GO-KART DESIGN CHALLANGE

TEAM MECHANIZERS 34.0

TEAM ID: 20190559
DESIGN REPORT
AUTHOR: Mamatha
CO- AUTHOR: Ashwini Shiva Sai Kiran

SREENIDHI INSTITUTE OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

HYDERABAD, TELANGANA

Page | 1
S.No INDEX Pg.No

1) Team Structure 3
2) Abstract 4
3) Introduction 4
3) Design Methodology 4
5) Frame Design 4-7
i)CAD modelling 4
ii)Prototype 6
iii)Miscellaneous 7
6) Transmission Subsystem 9-11
7) Braking Subsystem 12-15
8) Steering Subsystem 16-18
9) Conclusion 18

Page | 2
 TEAM
MECHANIZERS 34.0
FACULTY ADVISOR
Sirish

CAPTAIN VICE CAPTAIN

Rutwik Hruday

•Sai hemanth •Sharath Chandra

•Kedarnath •Puskar
•Akhila Bai •Sudharshan
•Ashwin •Medhavani
•Sameer •Mamatha

TRANS-
DESIGN
MISSION

BRAKING STEERING
•Ashwini Shiva Sai •Santhosh
Kiran •Saketh
•Manvith •Vaishnavi
•Sai Krishna •Sreeja Reddy
•Akhil sai •Spoorthy
•Ganesh
•Praneeth

Page | 3
 A. DESIGN
ABSTRACT body frame ,thus the finalized frame must be
rigid enough to carry the loads and flexible
The objective of this design report is to enough to absorb the shocks.
shed light on the design contemplations followed 1.2) DESIGN COSIDERATIONS:
by team Mechanizers 34.0, who potentially While in the selection process of the final
worked for building a Go-kart to complete in 7th design various factors were considered as
GO-KART DESIGN CHALLENGE listed below,
i) Functionality
The primary objective of the team is to ii) Restrains check
design and manufacture a frame for the prototype iii) High reliability
Go-karts strictly obeying the competition’s guide iv) Machinability
lines and exhibiting utter resistance to multitude v) Cost effectiveness
of forces acting on it to stay rigid, torsion free. vi) Light weight and compactness
Which at further stages can be extended to a vii) Drivers comfort and
higher manufacturing scale of an industry. viii) Aesthetics
The secondary objective is to emphasise 1.3) DESIGN METHODOLOGY
on driver’s safety, aesthetics and ergonomics of
the vehicle. RULE BOOK
CONSIDERATIONS
These objectives are achieved by a
following a simulated design methodology aided
with team work, sustainable engineering PRELIMINARY DESIGN
practises, and project management techniques.

1.1) INTRODUCTION: CAD MODELING

A Go-kart is generally a 4-wheeled single
seated low ground clearance vehicle usually
powered by a four stroke engine for a flat track
BENCHMARKING
and recreational purpose. In this era of rapid
advancements in automobile field there is seek to
design a go-karts of highest accuracy, efficiency,
safety. PROTOTYPING

After a thought go-through of the rule

book guidelines we thought of all possible ANALYSIS
approaches and selected the most acceptable
design for CAD Modelling through SOLID-
WORKS and analysed it through ANSYS
WORKBENCH .The results of FEA helped us to FABRICATION
weight our design against various factors like
withstand ability, material availability, cost etc…
.

Thus various modifications were made 2) CAD MODELLING:

and the process is made iterative at each stage Using SOLIDWORKS software we designed
.Due to the absence of suspension the shock a sustainable chassis model after a numerous
absorbing and with standing load goes on the iterations and corrections
Page | 4
 Specification Value (inches)
Wheel Base 46.5

Front Track 42
Width
Rear Track Width 52

Figure 1: Top View of chassis Table 1- Chassis dimensions

5) BENCHMARKING:

Materia TYS TUS C% Cost Avai

l (MPa (MPA /m lable
) ) (₹)

AISI 460 560 0.2-0.3 500 M

4130
Figure 2: Isometric View of Chassis
AISI 370 440 0.14- 200 H
1018 0.2

AISI 294.7 394.7 0.17- 100 L

1020 4 2 0.2

AISI 590 870 0.75- 250 L

1080 0.9
Table 2-Benchmarking
NOTE:
C%=Carbon percentage
Figure 3- Front View
6) CALUCULATION
Bending strength = (Sy × I)/Y.
Bending stiffness =E × I.
Sy= Yield strength.
I= Moment of inertia.
Y= Distance from neutral axis to extreme fibre.

