University of Bath

PHD

Lateral stability of passenger car-caravan combinations

Fratila, Dan

Award date:
1994

Awarding institution:
University of Bath

Link to publication

Alternative formats
If you require this document in an alternative format, please contact:
openaccess@bath.ac.uk

Copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Access is subject to the above licence, if given. If no licence is specified above,
original content in this thesis is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0
International (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0) Licence (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/). Any third-party copyright
material present remains the property of its respective owner(s) and is licensed under its existing terms.

Take down policy

If you consider content within Bath's Research Portal to be in breach of UK law, please contact: openaccess@bath.ac.uk with the details.
Your claim will be investigated and, where appropriate, the item will be removed from public view as soon as possible.

Download date: 25. Jan. 2024

 LATERAL STABILITY OF PASSENGER
CAR/CARAVAN COMBINATIONS

submitted by Dan Fratila

for the degree of PhD
of the University of Bath
1994

COPYRIGHT

Attention is drawn to the fact that the copyright of this thesis rests with its author.
This copy of the thesis has been supplied on condition that anyone who consults it is
understood to recognize that its copyright rests with the author and that no quotation
from the thesis and no infonnation derived from it may be published without the prior
written consent of the author.

This thesis may be made available for consultation within the University Library and
may be photocopied or lent to other libraries for the purposes of consultation.

1
 SUMMARY

This study investigates the lateral stability of passenger car/caravan combination

systems. Although a great deal of work has been carried out on articulated commercial
vehicles, coupled car and caravans have not been investigated to the same extent. The
most sophisticated models presented in the technical literature disregard important
degrees of freedom and often use simplified descriptions of tyre and suspension
characteristics.
The study was intended to be as general as possible, the aim being to identify the
major parameters affecting the handling and stability of the car/caravan combination
systems and to improve engineer's understanding of towed vehicle dynamics. Central
to the work is a car/caravan nonlinear mathematical handling dynamics simulation
model which has been developed and validated as part of the present work. The
equation of motions for a twenty four degree of freedom car and caravan model were
developed using Lagrange's equations and combined with measured secondary
suspension characteristic data. The roll centre concept was used to describe the
constraints between sprung and unsprung masses. The linkage between the car and
caravan was through a stiff compliant link. The separate coordinate systems employed
to describe car and caravan position were linked kinematically through the tow-ball
point. The model was implemented within a sophisticated simulation system
environment, making it an efficient and powerful tool. Caravan dimensional and
secondary suspension parameters were measured and used together with data from
a fully validated car simulation model to predict high speed instability and handling
behaviour.

Good agreement between the simulation and experimental results was obtained during
the validation and verification process. The model was considered well suited for the
analysis of lateral stability.

Following validation, the simulation model was used to investigate parameters which
cannot easily be measured leading to an improved understanding of high speed
instability. It was shown that car speed. caravan mass, yaw moment of inertia, tow-ball
load, axle position, wheel track and tyres were among the most important factors
governing lateral stability.
Stability devices, based on the generation of yaw damping forces, were found to be of
benefit, raising the speed at which instability occurred.

2
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Many people contributed -to the work presented here. Firstly I would like to thank my
supervisor Dr. Jos Darling and an the other members of the Department who have
assisted me over the past three years. The work was funded by Bailey Caravans of
Bristol and The Caravan Club. Special thanks must go to Stephen Howard, Ted Holt
and John Parsons for their continued support of this work, technical assistance and
advice. I am thankful to David MULTI for putting up with me and spending so much
time setting up the experimental rig. I am also indebted to Dr. Torquil Ross-Martin and
Luke Hickson, from the Vehicle Dynamics group established in the Department, for
sharing their knowledge on the subject. Also to Dr. Will Richards, who developed the
simulation package used in this work and gave invaluable assistance in the
computational aspects.
Finally, I would like to thank my parents for encouraging and supporting me during
all these years spent far away from home.

