics
The primary objective was driver safety. The guidelines
were provided in the Competition Rulebook 2014. With
the help of Finite Element Analysis (FEA), design assurance
was able to take place.

DESIGN PROCESS

The designing process consisted of the following steps:
Determination of design parameters
Setting of design objectives
Hand Sketching
CAD Modelling and CAE of CAD modeling
Modification based on CAE Result
CAE of modified Rollcage
Final design
MATERIAL
ST52 ERW Steel tube was selected as the primary frame
material because of its high strength and ductility. The
material has an ultimate tensile strength of 610 MPa with
tensile yield strength of 530 MPa. A tube dia of 1.25
inches was taken with a wall thickness of 2mm. This
material was selected due to its easy availability and its
wide use in the local automobile industry.

SAFETY
The INERNATIONAL GO KART CHAMPIONSHIP Organising
committee lays prime focus on the safety of the driver as
well as the fellow people on the track. As such, the
Competition Rule-Book lays down certain fundamental
guidelines for safety. These guidelines for frame design
can be found in the Article 2.7 of the rulebook. The rules
were implemented throughout the entire frame.
Once the baseline requirements were established, other
safety points were incorporated. The driver has been
provided sufficient room inside the cockpit. The frame was
then tested on FEA platform to validate the design and
verify the structural integrity.

ROLL-CAGE FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Simulated loads within a computer program were placed
on the CAD model of the roll-cage at critical points that
would simulate the amount of force the vehicle would
undergo from its own inertia along with a driver in various
cases of impact and roll-over.
The CAD model developed in PRO E was imported into the
FEA package ANSYS. Different load cases were
considered and the simulations provided the resultant
stresses in the members. A maximum force of 11080N was
applied in front impact and a reasonable factor of safety of
over 2.5 was achieved.
The results of the simulation ensure that the frame will
not fail in the load cases theoretically. The real world load
cases cannot be accurately simulated on the software
platform without data from actual crash tests of the
vehicle, which is quite difficult to obtain. The FEA results
show that the frame meets the desired standards and
expectations.


STRUCTURAL RIGIDITY

The overall structure was subjected to simulated impact
and torsion loads to achieve high degree of torsional
rigidity and structural integrity.

WEIGHT
Keeping the frame light in weight was a top priority. The
material selection process was extensive and a large
amount of time was dedicated to find the optimum
material that met the minimum requirements specified in
the rule book. ST52 ERW steel tube was chosen with a
tube dia of 1.25 and a wall thickness of 2mm. This
structure provides a sufficient bending stiffness and
strength. FEA was exhaustively used to keep the number
of members at the bare minimum to achieve optimum
weight of the cage. Redundant members were removed or
re-designed. The final weight of the frame was found to be
20kg.

OPERATOR ERGONOMICS
Providing a comfortable seating environment for the
driver was considered during the design of the cockpit.
The operator anthropometry was considered during the
placement of seat controls and the foot pedals.

MANUFACTURABILITY
The modelling of the roll-cage gave a visual picture of
what the vehicle frame would look like. Tube bends were
preferred over the welded mitre joints. The bending of
tubes provides an added advantage of retained strength
and reduction in cost due to elimination of welding at
those places. The mounts of various components were cut
from a sufficiently thick steel plate. The joining process
used was Metal Inert Gas welding. All welds used a 1.2
mm carbon coated steel wire as the filler material and CO2
as shielding gas. This process gave us a proper control of
the heated affected zones while reducing the induced
thermal stresses. Proper edge preparation was performed
to ensure a good and uncontaminated weld. All the
finished joints were ground and de-burred to provide a
good surface finish.



BODY AND COMPOSITES

BODY PANELS
The body panels were made from single layer Fiber
Re-inforced Plastic( FRP). FRP composite is a light weight
material with a good strength and puncture resistance.
These body panels protect the driver from rocks and
debris. Sound engineering practices were used to mount
these panels to the chassis.
SEAT
The seat structure is modified slightly to provide better
ergonomic comfort to the driver.

STEERING SYSTEM DESIGN

OBJECTIVE
The steering system is designed to withstand the stress of
safely manoeuvring the vehicle through any type of
terrain.