Material Bending Bending

strength(N-m) stiffness(N-m2)

AISI 1018 136.330 959.285

AISI 1080 217.391 889.093

Figure 4- Side View
AISI 1020 108.599 935.888

AISI 4130 169.491 982.682

Table 3-Bending strength and stiffness

Page | 5
 As per the availability and
requirements mentioned in the rulebook and
benchmarking result, AISI 4130 is selected as
chassis material.
To analyse the weight of the chassis, volumetric
analysis is done.
For length of 8m, analysis is done.
8) PROTOTYPING:
After clear affirmation of analysis results for the
final design we built a prototype of chassis frame
using substitute PVC pipes through which we
discussed and analysed various factors of
mountings, ergonomics.

OD Thickness Mass
(inch) (mm) (kg)

1 1.6 0.60174

1.25 1.6 0.61030

Table 4- Properties

Based on the above calculations and

availability of material we decided our chassis
material 4130 of specification 1” outer diameter-
1.6mm thickness and the various properties are
mentioned in table-3.

Parameter Specification
Material AISI 4130
Density 7.85 g/cc Figure 5- Prototype
Tensile yield strength 680 MPa
Tensile ultimate 733 MPa This prototype was referred and finalized
strength based on which a CAD model was generated as
Modulus of elasticity 205 GPa depicted in figure, resembling the end product
Poisson’s ratio 0.29
i.e., a complete go-kart
Carbon percent 0.2-0.3
Elongation at break 25.5%
Table 5- Properties 2. TRANSMISSION:
7) ANSYS RESULTS:
The above material properties are 2.1) INTRODUCTION:
imbedded into the ANSYS software where the Transmission in auto mobiles often refers to
CAD Model is imported and analysed in various controlled transmission of power from engine to
directions by applying an appropriate load, the rear wheels (usually) through an array of
results are obtained as shown in table-4 components which include gearbox, driver and
driven sprocket, chain rear shaft, bearings and
RESULT FRONT REAR SIDE wheels.
Factor of 2.1877 1.024 1.9143 This transfer of kinetic energy from
safety 5 engine to wheels can be achieved through three
Total 0.53395 2.838 0.88216 ways manual, automatic, semi-automatic
deformation transmission modes. We chose to install manual
(mm) transmission by a gear shifter as per the rulebook
Equivalent 210.2 449.0 240.3 and by its simplicity in handling.
stress(MPa)
Table 6- Properties 2.2) DESIGN METHODOLOGY:
Page | 6
 2.4) MATERIAL
RULE BOOK CONSIDERATIONS SELECTION

Component Material Reason

Engine Honda 125cc Good pick up,
BENCHMARKING fuel economy
Bearings Pillow block For more
bearings contact area and
more impact
absorption
MATERIAL SELECTION Sprocket 26 teeth Abided by the
calculations
Hubs Al 6061 High tensile
strength
Chain OEM By calculation
CALCULATIONS
and costs <900
Shaft Titanium It has more
strength to
weight ratio
(remarkably45%
COMPONENT DESIGN lighter than steel
Table 8- Material selection

