Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
(ATV)
CHAPTER N0. 1
INTRODUCTION
Page 1
CHAPTER N0. 2
DESIGN CRITERIA FOR THE VEHICLE & METHODOLOGY:
NO.
CRITERION
PRIORITY
Reliability
Essential
Ease of Design
Essential
Performance
High
Serviceability
High
Manufacturability
High
High
Lightweight
High
Economic/Low
Desired
Cost
9
Easy Operation
Desired
10
Aesthetically
Desired
Pleasing
Page 2
CHAPTER N0. 3
ROLL CAGE :
The purpose of the Roll cage is to provide a safe environment for the
occupant while supporting other vehicle systems. Several steps were taken to ensure
this objective was met. For the frame design, we focused on a lightweight and safe
frame that still meets all of the requirements set forth by SAE. Special considerations
were given to safety of the occupants, ease of manufacturing, cost, quality, weight,
and overall attractiveness. Other design factors included durability and maintainability
of the frame.
The frame design incorporated bends instead of miters in many of the
structural members, believing that this allowed for faster construction, and increased
material strength from cold working resulting in an overall increase in product
quality. Although there was added cost associated with out-sourcing tube bending,
this cost was offset by a reduction in fabrication man hours through decreasing the
amount of mitered and welded joints and eliminating man hours and material needed
to fabricate fixtures for fit-up ,The Roll cage consists of two main criterions as
follows:
Page 3
UTS
UYS
Elongation
Youngs
modulus
1 AISI
Mpa
Mpa
Gpa
560
450
21.5
210
36.5
200
15
205
4130
2 AISI
394.7 294.7
1020
3 AISI
440
385
1018
TABLE NO
NO.- 3.1
In
GRAPH NO
NO- 3.1
addition to the above table, selection depended mainly on the cost and
availability of the material. From the above tables, we concluded that AISI 1018 was
best suitable for the roll cage with economical cost and easier availability. For
satisfying the bending stiffness criteria and bending strength the thickness of the pipe
was decided to be 2.1 mm for the O.D. of 28 mm for the primary members of the
chassis and for the secondary members, O.D. was selected as 25.4 mm with the
thickness of 2.1 mm
Page 4
Tensile
Material
Strength
(MPa)
Yield
Modulus of
Percentage
Strength
Elasticity
Elongation
(MPa)
(GPa)
(%)
Hardness
(BHN)
Roll Cage
1018 steel
450
380
265
16
130
Hub
6082 Al alloy
225
186
70
12
75
Adapter
EN8
660
530
206
120
DETAILS
MAX
MAX
TIME OF
FORCE
FORCE
IMPACT
(kN)
(s)
Front impact
30
10
0.2
Side Impact
0.2
6.4
0.2
Torsional
1.88
FRONT
analysis
2.82
REAR
RESULTS:
DETAILS
MAX STRESS
MAX
FOS
DEFORMATION
(Mpa)
(mm)
Front impact
385.49
3.67
Side Impact
303.09
1.02
1.2
272.64
4.74
1.3
Torsional ansys
1.84(F)
3.64(R)
1.26
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
CHAPTER N0. 4
SUSPENSIONS:
4.1 FRONT SUSPENSION:
The problem that was encountered was to design a competitive front
suspension for the ATV . To do this the operating conditions of the competition had to
be researched, and from that design considerations had to be decided
Consideration
Priority
Reason
Simplicity
Essential
Main objective
Lightweight
Essential
10 of travel
High
Durability
High
Shock Absorbing
Desired
Adjustable
Desired
Compatibility with
Steering
Desired
From the above considerations to balance weight and cost savings for the
manufacturers, and comfort and handling for the customer, several options for front
suspensions were analyzed. For the best handling characteristics the front wheels must
always be in perpendicular contact with the ground. Bump steer and camber gain must
be minimized in both ride and roll changes. Two possibilities for the front suspension
were a double a-arm and a single arm McPherson Strut suspension. The double a-arm
suspension is the most feasible design according to our design, thus double A- arms
were selected for the front suspension. To design the front suspension several
software packages were utilized to ensure the best possible results. LOTUS SHARK
Page 10
Page 11
Consideration
Priority
Reason
Simplicity
Essential
Lightweight
Essential
8 of travel
High
Durability
High
The rear suspension geometry and modeling was done in Catia and it is as shown
below:
Page 12
Wheel
Travel
Values
Front
Rear
Suspension
Suspension
254 mm
206 mm
Wheel Rate
9.294 N/mm
19.90 N/mm
Jounce
117.4 mm
117.4 mm
Rebound
39.14 mm
39.14 mm
Camber
Gain
1.85
PARAMETERS
VALUES
Caster
Kingpin inclination
14
Static Camber
Set as Zero
Static Toe In
Set as Zero
30 km/hr
Roll Angle
172
Turning Radius
5m
Weight Transfer
90.77kg
Thus, FOX FLOAT 2 air shocks were selected and procured. It provides 6 inches of
travel and 19.8 inches of extended length, which is perfect from our design point of
view.
