Vehicle #28

CETYS Universidad Baja SAE Design Report

Gustavo Ovies, Andres Magaa, Alejandro Burgas
Ivn Pulido, Ivn Williams, Bernardo Valadez
Mechanical engineering division of CETYS Universidad, Campus Mexicali
Copyright 2007 SAE International

ABSTRACT
The Baja SAE Series is a competition
sponsored by the Society of Automotive
Engineers (SAE) which gathers students
from universities all around the world.
The teams are challenged to design,
build and test a recreational off-road
vehicle that conforms to the limitations
established by the Baja SAE Rules 2012
(SAE International, 2011)
There are several regional
competitions of the Baja SAE Series;
CETYS Universidad has chosen to
participate this year in Baja SAE
International at Portland, Oregon, USA.
In the present document it is
outlined the design and development
process for creating the Z7 prototype.
For general specifications please refer
to Table 5 at the appendix, page 12.
INTRODUCTION
CETYS Universidad has built seven
prototypes for the series, being the Z7
the seventh member of the family.
Figure 1 shows the Z7 Solidworks
model.
A lifecycle for Z7 as a product
has been methodologically planned. It

Figure 1. Z7 SolidWorks Model

gives a clearer vision of how the project

is organized. As shown in Figure 12, at
the appendix, the lifecycle includes six
stages: project plan, product redesign,
manufacturing
process
design,
competition, maintenance, recycle and
disposal. The present design report
explain only two stages, the first one
which is the product redesign and the
third one the manufacturing process
design.
The design stage is based in the
dynamic analysis of the components,
strain-stress
results,
deformation
results, and fatigue, but also taking in
consideration an easy manufacturability
and low cost.

This report describes the process

undertaken by the CETYS Universidad
team in the design and manufacture of
the Z7. Thepurpose
of this
competition is to simulate a real world
engineering design in which collegiate
teams design and manufacture a
prototype of a rugged, single seat offroad recreational vehicle intended for
sale to the non-professional week-end
off-road enthusiast as stated in the Baja
SAE official rules.
The objective of the design is to
create a durable, safe and easy to
maintain vehicle that is able to deal with
rough terrain in any weather condition.
Because there is a separate
report which deals with costs of parts
and manufacturing details, this report
will only consider costs when it becomes
a crucial factor in a design decision.

order to allow the new rear 3 link

suspension, the new powertrain and
drivetrain relocation, plus the new rack
& pinion positioning in order to reduce
the turning radius.
Looking to improve the frame
resistance while maintaining the weight
minimum as possible with our design,
we took this fellow materials and sizes
as shown in Table 1.
Material

1018
Steel

4130
Steel

4130
Steel

Outside
Diameter

2.540 cm

2.540 cm

3.175 cm

Wall
Thickness 0.304 cm

0.304 cm

0.165 cm

2791.1
Nm2

2791.1
Nm2

3635.1
Nm2

391.3 Nm

467.4 Nm

487 Nm

1.686 kg

1.686 kg

1.229 kg

Bending
Stiffness

FRAME DESIGN

Bending
Strength

OBJECTIVE

Weight
per meter

The chassis is the component in charge

of supporting all other vehicles
subsystems with the plus of taking care
of the driver safety at all time. The
chassis design need to be prepared for
impacts created in any certain crash or
rollover. It must be strong and durable
taking always in account the weight
distribution for a better performance.
DESIGN
This year, the chassis design presents a
revised model from the one used last
year in Peoria, Illinois 2011.
The
chassis
contains
improvements from the last iteration. In

Table 1. 1018 vs. 4130 steel (CES

Edupack)

The previous
table shows
different Bending Strengths comparing
the 1018 vs. the 4130 steel. By selecting
the 4130 steel with a larger diameter
and a smaller thickness, the inertia
moment of the tubes are improved with
the plus of a 27% weight reduction per
foot. In order to further reduce the
weight of the frame, we decided to use a
smaller diameter tubes with 1.651mm
(0.065in) wall thickness in non-critical
parts of theframe,
and using the

3.175cm (1.25in) OD tube only in the

main cage members.
Taking in account the new
selection of materials we achieved a
weight reduction in the frame from
61.235kg (135 lbs.) to 40.37kg (89 lbs.)
making a 34% reduction.
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS (FEA)
In order to prove the safety of our
chassis design we decided to use
GeoSTAR, due to its low memory
requirements.
After the static analysis, as
shown in Figure 2, we found out which
members of the frame were the ones
that suffered themost
stress and
decided to make some modifications as
shown in Figure 3.

