You are on page 1of 43

# WHAT THE BOOKS DIDNT TELL YOU

AND HOW TO USE IT IN SETUP
June 9, 2015 Rodrigo de Oliveira Santos

CTV News

Lets say that you are a race engineer and your driver is having trouble to go around the
slowest corners on the circuit. In a brief feedback after the first outing (a set of laps in a
session) of the free practice session, the driver complains about excessive oversteer in
these parts of the circuit. What would you do, in order to solve the problem?

Well, a thousand changes to the car could be applied. The fact that the problem occurs
in the slowest bits of the circuit might rule out the possibility of aerodynamic changes as

a solution. Then, most of the solutions available will be related to the subject of this post:

Lateral load transfer or lateral weight transfer, is the amount of change on the vertical
loads of the tyres due to the lateral acceleration imposed on the centre of gravity (CG) of
the car. In other words, it is the amount

## by which vertical load is increased on the

outer tyres and reduced from the inner tyres when the car is cornering.

The total lateral load transfer on the car can be calculated from its free body diagram,
as shown in figure 1. In the image, the car is looked from the rear in a right hand turn.
Here,
height,

## is the lateral acceleration in G units,

is the track width and

and

is the CG

## are the vertical loads on the left and right

tyres, respectively.

## Figure 1. Free body diagram of a car, rear view.

Taking the moment equilibrium about the point O, of the tyre, we can see that:

## tyre is the outside tyre. Hence:

This is the total lateral load transfer on the car. One important thing to notice is that its
difficult to change total lateral load transfer by setup. Some setup changes might apply,
for example, CG might be lowered by reducing ride height, and track width might be
increased by changing wheel offsets properly or using wheel hub spacers. However, these
approaches are limited, ride height being affected by the possibility of bottoming out and
track width by regulations that place a cap on vehicle width.

But if total lateral load transfer is difficult to change once the car has been designed and
built, then how can it be used to improve handling? The secret to answer this question is
to focus not on total lateral weight transfer on the car, but instead, on how it is distributed

between front and rear tracks. Before I explain this, let me talk about a good thing to
understand the subject the steady-state analysis of a pair of tyres.

Formula 1 Dictionary

In the previous post about understeer and oversteer, we have addressed the vehicle as
the bicycle model, with its tracks compressed to a single tyre. Let us expand that analysis
by looking at the pair of tyres. This analysis may even be used to prepare tyre data, in
order to make the bicycle model more realistic.

In a pair analysis, steady-state lateral force is obtained for the tyres on a track (front or
rear pair), through data from a single tyre. It may be a more practical way to assess

## vehicle handling in comparison to computer modelling, since the goal is generally to

increase the lateral force on either the front or rear track.

Also, the only direct link between the front and rear tracks is the chassis (all-wheel drive
cars are an exception), and vehicle behaviour can be evaluated by looking at the relative
performance of front and rear tracks.

For the analysis procedure, one can adapt the load transfer equation obtained above,
using

, and

Now consider

## , the vertical load on the outer tyre in a corner, and

, the height of
. This will give:

, the vertical

load on the inner tyre. We define the Fraction Load Transfer, FLT, as the ratio between
the difference

The parameter

## represents the total moment in the track about a point on the

ground. In cases where the performance of a pair of tyres is being analysed without
regards to a particular vehicle, the parameter

## changes in lateral load transfer. The analysis procedure is as follows:

The actual wheel loads are calculated for a series of FLT, which can go from 0 to
1.0, for the given track load. Then, a series of steer angles in the range of interest
is selected. A reference steer angle, which is the average of steer angles of both
wheels on the axle, is specified (but the individual slip angles are used when
entering the data).

For a more comprehensive analysis, the effects from suspension geometry such
as steer and camber variations due to ride, roll, braking, accelerating, lateral force
compliance or aligning torque compliance, can be introduced before entering tyre
data.

At this point, tyre data is entered and lateral force for each tyre in the axle is
calculated taking into account the effects described above (if the case demands
it).

The lateral force of the track is the sum of lateral forces obtained from each tyre.
This is multiplied by the cosine of the reference steer angle, to obtain a lateral
force in the direction of the turning centre. This force is then divided by the weight
on the axle
, to give the lateral acceleration in the direction of interest.