Max power 10.15HP@7500rpm

2.3) BENCH MARKING: Max torque 10.3Nm@5500rpm
Displacement 124.73cc
COMPON PROPERTIES AVA COST Mileage 65kmpl
ENT ILAB in Rs. Engine type 4 stroke, air cooled,
LE spark ignition engine
Honda shine H (16- Gears 4 gear of upper gear
Engine 125cc 37)e3 reduction 0.9 and
Discover 125cc M (10- lower gear reduction 3
38)e3 Top speed 80kmph
Pulsar 125 cc M 70000 Table 9-Engine parameters
Sprocket MS 30 teeth H 300
2.5) CALCULATIONS:
MS 26 teeth H 300
Transmission calculations are carried for three
AL A6030 H 320/kg
3 main outputs
Hub 2.69gm/𝑐𝑚 i) Sprocket teeth reduction
Alloy steel M 300/kg ii) Shaft diameter
3
8.05gm/𝑐𝑚 iii) Chain links
Bearings Pillow block H 250
Ball type L 100 Driver gear teeth 14
Shaft Titanium M 2200/kg Maximum velocity(V) 90kmph
Ti-6Al-4V Radius of tyre(R) 5.5inch
4.43g/𝑚3 Engine rpm 7500rpm
AISI 4130 M 400/kg Engine torque 10.3N-m
Table 7- Benchmarking Mass of the 150kg
vehicle(m)
Table 10-inputs
Page | 7
 Assumptions considered: Force=resultant
Coefficient of friction (µ) =0.01 mass=434.0925N
Grade angle (α) =50 Reaction calculation
Rb×1.3208=
Speed reduction (n2) = Engine / required speed 434.0925×0.1143+9.81×0.2928+4.905×1.0947+4
Required speed=60V/2Πr 34.0925×1.1963
=60×90×5/18/2×π×0.1397=1708.893448m/s Rb=577.163502/1.3208=436.9802408 N
n2=5500/1708.893448=3.218456953 Rb+Ra=882.9
Ra=445.9197592
sssTorque reduction (n1) = required torque /
(engine torque×2.7)
Required torque =
R× (gradiability+rolling resistance)
Gradiability=mgsinα
Rolling resistance=µmgcosα
((150×9.81×sin5°)+(0.02×150×9.81×cos
5°))×0.1397
=22.01220567 N-m
n1=22.01220567/30=0.735740189 Figure 11-Representation of front view
Total reduction (n) = (n1+n2)/2
=0.35340189+3.218456953/2=1.785929422 Moment calculation
Ms=4.905×0.8024+434.0925×0.904-436.9802408
Sprocket teeth= driver teeth × n ×1.0183
=14×1.785929422=26 =48.62158721Nm
Md=436.9802408 ×0.2159-434.0925×0.1016
No. of links (k) = =50.03703599Nm
(T1+T2)/2+ (2X/P) + ((T2-T1)/2×3014)2× (P/X)
Available pitch=0.012m
(ii) Top view
K==61.1rounded to 62
Force calculation at sprocket
Circumference of sprocket=pitch×T2
Centre to centre (X) = 2×ᴫ×r=P×T2
P/4((K-(T1+T2)/2) + √ (k-(T1+T2/2)) 2-(8(T2 -
r =p×T2/2ᴫ
T1/2π)) =3×10-3(42+√ ((41)2-8(22.8)
r=0.04965634224m
=0.2484927388m
Treq=F×r
F =22.01220567/0.04965634224
to calculate shaft diameter one must first evaluate
Fs=443.2909207N
the maximum moment that is experienced on
Force calculation at disc
shaft, as follows
Tdisc=F×r
755=F×0.09
(I) Front view: Fdisc= 8388.888889 N
Force calculation at sprocket Reaction calculation
Mass of sprocket=1kg 443.2909207×0.178+8388.888889×0.9804-
Force =mg= 1×9.81=9.81N 1.082×Rb=0
Force calculation at disc Rb=7674.096535kg-F
Disc mass=0.5Kg Ra+Rb=8832.17981
Force=m×g=0.5×9.81=4.905 Ra=1158.083275kgF
Force calculation at bearings
60% of vehicle weight is assumed to fall on rear
shaft
45kg on each side so

Page | 8
 3. BRAKING
3.1) INTRODUCTION:
The braking system in a vehicle is to control the
motion of vehicle or to inhibit the motion. This is
done by means of friction. Brakes help to
maintain a constant speed of vehicle.
Hydraulic Brakes work on Pascal’s law which
states that the fluids transmit pressure without
Figure 12-Top view loading any loss equally in all directions. The application
of this law is to increase the clamping force so
that it’s greater than pedal force in order to stop
Moment calculation the vehicle
𝑀𝑠 =7674.096535×0.904-8388.888889×0.8024
3.2) DESIGN METHODOLOGY
=206.1388231N
𝑀𝑑 =7674.096535 ×0.1016
=779.688208N
RULE BOOK
CONSIDERATIONS
Resultant moment
At sprocket
(𝑀𝑏 )s=√ [(48.62158721)2+ (206.1388231)2] STOPPING DISTANCE
=211.7947804N-M
At disc
(𝑀𝑏 )d=√ [(50.03703599)2+ (779.688208)2] BENCHMARKING
=781.2921391N-M