Page 13
CHAPTER N0. 5
STEERING:
On the rough terrains it is very essential to have the steering must be light
and should give quick response on turns. The design considerations are as follows:
CONSIDERATION
PRIORITY
REASON
Simple Design
Essential
Light Weight
Essential
Essential
Ackerman geometry
High
To make understeer.
Desired
Conserve momentum
while
Steering
Rack and Pinion steering system was selected due to its easy availability, easier
maintenance, feasibility to modifications and the cost. Most of the analysis was
focused on the steering system. The primary focus was on decreasing the steering
effort. The team also focused on decreasing the amount of steering wheel travel, and
increasing the steering responsiveness.
In the normal rack & pinion vehicle the driver had to turn the steering
wheel 540 to bring the wheels from the center to lock. The driver had to remove his
hand from the wheel at least once to complete the turn. The goal was to allow the
driver to use only 290 of steering wheel travel from the center to maximum wheel
travel. The goal was accomplished by using a REDUCTION GEARBOX after the
pinion .A new system provided a motion ratio of 6.5 to 1, or 70 mm of rack travel
per revolution of steering wheel travel. The higher ratio rack has inherently larger
steering effort, however using a longer moment arm tie rod mount offset this effect.
The Ackermann angle was selected by analyzing wheel angles from previous years.
Page 14
VALUES
Fig. Steering
assembly
57
36.57
Steering Ratio
6.59
108
109
2.48
Percentage Ackermann
Tie rod Length (mm)
TABLE NO.- 5.1
98.99
400
Fig. No. 5.1 :- STEERING ASSEMBLY
Fig. No.
No 5.2 :- ACKERMANN GEOMETRY
Page 15
Part
Without
Without
Reduction
Reduction
gearbox
gearbox
13:1
6.5:1
35 mm
70 mm
70 mm
57 mm
540
290
68 N
108 N
Steering Ratio
Rack travel per revolution
of steering wheel
Required Rack travel
(Centre to lock)
Rotation of steering wheel
(Centre to lock)
Steering Effort
Page 16
CHAPTER N0. 6
BRAKES:
The braking system for the vehicle is responsible for stopping the vehicle at all
times and is integral for the drivers safety. That why the brake must be capable of
locking all the four wheels when applied so we incorporated disc brakes in the front
and rear.
CONSIDERATION
PRIORITY
REASON
Simplicity
High
Light Weight
High
Lightweight parts to
minimize total weight.
Performance
High
Capable of decelerating a
320 kg vehicle.
Reliability
Essential
Ergonomics
Essential
According to the rim size and the braking calculations we chose to use Bajaj
Discover ST discs that will be mounted on the hub in the front. Disc brakes were
chosen because of the ace of compatibility, the availability of the replacement parts
and the overall effectiveness that the system provides.
For the rear design, rear disc brakes of Bajaj Pulsar 220 were used. It provided
the required diameter of the disc and the required braking torque could be achieved.