This lateral acceleration is plotted against FLT, with reference steer angle as a
parameter. This graph is called the potential diagram, and it reflects the potential
of a pair of tyres arranged on a track to generate lateral axle force. This is the
basic output of a pair analysis. Figure 2 shows the plot.

The actual load transfer depends on the track width and the rolling moment
produced by the lateral acceleration acting on the fictitious CG height. The lateral
might be represented through various diagonal lines
in the potential diagram.

## An additional curve might be obtained by plotting the intersections of the lateral

accelerations with the lateral load transfer parameter lines, against the reference
steer angle. Figure 3 shows the plot. This curve is called the cornering coefficient
curve for the track,
, and it shows the effect of load
transfer, geometry and other factors in modifying the characteristics of a single
tyre. It is a measure of how well the vehicle track configuration uses lateral force.

Figure 2. Potential Diagram. (MILLIKEN & MILLIKEN, Race Car Vehicle Dynamics)

Figure 3. Cornering coefficient curve for a track. (MILLIKEN & MILLIKEN, Race Car
Vehicle Dynamics)

## The potential diagram is a benchmarking of the performance that can be achieved by a

pair of tyres. Bear in mind that the lateral acceleration obtained from a specific fraction
load transfer value will not necessarily cause the correspondent load transfer on the axle.
The inputs are essentially the loads and orientations of the tyres, and the outputs are
given per unit weight on the axle, allowing for a vehicle-independent analysis. The
diagonal lines represent lateral force potential for constant

## values, whereas the

curved lines show values obtained for a constant reference steer angle.

In the post about lateral force from the tyres, we discussed tyre load sensitivity, the

property that makes lateral force from a tyre to grow at a smaller rate with increasing
vertical load. This will have a net effect of decreasing the lateral force generated by an
axle when the load transfer on it increases. This characteristic is also observed here. If
you analyse figure 2, you will see that an increasing fraction load transfer will come
together with a decreasing lateral force potential for the axle.

In figure 3 the effect is repeated, but from a different perspective. Here, the load transfer
is increased by means of the lateral load transfer parameter, instead of the FLT. Notice
the smaller cornering potential for higher values of the lateral load transfer parameter.

## The 3 Mechanisms of Lateral Load Transfer

Speedsport Magazine

As stated before, it is very difficult to change the total lateral load transfer of a car without
increasing the track width or reducing either the weight or the CG height. However, the

suspension of a car will allow lateral load transfer to present itself in different ways and
to be distributed between the axles in a controlled manner.

In this analysis, we will be interested in lateral load transfer in a single axle, and I will
discuss the three mechanisms by which that happens, namely, roll resistance moment
from springs and antiroll bars, direct lateral force load transfer and lateral load transfer
from unsprung mass.

All these mechanisms generate a moment about the car that will translate into a vertical
load difference between the inside and the outside tyres. Before we discuss how these
moments are quantified, its interesting to derive a relation between a generic
moment

## between tyres separated by a distance

. Refer again to figure 1. The moment equilibrium analysis will be the same here, but we
will substitute the moment from the inertial force about the CG,
moment,

, by a generic

## . The result will be:

Now we know that the load transfer caused by a generic moment about a track will be
the moment divided by the track width, and we can use that to analyse the effect of each

component of load transfer. Referring back to the total load transfer equation, we see
that the total weight transfer will be caused by inertial forces acting upon the entire mass
of the car. We can split the inertial force into sprung and unsprung components and we
will have the following relation:

Where

## is the moment on the

unsprung mass. A more in-depth discussion on how each of these moments are generated
will now be presented. After that, we will see how the components of load transfer can
be manipulated to tune the balance of the car.

## #1 Lateral Load Transfer from Unsprung Mass

Avian Photography

The simplest component of load transfer is the one related to unsprung mass. If unsprung
mass is isolated, its possible to find its own CG. When the car corners, lateral acceleration
is applied at this CG, generating a centrifugal force. This force will result in a moment,
whose arm is the unsprung CG height,

Where

## is the unsprung weight on the track being analysed.

This component of lateral load transfer is the least useful as a setup tool. Changing the
moment generated by this component requires changes in either the unsprung mass or
its CG height. Both of these changes will involve adding, removing or repositioning mass
(and therefore parts) within the unsprung part of the car. This could affect wheel hop
(the ride mode that characterises oscillation of the unsprung mass between the road
surface and the sprung mass) frequency and amplitude, reducing the contact of the tyres
with the ground and hence, reducing grip. This component will, however, be altered by
changes in other components (e.g. replacement of brake cooling ducts for a
lighter/heavier version).