3
CONTENTS

NOMENCLATURE 9

CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION 14
1.1 INTRODUCTION 14
1.2 CAR/CARAVAN DYNAMICS 15
1.2.1 General description of the problem 15
1.2.2 Simplifying assumptions used in previous work 16
1.3 PREVIOUS WORK 18
1.3.1 Review of previous work on car modelling 18
1.3.2 The "Ellis" model of car/caravan combination system
dynamics 20
1.3.3 The "Mikulcik" nonlinear model 22
1.3.4 The "Moncarz" model 25
1.3.5 Chassis stiffness 26
1.4 CONCLUSIONS FROM PREVIOUS WORK 35
1.5 CAR/CARAVAN DYNAMICS MODELLING NEEDS 35
1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES 36
1.7 LAYOUT OF THE REPORT 36

CHAPTER 2 THE CAR/CARAVAN MATHEMATICAL MODEL 37

2.1 INTRODUCTION 37
2.2 MODEL BACKGROUND 37
2.2.1 Two degree of freedom caravan model 37
2.2.2 Modelling objectives 38
2.2.3 Factors affecting the car/caravan model 38
2.2.4 Car/caravan model specification 39
2.3 CAR/CARAVAN MODEL THEORY 40
2.3.1 Car/caravan modelling methods 40
2.3.2 Description of the car/caravan model 41
2.3.3 Approximations and assumptions 41
2.3.4 Coordinate systems 43
2.4 MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL 44
2.4.1 Caravan motion states 44

4
 2.4.2 Lagrangian equations for quasi-coordinates 45
2.4.3 Derivation of the caravan equations of motion 46
2.4.4 Caravan sprung mass motion 47
2.4.5 Caravan unsprung mass vertical motion 49
2.4.6 Caravan secondary suspension 50
2.4.7 Caravan tyre mathematical model 52
2.4.8 Caravan tyre force dynamics 53
2.4.9 Caravan wheel spin 54
2.4.10 Tow-ball mathematical model 54
2.4.11 Car motion states 56
2.4.12 Car sprung mass motion 57
2.4.13 Car unsprung mass vertical motion 57
2.4.14 Car secondary suspension 57
2.4.15 Car wheel spin 58
2.4.16 External forces and disturbances 58
2.4.17 Caravan and car wheel orientation 60
2.4.18 Auxiliary variables 61
2.5 CONCLUSIONS 62

CHAPTER 3 SIMULATION OF CAR/CARAVAN SYSTEM DYNAMICS 64

3.1 INTRODUCTION 64
3.2 THE Bathfp SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT 64
3.2.1 Modelling approach 65
3.2.2 Causality constraints on the modelling process 65
3.2.3 The representation of systems 65
3.3 THE Bathfp CAR/CARAVAN HANDLING SIMULATION MODELS 66
3.3.1 Model formation and implementation 66
3.3.2 Factors affecting the separation process 67
3.3.3 The caravan component models 67
3.3.4 Caravan sprung mass model (CRV02) 68
3.3.5 Caravan unsprung mass model (CRV21) 69
3.3.6 Caravan secondary suspension model (CRV12) 70
3.3.7 Caravan tyre model (CRV33) 71
3.3.8 The standard car component models 71
3.3.9 Car sprung mass model (CARAVCO2) 72
3.3.10 Car unsprung mass model (CA25) 73
3.3.11 Car secondary suspension model (CA11) 74

5
 3.3.12 Car axle model (CA40) 75
3.3.13 Car tyre models (CA33 and CA35) 75
3.3.14 The tow-ball point model (LINK02) 75
3.3.15 Linkage of the caravan and car models 76
3.3.16 Car driver models (DRIV1 and DRIV2) 77
3.4 CAR/CARAVAN MODEL CAUSALITY 78
3.5 CONCLUSIONS 78

CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS 83

4.1 INTRODUCTION 83
4.1.1 Objectives and test requirements 83
4.2 TRAILER AND CAR PARAMETERS 83
4.2.1 Trailer general description 83
4.2.2 Trailer moments of inertia, mass and centre of gravity
position 84
4.2.3 Trailer secondary suspension spring rate 86
4.2.4 Car parameters 87
4.3 DATA ACQUISITION 87
4.3.1 Instrumentation 87
4.3.2 Signal conditioning 88
4.3.3 Data capture 88
4.3.4 Sampling frequency considerations 89
4.3.5 Calibration 89
4.4 ACCELERATION MEASUREMENT 90
4.5 EXPERIMENTAL TEST DETAILS 92
4.6 TEST RESULTS 94
4.6.1 Frequency response tests using a four poster road
simulator rig 94
4.6.2 Transient handling response tests 95
4.6.3 Step steer tests 96
4.7 CONCLUSIONS 96