(1in) diameter tube to 3.175cm (1.25in)

diameter tube. Also, reinforcements
were added under the drivers seat.

Figure 3. Second static analysis, with

revised frame design for optimum stress
distribution.

Further analysis proved an

impact factor of 9.5, which means that
the stress during impact would have to
reach more than nine times the normal
working condition to cause plastic
deformation or break. This could be
translated to an impact to the ground
from a height of 355.6cm (140in). Figure
4 shows the FEA reaching the materials
yield point.

Figure 2. Static analysis of the previous

design iteration.

The second analysis was made

after applying the modifications to the
lower frame. The stress graph shows a
decrement in the overall stress suffered
to an acceptable level.
To
achieve
this
proper
distribution the lower rear members of
the frame were changed from 2.54cm

Figure 4. FEA provides an impact factor of 9.5, an

improve of 35% from the previous design
iteration.

MANUFACTURING PROCEDURES
Every element of the frame was
machined at the ends to fit perfectly in
its position using a mill at the university
workshop. The whole frame was welded
with MIG using mild steel filling material.
In this process, the use of Chromalloy
becomes even a better choice because
of its weldability which allows the
material to maintain its mechanical
properties after being welded. For
chassis model please refer to Figure 13
at the appendix, page 13.

arms have a wall thickness of 1.651mm

(0.065in) and rear trailing arms have a
thickness of 2.108mm (0.083in), as
shown in Figure 5.

SUSPENSION
Figure 5. Rear suspension.

OBJECTIVE
The suspension is responsible for
dissipating the energy obtained from the
impacts absorbed by the shocks. These
impacts are caused by the uneven
terrain. It is also responsible for
maintaining the vehicles stability and
ride height when managing obstacles.
Another point is to reduce vibration for
the vehicles durability and drivers
comfort.
DESIGN
The rear suspension was a major
improvement in design over the
previous car. A three link suspension
was opted in order to work in
conjunction with the new drive train, as
shown in Figure 5.
This configuration gives us better
bump absorption due to its long trailing
arm, 63.5cm (25in). Both, front and
rear, arms are made out of 2.54cm (1in)
OD tube 4130 Chromalloy steel. Front

The front suspension works with

a double A-arm system. Both upper and
lower arms have identical length so the
wheels vertical plane is maintained at all
times during shock travel. Front
suspension is equipped with two FOX
2.0 Air shocks with 11.43cm (4.5in) of
travel. This setup gives us 26.67cm
(10.5in) of total wheel travel, giving the
car great ability to manage rocks,
bumps and other obstacles while
maintaining good traction.
ANALYSIS
The vehicles weight distribution is 33%
in the front and 66% in the rear;
therefore the rear shocks must be
stronger than the front shocks. The use
of the FOX 2.0 Air shocks allow the
team to easily adjust the spring rate of
the shocks at any time by adding or
extracting nitrogen. The spring rate of
the shocks is equivalent to 19.733kg/m
(1.105 lb/in) per 6.895kPa (1psi) of

nitrogen.
The working pressures of
the shocks in normal condition are
1.296MPa (188psi) in each shock in the
front and 1.551Mpa (225psi) in each
shock in the rear.
Figure 6 shows the analysis
made with Solidworks Simulation to
prove the resistance the A-arms
considering a 4.448kN (1000 lbf).

The rack is connected to 2 tie

rods working in front of the shocks for
reduced weight. The rack travels
8.89cm (3.5in) from lock to look to make
the wheel turn.
The front wheels configuration
has a 3.5 camber angle and an 11.5
caster angle. The caster tends to drive
the wheels forward, which makes it
easier to maintain the car in a straight
direction, also the inclination of the
knuckle helps to reduce the turning
radius to 198.12cm (78in), as shown in
Figure 7.

198.12cm
Figure 6. Front suspension analysis in
SolidworksSimulation.

STEERING
OBJETIVE
The steering subsystem is responsible
for the control of the vehicle. In the
design process of this process of this
subsystem the goal is to achieve a small
turning radius and steering stability. The
speed of response and the drivers input
are also prime factors for the design of
the steering system.
DESIGN
The steering system works with a VW
off-road rack and pinion. The rack
travels one and a half turns from lock to
lock which allows good control of the
vehicle and good responding speed.