The design calculations are tabulated as follows:
Page 17
PARAMETERS
FRONT
REAR
Outer diameter(Custom)
Effective Rolling
Radius(mm)
Thickness(mm)
Material
Radius Of Gyration(mm)
Moment of Inertia(kg/m^2)
Calliper
Calliper Piston
Diameter(mm)
Coefficient of friction
Tandem Master Cylinder
TMC diameter(mm)
190
81
218
95
3.47
3.47
Perlite Grey Cast Iron
170
280
0.289
1.176
BAJAJ DISCOVER 125 ST
28
0.45
Maruti 800
19.05
TABLE NO.- 6.1
PARAMETERS
VALUES
Braking distance(m)
17.66
(Deceleration 0.8kg )
Pedal Force(N)
130
Pedal Ratio
1:4
0.5bar
83.63
22.5
Page 18
CHAPTER N0. 7
POWERTRAIN:
The goal of the drive train is to transfer power from the engine of the vehicle
to the wheels. The power transferred must be able to move the vehicle up steep grades
and propel it at high speeds on level terrain. Acceleration is also an important
characteristic controlled by the drive train. Calculations were done according to the
considerations, looking at gear ratios, engine power and wheel size. After the
calculations were re verified no reduction is to be given was decided. Hence direct
line was given. Also during design, the angle of the propeller shafts was taken care.
The drive train for the car has been radically overhauled to improve overall
car performance and correct vulnerabilities. The Drive Train Based of Mahindra GIO
was used based on the traction and speed calculations. The system benefited with
simplicity and low cost.
GIO transmission was used in forward configuration, this year to enhance
torque the transmission is used in Reverse configuration. It can be tabulated below :
GEAR RATIOS
GEARBOX
Initial
MULTIPLATE
CLUTCH
Tractive
G1
G2
G3
G4
Effort
(N)
PIAGGIO APE
Acceler
ation
(m/s)
YES
25.52
15.16
9.25
5.96 30.62
1702.8
2.80
YES
31.48
18.7
11.4
7.35 55.08
2100
3.76
YES
25.52
15.16
9.25
5.96 30.62
1702.08
2.80
TATA NANO
NO
27.6
15.6
1841.58
3.14
MAHINDRA GIO
YES
27.66
14.86
8.48
5.55 33.66
1845.58
3.15
YES
33.66
2245.93
4.11
NO
24.42
14.58
1629.40
2.63
PASSENGER
MAHINDRA
ALFA CHAMPION
MAHINDRA
ALFA
PASSENGER
MAHINDRA GIO
IN REVERSE
FORCE MINIDOR
PICK UP
8.22
4.8
23.4
Page 19
YES
23.55
18.8
8.66
NO
25.081
15.12
9.33
5.27 27.98
23.54
1571.35
2.49
1673.50
2.73
Specification
Gear ratio
4.979
Overall gear
4.925
ratio
Max.
Velocity
Max. Torque
Clutch type
Gearbox type
Trans-axle
axle Constant mesh gearbox
Shifter type
DRIVELINE
Page 20
PARAMETERS
VALUES
Max. Equivalent
Stress
Max. Shear Stress
193.46 mpa
Max. Deformation
0.13mm
104.46 mpa
Factor of safety
2.74
Page 21
CHAPTER N0. 8
WHEEL ASSEMBLIES AND BODY PANELS:
In an all-terrain
terrain vehicle, traction is one of the most important aspects of both
steering and getting the power to the ground. Tire configuration, tread depth, weight,
and rotational of inertia are critical factors when choosing proper tires. The ideal tire
has low weight and low internal forces. In addition, it must have strong traction on
various surfaces and be capable of displacing water to provide power while in mud.
For the front, smaller
maller diameter tires were used to allow better maneuver
control. Therefore, tires with specifications of 21x7x10 were selected. The 10
10-inch
diameter of the rim will allow the brake components to fit inside the wheel.
For the rear, requirements are better traction and larger diameter, thus, tires
with specifications of 25x10x12 were selected.
The Front wheel hub was made from Aluminum this year to reduce the weight.
Bearings were selected according to required design, thus, Maruti Alt
Alto
o bearings were
used. The Rear wheel hub is the OEM part and modifications were made to assemble
disc onto the hub.
Fig. No. 8.1 :- FRONT AND REAR WHEEL ASSEMBLY EXPLODED VIEW
Page 22
CHAPTER N0. 9
ERGONOMICS AND SAFETY:
Ergonomics is the science of equipment design intended to maximize
productivity by reducing driver fatigue and discomfort. The ergonomics aspect of the
SAE Baja vehicle is crucial in ensuring that the car will both meet all of the rules
stated in the SAE rule book as well ensuring that all of the components of the car will
function properly when assembled together. It is essential that each member of the
team is able to safely and comfortably operate the vehicle.
Std.