Component)

F1 Technical

## Before we start this analysis, lets make some important definitions:

The Roll Centre of an axle is the point on the transversal vertical plane passing
through the wheel centres of an axle, where a lateral force is applied to the sprung
mass without producing any roll. Its also the point through which the lateral force
applied to the sprung mass is transferred to the unsprung mass, i.e. the roll centre
is the force coupling point between sprung and unsprung mass.

The Neutral Roll Axis, or just roll axis, is the line that connects the roll centres from
front and rear suspensions.

Load transfer from direct force is one of the two components related to the lateral force
acting upon the sprung mass. It arises from the force coupling effect that roll centres
have, directly linking forces on sprung mass to the unsprung mass. Its also called
the kinematic load transfer component, because the roll centres are defined by the
suspension kinematics. Here, the lateral force acting on the sprung mass (

) will

generate a moment on the tyres through the roll centre height that will also contribute
to lateral load transfer. This is given by:

Here,

## is the sprung weight distribution to the axle being analysed and

is the

roll centre height for the track. Sprung weight distribution is calculated as the ratio
between the distance from the sprung weight CG to the axle opposite to the one being
analysed,

## The equation for this component can then be expanded:

Because the force coupling nature of roll centres is not as widely known as the definition
of the term roll centre itself, some people are unaware of this component. This leads
some to think that increasing roll centre heights will actually decrease weight transfer
because it reduces roll. The thing is, roll is only one part of the equation, and as the
discussion on this post will show, increasing roll centre height might either increase or
decrease the lateral load transfer, depending on other parameters.

#3 Load Transfer Due to Roll Angle (or Elastic Load Transfer Component)

Racin Today

When the vehicle is cornering, the centrifugal force from inertia generates a moment that
makes thesprung mass roll to the outside of the corner. When this happens, the outside
spring of the suspension is compressed and the inside spring is extended.

Since springs are devices that generate forces upon displacements, a force on each
spring arises, and these forces generate a moment that tends to resist the rotation of the
body. The forces upon the springs are reacted by the tyres, and that contributes to lateral
load transfer. Because of this interaction with the springs, this component is also referred
as the elastic weight transfer component. Also, when the chassis rolls, the CG of the
sprung mass will be shifted sideward, and that will give rise to another moment that will

When cornering, the sprung mass of the car will roll by an amount
is reacted by the roll stiffness (or roll rate),

## , of the car. Roll stiffness is defined as the

resistance moment generated per unit of roll angle of the sprung mass, and it has SI
units of Nm/rad. On independent suspension vehicles, roll stiffness is a function of the
vertical stiffness of the suspension (ride rate, which includes tyre stiffness) and track
width.

Antiroll bars are generally added to the car to make it stiffer in roll without altering the
ride characteristics. The roll stiffness of the car is the sum of roll stiffnesses of front and
rear axles:

One important thing to notice is that the chassis is assumed a rigid body, and hence, the

roll angle is the same for front and rear suspensions. Thus, the roll resistance moment is
given by:

## Tyre stiffnesses are included in the roll rates;

Vehicle CG and roll centres are located on the centreline of the car;

## Small angles are assumed, such that

and

For this analysis, lets consider the sprung mass in isolation. Figure 4 shows the forces
and moments acting on the sprung CG. The views are along the roll axis.

## Figure 4. Roll Load Transfer Geometry

Lets analyse the moment involved in roll. The inertial force acting on the vehicle CG will
generate a moment about the roll axis. This moment is called roll moment or roll
couple,

, because it is responsible for body roll. The splitting of the roll moment

between front and rear axles is useful in analysing lateral load transfer and this is called
roll moment distribution between front and rear axles.