DESIGN
Initially we were trying for mechanical linkage steering
system,although it was easy to manufacture and
decreased steering effort but the major disadvantage of
using such type of steering system was that the geometry
could be manufactured within tolerance.
Another problem was that allowable total steering
system free play is limited to 7 degree as per rulebook
article 2.7.1.5 which is difficult to achieve through
mechanical linkage.
Simplicity and safety were the main design specifications
for the vehicles steering system. A small, lightweight rack
with a 12:1 ratio was chosen as the main component of
the assembly. Stock Maruti Tie rods were taken and
modified to achieve the necessary tie rod length and the
mounting requirements to withstand the strictly axial
forces applied to it. Steel tubing was used for the steering
column due to the torsional loads it will need to withstand.
A universal joint provided easy redirection of the steering
column as it extends from the rack.

STEERING RACK
A custom centralised steering rack was used as the
steering gear box. Ackerman geometry was achieved. The
rack was modelled after the existing pre-centralised
steering racks available commercially. The steering ratio
was set at a value of 12:1. The setting of the wheel track
was necessary constraints for the mounting of the rack
and the length of the tie rods.

SIMULATION
The steering system was mounted on the software
platform of MSC ADAMS. The steering was simulated and
these results were used to optimize the position of the
steering arm on the knuckle and the length of the tie rods
such that the turning radius could be reduced. The setup
and results are attached.

DRIVE-TRAIN DESIGN

OBJECTIVE
The drive-train is a very important part of the car, taking
into consideration that all of the cars power is transferred
through the drive-train system to the ground. The
challenge is to harness the engines 13.5 horsepower and
distribute it to the ground in the most efficient way. The
drive-train needs to be able to operate in the lowest and
highest gear ratios while performing in all of the different
aspects of the competition.

DESIGN
The drive-train design focuses on being highly variable
while also staying very light and easily serviced. The
drive-train allows the car to be vary between the gear
ratios of 21.42:1 to 6.25:1. This gear ratio setup allows the
car to have a top speed of 78 kmph.

REAR AXLE
To achieve a unique drive-train performance, the rear
axles were single custom EN8 drive axle,30 mm dia.

BRAKING DESIGN

OBJECTIVE
The purpose of the brakes is to stop the car safely and
effectively. To achieve the maximum performance, the
braking system was designed to lock rear wheels while
minimizing cost and weight.


DESIGN
The braking system focuses primarily on the safety of the
vehicle in the dynamic situations. The vehicle uses custom
disc brakes on rear axle. The system consists of custom
190mm dia disc using stock honda aviator callipers to lock
up the wheels. The wheels are mounted on custom Hubs.

Disc Brake Rotor
The rotor used is a custom design. The rotor is made from
Stainless Steel SS420 and is cut from a blank of 6 mm
thickness and then machined to a usable 4 mm.

BRAKING EFFORT
The pedal force needed to lock the wheels was calculated
as 250N which is within the capability of any driver. The
torque required to lock the wheels at top speed was
calculated as 215.68 Nm. The stopping distance of the
vehicle at various vehicle speeds is tabulated in the
appendix.

SAFETY EQUIPMENTS
The primary focus during the design and fabrication of the
vehicle was zero tolerance towards compromise of safety.
As such, all the required guidelines set by the rule-book
were met.

SAFETY HARNESS
3 point Safety Harness meeting the SFI 3.3 standard has
been used. The harness employs a metal to metal release
latch. The mounting points have been selected on rigid
members of the roll-cage. Sound engineering practices
have been used to fasten the harness inside the cockpit.

KILL SWITCHES
Stock Polaris #4110106 push-to-off kill switches have been
used. 2 switches are ued in the vehicle in accordance with
the rule-book. One switch is mounted inside the cockpit
within easy reach of the driver. One is externally mounted
to be easily accessible by the track workers or people
assisting the driver.
FIRE EXTINGUISHER
UL 5B:C rated fire extinguishers are used and mounted
firmly in the cockpit using metallic manufacturer mounts.


ELECTRICAL SYSTEM

OBJECTIVES
The electrical system of the vehicle was designed to fulfil
the key purpose of supporting the mandatory safety
equipment namely the kill switches, brake light, the
reverse light and alarm.