Design
Value
Value
110-130
110
120-150
130
Parameter
Angle at
elbows
Angle at knees
Parameter
Steering Wheel
Dia. (mm)
Angle of Steering
Wheel
Std. Value
Design
Value
320
20-45
20
6.5
Clearance from
vehicle
Head Clearance
(inches)
TABLE NO.- 9.1
Drivers should be able to experience fast pace, exciting racing without
risking major injury. Car 80 meets or exceeds all of the minimum safety requirements
composed by the Society of Automotive Engineers and the event coordinators. In
addition, a number of safety features have been added to further reduce the possibility
of personal injury.
extinguisher, and two kill switches were all placed for easy access and use, as well as
maximum optimization of their functions during an emergency.
Page 23
CHAPTER N0. 10
ELECTRICALS:
The electrical system was proposed to work on many road vehicles. The
electrical circuitry is to be done mainly for the brake light, horn, reverse light and kill
switch.
The electrical circuit for the vehicle is as shown below:
Fig. No.
No 10.1 :- ELECTRICAL CIRCUIT
Page 24
CHAPTER N0. 11
CONCLUSIONS:
The Team used extensive physical testing, hours of simulation and analysis,
and prototype construction to create a vehicle that is fast, maneuverable, and reliable.
Several team members attended the time to time workshops arranged by BAJA to
gather
her ideas and information about what design choices were successful and how they
could be incorporated into our design.
After initial testing it can be seen that our design should be a strong competitor
in this years competition. There will be extensive testing done to prove the design
and durability of all the systems on the car and make any necessary changes up until
the leaves for the competition.
Page 25
CHAPTER N0. 12
CAD MODELS:
FRONT VIEW
SIDE VIEW
REAR VIEW
TOP VIEW
Page 26
CHAPTER N0. 13
DESIGN FAILURE MODE EFFECTIVE (DFME) ANALYSIS:
SYSTEM
COMPONE
NT
POTENT
IAL
FAILUR
E MODE
Trailing
Arm
Torsion
Knuckle
R
P
N
Drive Shaft
Steering
Pinion
Brake
Tandem
Master
Cylinder
Engine
Engine Air
Intake
Pedal
Optimum design
consideration
to
reduce tensional&
bending force; colinear line of action
of wheel& spring
centerline.
Soldering
of
Knuckle
O D
R
P
N
4 2
56
2 2
28
147
Knuckle
Dislocati
on
Detachm
ent from
different
ial
210
192
Perfect
length
Shaft
2 3
48
Muff
weld
failure
10
320
3 3
72
Pinion
Failure
Failure
of Push
rod
90
2 2
36
144
Align using V
block& Drill hole
in Muff coupling
for excess weld
material
Penetration .
Replacement
of
Pinion
Push rod should
have
adequate
D.O.F; co-linear of
line of action the
pedal & pushrod.
2 4
64
Leakage
of oil
from
fluid line
Cloggin
g of Air
filter
108
2 2
36
9
7
8
252
196
224
10
7
8
2 3
60
42
48
Failure
of
linkage
10
120
Rerouting of Air
intake above the
driver seat through
the firewall
Replacement
of
linkage
10
2 2
40
Bending
Suspension
Power
Train
ACTION TAKEN
Page 27
CHAPTER N0. 14
DESIGN VALIDATION PLAN
System
Design
Value
Steering
Minimum
Turning
Circle
Diameter
4.9 m
Front-
Spring
Stiffness
Rear-
deflection is to be noted.
40.10N/mm
Suspension
Travel
Jounce-
117.4mm
Rebound-
Gradient
Climbing
33
Page 28
Top speed
Brakes
Stopping
Distance
17.5 m
Weld Test
Weld is seen
to fail.