CHAPTER 5 MODEL VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION 105

5.1 INTRODUCTION 105
5.1.1 The need for verification 105
5.1.2 The need for validation 105
5.2 VERIFICATION PROCESS 105

6
 5.3 VALIDATION PROCESS 106
5.3.1 Acceptable levels of accuracy 106
5.3.2 Validation methodology 106
5.3.3 Limitation to the validation process 107
5.4 PARAMETRIC DATA FOR CAR AND CARAVAN MODELS 107
5.4.1 Caravan parametric data 108
5.4.2 Car parametric data 108
5.5 SIMULATION 109
5.5.1 Steering wheel impulse input test procedure 110
5.5.2 Step steer test procedure 110
5.6 COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS 110
5.6.1 Steering wheel impulse input tests 111
5.6.2 Analysis of steering wheel impulse test results 113
5.6.3 Step steer tests 114
5.6.4 Analysis of step steer test results 114
5.7 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY 115
5.8 CONCLUSIONS 116

CHAPTER 6 SENSITIVITY STUDIES USING THE COMPUTER MODEL . . . . 122

6.1 INTRODUCTION 122
6.2 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS 122
6.3 THE NEED FOR SENSITIVITY STUDIES 122
6.4 PRELIMINARY STABILITY AND HANDLING ASSESSMENT 123
6.5 METHODS USED TO ASSESS CAR/CARAVAN SYSTEM LATERAL
STABILITY 126
6.6 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY 127
6.6.1 Caravan total mass 128
6.6.2 Caravan yaw moment of inertia 130
6.6.3 Caravan roll moment of inertia 131
6.6.4 Caravan centre of gravity vertical position 133
6.6.5 Caravan tow-ball load 134
6.6.6 Caravan secondary suspension system 136
6.6.7 Caravan wheel track 139
6.6.8 Caravan axle to articulation point 141
6.6.9 Caravan tyres 142
6.7 CONCLUSIONS 144

7
CHAPTER 7 STABILITY DEVICES 155
7.1 INTRODUCTION 155
7.2 THE NEED FOR STABILITY DEVICES 155
7.3 TYPES OF CARAVAN STABILISER 155
7.4 INVESTIGATION OF A CARAVAN STABILISER 156
7.4.1 Stabilising moment levels 156
7.4.2 Implementation as Bathfp model 157
7.4.3 Effects of the stabiliser on the overall car/caravan
stability 157
7.5 CONCLUSIONS 159

CHAPTER 8 CONCLUSIONS 162

8.1 CAR/CARAVAN MODELLING 162
8.1.1 Mathematical model 162
8.1.2 Model implementation 162
8.1.3 Experimental measurements 163
8.1.4 Model verification and validation 163
8.2 SENSITIVITY STUDIES 163
8.3 STABILITY DEVICES 164
8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK 164

Appendix A THE LAGRANGIAN EQUATIONS FOR QUASI-COORDINATES 167

Appendix B DERIVATION OF THE CARAVAN EQUATIONS OF MOTION , , , 174

Appendix C FUNCTIONS USED TO REPRESENT CAR CHARACTERISTICS . 193

Appendix D THE FRAME MOMENTS OF INERTIA CALCULATION 195

Appendix E FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS MATHEMATICAL

DESCRIPTION 198

Appendix F CARAVAN AND CAR PARAMETRIC DATA 202

REFERENCES 208

8
 NOMENCLATURE

In general the terminology adopted for this work follows standard vehicle dynamics
terminology as defined in SAE J670e (1976). The time derivatives of variables are
denoted using dot notation. A single dot above the variable name indicates the first
derivative, two dots the second derivative.
This nomenclature is separated into two sections: The Lagrangian equations for quasi-
coordinates presented for the general case (Appendix A) and the derivation of the
motion equations for the car/caravan combination model.

1. The Lagrangian equations for quasi-coordinates

1.1 Variables

KE Kinetic energy of the system written for quasi-coordinates [J]

[M] Square matrix of the a„ functions
[MIT Transpose of matrix [M]
[N] Inverse of matrix [MIT
Q, The external forces and moments applied to the system [N] and [Nm]
Generalised coordinates chosen to describe the system [m] or [rad]
(c) Vector of generalised velocities [m/s] or [rad/s]
Kinetic energy of the system written for generalised coordinates
W, Work done by an external force or moment referenced to the quasi-coordinate
system
Given functions of generalised coordinates q,
Quasi-coordinates chosen to describe the system [m] or [rad]
Vector of quasi-velocities [m/s] or [rad/s]
Quasi-velocities [m/s] or [rad/s]
Virtual displacement [m] or [cad]

2. Derivation of the motion equations for car/caravan combination model

2.1 General

frequency [Hz]

9
 t time Es]
s Laplace's operator
co frequency Irad/s]
Secondary suspension damping ratio [-I

