I. Formatting (10 points) A. Cover Page Title Team Members Date B. Verification Statement C. Abstract D. Table of Contents II.

Introductory Material An introduction should give the reader reasons for reading the report. It should inform the reader of the: A. Purpose of the report. B. Nature of the problem. C. Significance of the problem. D. Organization of the report. E. Methods of analysis and evaluation used. III. Analysis and Definition of the Problem A. Document the existence of need. 1. What problems are to be satisfied? 2. How was the need determined (market survey, intuition, specific request)? 3. What are the factors involved (physical, human, economic, etc.)? B. Describe the inputs to the problem. 1. What are the variables involved (including units and methods of measure)? 2. How are the inputs related? 3. What are the constraints on the input variables? C. Describe the general limitations on the device or system to be designed. D. Describe the design outputs. 1. What are the variables involved (including units and methods of measure)? 2. How are the outputs related? 3. What are the constraints on the output variables? 4. Which of the outputs are desirable and which are undesirable? E. State the goals that are to be achieved by the design. 1. What are the critical parameters? 2. What are the criteria to be used for evaluation of the design? IV. Possible Solutions A. Describe all the solutions to the problem which you have generated (verbally and graphically, as required). B. Which of these solutions are plausible? (Eliminate the completely ridiculous, but give reasons for each one eliminated.) C. Which of the designs are physically realizable? How? D. Which appear to be profitable? Why? V. Comparison Analysis A. Describe the process of selecting the criteria. How were they determined to be valid? What are the units of measure? B. Describe how the weight factor of each criterion was selected. C. Describe the procedures used to obtain the relative worth of each criterion. D. Compare each possible solution. VI. Summary and Recommendations Support a recommendation to the management indicating which solution or solutions (if any) should be developed further (Developmental Design). VII. Project Schedule 1

A. Gantt Chart B. Individual Assignments/Responsibilities

I. Formatting (10 points) A. Cover Page Title Team Members Date B. Verification Statement The Formula SAE Suspension Team (Team Redline) has verified that the UCF Formula car suspension is in need of a new design for the May 2013 Formula SAE Competition that will be held in Michigan. To fully comply with these requirement, Team Redline had identified key areas in which the project will need to make improvements, such as: tire data comprehension, replacing all heims (rod ends) with spherical bearings, and improvement of lighter and stronger material use on the control arms (A-arms) and uprights. C. Abstract Formula SAE is an international, collegiate, engineering competition that challenges teams of students to conceive, design, fabricate, develop and compete with small, open-wheel formula car. We will be developing the suspension system for the upcoming car. This requires many aspects of engineering, including kinematics, vibrations, and machine design.

Some of the objectives include, compete against other Universities from around the world and place well. To better understand how the car reacts in dynamic conditions. Maximizing performance of tires through tire data and kinematics (maximum lateral force into the tires). Minimizing unsprung mass for a faster reacting suspension. Determining ride and roll rates of the suspension to better control weight transfer and vibrations. Design and fabricate components of the suspension D. Table of Contents I. Introductory Material An introduction should give the reader reasons for reading the report. It should inform the reader of the: A. Purpose of the report. This report details some ideas that are being considered for the design of the suspension system for a Formula SAE Racecar. B. Nature of the problem. The system is designed for performance, with the purpose of carrying as much speed as possible through corners without upsetting the cars balance. The suspension must be designed in such a way that it can minimize such factors as understeer, oversteer, bump steer, unsprung mass, and ride height. C. Significance of the problem. In eliminating these problems, the vehicle will have the ability to perform better in racing conditions, which will result in a higher point total and better placement for the team during competition. D. Organization of the report. This report will give details on the problems that will be encountered and performance parameters that must be met. An overview of possible design solutions is given. In addition, the criteria that will be used to compare the possible solutions is discussed. E. Methods of analysis and evaluation used. Analyses of conceptual designs have been performed in MathCAD using known formulas and expected variables. These calculated metrics will then be used to design a theoretical suspension system in CAD software SolidWorks. This theoretical design will then undergo simulation to observe theoretical static and dynamic analyses of the suspension under forces and loading. Data from static and dynamic analyses will be used to evaluate the expected performance of the suspension system. This preliminary evaluation of expected performance of the different conceptual designs will allow the team to form an informed decision on the final design. II. Analysis and Definition of the Problem A. Document the existence of need. For a Formula SAE car, the suspension needs to obtain optimum grip laterally and longitudinally. The tires make maximum lateral force at a given slip angle which changes for given conditions, so a compromise has to be made to maximize the benefits for the conditions that the tires might see. Our tire data needs to be more understood and used to its full extent. The suspension must also be able to react loads both longitudinally and laterally, which can be separated with an Anti-Roll bar. These should allow the car to take bumps while remaining stiff in corners. The suspension also has to be light as possible. Most of it is