Page 29
CHAPTER N0. 15
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
ENGINE
Type
Displacement, cc
Max. Torque,
Nm @ rpm
Max Power,
kW @ rpm
Briggs &
Stratton 10HP
OHV
305
19 @ 2500
7.5 @ 3600
Transmission
Mahindra Gio
Gearbox
4 forward 4 reverse
speed
Steering
Front
Rear
Brakes
Hydraulic Disc Brakes
Dimensions
Length (mm)
Width (mm)
Height (mm)
Weight
Kerb Weight (Kg)
Gross Weight (Kg)
Wheel size
Front (inches)
Rear (inches)
Centre of Gravity
Position w.r.t.
center of base of
firewall (mm)
Double
Wishbone
Trailing Arm
Overall Performance Targets
2286
1600
1400
240
320
21x7x10
25x10x12
X :109.33
Y:
Y:-45.82
Z:165.26
20%
Front
20%
Left
Weight Distribution
Right
30%
Rear
30%
Page 30
CHAPTER N0. 16
TESTING:
BRAKE TEST
JUMP TEST
FINAL VEHICLE
Page 31
CHAPTER N0. 17
References:
1 Vehicle Dynamics By Thomas D. Gillespie
2 Windsor
3 Mille ken & Millikenh
4 Automobile Engineering volume 1-volume 2 By Kirpal Singh
5 Google Search
6ARAI India
Page 32
APPENDIX A
SUSPENSION DESIGN
KINEMATIC ANALYSIS
Sample calculation front suspensionA arm suspension:
The weight of the vehicle is 200 kg but because of 40:60 ratio of weight distribution
between front and rear suspension, the front weight is 80 kg.
F = 8049.81
=3139.2 N
?
K=?
=
3139.2
117.4
= 26.73 N/mm
Page 33
?? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?
Motion ratio = ? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?
wheel travel =
152.4
0.6
Page 34
?? ? ?? ?? ? ? ? ?
Motion ratio =
? ? ? ? ? ?? ? ? ? ?
152.4
Wheel travel
Wheel travel
= 205.94 mm
0.74
?? ? ?
? ? ? .?
(from internet)
Front suspension
A-arm double wishbone
k =
=
?? ? ?
? ? ? .?
0.482 9622.8
2 57.3
= 19.34 Nm/deg
Page 35
Rear suspension
Trailing arm suspension
k =
?? ? ?
? ? ? .?
t = 885 mm = 0.88 m
kw = 19901.39 N/m
0.882 19901.39
k=
2 57.3
= 134.48 Nm/deg
Jounce
It is the upward movement or compression of suspension component.
?
? = .from internet
?
Rebound
it is the downward movement or extension of suspension component.
Rebound : jounce = 3:1
Jounce(at 4g load) ? =
Page 36
49.8180
26.73
= 117.44 mm
? ? .? ? ? ?
? ? .? ? ?
= 39.14 mm
Jounce(at 4g load) ? = ? =
49.81120
40.10
= 117.42 mm
Natural frequency:-
= 39.14 mm
???
..(from internet)
??
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
N.F =
???
= 1.45 Hz
Page 37
N.F =
??
? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
?? ? ? ? ? ? ? ??
= 1.6 Hz
Ride rate
The change of wheel load at thecentre of tire contact, per unit vertical
displacement of the sprung mass relative to the ground at a specific load.
Ride rate = ?
=
? +??
26.73 0.421
26.73+0.421
= 0.414
Ride rate = ?
=
? +??
40.10 0.51
40.10+0.51
Page 38
Camber gain:The amount of angle change in front spindles as suspension travels inward or outward
from the centre of car
A. Front suspension:
suspension:Camber gain = 1 inch = 0.30 for front suspension
Page 39
APPENDIX B
STEERING DESIGN
CALCULATIONS:A) STEERING TYPE : RACK & PINION
1. Rack Travel: 57mm
2. Steering Wheel Centre to lock Angle 290
3. Rack Used :- MARUTI 800
B.TURNING RADIUS
(R) 2 = (R1) 2 + (C)
R = 2.48m
C. STEERING RATIO
S.R. = Steering Wheel Lock Angle / Road Wheel Angle
S.R = 6.59
D. STEERING EFFORT
S.E. = Weight On Front Wheel/ Moment Ratio
Page 40
Page 41
Page 42
Part
Implementation in vehicle
Steering Ratio
6.5:1
70 mm
of steering wheel
Required Rack travel
57 mm
(Centre to lock)
Rotation of steering wheel
290
(Centre to lock)
Steering Effort
108 N
Page 43
APPENDIX C
BRAKE
CALCULATIONS:A. TMC
1.
2.
3.
4.
