118

CHAPTER 7

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

The characteristics based on Road conditions have been studied in

this chapter. The variable road profiles determine the damping coefficient of
the damper. The performance characteristics for normal and semi active
suspension system is studied based on geographical positioning of vehicle
travel, dynamic characteristics and simulation characteristics. These three
characteristics determine the efficient damping of the magneto rheological
damper over the passive dampers. considering force, it is 20% better than
normal suspension system.

7.1 GEOGRAPHICAL POSITIONING CHARACTERISTICS

A GPS tracking unit is a device, normally carried by a moving

vehicle or person, that uses the Global Positioning System to determine and
track its precise location, and hence that of its carrier, at intervals. The
recorded location data can be stored within the tracking unit, or it may be
transmitted to the connected computer, using modem embedded in the unit.
This allows the asset's location to be displayed against a map backdrop either
in real time or when analyzing the track later, using GPS tracking
software. The geographical positioning characteristics determine the
movement of the vehicle with respect to its velocity of travel. The
acceleration, displacement and force could be correlated with the distance
moved with the help of the gps system. The unpredicted motion of the vehicle
for the various road profiles on real time tests are shown in following Figure.
 119

Figure 7.1 Motion of vehicle in continuous speed breaker

(Average % of difference: Force – 20 % , Acceleration – 19 % and Displacement – 40 %)

Figure 7.2 Motion of vehicle in Plane road

(Average % of difference: Force – 20 % , Acceleration – 25 % and Displacement – 40 %)
 120

Figure 7.3 Motion of vehicle in Sand road

(Average % of difference: Force – 20 % , Acceleration – 34 % and Displacement – 40 %)

Figure 7.4 Motion of vehicle in Semi bump road

(Average % of difference: Force – 10 % , Acceleration – nil and Displacement – 30 %)
 121

Figure 7.5 Motion of vehicle in Tile road

(Average % of difference: Force – 15 % , Acceleration – 20 % and Displacement – 23 %)
7.2 SIGNAL FILTRATION CHARACTERISTICS

The signal filtration characteristics determine the efficient de

noising of the raw data signals that contains three variant of noises caused by
external disturbances, which resonates the signal space. DWT is applied to
deal with the sensors signal and the waveform are shown in Figures 7.6,7.7
and 7.8 Among the most widely used approaches for noise suppression of
mechanical systems is the wavelet-based techniques. Thus this method is
utilized to implement comparison with noisy raw data signals. In order to
suppress noise, it is common to deal with the wavelet coefficients using
thresholding techniques, among which the hard thresholding method and soft
thresholding method are two most frequently used algorithms. From the
perspective of waveform, some cases enhanced with presence of higher value
are shown in Figures 7.6, 7.7 and 7.8. It is clearly noted that in Figures, the
number of extremes is in raw signals, which can contain original information
 122

of the suspension dynamic characteristics. All the techniques can obtain the
vehicle dynamic characteristic of the sensor components.

Besides, the spectrum by DWT exhibits another two appealing

signatures: (i) the characteristic frequency and its second harmonic generation
possess sideband. In addition, the difference between sideband and its
corresponding center frequency is 14.5 Hz, which is equal to the sensor
frequency. (ii) Sensing frequency 14.5 Hz and its second harmonic generation
48 Hz are obvious. The difference between FFT and wavelet analysis is
significant, which may lead to incorrect diagnosis by FFT analysis. Wavelet
achieves superior performance in de noising capabilities because it has good
noise suppression capability and hence outperforms wavelet analysis.

Figure 7.6 Signal filtration for Acceleration using Discrete wavelet

transform
 123

Figure 7.7 Signal filtration of forceusing Discrete wavelet transform

Figure 7.8 Signal filtration of displacement using Discrete wavelet

transform
 124

7.3 DYNAMIC CHARACTERISTICS

The dynamic characteristics of the proposed adaptive controller

based semi active suspension system over normal passive suspension system
was studied. The results prove the enhancement of magneto rheological
damper over the existing passive system in terms of the suppression of
vibrational amplitude and force obtained due to the dynamical approach of the
vehicle travel. The signals for the passive and proposed semi active damper
has been compared for various roads conditions with their vibration, force,
displacement and velocity of travel have been studied with respect to the time.

