International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology (IJMET)

Volume 9, Issue 5, May 2018, pp. 182–192, Article ID: IJMET_09_05_022

Available online at http://www.iaeme.com/ijmet/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=9&IType=5
ISSN Print: 0976-6340 and ISSN Online: 0976-6359

© IAEME Publication Scopus Indexed

DESIGN OF STEERING GEOMETRY FOR

FORMULA STUDENT CAR’S
J. Naveen
Assistant Professor, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
KL Educational Foundation (KLEF), Vijayawada, India

T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

UG Scholars, Department of Mechanical Engineering,
KL Educational Foundation (KLEF), Vijayawada, India

ABSTRACT:
This article presents the “Design of steering geometry for formula student cars”,
optimization and analysis of steering components. The main purpose of the project is
to ensure the steering input or response between the driver and the wheels should be
more effective and sensitive. Reducing the driver effort and increasing interaction
between the driver and the wheels. To get that sensitivity we have to consider the
factors like Ackerman set-up, steering effort, steering arm length, rack travel, turning
radius, steering ratio, slip angle, castor, toe angles, kin-pin angle and camber angle.
Here, Rack and Pinion is the intermediate between the driver and wheels. Soft-wares
used in designing and analysis of components are catiav5,Ansys 15,Lotus.
Keywords: Steering system, Ackermann angle, Turning radius, Toe rods, Camber.
Cite this Article: J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan
and K. Chandra Mouli, Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s,
International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and Technology, 9(5), 2018,
pp. 182–192.
http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/issues.asp?JType=IJMET&VType=9&IType=5

1. INTRODUCTION:
In this paper, the complete prototype of steering system and its assembly is done in catia v5.
To get that enhancement of steering response we majorly concentrated on Ackermann
principle which is a primary consideration of a vehicle, based on it the vehicle behavior
depends .We are designing the steering geometry for formula cars and it’s components with a
specified turning radius and wheel turning angles, the system could be optimized for a low
steering effort. This design overcomes the major issue of most of the formula student cars
during endurance events i.e drivers fatigue. While the lowest steering effort possible would be
ideal, a compromise would have to be determined since a low steering effort also gave a slow
steering response and therefore a large steering wheel angle at full lock. To allow for a fast

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 182 editor@iaeme.com

 J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

steering response with a reasonable steering wheel angle, the full lock position was set to 360
degrees from lock to lock position. This compromise allowed for the uprights to incorporate
the necessary moment arm to achieve the maximum wheel angle based upon the selected
steering rack.

2. DESIGN PARAMETERS AND CALCULATIONS:

2.1. Ackermann Geometry:
The formula student vehicles, the rate at which each wheel will turn with respect to each other
diagnoses to what degree the car will turn at both low and high lateral accelerations [2]. This
concept can be understood easiest in the low lateral acceleration of the vehicle, for which slip
angles and weight transfer is negligible, because in this state a pure Ackermann steering
configuration would be ideal, so that the inside wheel will turn with a smaller radius than the
outside wheel as seen in the figure[2] .

Figure 1 Ackermann instant center turning diagram

This geometry can be easily defined if the wheelbase, kingpin locations, and moment arm
lengths are known. As seen in the figure the arrangement of the geometry must be followed.
A straight line must be made at neutral steer to the center of the rear wheelbase from each of
the kingpins at the specified height. The toe rod pickup point location should be positioned on
that line at a point which is the distance of the moment arm length from the kingpin. This is
what is considered a 100% Ackermann geometry[2].

Figure 2 Ackerman Steering Instant center static diagram

From the research of Milliken and Milliken Book [2], the primary interrelation between
Ackermann steering geometry and approaching to different lateral accelerations is generated.
At low lateral accelerations, an Ackermann geometry system would be ideal, yet at higher

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 183 editor@iaeme.com

 Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s

accelerations which a race car would see, a parallel steer or even reverse Ackermann system
would be preferable [3].
INNER WHEEL ANGLE=Wheel base /(Turning radius –(Track width/2)) =39.27deg
OUTER WHEEL ANGLE=Wheel base/(Turning radius +(Track width/2))= 24.47deg
ACKERMANN PERCENTAGE = Ackermann angle/ Inner wheel angle = 81.15%
Apart of this information, there was no significantly perfect geometry since each system
has its own drawbacks.