2.2 Subscripts

c Caravan
3 Car
s Sprung mass
u Unsprung mass
1= 1-4 Referring to the front right, front left, rear right and rear left respective car
wheel stations
1=1-2 Referring to the right and left caravan wheel stations
x,y,z Body centred coordinate axis
X,Y,Z Inertial frame of reference

2.3 Basic dimensions

ac Horizontal distance between tow-ball and caravan centre of gravity [1111

B Caravan secondary suspension track [m]
BtCaravan tyre contact patch track Iml
hI Distance between caravan sprung mass centre of gravity and roll axis [m]
heDistance between caravan sprung mass centre of gravity and Ox, axis [m]
h vertical distance between caravan sprung mass centre of gravity and
wheel hub [m]
L Horizontal distance between tow-ball and caravan axle [ml
Sv Distance between the car sprung mass centre of gravity and tow-ball poinfm]

2.4 Mass and inertial properties

I sprung mass moment of inertia about the Ox axis [kgm2]

I sprung mass moment of inertia about the Oy axis [kgm21
Izz.s Caravan sprung mass moment of inertia about the Oz axis Ikgm21

10
 Caravan moment of inertia about the Oz axis [kgm2]
1.mCaravan sprung mass product of inertia [kgm2]
Caravan sprung mass product of inertia [kgm2]
yz.,
l Caravan sprung mass product of inertia [kgm2]
yym
Wheel spin inertia [kgm2]
Total mass of the caravan [kg]
M, Caravan sprung mass [kg]
mv, Wheel mass [kg]

2.5 Miscellaneous

A Frontal area frei

b, Load dependency of longitudinal friction [W]
b2Longitudinal friction level at zero load
CD Aerodynamic drag coefficient[
Cs Side force coefficient
Caravan secondary suspension damping rate [Ns/m]
c, 'Pyre vertical damping rate [Ns/m]
Dam, Aerodynamic drag [N]
• Caravan secondary suspension spring stiffness IN/m]
kt Tyre vertical spring stiffness IN/m]
L, Tyre relaxation length Em]

Rt f Tyre free radius Erri]

Rt, Tyre loaded radius Em]

Sam, Aerodynamic side force [N]

3 Total wind velocity [m/s]

Air density [kg/m1

2.6 Variables

c, Tyre longitudinal slip stiffness at zero slip

C1 .C2 Regression coefficients
• Car/caravan relative angle damping ratio
D„ Reference speed damping
Tow-ball longitudinal force

11
 FyTow-ball lateral force [N]
F, Tow-ball vertical force [N]
Feutap Secondary suspension vertical forces [N]
F, Tyre longitudinal force [N]
Fty Tyre lateral force [N]
F, 'lyre vertical force [N]
Ftyw, Steady-state tyre side force [N]
ftx Tyre longitudinal force characteristic function [N]
ftyTyre lateral force characteristic function [N]
ftmz Tyre self aligning torque characteristic function [Nm]
H Angular momentum [kgrn2/s]
hgGround vertical displacement [ml
M b Brake torque [Nm]
Md Drive torque [Nm]
Mroll Secondary suspension roll moment [Nm]
M st Stabiliser moment [Nm]
Mt2 Tyre self aligning torque [Nm]
M Steady-state tyre self aligning moment [Nm]
P Roll angular velocity [rad/s]
q Pitch angular velocity [rad/s]
3 Yaw angular velocity Irad/s1
Se Tyre equivalent longitudinal slip [-I
sx Tyre longitudinal slip [-]
u Linear longitudinal velocity [m/s]
uw Wheel longitudinal velocity Im/s]
3 Caravan system potential energy PI
3 Linear lateral velocity [m/s]
vwWheel lateral velocity [m/s]
Vzd Zero damping speed [m/s1
v0.05 Reference damping speed [m/s]
X Inertial OX coordinate [ml
x Longitudinal Ox coordinate Ilul
Y Inertial OY coordinate [In]
y Lateral Oy coordinate [m]
z Vertical OZ coordinate inil
a Tyre slip angle [rad]
(le Tyre equivalent slip angle [rad]

12
R Attitude angle (rad]
7 Wheel camber angle [rad]
(1) Roll angle [rad]
0 Pitch angle [rad]
kV Yaw angle [rad]
v Course angle [rad]
5„,, Driver steering wheel angle [rad]
S1 Wheel hub angular velocity about the spin axis [rad/s]
cs lyre total theoretical slip [-I
11.2 Secondary suspension vertical deflection (right and left) [nil
1 34 Tyre vertical deflection (right and left) [m]
A Caravan system dissipative function [Nm/s]

13
 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION

1.1 INTRODUCTION

The number of cars towing caravans has gradually increased over the last few decades.
It is estimated by The Caravan Club that there are approximately 560,000 caravans on
the roads of the UK. Most are less than ten years old and will travel less than one
thousand miles a year. Although caravans are involved in only 0.1% of all accidents on
the road, many of these accidents are of unknown cause (380 in 1991 according to
Department of Transport statistics).