considered unsprung mass. Less unsprung mass allows for the suspension react much faster, due to less moment of inertia. These needs were determined through research and previous experience/data. For example in past years, it was very tiring to steer the car, so this past year we reduced the trail in the kinematics which lightened up the steering making it easier to use. These human factors need to be taken into account, and we get that input from the drivers. For example, we can design the car to be more forgiving for inexperienced drivers, but without the optimum use of the tires, or vice-versa. The suspension also has to fit around the driver and engine on a small frame that is typically packaged very tightly. We also need to we wary of choosing materials within our budget. B. Describe the inputs to the problem. The suspension starts at the tires. For the most part we will be looking at slip angle vs. Lateral force charts. While, the are other other factors involving the tires, this is the big one. The slip angle is the difference in which way the tire is facing and which way the car is going due to the deformation of the tire. The tires lateral force peaks at a given slip angle for a given normal force. So the efficiency of the tires changes given the condition. The kinematics need to use the camber change (among other kinematic definitions such as kingpin axis and castor) to maximize tires potential. Since the max lateral force changes with maximum lateral force we also need to optimize the car or that. The normal force changes with weight transfer. As the car changes and/or speed, weight will be transferred to the different corners of the car. This is due to the moment from the center of gravity rotating about the roll center and the ground. These forces, through the contact patch of the tire also travel through the a-arms and pushrods (seperately) into the chassis. The weight transfer is also dependent on the spring being used which are measured in lbf/in or N/mm, or in the case of the anti-roll bar ft*lbf/deg or N*m/deg. We generally want to keep the spring fairly stiff to minimize weight transfer (to give more predictability in the tires), but we also want them to be soft in bump so the car doesnt react two suddenly to a given input. We will define a roll rate in gs/degree of roll. But we will also determine the ride rate of the front and rear suspension in Hz, so we can make the wheels have a settling time in the same area for a given bump. The spring will also have to be related back down trough the linkages to the wheel through what is called a Motion Ratio. This compares the wheel movement to the spring movement. In terms of measuring these, all are possible, but all may not be in our budget or capability. For instance, the slip angle can be calculated with accelerometers and a gyro, but that may not be available given the sensors price and our current data acquisition system. We do have linear potentiometers to measure the spring and damper movement. With that we can measure the roll and ride rates of the car. We also have a lateral accelerometer, which allows us to measure our weight transfer and maximum lateral acceleration. We can also measure wheel rate with a jack, ruler, and a scale, and plotting the points. Also we have a handheld temperature gage to measure the tire temperatures when testing. C. Describe the general limitations on the device or system to be designed. Our tires will limit the suspension based on ho much grip they can get and how they react given the condition of the track and what kind of track it is. Our designs will also be limited by the packaging of the car. We will also have to package our design with other systems, such as drive-train. Will also be limited by budget, and obtainable materials. D. Describe the design outputs.

The car handling will be the output of the car. This ill be somewhat determined through the opinions of the driver. For example, he may tell us if the car is oversteering or understeering. We can also look at the lateral acceleration to see how well the tires are performing. We can also look at the time it takes for the car to make it around the track, and tune it accordingly. The more quantative outputs can be tire slippage, roll angle during heavy cornering, lateral acceleration, as well as other parameters that can be measured digitally through testing of the car. The idea is to minimize and maximize certain values. 1. What are the variables involved (including units and methods of measure)? a. Steering Output under dynamic conditions b. Vibrations under static and dynamic loadings. (Force over time) c. Damping under static and dynamic loadings. (Force over time) 2. How are the outputs related? The aforementioned outputs are related due to the fact that they are properties of the suspension system itself, and any changes made to the suspension will change several characteristics at once. 3. What are the constraints on the output variables? Constraints on the output variables are those stated by the SAE Rulebook, which stipulates a minimum of 2 inches of wheel travel, and that the vehicle must pass a 60 degree tilt test, which checks for rollover. Also, constraints on the output variables may be dictated by the driver. The human interface of a vehicle has a delicate relationship with its performance abilities. This human feedback factor may dictate some of the required outputs during testing. Ultimately, the outputs can be quantified by the points structure of the Formula SAE event where a better performing car will achieve more points. Since the track is not defined for the May 2013 competition, some outputs cannot be directly predicted and therefore cannot be directly planned into the design of the suspension. Outputs such as anti-roll resistance may need to be changed once the track layout is known. A well engineered suspension should be adjustable so that when inputs from the track change, the outputs delivered by the car and driver can be adjusted for accordingly. 4. Which of the outputs are desirable and which are undesirable? Excessive vibrations and inadequate damping are undesirable because one or the combination of the two negatively affects the performance capabilities of the vehicle. Poor steering calibration will hinder the drivers ability to control the vehicle while in motion. With vibration and damping forces kept to a minimum, this will output desirable suspension performance. Correct steering alignment and turning radii will reduce negative effects of understeer and oversteer.This desirable output performance will lead to improvements in handling and stability. Improvements of that nature will in turn allow the driver the most efficient use of the power from wheel to the ground, thus allowing maximum maneuverability. E. State the goals that are to be achieved by the design. Our suspension must fit within the wheelbase and track of the rules (60in and a minimum of of the wheelbase respectively). A neutral driving car (neither oversteering nor understeering) Low compliance Low cost Simplest manufacturing process Appealing design that encompasses optimal functionality Fully adjustable suspension 5