2.2. Reasons to select Ackermann type steering system:

1. Reduce the weight of steering column or steering shaft because in Anti-Ackermann
system the positioning of rack will be frontal portion of wheel centerline which
directly increases the shaft length.
2. A parallel or reverse Ackermann system would be difficult to steer at low speeds, such
as during a low speed run or moving the vehicle through the pits [2].
3. Reverse Ackermann geometry is also difficult to achieve without longitudinal
translation of the steering rack since the pickup points for the steering arms are on the
outboard side of the kingpins. While this is possible to package at low steering angles,
at higher steering angles collision becomes a major issue between the tie rod, upright,
and wheel [2].
In order to properly validate and justify this , several cases taken into an account for
selection of perfect geometry[2] .So, that we finally went in optimal to reduce the weight of
the steering column and selected Ackermann type steering system.

3. JUSTIFICATION FOR BOTH WHEELS NOT TURNING AT SAME

ANGLES:
Both Ackermann and Anti Ackermann, the radius of inner and outer wheel is usually not
equal .This configuration gives only the required turning radius with given track width and
wheel base [9].
Firstly, the initial turning force is equal for both the wheels but then it varies depending
upon the inner and outer wheels. so in dynamics the force is not usually constant . Now
,considering at instant at which equal force is applied on both wheels ,one of them turns more
than the other because both the Ackermann and Anti-Ackermann usually employs
“Trapezoidal geometry”, due to this geometric shape the wheels do not tend to turn by equal
angles [9].

Figure 3 Path of motion for the center of the tire print

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 184 editor@iaeme.com

 J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

4. ACKERMANN PRINCIPLE APPLIED TO STEERING TO STEERING

GEOMETRY:
Basically the Ackermann principle states that, when the driver turned the wheels to full lock
position then the both wheels will not turn at same angles because the formation of
trapezoidal geometry[3]. We went through a process that based on the steering arm
displacement and c-factor, where we drawn the steering arm of both inside wheel and outside
wheel in different quadrants and displaced the same c-factor length. Because of change in
quadrants the c-factor maybe the same but the angular displacement is different [6].

Figure 4 shows the difference in angle of inner wheel and outer wheel on full lock

Figure 5 shows the wheel angle

5. TURNING RADIUS:
By changing the Ackermann settings of the car the overall turning radius of the car can be
adjusted. The turning radius of the vehicle was calculated based on the ideal Ackermann
position to maximum turning angles of the wheels [3]. Since the two front wheels turn at
different angles based on the Ackermann setting on the uprights the average steering angle
first needed to be determined for the Ackermann setting [3]. The average steering angle was
calculated using wheelbase, distance of CG from the rear axle and the required turning radius
.The car had a wheelbase of 1540mm and the distance from the CG location to the rear axle
was 616 mm. The required turning is 2.501 m which is reasonable for the expected hairpin
turns of the formula autocross racetrack.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 185 editor@iaeme.com

 Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s

Then the inner wheel and outer wheel steering angles are calculated from the average
steering angle and other parameters like rack travel, c factor [3],

From, the above calculations the steering angles of the Ackermann setup were 39.27
degrees for the inner tire of the turn and 24.47 degrees for the outer tire of the turn. These
values gave a turning radius of 2.501m which are justifiable for the expected vehicle to take
hairpin turns of the autocross track[3].

R=2.42 m
As seen above, The next step in the design process was to determine the method for
transmitting the steering force and how the system would be packaged [3]. However this is
calculated and then the system could be optimized to allow for the minimum steering force
over a given steering angle.

6. GEOMETRIC CONSTRAINS FOR POSITIONING OF RACK AND

MOMENT ARM LOCATION INTO A KNUCKLE:
In our vehicle, a wheel using a customized upright design with a rack and pinion with
housing, the wheel assembly can be steered by attaching the steering rack to the upright, we
differentiated the whole knuckle into one four quadrants. Thus, for a formula student vehicle
the centre of gravity is low which is a driving factor in this system design[6]. So the upper
quadrants of the upright were not considered since the moment arms, toe links, and steering
rack would have to be located at an elevated position, therefore raising the center of gravity.
If, front lower quadrant was used, that would change the geometry into Anti-Ackermann
system and the steering shaft also have to be longer which would increase the overall system
weight. The rear lower quadrant would allow for a more compact, lightweight packaging, So
that rear lower quadrant of the knuckle can make the toe links light in weight and compact in
design doesn’t hold much space as other three quadrants and thus aligned with the overall
vehicle design [4]. Initially, we selected for middle part of the upright for better compliance
with suspension system like bump steer and Ackermann angle setup