The analysis begins by taking the moment equilibrium about the roll axis:

Where
term

## is a gravity component that arises due to the sprung CG being shifted

to the side when the chassis rolls. Applying the small angle assumption, we have:

Substituting the definition of the roll resistance moment in the equation above, we have:

Solving for

and dividing by

## we obtain the roll sensitivity to lateral acceleration of

the car, i.e. the amount of body roll per unit of lateral acceleration:

If we isolate the roll angle from the equation above, we can use it to calculate the
moments from roll resistance moment and sprung CG side shift for a single axle. In a

single axle, the roll resistance moment will be the roll angle multiplied by the roll stiffness
of the axle analysed,

Note that this component resists only roll angle, and the entire sprung mass is used here,
as this is how we obtained the expression for roll angle. The same will not be true for the
weight shift component, because the axle will only support the fraction of the sprung
weight distributed to it. The weight shift component for a single axle will be:

## Substituting roll angle on the expression above, we have:

The total moment from roll angle on a single axle will then be:

The lateral load transfer from this moment is obtained by dividing this by the axle track
width, t:

## Lateral Load Transfer as a Setup Tool

UK2 Group

The three components of lateral load transfer should be added in order to obtain the total
lateral load transfer on an axle:

The expression above can be utilized to calculate the load transfer on each axle, which
can then be used to improve handling. Now that we have quantified lateral load transfer
on an axle, we can start to analyse how the individual components interact.

Before we start, its worth to give a note on units. For you to get meaningful results from
the equation above, you need to use consistent units. For the SI system, the weights
should be in N, the angular stiffnesses in Nm/rad, the lengths in m, and the acceleration
is nondimensional (because we are dividing lateral acceleration by the acceleration of
gravity).

sensitivity that lateral load transfer will decrease the lateral force capability of the axle.
On limit conditions, this will translate in one of the axles breaking loose and skidding
before the other. If that is the case in the front axle, the car will understeer, if it is in the
rear axle, it will oversteer.

We have established that playing with the unsprung weight component is not the
smartest thing to do, so lets focus on the sprung weight components, i.e. the kinematic
and elastic components.

The first one to analyse is the kinematic or direct lateral force load transfer component.
From the general lateral load transfer equation, we know that this component is changed
by modifications to either the weight distribution of the car, or the roll centres height.
Weight distribution can be controlled through positioning of ballast in the car. Changing
weight distribution will obviously alter CG longitudinal location, and that might have
undesirable effects on many other aspects of the car. For example, if the weight is shifted
forward, the front tyres may be overloaded under heavy braking, while the rear tyres
may lose most of their vertical load, reducing the brake capability of the car.

The second option to alter load transfer from direct lateral force component is to change
roll centre heights. This is a complex measure because it requires changes in suspension
geometry, and it has influence on all geometry-related parameters, such as camber and
toe gain, anti-pitch features and so on. This is altered by moving the suspension pickups
so

that

suspension

arms

will

be

at

different

position

and/or

orientation.

In some categories, the rear suspension is mounted on the gearbox, for example, Formula
3, shown in figure 5. Here the pickup points are highlighted for better comprehension.
Figure 6 shows the CAD design of a similar gearbox, highlighting the different options for
installing pickup points. As we move up to higher categories, the engineering gets more
complex. Figure 7 shows the gearbox from Mercedes W05, 2014 Formula One champion.
Here the gearbox has a removable carbon fibre structural outer sleeve, allowing changes

in the design of the rear suspension without having to re-test the rear of the car for
crashworthiness.

## Figure 6. Indy Lights Gearbox (Ricardo Software)

Figure 7. Mercedes W05 Carbon Fibre Gearbox Sleeve for Mounting Suspension Points
(F1 Technical).

Its not possible to conclude directly what influence increasing roll centre heights will
have. A quick look at the lateral load transfer equation might lead you to think that lateral
load transfer will increase with increasing roll centre heights because of the direct relation
in the equation.

The fact is, by increasing the roll centre height in one axle, you are increasing lateral load
transfer from the direct lateral force component, while at the same time you are
decreasing lateral load transfer from roll angle component. Bear in mind that the roll
moment arm

## is the perpendicular distance between the CG of the sprung mass and

the roll axis. Figure 8 clarifies. The overall effect will depend upon roll centre heights and
roll

stiffnesses,

and

definitive

conclusion

will

require

deeper

analysis.