CONSUMER INTEREST
The appeal of the finished product to a consumer is
equally as important as all other aspects of the design
process. A consumer must find the vehicle to be
reasonably priced, aesthetically pleasing, exhilarating to
drive, safe, and dependable in order to insure that the
vehicle will be purchased. These consumer factors were
continually considered throughout the design of the The
drive-train gives the car a top speed of 78 kmph, while still
being able to provide 284.8Nm of torque at the wheels.
Design for simplicity yet sophistication is another way to
promote reliability of the Mechasonics vehicle. The
vehicle also has a good level of serviceability which
facilitates easy maintenance of the vehicle.

CONCLUSION
Once all the design aspects have been combined into one
complete vehicle, the result is profound. Safe, sturdy,
reliable, fast, aggressive and plain fun to drive is what the
Mechasonics go kart is all about. The drive-train supports
a respectable lower end wheel torque of 284.8 Nm while
maintaining a top speed of 78 kmph. The steering system
gives a small turning radius. Not only will the performance
catch a consumers interest,The careful design and the
technology that went into this vehicle will prove itself
during manufacturing, in the show room, and of course, at
the track.










Fig1- Front impact setup



Fig2- Front effect result



Fig-3 Rear impact setup
















Fig 4- Rear impact results



Fig 5-Side impact setup



Fig 6- Side impact result











Fig 7-Torsional setup



Fig 8- Torsional result







Fig 9- Steering rack used in our vehicle








Fig 10- Steering Simulation setup on ADAMS




Fig 11- ADAMS Result- Turning angle vs Time


Fig 12- custom disc






Table 1-Technical specifications

Dimensions
Overall Length 72 inches
Overall Width 43.75 inches
Ground
Clearance
3.5 inches
Wheel Base 47.5 inches
Wheel Track 39 inches
Performance
Top Speed 78 kmph
Min. Turning
Radius
3.1 m
Engine
Type
Single cylinder,
two-stroke
Displacement 125

FuelSystem
Fuel Tank
Capacity
3.5L
Steering
Steering Gear
Box type
Rack and
Pinion
Steering Ratio 12:1
Brakes
Brake Circuit
Rear Circuit
TMC
Brake Type
Hydraulic Disc
Brakes

Table 2-Material properties

Property
ST52 ERW Steel
Tube
Ultimate Tensile
Strength
630 MPa
Tensile Yield
Strength
510 MPa
Density 7870 kg/cu. m
Tube Section 1.25 x 2 mm








Table 3- FEA results

Load
Case
Load
Applied
Max Stress FOS
Front
Impact
11080N 183.34
MPa
2.94
Rear
Impact
11080N 107.4MPa 5.02
Side
Impact
5540N 247.37MPa 2.18
Torsion 1471.5N 142.95Pa 3.77



Table 4- Gear Vs Torque

Gear Torque
I 284.8 Nm
II 163.6 Nm
III 124.8 Nm
IV 99.2 Nm

Table 5-Braking Data

Outer Dia of Disc 190 mm
Inner Dia of Disc 130 mm
Disc Thickness 4 mm
Tire Radius 179 mm
TMC Piston Dia 19.05 mm
Calliper Piston Dia 33 mm
Leverage 5
Driver Effort 250 N
Brake Force 1250 N
Pressure Inside TMC 4.38 MPa
Total Frictional Force 2.696 kN
Braking Torque 215.68 Nm
Deceleration 17.97 m/s
2

Table 6- Stopping distance vs Vehicle Speed

SPEED
40kmp
h
50kmp
h
60kmp
h
80km
ph
STOPPING
DISTANC
E(meters)
3.43 5.33 7.72 13.74
STOPPING
TIME(secs)
.61 .77 .92 1.23








ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

The students of Team Mechasonics would like to propose
sincere acknowledgements to the management of
Medi-Caps Institute of Technology and Management for
allowing us to participate in international go kart 2014.
The team extends sincere thanks to all the faculties of the
Mechanical Engineering Department who stood by the and
gave valuable guidance. The team also thanks the seniors
for providing motivation and sharing their vast
experiences.

REFERENCES
Dr. Kirpal Singh, Fundamentals of Automobile Engineering
Vol. 1 & Vol. 2
Thomas D. Gillespie, Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics,
SAE International 1995


CONTACT
Abhishek Mittal, Captain and Driver,
Email: abhishek_abhimittal@yhoo.in
Mechanical Engineering, Final Year

Dr. K.K.Gupta, Faculty Advisor
Email: gupta.kks@yahoo.com
Proffessor and Head, Mechanical Engineering Department