 Lightweight One inch bounce and once inch rebound on suspension travel 1. What are the critical parameters? The completed vehicle should perform well during Tilt Table Testing, Skidpad and Autocross events. These portions of the competition are designed to display the effectiveness of a suspension and reveal any flaws in the design. The Skidpad is setup as shown in figure X. (insert skidpad dealie) The Autocross event does not have a predetermined course displayed before the event. The Formula SAE rulebook dictates the possible parameters for design of an autocross course, giving teams the opportunity to engineer a suspension to handle the course properly. The course is defined in the following ways (Taken from FSAE Rulebook 2012):
D7.2.1 The following standard specifications will suggest the maximum speeds that will be encountered on the course. Average speeds should be 40 km/hr (25 mph) to 48 km/hr (30 mph).
Straights: No longer than 60 m (200 feet) with hairpins at both ends (or) no longer than 45 m (150 feet) with wide turns on the ends. No longer than 60 m (200 feet) with hairpins at both ends (or) no longer than 45 m (150 feet) with wide turns on the ends. Constant Turns: 23 m (75 feet) to 45 m (148 feet) diameter. 23 m (75 feet) to 45 m (148 feet) diameter. Hairpin Turns: Minimum of 9 m (29.5 feet) outside diameter (of the turn). Minimum of 9 m (29.5 feet) outside diameter (of the turn). Slaloms: Cones in a straight line with 7.62 m (25 feet) to 12.19 m (40 feet) spacing. Cones in a straight line with 7.62 m (25 feet) to 12.19 m (40 feet) spacing. Miscellaneous: Chicanes, multiple turns, decreasing radius turns, etc. The minimum track width will be 3.5 m (11.5 feet). Chicanes, multiple turns, decreasing radius turns, etc. The minimum track width will be 3.5 m (11.5 feet).

Due to the nature of suspension design, many of the specific parameters have not been chosen. Since the entire vehicle has not been fully developed, the goal is to be able to adjust the suspension to achieve parameters that will produce a properly handling car in the aformentioned tests. 2. What are the criteria to be used for evaluation of the design? The criteria used will be implemented to allow the suspension system to assist in the overall performance of the race car. During the Formula SAE Competition there will be a series of events that will allow the team to score points. These events are broken down into the following categories: Static Events, and Dynamic Events. The Static Events will allow a team to earn up to 325 points. During this event, the vehicle will undergo a Technical Inspection. The suspension must aid in the completion of the Tilt Table Test where the vehicle must satisfy the sixty degree (60) rollover stability requirement. Cost and Budget of the suspension system will assist in scoring more points in the Static Event so the estimated overall Bill of Materials of the suspension design will be a criteria used to evaluate concept designs. Function and form will both be taken into high regard. 225 points will go to the presentation and design so the suspension system must demonstrate a well engineered product. The Dynamics Events include Acceleration, Skid Pad, Autocross, Fuel Economy, and Endurance. The vehicle must excel in these categories in order to aid in scoring up to 675 points for the UCF Formula SAE team. The suspension must assist and not hinder vehicle performance in these categories. The suspensions overall weight will be

a primary target criteria, the use of lightweight materials is a must. The selection of a suspension design that will perform well in the Dynamics Event will be dependent of the designs unsprung mass, adjustability, spring rates, damper choices, steering geometry, anti-roll capabilites, dimensions and suspension travel. These parameters will become criterias used to determine which suspension system design will provide optimal performance in the Dynamic Event. III. Possible Solutions Three possible solutions are being considered as templates for this design. These are conventional pushrods, conventional pullrods, as well as a rotary damper system with torsion bars. Pushrods and pullrods have been proven to work in open wheel racing for professional teams, and are very commonly used. A torsion bar system is also a plausible solution, already in use by some of the previous Formula SAE teams. The pushrod and pullrod designs are physically realizable for the team due to the fact that similar designs have been used in years past and parts may be scavenged from older cars. A torsion bar system would be more expensive since it requires parts that have not been purchased, and may also add more unsprung mass due to its complexity, which makes it more unlikely to be physically produced for our car unless it is shown that doing so will make significant improvements to handling. The most cost effective solution is either the pushrod or pullrod, due to its simple construction and parts availability.