Diameter calculation MATERIAL

SELECTION
Tshear= (16/ πd3) (√ (Mb) 2+ (Treq) 2)
d=3√ (16/ π548.15×106) √ (22.01220567)2 +
(781.2921391)2) COMPONENT DESIGN
d=19.36505858mm=20mm AND ANALYSIS

2.6) RESULTS
CALCULATIONS
FINAL OUTCOME VALUE
Sprocket teeth 26
Chain link 62
Centre to centre distance 0.25m
Shaft diameter 20mm
Table 11- Transmission Results

Page | 9
 3.3) BENCH MARKING: 3.4) CALCULATIONS:
Braking calculations are observed for
Component Properties Availability Cost in i) Master cylinder diameter (Dmc)
Rs. ii) Caliper diameter (Dc)
KTM duke M 980 iii) Disc mean effective radius (Reff)
Master 200
cylinder D=19mm Maximum velocity(V) 90kmph= 25m/s
L=5.9 inch Brake disc diameter (D) 180 mm
Nissan M 2200 Mass of the vehicle + driver 150 kg
micra (M)
D=20mm Mass of the rotating parts (m) 15kgs
L=8inch
Royal M 950 Co-efficient of friction 0.35-0.42
Enfield between pads and disc (µc)
D=19mm Maximum stopping 5mts
L=8inch distance(s)
Hydraulic - M 130/1unit Pedal ratio 6:1
switch Maximum Pedal Force(F1) 100 lbs. = 444.8
3-way Brass L 150 N
couple
Banjo bolt - M 25 Table 15-Inputs
Royal M 2100
Caliper Enfield Total kinetic energy of the vehicle (KE)
d=24mm = (½) × M × v2 + (¼) × m× v2
Double = ½ × 150 ×252+ ¼ ×15× 252
piston = 78.75× 252
Honda M 1000 = 49218.75 J
shine Braking Force = M ×v2 / 2×S
D=22mm 150 × 252 / 2 × 3= 9447.84 N
Double Clamping Force (F2) = Braking Force / 2 × µc
piston 9447.84/ 2 × 0.4= 11809.8 N
Brake disc SS321 H 290/kg
SS420 L 300/kg According to Pascal’s law,
Brake pedal Mild steel H 50 F1/F2 = A1 / A2,
Al-6061 M 250 Where,
Disc hub Al-6061 H 280 F1 = Pedal Force, F2 = Clamping Force,
Table-13 bench marking A1 = Master Cylinder area, A2 = Caliper Piston
area
2668.8 / 11809.8 = A1/ A2
Component Material
Dc /Dmc = 2.108
Master KTM Duke 200
Cylinder As per the availability of Master cylinders and
Brake calipers (double piston) and above
Brake Caliper Honda Shine
obtained ratio, Dmc = 19.05 mm and Dc = 22 mm
(Double Piston)
Disc Hub Aluminium 6061 Braking Torque = Braking Force × Reff
Brake disc SS 420 Reff =R – R2
R2 = Radius of caliper piston R= Radius of disc
Brake Pedal Mild Steel = 90 –10= 80mm = 0.08 m
Braking Torque = 9447.84× 0.08 = 755.8272N-m
Table 14-Final Material
Page | 10
Total kinetic energy = Braking torque × θ Chassis as Simply supported beam in front view.
Where θ = angular displacement of disc. From equilibrium conditions,
θ = K.E/ B.T =49218.75 / 755.8272 = 65.12° i.e., Σ Fy = 0
 RL+ RRi-1
CENTRE OF GRAVITY CALCULATIONS:  49.5= 0
 RL+ RRi=149.5
LONGITUDINAL
From equilibrium conditions,
And Σ Ma = 2.5(36) +13(1.5) +21(33) +22(62)
i.e., Σ Fy = 0 +29(0.6) +42(2) +47(3) +48.5(2.5)-5(3)-6.5(2.5)-
 RF + RR – 149.5 = 0 RRi (42) = 0
 RF + RR = 149.5  RRi= 58.71 Kg-F
  RL = 90.79 Kg-F

Let centre of gravity be at a distance y in. from

left end. The whole weight 149.5 kgf acts at that
point.
ΣMa = 0
 149.5(y) – RRi(42) = 0
 Y =58.71 × 42 / 149.5
Y = 16.494 in