Figure 7. Turning radius calculation.

DRIVETRAIN
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the drivetrain is
providing to the driver more than the
enough torque to the wheels from the
engine to the wheels. The calculations
were made in order to select the proper
components that satisfy a top speed of
13.411m/s (30mph) to 15.646m/s
(35mph) and to provide the car the
enough strength to climb a 60 incline.
DESIGN
The main component of the drivetrain is
the Briggs & Stratton engine which gives

19.66Nm (14.5 lb-ft) of torque at 3800

rpm and 10 hp at 3800 rpm, as shown in
Figure 8.

Component

Hi Ratio

Low Ratio

CV-Tech Pulley
DANA Transaxle

0.65

3.6

Total Reduction

7.5:1

11.47
41.3:1

Table 2. Drivetrain system.

(CV-Tech &DANA)

ANALYSIS
For the evaluation of the torque required
to obtain the enough strength to climb
the 60 incline we made a simple study
case, as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 8. Power and Torque Curve.

(Briggs & Stratton)

The system is composed by a

CV-Tech CVT Pulley System with a
PWB50 drive pulley and a TAS-99
driven pulley, which gives us a ratio of
0.65:1 at the hi ratio position and 3.6:1
at the low ratio position.
After the driven pulley we use an
H-12 FNR Independent Suspension
Transaxle
from
DANA.
This
component includes the transmission,
which allows the vehicle to reverse. This
component also includes the differential,
with a total reduction of 11.47:1.
The use of the transaxle gives to
the system a lot of reliability, strength
and a high factor of safety. Table 2
shows the total reduction at the hi and
low ratio.

Figure 9. 60 Climbing case. (Reference #9)

Also we evaluate the Gravity

Center of the car, as shown in Figure
10, in order to reach the closes value to
60 between the GC of the car and the
rear axle to obtain stability.

Figure 10, Gravity Center. (GC)

RIMS AND TIRES

BREAK SYSTEM

OBJECTIVE
The function of the rims and tires of the
vehicle is first, to convert the torque
given by the drivetrain into a push force
to accelerate the car. Also the wheels
work as a plus to help the suspension in
reducing vibration. Last but not least,
the correct selection of tires helps to
keep traction in different types of terrain
to keep the vehicle moving at any time.

OBJECTIVE
The breaking system of the Z7 is
designed to lock all four wheels quickly
to provide safe breaking.

DESIGN
The Z7 prototype is designed to work
with two 58.42cm (23in) diameter tires
and two 63.5cm (25in) diameter tires.
This allows the vehicle to reach a higher
top speed by sacrificing some push
force. The tires selected are the ITP
Holeshot ATR AT and ITP Holeshot
XCT AT, as shown in Table 3,
because they have the lowest weight in
their class and they are reliable. Also
the thread pattern of the wheel gives
maximum traction on mud and loose
terrain, the types of terrain you would
encounter in an off-road race.
The wheels selected are made of
aircraft grade aluminum alloy, which
gives enough strength to endure rough
terrain while reducing the weight
considerably.
Component
Douglas 0.190
Aluminum Wheels
Douglas 0.190
Aluminum Wheels
ITP Holeshot ATR
AT Tires
ITP Holeshot XCT
AT Tires

Size

Weight

12x8

2.495kg

10x5

1.588kg

25x10R12

9.979kg

23x8R10

7.167kg

Table 3. Tires and Rims Selection.

DESIGN
For the breaking system we used two
independent hydraulic system, both
working with a VW 19mm master
cylinder and a single pedal.
The master cylinders make a
cross connection, each controlling a
front wheel and the opposite rear wheel
as shown in Figure 11. By working in
this way can ensure that in event of
failure of one cylinder the car will not
tend to turn out of the road. All four
wheels have a Honda caliper with
rotors to provide breaking force.
The pedal has length of 38.1cm
(15in) from foot position to bias bar
contact, which makes it easier to
provide enough breaking force.

Figure 11. Braking system.

ELECTRIC SYSTEM
The electric system contains the
breaking lights; reverse light, reverse
alarm, and emergency stop kill switches.