This thesis will investigate the handling characteristics of car/caravan combination

systems. The ride characteristics will not be considered due to the fact that caravans
only carry passengers when stationary. The ride characteristics pertain predominately
to the vertical motion of the car/caravan combination system. The handling
characteristics apply primarily to horizontal-transversal motion of the car/caravan
system and to its directional control behaviour. Directional control involves both the
mechanical properties of the car/caravan combination itself and driver control
performance, however it is not the intention of this work to address the problems of
driver performance modelling. The principal area of interest concerns the dynamic
properties of the car/caravan combination system.

With the advent of computer simulation techniques, testing, designing and developing
cars or caravans is no longer a process of trial and error demanding extensive practical
modification and testing. State-of-the-art expertise has developed to the point where
it is now possible to predict with close accuracy many aspects of car/caravan
combination behaviour. A summary of the previous work done in this field and the way
that this work has evolved is presented in [l].

A great deal of work has been carried out over a considerable period of time concerning
the ride and handling characteristics of single cars. The techniques involved in
analyzing single cars are basically the same as those involved in the analysis of
car/caravan combination systems. In essence, vehicle dynamics are concerned with
the response of masses subject to forces. Therefore a wealth of relevant information
exists in the literature concerned with the modelling and behaviour of cars and much
of this will be referenced to support the development of a linked car/caravan

14
 simulation model.

Statistics [1] have shown that many accidents related to towed caravans are caused by
snaking or weaving prior to the accident. In a significant number of these cases this
was initiated by winds, passing large trucks, or excessive speed.
All these aspects point to the importance of caravan stability in car/caravan safety. In
particular, there are some questions to be addressed:
- how can caravan design be improved ?
- how can caravans be tested to ensure that stability is sufficient for a safe
combination car/caravan configuration at motorway speeds ?
- how can caravans be made less sensitive to loading conditions ?

Using mathematical modelling and computer prediction this thesis will illustrate why
some ill-prepared caravans have oscillatory tendencies.

1.2 CAR/CARAVAN DYNAMICS

1.2.1 General description of the problem

Analyzing the dynamic behaviour of car/caravan combination systems involves the

application of Newton's laws, or related principles such as Lagrange's equations for
non-conservative systems. Therefore an accurate knowledge of the forces acting in the
system is a first prerequisite for an accurate analysis of dynamic behaviour.

Cars towing caravans can exhibit three types of instabilities as presented in [1]. The
first is known as jackknifing and consists of an aperiodic instability in which the car
yaws continuously in one direction with the caravan yawing only slightly, leading to
unforseen accidents. The second type of instability, known as caravan swing, is in fact
the opposite of the first, mainly an aperiodic motion where the caravan yaws
continuously in one direction with the towing car yawing only slightly. The third and
last type of instability of the car/caravan combination is an oscillatory motion, the
towing car and caravan both yawing with an amplitude which is increasing with time.
This very dangerous type of instability is known as flutter.

Much attention has been directed to the tendency of cars towing caravans to exhibit

15
flutter when the car/caravan combination system exceeds a limit velocity which is a
characteristic for any car/caravan system. For commercial vehicles the emphasis has
shifted to the jacklcnifing problem.

Jacklcniftng is considered a very severe problem for commercial vehicles towing trailers
or semi-trailers (31. The reason for this is the fact that the mass of the trailer is much
larger than the mass of the towing vehicle. Therefore the inertia of the towed vehicle
affects the behaviour of the vehicle. As presented in the model analysed by Mikulcik
PI the semi-trailer mass is more than five times higher than the towing vehicle mass.
In this study the weights of the car and caravan are very similar (it is indicated by
manufacturing companies that, if possible, the caravan weight must not exceed the car
weight). Another aspect of caravans design is that they are fitted with an inertial
braking system which uses the weight of the caravan to brake the caravan when there
is a deceleration in the system. This is rather different to those systems used on
articulated lorries.

As can be inferred from the previous section, the most undesirable type of instability
is flutter, this being one of the most critical dynamic modes associated with
car/caravan yaw oscillations. This mode is critical because at high speed large caravan
oscillations can lead to instability and associated danger. Knowledge of such systems
is still far from complete.