D. Coefficient of friction
= = 0.45
Page 44
. (28=calliper dia)
=245mm
Page 45
I. Temperature Rise=22.5c
Type-Disc brake(custom)
Size -21*7*10
Disc dia.=190mm
Front Pistriction-220mm
Disc thikness-3.4=4mm
Type-Disc brake(custom)
Size -25*10*12
Disc dia.=21.83
Front Ristriction-260mm
Disc thickness-4mm
Page 46
APPENDIX D
POWERTRAIN DESIGN
CALCULATIONS: Calculations for Gear Box Selection
Taking following Assumptions:
IE = 1
= 1.3
tot = 1
rdyn = 0.29 m
All calculations for 1st gear , taking available gear ratios in
consideration.
Page 47
Page 48
3. TATA NANO
FzA=184.58 N
FzEX =1307.58 N
Acceleration(a)=3.14 m/s2
(ast)=24.60
4. Mahindra Gio
FzA=1845.58N
FzEX =1311.58 N
Acceleration(a)=3.14 m/s2
(ast)=24.69
6. Auto Rikshaw
FzA=1571.35 N
Page 49
m/s2
(ast)=19.29
Vehicle Name
No.
Initial
Acceleration
Tractive
Gradient
Angle
Effort
1)
1702.8
2.80
22.9
2)
2100
3.76
29.93
3)
1702.8
2.80
22.9
4)
TATA NANO
1841.58
3.14
24.60
5)
Mahindra Gio
1845.58
3.14
24.60
6)
2245.93
4.11
33.04
7)
1629.40
2.63
20.42
8)
Auto Rickshaw
1571.35
2.49
19.29
9)
Mahindra Champion
1673.50
2.73
21.80
Passenger
Page 50
Reverse Configuration .
1st Gear = FzA1 = (19.3532.66)(10000.29)
=2245.93 N
Page 51
Page 52
Adapter ansys:
PARAMETER
VALUE
Max Equivalent
193.46 Mpa
Stress
Max Shear Stress
104.46 Mpa
Max Deformation
0.13 mm
Factor of Safety
2.74
Page 53
APPENDIX E
Page 54
1. INTRODUCTION
Optimization techniques are very promising means for systematic design
improvement in mechanics, yet they are not always well known and applied in
industry. Despite this, the literature over the topic is quite rich and is addressing both
theory and applications. To cite a few applications in the automotive _eld the works
of Chiandussi et al. [1], Pedersen [2], and Duddeck [3] are of interest. They address
the optimization of automotive suspensions, crushed structures, and car bodies
respectively .Structural optimization methods are rather peculiar ways of applying
more traditional optimization algorithms to structural problems solved by means of
_nite elements analyses. These techniques are an effective approach through which
large structural optimization problems can be solved rather easily. In particular, with
the term structural optimization methods we refer to: (i) topology optimization,
(ii)topometry optimization, (iii) topography optimization, (iv) size optimization, (v)
shape optimization. In the following some of these techniques will be introduced and
their application to chosen automotive structura ldesign problems discussed.
Page 55
2. STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION
In the de_nition of any optimization problem a few elements are necessary,
these are: (i) design space or space of the possible solutions (e.g. in structural
optimization this is often given by the mesh) (ii) variables, (iii)objective(s) (e.g. mass
minimization), (iv) optimization constraints (e.g. stiffness and/or displacement
stargets), (v) the mean through which, for a given set of variables, targets and
objectives are evaluated (e.g.,in our case, _nite elements analyses), (vi) the
optimization algorithm (e.g. in structural optimization this is commonly a gradientbased algorithm, such as MMA).Trying to simplify in a few words a rather complex
and large topic, it could be said that the various structural optimization methods
essentially differ from each other in the choice of the variables of the optimization
problem as follows.
2.1. Topology Optimization
In topology optimization it is supposed that the elements density can vary
between 0 (void) and 1 (presence of the material). The variables are then given by the
element-wise densities. Topology optimization was _rstly introduced by Bends_e and
Sigmund and is extensively treated in [4]; it has developed in several directions giving
birth to rather different approaches, the
most simple and known of which is the SIMP (Single Isotropic Material with
Penalization).(a) reference model, top view (b) reference model, bottom view (c)
optimum layout Figure 1: Ferrari F458 Italia front hood: reference model and new
layout from the optimization results. The optimization was performed in three stages:
topology, optometry, and size.
c) optimum layout
Figure 1: Ferrari F458 Italia front hood: reference model and new layout from the
optimization results. The optimization was performed in three stages: topology,
topometry, and size.