There are two kill switches in the

vehicle one over the wheel reach of the
driver, and the second one outside of
the car at the top right side of the rear
body panels. This second location is
easily accessible to team members and
competition
judges in
case
of
emergency.
The kill switches work by closing
the circuit and killing energy to the
engine
causing
immediate
stop.
However, pressing the kill switches does
not kill the lights. For the electric system
diagram please refer to Figure 14 at the
appendix, page 14.
SEAT AND RESTRAINTS
OBJECTIVE
The objective of the seat is to provide
comfort and safety to the driver, while
the restraints have to keep the driver
inside the cockpit and on his seat at all
times.
SEAT AND RESTRAINTS SELECTION
The seat is selected in order to provide
the pilot the necessary comfort during
the whole race and the minimum weight
possible.
The seat is slotted for a five-point
harness restraint. We chose the
CROW latch-and-link-point harness
because of the previous experience we
have with it. CROW provides good
quality and reliability at a fair cost and
that is why it has been considered as
our first choice in safety for now.

GUARDS
OBJECTIVE
The main objective of the guards and
body panels is to keep the drivers safe
debris and mechanical system, among
other things.
MATERIAL SELECTION
All of the body panels, as well as the
firewall and roll cage guards are made
of aluminum sheet. We use a 0.508mm
(0.020in) thick sheet to reduce weight
while maintaining resilience in the
panels.
The skid plate is made out of
textured aluminum sheet with a
thickness of 1.651mm (0.065in) to
provide good support for the driver and
to ensure good grip at all times.
All of the moving parts in the
drivetrain are covered with regular 1010
steel expanded metal 1.27cm (1/2in)
#16 3.988mm(0.157in) thickness case,
which provides excellent protection in
case of drivetrain failure.
Table 4 is a comparative of
different materials selected as options
for the drivetrain guards, based on
weight and energy absorption at rupture
as shown in Figure 15.

Table 4. Material Comparison

(CES Edupack )

CONCLUSION
The process of designing a vehicle is
not a simple task; as a matter of fact it
takes a lot of effort from all members of
the team to achieve a successful
design.
The final prototype was the
product
of
a
collaborative
multidisciplinary team design. The goal
of the project was to create an off-road
recreational vehicle that met o exceed
the SAE regulations for safety, durability
and maintenance, as well as to achieve
a vehicle performance, aesthetics and
comfort that would have mass market
appeal for the off-road enthusiast. All of
the design decisions were made
keeping these goals in mind.
The selection of components
were
made
using
engineering
knowledge achieved through with offroad enthusiast
and engineering
advisors, taking as parameters first of
all,
safety,
performance,
weight,
reliability and last of all cost. To see an
overall technical description of the Z7
see Table 5.
Computational design became
the most important part of the process;
by using CAD software we were able to
print our ideas before constructing any
prototype, plus the CAE packages and
FEA allowed the team to recreate actual
working conditions of some of the
subsystems to ensure their durability,
finally the CAM allowed is to fabricate
some components at the CNC mill in the
CETYS machine shop.

Being part of a project of this

nature is an experience that can be
hardly matched to any other extracurricular project, as it allows the
engineering student to exploit all of
his/her knowledge while gaining even
more, not only in the engineering
discipline,
but
also
in
project
management, team work, accounting
and even marketing sales. The
multidisciplinary gain of this project is
what makes it successful and surely an
experience to remember for the rest of
your life.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Proyecto Zorro would like thank the
engineering department of CETYS
Universidad first of all for their support in
development of the Z7 project. We
extend our thanks and appreciation to
our sponsors, especially to Honeywell
MRTC, Ramsey Products Corporation,
and Mexicana Logistics, for their special
contribution as the project could not
have been completed without their
contribution.
We also thank the rest of our
sponsors,
ASCOTech
Mexicali,
Kenworth Mexicana, Energy & Lighting,
Persal Manufacturing Solutions, FMM
and Urbi, for taking part in this
challenge.
Last but not least we would like to
thank SAE, Briggs & Stratton and all of
the people that make these competitions
possible for the opportunity they give to
engineering students around the globe.