1.2.2 Simplifying assumptions used in previous work

Due to the complexity of the system, most existing car/caravan mathematical models
require simplifying assumptions and are restricted to limited manoeuvring situations
in which:

- system forward speed remains constant:

- system sideslip angles remain small and curvilinear velocities and
accelerations are small:
- second and higher-order terms involving small quantities are ignored.

In addition, the nonlinear governing differential equations have often been

approximated with linear equations.
Tyre lateral forces are considered to be of primary importance 11. In most analyses

16
published in the technical literature the tyre slip angles are used to calculate the forces
and moments acting on the wheels of the articulated vehicles. In fact, modelling tyre
forces and moments is a subject in itself [4-7], and various tyre theories can be
employed to account for the magnitudes, directions and points of application of the
forces acting at the wheel contact area. A state-of-the-art survey on the tyre forces is
presented in [1] and a critical review and analysis of test methods for measuring tyre
cornering properties is presented in [8]. The theoretical models provide useful and
interesting insights into the physics of tyre behaviour, but for accurate information on
tyre forces and moments it is still necessary to rely on experimental data.
Most tyre modelling has been concerned with steady-state tyre behaviour. However,
due to the flexibility between the contact patch and the wheel, it is necessary for the
wheel to roll a certain distance before the contact patch can shift to its steady-state
position relative to the wheel. As indicated in [9]. tyre flexibility was felt to be of little
practical significance as regards vehicle transient response. However, increasing use
of radial tyres, which are more flexible laterally than cross ply tyres, has generated
considerable interest in the effect of lateral tyre flexibility. In [101 transient tyre
behaviour in terms of a force versus slip-angle loop obtained during transient tyre tests
are represented. The current state of the art mathematical tyre model representation
is presented in [7]. This has been used in the work presented here.

It is clear that the choice of a mathematical model to represent an articulated

car/caravan system is not a simple matter. The validity of any conclusions depend on
the ability of the mathematical model to represent the behaviour of the real system.
Many authors have assumed that the equations describing the lateral dynamics of the
car/caravan combination system are not coupled to the other equations of motion.
Furthermore the lateral weight transfer, which is an important factor governing the
magnitude of tyre lateral forces, was neglected by assuming that the system has zero
width as defined in 1111: "the vehicle is considered to be telescoped laterally, so that
each axle set is represented by one wheel". Making these assumptions implies that the
lateral dynamics are not significantly affected by roll [4,12-151 which was a simplifying
assumption used to overcome the extremely lengthy and complex system equations.
These simplifications were criticized by other authors and some [16,17] have claimed
that roll, through the influence of roll steer, is important and must be included in a
model used to study lateral stability.

17
 1.3 PREVIOUS WORK

In this review, previous work carried out on stability will be presented for both trailers
(caravans) and semi-trailers. A short presentation of car modelling background will also
be given.

1.3.1 Review of previous work on car modelling

The understanding of car dynamics has slowly developed over a long period of time. In
the early years, due to a lack of knowledge concerning tyre mechanics, initial theories
were kinematic and based upon geometric considerations alone. They did not recognise
the need for side forces and were applicable only at low speeds. The real progress
towards a complete understanding came with the introduction of the tyre slip concept
and the measurement of the mechanical properties of pneumatic tyres. It is widely
accepted that the dominant forces acting on a vehicle to control performance are
developed by the tyre against the road.

Mathematical models have been employed extensively in vehicle dynamics research.

The existence of a model provides a means to identify important factors and a
predictive capability, so that the necessary changes required to reach a given
performance goal can be identified. The first analytical models, such as those developed
at Cornell in the USA in 1956, were used to establish the basic characteristics affecting
vehicle directional response, such as load transfer and geometric steer effects. This
called for simple low degree of freedom models due to the mathematical limitations in
solving problems. Without the help of computers. the analysts were trying to find
relationships between the variables of interest. In doing so, they often neglected factors
and linearised the models used. The existence of a large numbers of components,
systems, sub-systems and nonlinearities in vehicles made comprehensive modelling
almost impossible.
With the advent of computer based simulation, more complex non-linear lumped
parameter models were developed for the study of vehicle behaviour under extreme
manoeuvres. More recently, new applications have been exploited such as the analysis
of detailed component design and its effect on dynamic performance.
A variety of modelling methods have been employed. These are divided into two main
approaches to the problem:
a) Lumped parameter models. These models neglect unimportant degrees of