2.2. Topometry Optimization
The idea behind topometry optimization is very similar to that of topology
optimization, the variables being the element-wise thicknesses. Of course, this method
does not apply to 3D elements where the concept of thickness could not be de_ned.
Page 56
3. APPLICATION EXAMPLES
3.1. Automotive Hood
The internal frame of the Ferrari F458 front hood has been studied aiming at
reducing the weight while keeping the same performance target and manufacturability
of the reference model. The targets relate to bending and torsion static load cases,
compliance when closing the hood, deformations under aerodynamic loads. A suitable
preliminary architecture has been de-_ned by means of topology optimization. The
results have been re-interpreted into more performing thin-walled cross-sections. A
series of topometry optimizations followed to _nd the optimal thickness distribution
and identify the most critical areas. The solution was re_ned through size
optimization. In the end, the weight was reduced by 12 %, yet in the respect of all the
performance requirements (Fig. 1).
3.2. Rear Bench
The rear bench of a car is fundamental to isolate acoustically the passengers
compartment from the engine. The bench of Ferrari F430 has been analyzed with the
objective of reducing the weight while maintaining the
same vibrational performance of the reference panel. Generally, the damping material
distribution is not known during the numerical veri_cation stage, but is decided later
during the experimental analysis, where the material is added iteratively to counteract
the _rst normal modes. In this study vibration-damping material distribution and panel
design, in terms of beads and thickness, have been optimized through size and
topography optimizations at the same time. Size optimization is applied to control the
thickness of the aluminum plate and of the vibrational-damping material. The
presence of damping material should be limited to essential parts due to its relatively
high weight. Thus, just one thickness variable was created for the aluminum layer
because its value should be uniform along the plate, whereas several thickness
variables were created locally for the damping layer. Topography optimization was
used to improve the beads disposition in the panel. The objective of the optimizations
was mass minimization, while the _rst normal mode frequency was constrained to be
outside the range of interest (Fig. 2).
Page 57
Figure 2:
Rear bench coupled optimization. In the results, blue stands for low
deformation/thickness, red for high.(a) domain, or design space (b) optimum chassis
con_guration (c) optimum roof con_guration
Figure 3:
Automotive chassis topology optimization. In the results, the density range
from 0.1 (blue) to 1.0 (red). (iii) modal analysis, (iv) local sti_ness of the suspension,
engine, and gearbox joints. The initial design space is given by the provisional vehicle
overall dimensions of Ferrari F430 including the roof
(Fig. 3(a)).
The results for the chassis and the roof are shown in
Figs. 3(b) and 3(c).
A more detailed discussion on a combined methodology for chassis design
including topology, topography and size optimizations was presented in [5] by the
authors.
Page 58
4. CONCLUSIONS
A quick overview on structural optimization methods has been given including
various application examples. Their potential has been shown to be large and it is
believed that their spreading in mechanical design could boost innovation in industry
considerably. Examples in the automotive _eld have been provided. To be noted that
the different methods have different characteristics and in a design process it is
recommended to rely on more than just one technique. For instance, topology and
topometry optimizations are more suitable for an early development stage, whose
outcome could be further re_ned through size and shape optimizations. On a general
basis these techniques do not deliver the shape of the _nal product, but they give
useful hints to the designer in view of the product development and engineering.
Page 59
5. REFERENCES
1] G. Chiandussi, I. Gaviglio, and A. Ibba, Topology optimization of an automotive
component without _nal volume constraint speci_cation, Advances in Engineering
Software, 35:609-617, 2004.
[2] C. B. W. Pedersen, Crashworthiness design of transient frame structures using
topology optimization,Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, 193:653-678.
3] F. Duddeck, Multidisciplinary optimization of carbodies, Structural and Multi
disciplinary Optimization, 35:375-389, 2008.
[4] M. P. Bends_e and O. Sigmund, Topology optimization: theory, methods and
applications, Springer,2004.
5] M. Cavazzuti, A. Baldini, E. Bertocchi, D. Costi, E.Torricelli, and P. Moruzzi,
High performance automotive chassis design: a topology optimization based
approach, Structural and Multidisciplinary Optimization, 44:45-56, 2011.
Page 60