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 186 editor@iaeme.com

 J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

Figure 6 shows steering assembly

7. MOMENT ARM IN UPRIGHTS (STEERING):

The moment arm could be added to finalize the assembly of whole upright to designs. As
mentioned in the Steering Rack and Rack Mount and toe links assembly, the moment arm of
the steering rack was fully defined at a parallel steer position to create the initial geometry.
The moment arm defined, the height was chosen to be based upon the rack height to minimize
steering effort and bump steer throughout suspension travel [8]. To connect the toe links to
upright, we used rod ends such that the ends should always be used in double shear, so two
parallel moment arms were used to transmit the steering forces on the upright. The moment
arm should be inclined and imaginary line drawn from the moment arm to the rear wheels
should meet at the centre on the rear axle. For that we considered Ackerman principle [8]. Tan
α/2=(Track width/2)/Wheel base=20.14 degrees.
So, the angle of the moment arm in upright is designed to meet the requirements of
Ackermann setup in the car.

7.1. DATA FOR STEERING RESPONSE IN LOTUS STIMULATION

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 187 editor@iaeme.com

 Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s

8. STEERING RATIO
The amount of input from the driver to which the output of wheel turned is called as “Steering
Ratio”. The Steering ratio is dependent on many factors like diameter of the Pinion, Rack
travel, Steering wheel diameter, Moment arm length. So, to attain this ratio ,we considered
C FACTOR = Rack travel / one rotation of pinion=100mm

Figure 7 shows average steering angle

In this figure, We considered the average steering angle and assumed a preferable
Moment arm length. So we found that the average rack travel for 360 of rotation.
STEERING RATIO =Arc Sin(C factor/Arm length)=(90*4*360/360)=4.25:1

9. TOE ROD DESIGN:

Background and Design
To translate the given force from the steering rack system to the knuckle, a link must be
attached between the two components, which in this case is referred to as a toe rod. Since
there is translation, and rotation in two axis, toe rod ends must be used to prevent binding of
the system. The design intent behind these components is to have a strong and stiff
component which is lightweight and limits play in the system. The toe rod must be adjustable
to accurately change the degree of toe in or out[8]. A right and left hand threaded nut welded
to each end with right and left hand thread toe rod ends were selected for the basis of the
design. A thin walled tube was chosen for the member since it allows a lightweight design
while maintaining a moderate section to improve stiffness [10].

Figure 8 shows equivalent stress analysis in tie rods

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 188 editor@iaeme.com

 J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

Figure 9 shows total deformation stress analysis in tie rods

10. RACK MOUNTING PLATE

Rack mount is a metallic plate on which the rack and pinion has to be fixed. It should be
capable of bearing the stresses which will act on it due to loads from rack and pinion. It is
fixed to the frame of the car. Hollow gaps were place in the rack mount for weight reduction
[10].

Figure 10 shows total deformation in backing plate

Figure 11 shows Equivalent stress in backing plate

11. STEERING WHEEL DESIGN AND TORQUE CALCULATIONS:

The steering wheel used in the car is in near oval shape. Thus rotating the steering wheel will
be easy to rotate and improves the feel for the driver. The steering wheel was redesigned in
order to reduce weight and provide better legroom and visibility [4]. The torque required to
rotate the steering wheel by the driver is called Steering Wheel Torque (WT).

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 189 editor@iaeme.com

 Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s

The calculations for steering wheel toque as follows,

W=Front axle weight=116kg

U=Coefficient of friction=0.7
E=kingpin offset=30mm
B=Width of tire=6.89 inch
T=54.6100 N-M
Steering wheel torque=kingpin torque/gear ratio
Then the output torque is divide by steering ratio which is 4.25 degree.
Final steering wheel torque=14.191N-M,FORCE applied on steering wheel is 55.87N.
The values of Steering Effort, Gear ratio, Steering Ratio for different predefined Pinion
sized are shown below, the table shows that the change in pinion size is directly proportional
to the steering effort applied by the driver and the steering ratio. And similarly pinion size is
inversely proportional to total steering lock to lock angle [4].

12. STEERING WHEEL DESIGN AND ANALYSIS:

The steering wheel is the interface between driver and car wheels.