18
 freedom in order to produce a reduced set of differential equations that can be
easily manipulated. Their advantages result mostly from the elimination of
detail thought to be unnecessary for their purpose, resulting in ease of use and
limited data requirements.
This approach to the problem allows the dynamicist to utilise knowledge of the
system characteristics in order to minimise model complexity, but they are
potentially less accurate and can be inflexible.
The latest lumped parameter models tend to incorporate more nonlinear
functions describing system characteristics, therefore improving the
predictions. Suspension derivatives have been used successfully ROI to model
with considerable accuracy the effects of wheel kinematics on tyre loads, slip
and camber angles. However, the work required to gather the necessary data
for validation purposes can be insurmountable, or at least very lengthy.

b) Multibody systems formalisms. These are used to generate the equations of

motion in symbolic or numerical form. This approach encourages a non-
discriminatory modelling process, but they are slow running and require an
immense amount of data. They are often part of an integrated software package
which includes useful additional analysis functions. In recent years ADAMS has
become an auto-industry standard. However, it can be expensive, hardware
Intensive and require high levels of user skill and in some instances the
complexity of such models can be disadvantageous (1): "current modelling
ability is far more advanced than our ability to interpret the information
producible from the models".
Another major problem is that in the design stage of a prototype there is
insufficient knowledge of the kinematics of coupled vehicle systems which can
limit the usefulness of such software for conceptual design. It has been shown
in [2] that "valuable design information can be obtained using a simplified
vehicle ride and handling simulation model".

Returning to the lumped parameter approach, for the study of ride, the quarter car
(only 2 degrees of freedom) model has been extensively used. It is argued in [21] and
[221 that it is the simplest model to contain the required features of the real problem.
However, it has been shown (23] that better models can be obtained using a half car
model and acknowledge the fact that road inputs to the rear suspension are time
delayed versions of those at the front wheels.
For the study of handling, the bounce and pitch motions have often been ignored and

19
the road surface assumed level. The simplest models had only lateral acceleration and
yaw velocity as degrees of freedom, therefore ignoring roll and all the other associated
effects (load transfer, roll steer compliance). Although simple models provided an
Insight into the fundamental nature of vehicle handling dynamics, more complex
models were required to study the interaction of roll and lateral dynamics together with
the effect of suspension characteristics on response. In [241 the level of complexity
required to study different aspects of behaviour was discussed since when complex
models were used, a significant problem was the setting up of equations describing the
motion in a suitable form for computerised solution.

It is worth pointing out as a conclusion to this section that analytical methods are not
foolproof because they only approximate reality, many assumptions being made to
obtain manageable models. Therefore, it is very important to understand the
assumptions that have been made in the modelling process.

It is not intended to give a more comprehensive description of car computer models

developed over the years since car/caravan combination system computer models and
related work are presented in the following paragraph.

1.3.2 The "Ellis" model of car/caravan combination system dynamics

Ellis (11] has developed two mathematical models, one for ride and one for handling.
He stated that "when the equations of motion for handling and for ride of an articulated
semi-trailer vehicle are developed it is found that there is a considerable similarity
between the two". However as can be inferred from [ll) the equations of motion for
handling characteristics were written with respect to a mobile rectangular coordinate
system, while the equations of motion for the ride analysis were written using a fixed
coordinate system. The handling model was reduced to a laterally telescoped
articulated semi-trailer vehicle model. As a result, the roll movement was not taken
Into account. However the method used has the advantage of permitting the
Investigation of conditions at an unsteady forward speed and with large yaw angles
between the car and caravan. These studies of the articulated semi-trailer have been
undertaken with the "object of providing design information and in the expectation that
this data will result in a better understanding of the phenomena".

The concept of the "fifth wheel" which represents the tow-ball point was introduced.

20
The position of the tow-ball point on the vehicle's longitudinal axis as well as the
relative heights of the centres of gravity of the car, trailer and the fifth wheel are
considered as important parameters in the design of the vehicle and the trailer.

The handling equations were concerned with the transient and steady state responses
to typical car steering inputs. The equations were developed in terms of the tyre
characteristics and position of the fifth wheel axle and expressions for understeer and
oversteer that correspond to those of the normal car have been deduced.

The tyre characteristics were considered, such that when the braking force increases
there is load transfer from the caravan axle on to the tow-ball point and the lateral tyre
force decreases, for a given sideslip angle.
The tyre lateral force was modelled as a third order polynomial function:

f (a) = C1a+C3a3

where:
a- tyre sideslip angle;
C1 , C3- polynomial coefficients:
f(a)- tyre lateral force.

It was found that "even in the fixed control condition, jack-knifing was slow to occur
unless one set of wheels was locked".