IV. Comparison Analysis The selection of criteria for the purpose of comparison of a desirable suspension system will be based on prior and researched knowledge of suspension, desired values for a certain portion of the competition, inherent cost of any particular system and any data generated using modeling software. Many of the criteria are based on prior personal knowledge of racing and dictated by variables such as tire choice, right height, etc. Selecting valid criteria for a suspension system is completed by referring to the list of qualities desired by from the suspension and rating them based on importance. Rating of the qualities is done via group discussion, brainstorming, checking prices for components, and viewing statistical data based on prior teams performance with a given suspension system. Choosing which values to make a higher priority allows for discussion and free thinking of which ideas would be applicable, and which ides may lead to qualities outside the scope of the project. The major source of information for deciding on a new system can be based on parameters of previous years vehicles and their respective performance. One example of this can be viewed in Figure X, which shows how track width can affect skid pad performance.

Using data from previous events allows the team to make decisions that are directly correlated to a success rate. Any criteria that show a strong correlation to an increase in competition points deserves particular attention. Some high priority criteria are obvious. One example of an obvious desired quality is a low unspring weight. Weight is an enemy of performance with regard to a vehicles ability to accelerate, brake and corner effectively. This universally accepted fact can be applied to all aspects of the teams design. Other less obvious criteria include cost and availability of parts. Systems that require exotic or expensive parts can be problematic for a team that is given a relatively limited budget. Deciding on a system that is cost effective to fabricate and service is a paramount priority. Finally, the most important criteria is driver safety. Safety is chosen as among the highest priority criteria for obvious reasons. Suspension should allow for the driver to predictably control the vehicle. In order for a driver to maximize the performance, he/she should feel safe and be able to focus on driving. Failure in a component of a suspension system can lead to personal injury to spectators as well as the driver of the vehicle. The dedicated choice of a design requires a fairly complete analysis of a system. Some ideas can be discounted easily based on inherent disadvantages. The pushrod concept is a well developed system that allows for most of the desired criteria to be completed fairly easily. Since pushrods are single force members, factor of safety is easy to calculate. Pushrod geometry is simple with regard to design and adjustment and generally speaking, would allow for inexpensive manufacture. One disadvantage of using pushrod suspension is that the location of components tends to be higher on the chassis of the vehicle. This can contribute to a higher roll-center which is undesirable. The other disadvantage to this system is that the anti-roll system is unintentionally linked to the spring rate for a given axle. This makes the anti-roll adjustability more difficult and can give some unwanted handling characteristics. Using pullrods can have the advantages of a pushrod system with the added benefit of being able to lower the center of gravity. This allows for better anti-roll performance and a generally overall better handling vehicle. Pullrods can have the disadvantage of requiring extra

moving parts and can move components to a location already occupied by other vehicle components. These obstacles may be easily rectified if this option is chosen. Using torsion bars instead of coil springs would be a third option the team may utilize. The advantages are limited in this system. Major racing teams have utilized this system for its aerodynamics advantages, which would be out of the scope of this project. One of the disadvantages is the need to manufacture torsion springs. The other major disadvantage is adjustability. Torsion springs would require additional mechanisms for adjustment. Packaging torsion bars presents an additional challenge. Finally, the torsion bar system will still require a separate method of damping. This means that a system of pushrods or pullrods would still be required since a spring and damper is no longer in one convenient unit. Obviously this would involve more components and weight, which is a major disadvantage. V. Summary and Recommendations In conclusion, the top design choose will be either the pull or push rods. The torsion bar suspension will not be the best choose do to the material and the knowledge is hard to find and the production of the material will take for time then we have to design and manufacture and present a prototype. The best design will be choose by the following requirement, which are to minimize such factors as understeer, oversteer, bump steer, unsprung mass, and ride height. VI. Project Schedule A. Gantt Chart (will insert Gantt Chart excel) B. Individual Assignments/Responsibilities The team will be working together when assembling the suspension together, but some certain special project will be given to the most senior member in the group. Chevy Butman (Program Manager) will be working with Optimum K, a kinematic program that will help set up the position of our A-arm from chassis to tries. Phillip Blitz (Tooling Engineer) will be specializing on CAMWorks, a camming program that will allow the use of UCF SAE machine room to optimize the time to get the product to the car to be reassemble. Overall each team member is have a hand on certain component of the suspension. For example Nicholas Schiavone, will be working on the front and back uprights on car. While Emmanuel Garcia will be figuring out the right material for the control arm to connect to the chassis. Then Gregory Benjamin will be able to find the correct bearings and poxy while testing to connect the suspension. So there will be no failure. Each team member will need to know how to use a Bridgeport mill and Lathe safely and correct, so the time schedule will be on time and not slow us down.

10