Figure 12 shows model of Steering wheel

Material- Aluminium alloy Dimensions- 215mm x 165mm

Figure 13 shows total deformation analysis of steering wheel

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 190 editor@iaeme.com

 J. Naveen, T. Deepak Varma, D. Sudhakar Reddy, N. Guru Vardhan and K. Chandra Mouli

Figure 14 shows equivalent stress analysis of steering wheel

13. WHEEL ASSEMBLY SPECIFICATIONS:

S.NO PARAMETERS UNITS Front Rear
1 CASTOR Degree 0 0
2 TOE IN Mm 3-5 0
3 TOE OUT Mm 0 0
4 SCRUB RADIUS Mm 30 0
STEERINGAXIS
5 Degree 9 0
INCLINATION

14. SPECIFICATIONS OF RACK AND ACKERMANN ANGLE:

S.NO PARAMETERS UNITS RESULT
1 C FACTOR Mm 100
2 RACK WEIGHT Kg 1.0
ROTATIONFROM LOCK TO
3 Degree 360
LOCK
4 RACK TRAVEL mm 100
5 TIE ROD LENGTHS mm 405.5
6 TURNING RADIUS(R1) M 2.501
7 TURNING RADIUS(R) M 2.42
ACKERRMANN
8 % 81.24
PERCENTAGE
Inner Outer
angle angle
9 ACKERRMANN ANGLE Degree
39.27 24.67

10 ARM LENGTH Mm 100

11 COLUMN LENGTH Mm 200

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 191 editor@iaeme.com

 Design of Steering Geometry for Formula Student Car’s

15. CONCLUSION:
The designing process for static conditions is completed. The numerical solution is
approximate to the simulated solution hence our design procedure is correct for such kind of
vehicle design. This paper includes static and dynamic parameters according to the formula
student race. The work successfully achieved the objective. Result shows that designing of car
and its components using Catiav5 has very good extent for enhancement of vehicle geometry,
behavior and performance of the vehicle. The overall analysis satisfies the constraints and of
Formula SAE International rulebook, so the vehicle modeling under the dynamic analysis is
considerable.

ACKNOWLEDGMENT:
The design process is a team effort. All the team members worked in compliance with one
another as per the norms of a team play. We would like to show our gratitude towards our
faculty advisor. We would also like to express our gratitude towards the Mechanical
department and on the whole towards the college for the support.

REFERENCES:
[1] Auto-mobile engineering by Kirpal singh.
[2] Milliken and Milliken, Race Car Vehicle Dynamics, SAE Inc.
[3] Smith, C, Tune to Win: The Art and Science of Race Car Development and Tuning, Aero
Publishers, Inc. 329 West Aviation Road, Fallbrook, CA 29028, 1978.
[4] Prashant L Agrawal, Sahil Shaileshbhai Patel, Shivanshu Rajeshbhai Parmar Design and
Simulation of Manual Rack and Pinion Steering System IJSART - Volume 2 Issue 7 –
JULY 2016 ISSN [ONLINE]: 2395-1052.
[5] R.S. Khurmi, J.K. Gupta Theory of Machines, S. Chand & Company Pvt. Ltd., Vol 1,
14th Edition, 2014.
[6] P. Bridjesh, Subramanyam B and Madhu S, Design and Analysis of Steering Components
for a Race Car, IJSART- Volume 8, Issue 6, June 2017, pp. 125–129, Article ID:
IJMET_08_06_013.
[7] Subramanyam B, P. Bridjesh and Madhu S Manufacturing of Steering Components for a
Race Cars IJSART- Volume 8, Issue 6, June 2017, pp. 207–211, Article ID:
IJMET_08_06_022.
[8] Thomas D. Gillespie, Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics, SAE Inc.
[9] R.S.Khurmi,J.K. Gupta Theory of Machines, S. Chand & Company Pvt. Ltd., Vol 1, 14th
Edition, 2014
[10] V. B. Bhandari Design of Machine Elements McGraw Hill Education India Pvt. Ltd., vol.
3, 11th Edition, 20.
[11] Aman Doraya, Mohit Singh Panesir, Bhavya Bhardwaj and Aditya Bochare. 4-Wheel
Steering System Mechanism Using DPDT Switch. International Journal of Mechanical
Engineering and Technology, 6(11), 2015, pp. 176-182.
[12] Dhiraj Malu, Nikhil Katare, Suraj Runwal, Saurabh Ladhe, Design Methodology for
Steering System of an ATV. International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and
Technology, 7(5), 2016, pp. 272–277.

http://www.iaeme.com/IJMET/index.asp 192 editor@iaeme.com