## Figure 8. Roll Moment Geometry.

One thing we can tell without any deep analysis is that increasing the roll centre height
in one axle decreases the lateral weight transfer on that axle, everything else kept
constant. This happens because raising the roll centre will approximate the roll axis to
the sprung weight CG. This will decrease roll angle component, but since the roll centre
height of the opposite axle will not be raised, the direct lateral force component will not
increase and the overall effect will be a reduction in weight transfer.

To further expand our analysis, lets put the theory into practice. Figure 9 shows a contour
plot of lateral weight transfer sensitivity (lateral weight transfer divided by lateral
acceleration) on both axles of an open wheel single-seater. To obtain these, I created a
MATLAB routine to calculate the total lateral weight transfer from our previous discussion,
keeping the front and rear roll stiffnesses equal and constant while varying front and rear
roll centre heights. The input data were based on the manuals from the manufacturer of
an important formula category.

## Figure 9. Lateral weight transfer sensitivity to roll centre heights.

By analysing Figure 9 you can see that lateral load transfer is very sensitive to changes
in roll centre height. For example, if you investigate what would happen to the weight
transfer in both axles if you held rear roll centre height constant at 30 mm while increasing
the front roll centre height, you would see opposite effects happening on front and rear
tracks (weight transfer would decrease in the rear axle while increasing in the front).

Try this exercise: pick whatever value you want for rear roll centre height, and imagine
an horizontal line passing through the point correspondent to that value in both graphs,
and observe how weight transfer changes along this line in both graphs (remember each
graph represents an axle). Now do the same, but picking a front roll centre height and
imagining a vertical line instead. What happened?

As you see, when we increase front roll centre height, the lateral weight transfer
decreases on the rear axle while increasing on the front. Conversely, if you increase rear
roll centre height, lateral load transfer increases on the rear axle and decreases on the
front axle. Can you see the trend?

When you increase roll centre height in one axle you increase the overall lateral load
transfer on that axle, while decreasing it on the opposite axle. This leads as to believe
that the roll centre height gain is higher than the decrease in the roll moment arm

The change in this arm with roll centre heights will depend on the wheelbase and weight
distribution.

The calculations presented here were based on a vehicle with a 3125 mm wheelbase and
54% weight distribution on the rear axle, which are reasonable values for most race cars.
For this case, roll moment arm decrease with roll centre heights was smaller than the
increase in roll centre heights themselves. In my time in Baja, I have done calculations
of the type for vehicles that had roughly the same weight distribution and wheelbases of
approximately 1500 mm. The results were the same. I make no claim that this would
hold true for every car in the world, but if thats the case for vehicles with wheelbases as
different as the ones Ive tried, than I wouldnt be surprised if it was for other cars.

This component is the easier to control. Lets repeat the weight transfer equation here to
make things easier:

By looking at the equation, you can see that the weight transfer component from roll
angle can be altered by changes in front or rear roll stiffnesses, roll moment arm or
weight distribution. Now lets stop for a moment to analyse the influence of the gravity
term

## on the lateral load transfer component.

As we discussed, we should input consistent units into the equation to obtain meaningful
results. The manual of the vehicle used here specified a roll stiffness values ranging from
350,000 Nm/rad to 5,600,000 Nm/rad. The sprung mass used was 675 kg, which gives a

weight of 6621.75 N. With a CG height of 254 mm and the minimum roll centres specified
in 3 mm, which is very low, the moment arm will be 251 mm. With those values, the
gravity term will be 1662.1 Nm. Do you see how small it is compared to the roll stiffness
of the car?

You might not be convinced of the insignificance of this term by arguing that those values
were obtained for a very light car with a very low CG. So lets try it with a 1200 kg vehicle
with CG height varying from 100 mm to 1 m (which is ridiculously high even for a road
car). Figure 10 shows the plot of the roll angle component versus gravity term.

Figure 10. Gravity Term Influence on Roll Angle Weight Transfer Component.

Varying the gravity term from 800 Nm to 11395 Nm resulted in a difference of only 0.0148
(from 0.5011 to 0.5159) or 2.96 %. Bear in mind that these values were obtained for a

fairly heavy race car with an unreasonably high CG, and this is only one of three weight
transfer components.