REFERENCES
1. SAE International (2011) Baja
SAE Rules. 2012 Collegiate
Design Series.
2. SAE International (2009) Baja
SAE Rules. 2010 Collegiate
Design Series.
3. Briggs&Stratton. 1450 SeriesTM
Engine.
From:www.briggsandstratton.com
4. Shigley, J.; Mischke C. ;
Budynas, R. (2003) Mechanical
Engineering Design. Seventh
edition. McGraw Hill.
5. Spotts, M.F.; Shoup, T.E. (2004)
Design of Machine elements.
Seventh edition. Prentice Hall.
6. Dixon, J. (1999) The shock
absorber handbook. Second
edition.
SAE
publicationsProduct
lifecycle
management. McGraw Hill.
7. Birch, T. (1999) Automotive
Suspension
&
steering
systems. Third edition. Delmar
Editorial.
(1992)
8. Gillespie,
T.
Fundamentals
of
vehicle
dynamics. SAE International

CONTACT
Alejandro Burgas
Mechanical Engineering Student
(a_burgas@hotmail.com)
Andres Magaa
Mechanical Engineering Student
(andre.magana@gmail.com)
Gustavo Ovies
Mechanical Engineering Student
(gustavo_oz@hotmail.com)
ADITIONAL SOURCES
Matlab Simulink Solid
Works
SolidworksSimulation
Geo Star
CES Edupack
DEFINITIONS, ACRONYMS AND
ABBREVIATIONS

Camber: is the angle of the

wheel relative to vertical, as
viewed from the front or the rear
of the car.

Caster: is the angle to which the

steering pivot axis is tilted
forward or rearward from vertical,
as viewed from the side.

Energy absorption at rupture:

is defined as the amount of
energy that material can absorb
before cracking or breaking. It is
also the area below the stressstrain curve. (See Figure 15)

10

SAE- Society of Automotive Engineers

CETYS- Centro de Enseanza Tcnica
Y Superior
MIG- Metal Inert Gas
CVT- Continuously Variable
Transmission
CAD- Computer Aided Design
CAE- Computer Aided Engineering
CAM- Computer Aided Manufacture
CNC- Computer Numerical Control

FEA- Finite Element Analysis

RHO- Roll Hoop Overhead Member
RRH- Rear Roll Hoop
LC- Lateral Cross Member
FBM- Front Bracing Member
LDB- Lateral Diagonal Bracing
LFS- Lower Frame Support
FLC- Front Lateral Cross Member
SIM- Side Impact Member

11

APPENDIX
ENGINE
Model
Displacement
Compression Ratio
Power
Torque
DRIVETRAIN
DANA Transaxle
CV Tech Pulleys
Total reduction
DIMENSIONS
Overall Length
Wheel Base
Overall Width
Ground Clearance
Weight
SUSPENSION
Front Suspension
Rear Suspension
Front Shocks
Rear Shocks
STEERING
VW off-road Rack & Pinion
Camber Angle
Caster Angle
WHEELS AND TIRES

Briggs & Stratton OHV Intek

305 cc
8:01
10HP
19.66Nm (14.5 ft-lbs)

Front Wheels
Rear Wheels
Front Tires
Rear Tires
BREAKS
Master Cylinder
Calipers
ELECTRIC
Kill Switches
Lights
Reverse Alarm
PERFORMANCE
Max speed
Turning radius

10 x 5 Douglas 0.190 Aluminum Wheels

12 x 8 Douglas 0.190 Aluminum Wheels
23 x 8 R10 ITP HOLESHOT XCT AT Tires
25 x 10 R12 ITP HOLESHOT ATR AT Tires

11.47:1 Ratio
3.6:1 to 0.65:1 Ratio
41.3:1 to 7.5:1
254cm (100in)
176.53cm (69.5in)
161.29cm (63.5in)
35.56cm (14in)
215.456kg (475 lb)
Double A-arm, 26.67cm (10.5in) travel
Three link, 17.78cm (7in) travel
FOX 2.0 Air Shocks, 11.43cm (4.5in) travel
FOX 2.0 Air Shocks,11.43cm ( 4.5in) travel
Rack 8.89cm (3.5in) travel
3.5
11.5

VW 19mm
Honda 2009 TRX450R w/rotors
Ski Doo kill switches
Breaking and reverse
Back up alarm 97db
15.646m/s (35 mph) @ 3800 rpm
198.12cm (78in)
Table 5. Z7 General Specs.

12

Figure 12. Project lifecycle (Grieves, 2006)

Primary members
3.175cm (1.25in) OD
Secondary members
2.54cm OD (1in) OD

Added after FEA

Rear bracing

Removed and replaced for the blue members

Figure 13. Z7 Chassis

13

Figure 14. Electric System Diagram

Figure15. Energy absorption at rupture, 1010 Steel. (SAE International, 2009)

14