Figure 13-Point loads in longitudinal view

VERTICAL:
Chassis as simply supported beam in lateral view
And Σ Ma = 0
 -13.5(2.5)+4.5(1.5) +5(10) + 23.25(20)
(46.5-17)62+(46.5-12)(36) +
46.5(11)-46.5(RR) +54(2.5) =0
 RR = 90.44 Kg-F
 RF = 59.06 Kg-F
Let centre of gravity be at a distance x in. from
front end. The whole weight 149.5 kgf acts at that
point.
ΣMa = 0
 149.5 (x) – RR(46.5) = 0
 X= 90.44 × 46.5 / 149.5= 28.13 in.
LATERAL:

The coordinate of CoG in vertical axis from

ground is given by
Z= ( m1z1 + m2z2 + m3z3 + m4z4 + ------) / (m1 +
m2 + m3 + m4 + ------)
Where m1, m2, m3, m4 ---- are the weights of
components located at heights z1, z2, z3, z4 ---
respectively.

Figure 14-Point Load in longitudinal view

Page | 11
 Z = [51.5(2.5) + 36(7.2) + 62(3)] /
149.5
 Z= 3.83 in.
Load Transfer vs. Speed of
Vehicle
LOAD TRANSFER 50 38.45

Load Transfer in N
CALCULATIONS: 40
Load transfer can be calculated by the formula 30 24.55
LT = (µ × h × d × Rr) / (WB × g) 14.309
20
Where, 7.48
µ = coefficient of friction between the wheel and 10
the road. 0
h = position of CoG in Z-axis 30 50 70 90
Rr = Rear wheels’ reaction force Speed of Vehicle in kmph
d = deceleration, WB = wheel base
g = acceleration due to gravity
d = (Braking Force + Drag Resistance +
Frictional Force)/M Stopping Distance vs Speed of
Where M = Mass of vehicle, vehicle
Braking Force = Mv2 / 2×S
6 4.96
Drag Resistance = 0.5 × C × ρ × A × v2
Stopping distance in m

Frictional Force = µ × M × g 5
4 3
µ=0.7, h = 4.27 in., Rr = 90.44Kg-f, WB= 46.5 3
in., g = 9.81m/s2, ρ = 1.225 kg/m3 2 1.5
BF= 9447.84 N, 0.55
1
Drag Resistance = 0.5 × 0.8 × 1.225 × (52 × 36.5
× 0.02542) × 252 = 375.007 N, 0
FF = 0.7 × 150 × 9.81 = 1030.05 N 30 50 70 90
d = (9447.84 + 375.007 + 1030.05) / 150 Speed of Vehicle in kmph
 d = 72.35 m/s2

LT = (0.7 × 3.83 × 72.35 × 90.44) / (46.5 × 9.81) 3.5) RESULT

 LT = 38.55 Kgs

FINAL OUTCOME VALUE

Deceleration vs Speed of vehicle Master cylinder diameter 19.05mm
80 72.35 Caliper diameter 22mm
Deceleration in m/s2

Brake torque 755.82N-m

60 46.18 Deflection 65.12°
40 26.92 CoG from front wheel X 28.13 inches
14.083 CoG from left wheel Y 16.494 inches
20
CoG from ground Z 3.83 inches
0
30 50 70 90 Table 16-Braking Outputs
Speed of Vehicle in kmph
Page | 12
 4. STEERING 4.3)BENCH MARKING
4.1) INTRODUCTION
The function of the steering system is
COMPON PROPE AVAIL COS
to steer the front wheels in response to driver ENT RTIES ABILIT T IN
command inputs in order to provide overall Y RS.
directional control of the go-kart. In front wheels SS H 520/m
can be turned to left and right by steering system STEERING tr
so that, the vehicle can be steered. The steering WHEEL Al-6061 M 280/m
wheel is placed in front of the driver. It is TUS=360 tr
mechanically linked to the wheels to provide the MPa
steering control. The primary function of the TYS=280
steering system is to provide angular motion to MPa
front wheels so that, vehicle can negotiate a turn. EN8 M 56/kg
It also provides directional stability to vehicle SPINDLE 1inch
when the vehicle moves ahead in straight line. diameter
Nowadays, many vehicles are EN19 L 80/kg
equipped with power steering which uses 1inch
pressure of a fluid to reduce steering effort. When diameter
driver turns the steering wheel, a hydraulic SS H 520/m
mechanism comes into play to provide most of STEERING TUS=505 tr
the effort needed to turn the wheel. COLOUM MPa
TYS=215
4.2) DESIGN METHODOLOGY MS M 56/kg
PITMAN MS M 56/kg
ARM I INCH
RULE BOOK CONSIDERATIONS THICK
TIE RODS EN8 M 56/kg
EN19 L 80/kg
EN8 M 56/kg
TURNING RADIUS STEERING 1inch
ARM thick
EN19 L 80/kg
1inch
GOLDEN RATIO thick
MS M 56/kg
STUB EN8 M 56/kg
MS M 56/kg
CALCULATIONS C-CLAMP Iron M 80/kg
EN8 M 56/kg
Table 17- Benchmarking