At this moment, you should be convinced of the irrelevance of the gravity term on roll
angle weight transfer component. This basically rules out weight distribution as a way of
controlling roll angle component. We now have roll moment arm and roll stiffnesses to
play with. From our previous discussion on direct force weight transfer component, you
know that to change roll moment arm you need to play with roll centre heights, which
will ultimately affect that weight transfer component in the opposite way you want.

Another reason to rule out changes in roll moment arm is that, because it directly
multiplies the proportion of roll stiffnesses, it will have the same effect on both axles
whether is to increase or decrease lateral load transfer. For setup, we look into changing
the lateral load transfer in one axle relative to the other, to affect balance. This makes
changes in roll moment arm to control roll angle component useless. Lets now analyse
roll stiffnesses.

Roll stiffness can be altered by either changing ride stiffness of the suspension (vertical
stiffness) or by changing the stiffness of the antiroll bars. Ride stiffness can be altered by
either changing springs or tyre pressures (tyre pressure affects tyre stiffness, which
contributes to the overall ride stiffness). This is generally not the first option to take
because of the effect that it has on other aspects of the car.

For the sake of example, ride stiffness controls ride height, which has strong effects on
aerodynamics of ground effect cars (almost every race car with relevant aerodynamics
design). Another example would be the effect of ride stiffness on wheel hop frequency.
Hence, springs and tyre pressures should only be changed when other aspects need
modification, but not only roll stiffness itself (unless the vehicle has no antiroll bar).

The most reasonable option would be changes on antiroll bar stiffness. This can be done
in multiple ways. The hardest one would be to change the bar itself, though there are
some antiroll bars that have adjustable stiffnesses, eliminating the need to replace bars.
These adjustable bars generally have blade lever arms, as the one shown in figure 11.

By rotating the lever arms, its area moment of inertia in bending is changed, hence
altering its stiffness. Figure 12 shows a finite element stress analysis, with colours closer
to yellow and green indicating higher stresses. Some race cars have push-pull cables
connected to the bars that allow the driver to change roll stiffnesses from inside the car.

Figure 12. FEA stress analysis of a blade antiroll bar (Proven Wicked).

Now that we know the best ways to change roll stiffness, lets see how it affects lateral
load transfer. Figure 13 shows the contour plots of lateral weight transfer sensitivity as a
function of front and rear roll stiffnesses. These data were obtained for the same open
wheel car analysed in figure 9, but this time front and rear roll centres heights were held

constant and equal, while roll stiffnesses varied. The stiffnesses are shown in
kgfm/degree, that have clearer meaning, but the data were input in Nm/rad.

## Figure 13. Lateral weight transfer sensitivity to roll stiffnesses.

If you compare figures 13 and 8, you will see that, while lateral weight transfer changes
with roll centre heights along contours defined by lines that have the same inclination,
the effect is different with respect to roll stiffnesses, as the lines that limit the contours
have different inclinations.

If you represent the rear roll stiffness as proportion of front roll stiffness in a line plot,
the result will be a straight line, with an inclination equal to the proportion between the
roll stiffnesses. If you represent multiple proportions, you will have multiple lines with
different inclinations. Do you see where this heading? Lateral load transfer in one axle
will change with the proportion of the roll stiffnesses on that axle, not the roll stiffnesses

themselves.

This can be confirmed by adopting the conclusions from the analysis of figure 10, where
we agreed that the gravity term is negligible for roll angle lateral weight transfer
component. If we use

## , the remaining roll angle component will be:

If we keep the roll moment arm constant, then roll angle lateral load transfer component
in one track will obviously be a function of the ratio between the roll stiffness on that
track and the total roll stiffness of the car. The term between brackets in the equation

above is the roll rate distribution or roll stiffness distribution for a given axle, and it will
ultimately control the elastic lateral load transfer component.

## Elastic and Kinematic Components Combined

So far, we have discussed the influence of each component in lateral load transfer in
isolation. Lets now see how these components affect each other and how they affect
load transfer together. For this analysis, only the rear axle was considered. The front and
rear roll centres heights were kept equal, but varied from 3 mm to the CG height (254
mm). The weight distribution on the rear axle was 54 %. Roll stiffnesses were input in
the form of roll rate distribution, varying from 0 to 1. Figure 14 shows the contour plot.