Among various testing conditions, initially the vehicle is allowed to

travel in a continuous speed breaker hence the acceleration, force,
displacement and velocity has been obtained. The results produced suggests
that the force in value is drastically reduced in magnetorheological damper
than in passive damping system. This is shown in Figure 7.9 as the flow of
current to the electromagnetic coil in sustaining the damping coefficient is in
the form of sinusoidal wave. This helps the study as a backbone to support the
force obtained in the form of sinusoidal wave in the magneto rheological
damper. The study observation claims the smoothness in damping with the
proposed semi active suspension system. As in the case of displacement
obtained the magnetorheological damper just smoothens out compression and
retraction of the suspension in achieving a cushioning effect. The working
temperature of the MR fluid suspension will be in around 50 C and it‘s very

normal in running conditions

The displacement value doesn‘t find a major difference when

compared to the passive one. This is shown in figure, the accelerometer
reading proves the internal vibrations that are caused over the sub structure of
the vehicle, which is also suppressed by the suspension system. The readings
 125

prove the efficient suppression of vibration caused by the vehicle system with
the use of magneto rheological damper in comparison with the passive
system. As concerned with the road profiles, the MR fluid damper is not that
much efficient in suppressing the jounce caused through the continuous speed
breaker. As more precisely sensing feed back circuit have to be promoted in
suppressing the vibrations caused with these cases.

7.3.1 Continuous Speed Breaker

Figure 7.9 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.10 Displacements Vs Time

 126

Figure 7.11 Acceleration Vs Time

7.3.2 Plane road conditions

Figure 7.12 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.13 Displacement Vs Time

 127

Figure 7.14 Acceleration Vs Time

7.3.3 Sand Road

Figure 7.15 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.16 Displacement Vs Time

 128

Figure 7.17 Acceleration Vs Time

7.4 SIMULATION CHARACTERISTICS

The simulation data from MSC ADAMS software validates the

analytical form with the experimental data. Results Figures mentioning
below summarizes the transient response of the variables for each test. Human
and ride comfort performance show discrepancies in resonance frequencies
when different MR damper models are used. Road holding (lateral
acceleration ;) does not present significant differences, but handling (yaw rate
;) shows a significative deviation at the end of a fishhook maneuver. Roll is
the most sensitive performance to the MR damper model since the magnitude
of roll is bigger with the two-zone MR damper model, as well as in
suspension performance), where performance is degraded.

The performance in the DLC test is different since it exhibits a

different estimated frequency in rear suspension deflection. The BSST, DLC
and FSH tests exhibit differences in the rear corner, but the DLC test shows
the highest difference the main difference occurs in handling, roll and
suspension performance. The vehicle performance indices related to comfort,
roll and suspension are the most sensitive to the MR damper models. The
main difference between the models is the representation of passive behavior,
where friction and valve system cut-off forces are well represented in the full-
 129

modified SP model as parameter damping coefficient and hyperbolic tangent

function, respectively. This difference does not affect precision comparing
MR damper models. However, these phenomena, friction and valve system
cut-off forces, can be of importance when the MR damper model is part of a
semi-active suspension. Some findings show the influence of lack of precision
in MR damper simulation low velocities. The accurate simulation of low
magnitude forces leads to an accurate assessment of the control system.

The discrepancies in road holding (0%) and handling (+8%)

performance when using a fishhook test are not important when using
different MR damper model. In steering, the performances of the two
suspensions are quite similar. The difference is at the end of the FSH test,
where the yaw rate varies. The cause is the low amplitude of vertical
velocities (very small frequencies) in vehicle corners. Since the adaptive relay
feedback controller uses hard damping according to controller design, the
difference in damping force at low velocities is caused by the lack of friction.
Summarizing, simulations of maneuvers that present very small velocities in
suspension deflection need MR damper models with friction and valve system
parameters. The roll performance shows the highest degradation of all the
performance (+33%). The roll is more sensitive to damping estimation errors.
The reference semi-active suspension, the suspension with the full-modified
SP model, generates more damping force in each vehicle corner with the same
manipulation as the other one. The performance of simulation characteristics
for the acceleration, force, displacement parameters with the use of passive
and MR fluid damper are shown in result figures. It is found that the datas
achieved through simulation tests is correlated with the experimental tests.
 130

7.4.1 Continuous Speed Breaker

Figure 7.18 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.19 Displacement Vs Time

 131

Figure 7.20 Acceleration Vs Time

7.4.2 Plane Road

Figure 7.21 Force Vs Time

 132

Figure 7.22 Displacement Vs Time

Figure 7.23 Acceleration Vs Time

 133

7.4.3 Sand Road

Figure 7.24 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.25 Displacement Vs Time

 134

Figure 7.26 Acceleration Vs Time

7.4.4 Semi Bump Road

Figure 7.27 Force Vs Time

 135

Figure 7.28 Displacement Vs Time

Figure 7.29 Acceleration Vs Time

 136

7.4.5 Tile Road

Figure 7.30 Force Vs Time

Figure 7.31 Displacement Vs Time

 137

Figure 7.32 Acceleration Vs Time