BENCHMARKING

COMPONENT DESIGN

Page | 13
 In real-time dynamic
Ackermann condition i.e., while turning:
COMPONENT NAME MATERIAL
STEERING WHEEL Al-6061
STEERING COLUMN SS
PITMANN ARM MS
ROD-ENDS NA
TIE-RODS MS
STEERING ARM MS
C-CLAMP EN-8
STUB EN-19
SPINDLE EN-8 Figure 16- Change in Ackermann angle
Table 18- Material selected P=t+2dsin (a)
t=p-2dsin(a) (1)
4.4) CALCULATIONS From the above figure
Considering a front wheel steering vehicle, x2+y2=t2 (2)
according to the Ackermann Geometry x=dcos(a-ø)-dcos(a+ѳ) (3)
y=p-dsin(a-ø)-dsin(a+ѳ) (4)
Put 1, 3, 4 in 2
(p-2dsina) 2= (dcos (a-ø)-dcos(a+ѳ))2+(p-dsin
(a+ѳ)-dsin (a-ø))2
For perfect steering condition
Error =√ ((ø1-θ1)2+ (ø2-θ2)2+ (ø3-θ3)2+ (ø4-θ4)2+
(ø5-θ5)2+ (ø6-θ6)2)/ 6
d=steering length=4.5inches (126.8mm)

ACKER 20 22 24 26 28 30
MANN
ANGLE-
Figure 15-steering geometry (ALPHA)
Ѳ=inner wheel angle /
Ø=Outer wheel angle INNER
Tanѳ=L/ (A-W/2) ANGLE(i
A-W/2=Lcotѳ )
(1) 5 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 2.8 2.
Tanø=L/ (A+W/2) 3 1 9 7 2 5
A+W/2=cotø 10 9.3 9.2 9.1 9.1 5.6 5
(2) 3 6 8 9
Comparing 1&2 15 13. 13. 13. 13. 8.1 7.
Lcotø-(W/2) =Clot+ (W/2) 52 36 2 03 4 5
Cotø-Cotѳ=W/L
20 17. 17. 16. 16. 11. 10
(3)
4 12 84 55 69
Equation 3 is said to be perfect steering condition
From the above figure, 25 20. 20. 20. 19. 14. 12
OC=turning radius 95 52 11 68 88 .5
From triangle OCD,
Assuming that R = 2mts 30 24. 23. 22. 22. 18. 15
15 57 98 39 27
The maximum inner angle = 43.22
Table 19- Finding error table
The maximum outer angle =24.62
Page | 14
 Figure -17
CONCLUSION
20 22 24 26 28 30 With the help of market survey and calculations,
the required parameters are calculated and the
components are designed accordingly.
30
OUTER WHEEL

25 24.15
23.57
20 20.98
20.53
17.4
17.12 18.27
15 14.88 15
ANGLE

13.52
13.36
11.69 12.5
10 9.26 8.14 10
9.33
7.5
5 4.81 5.69
4.83 5
2.82
2.5
0
5 10 15 20 25 30

INNER WHEEL
ERRORS ANGLE

2.5
2
1.5
ERROR

1
0.5
0
20 22 24 26 28 30
ACKERMANN ANGLE
Error

Figure 16- Error line

4.5) RESULT

FINAL OUTCOME VALUE

ACKERMANN ANGLE 26 deg
TURNING RADIUS 2 mts
MAXIMUM INNER ANGLE 43.22 deg
MAXIMUM OUTER ANGLE 24.62 deg
ACKERMANN % 81%

Table 20- Results of Steering

Page | 15