Figure 14. Lateral weight transfer sensitivity to roll rate distribution and roll centre
heights.

Figure 14 can lead us to very interesting conclusions. First notice that there are two
particular regions in the plot, where any changes to one of the components will produce
no sensitive effect on weight transfer. This is characterised by the green region in the
graph. If you hold rear roll rate distribution constant at 54 % and increase roll centre
height, lateral load transfer will have no significant change. Conversely, if you hold roll
centre heights at about 254 mm and vary rear roll rate distribution, lateral load
distribution wont suffer relevant differences. What happened here?

If we

define

and

the

distribution

## , the sprung weight distribution on the rear axle, then the

lateral load transfer equation for that axle can be rewritten to give:

First, lets analyse what happens when we hold roll rate distribution equal to the weight
distribution on that axle. Substituting the values on the terms inside the brackets, we
have:

But if we assume that front and rear roll rates are equal, then the moment arm will be
given by:

## Substituting into the weight transfer equation yields:

This shows that when weight distribution and roll rate distribution are equal, for a
horizontal roll axis, the sprung weight load transfer component will be independent of roll
centres heights. Notice that this conclusion doesnt necessarily hold true for different roll
axis inclinations.

Now lets analyse what happens when roll centre heights get close to the CG height.
If
in

## , and will have the term inside brackets resulting

.

This will tell us that lateral load transfer on a track will become less dependent on the roll
rate distribution on that track as the roll axis gets close to the CG of the sprung mass.
This conclusion is somehow trivial, as we know that roll moment arm decreases as roll
axis gets closer to the sprung mass CG and roll rate distribution only affects the roll angle

Now lets use the knowledge discussed here applied in the example presented of the

beginning of this article, with a little more detail in it. Lets say the car is rear wheel drive
with a rear weight distribution and large, lightly loaded tyres. If your driver complies
about oversteer in the slowest corners, it means that the front axle is generating higher
lateral force than the rear. By the methods presented here, the simplest solution would
be shifting roll rate distribution to the front, by either stiffening the front antiroll bar or
softening the rear. In order words, the goal would be to reduce lateral load transfer in
the rear axle in comparison to the front axle.

If that solution doesnt work, you could have roll centre heights that would give a roll axis
too close to the sprung CG, as discussed before. If that was the case, you should work
on the roll centres heights instead, and then adjust suspension parameters accordingly.
Again, if that doesnt work, then lateral load transfer will not be the right parameter to
change.

Bear in mind that lateral load transfer affects the balance through tyre load sensitivity
(the tendency of the tyres to generate higher lateral forces at a decreasing rate with
higher vertical loads). If the tyres of the car are lightly loaded, there might not be enough
load sensitivity in the tyres, so that even if one end of the car takes all the lateral load
transfer, the lateral force performance isnt degraded significantly.

In that case, changing roll rate distribution or roll centre heights will have little effect in
the balance, and other alternatives must be looked at, such as adjusting tyre pressures,
tyre size and/or width or moving CG location (so that the inertial forces will be different

in each axle). Notice that this is just one possibility and other parameters might be
investigated as well.

## A Summary of What Youve Read

Zimbio

We used steady-state pair analysis to show once again that lateral load transfer in
one end of the car decreases the capability of that end to generate lateral force.

We derived the equations of lateral load transfer in one axle of the car, showing
that its composed of three components:

## 1. Unsprung weight component not useful as a setup tool because of the

effect that it has on ride, specifically wheel hop mode.

## 2. Direct force component or kinematic component useful as a setup tool,

especially when roll axis is close to the sprung CG, and the influence of roll
component is reduced.

## 3. Roll angle component or elastic component the most useful component

as a setup tool, since it is the easiest to change when antiroll devices are
present. It has increased importance when roll rate distribution in one track
gets close to the weight distribution on that axle, as direct force component
has its importance reduced (assuming horizontal roll axis).

If changes to lateral load transfer have not significant effects on the balance of
the car, this might be an indication that the tyres are lightly loaded, and load
sensitivity is small.

Bear in mind that all the analysis done here was for steady-state lateral load transfer,
which is why dampers were not mentioned at all. Transient lateral load transfer is an
important aspect of vehicle setup, but lets leave the discussion on that for another day.