The assumptions that were made to develop a simplified set of mathematical equations
for handling were as follows:
- the vehicle forward speed remains constant:
- tyres sideslip angles are small: less than five degrees.
Ellis (111 stated that "these limitations are acceptable for the majority of driving
conditions, and the articulated vehicle can be considered in a similar manner".

As an example of the stability of this type of vehicle, a typical set of numerical values
was taken and the positions of the fifth wheel and the centre of gravity of the trailer
load were varied. From the analysis it can be seen that the position of the fifth wheel
Is of prime importance and, as it is moved to the rear of the car. .with a uniformly
distributed load on the caravan, the car/caravan combination becomes less stable, and
the instability takes the form of a motion similar to that of an oversteering car.

21
 Steady state responses to steering inputs (steer pad) are obtained by considering the
equations of motion when the rates of change of the vehicle lateral velocity, yaw
angular velocity and relative angle between vehicle and trailer are zero. The responses
are dependent on the forward speed of the system, except one situation which is
similar to a car neutral steer condition.

The ride model was only used to study the fore and aft shake of the system which can
Influence the driver and load ride conditions. Lagrange's equations were used to find
the equations of motion, considering only small disturbances from the steady state
operating position of the system, i.e. the system equations were linearised.

From this work it is clear that the forces generated at the tyre-road interfaces affect
lateral stability, and it might be supposed that the suspension properties, dimensions
and mass distributions of both the towing and the towed vehicles are also important.
Another important conclusion is that it is possible to use the terms understeer and
oversteer to describe the behaviour of an articulated semi-trailer vehicle in the same
way as that of a single car.
Ellis concluded that stability requirements suggest a well forward position of the fifth
wheel. Furthermore, friction at the fifth wheel causes a big variation in handling
characteristics, especially on round-abouts.
In addition, the ride properties of an articulated vehicle are unique, the articulation
causing a "fore and aft shake" in many loading conditions.
Only limited results were presented, no comparisons being made with experimental
data. However, this work was one of the first papers to address the subject of towed
vehicles. Much of the subsequent work that followed was based upon a similar model
developed by Ellis. Modifications were made to this model to account for other effects
such as roll steer compliance, tyre load transfer, aerodynamic forces, but the basic
factors included in [11] were adequate to demonstrate the basic principles of towed
vehicle dynamics.

1.3.3 The "Mikulcik" nonlinear model

Mikulcik [3] developed a nonlinear model which has formed the basis for much
subsequent work on trailer vehicles. The equations of motion for a tractor-semitrailer
vehicle in which both the tractor and semitrailer can pitch, roll, yaw and translate are
derived and solved numerically in their nonlinear form for steering and braking inputs.

22
Twelve degrees of freedom are used to model the tractor and semitrailer. Due to the
constraint equations written for the fifth wheel, only eight of these degrees of freedom
are independent. No attempt Is made to model the unsprung mass of the tractor or the
semitrailer. Roll-steer effects are neglected and the wheel axle assembly translates and
yaws with the sprung mass. The wheel axle assembly is considered weightless and
inertialess and therefore, the wheel's dynamics are neglected in this analysis.

Three possible equations are employed to describe tyre side forces depending upon the
magnitude of the braking force. Interaction of the side forces and longitudinal (braking)
forces is accounted for by the "friction circle" concept described in [181. When braking
forces are applied to a wheel, the tyre side force remains unaffected until the vector
sum of the side force and the braking force has a given magnitude which is evaluated
as a percent of the tyre vertical load (pZ). If the braking force increases above a given
value, the tyre side force decreases such that the vector sum of the braking force and
side force is still pZ. This effect is denoted in [181 as "partial skid". The maximum
possible braking effect results in "total skid", when the vector sum of the side force and
the braking force still has the same magnitude pi but the direction of this sum vector
is directly opposite to the motion of the wheel in the horizontal plane. For the
remaining case of "no skid", the relationship between tyre side force, vertical load and
slip angle is expressed in polynomial form as presented in 119]. However, the tyre side
force is considered to remain stationary at a given value when the tyre slip angle is
bigger than a given value and the "no skid" conditions are met.

The linearised equations are also determined and solved so that comparisons between
the linear and nonlinear model responses are made. The following assumptions are
made in order to linearise the equations of motion:

a) pitch and roll angles of the sprung masses and the difference in yaw angles
of the sprung masses remain small:
b) rates of change of the angles in the first assumption remain small;
c) lateral velocities and accelerations of both sprung masses are considered to
be small;
d) the second and higher-order terms involving small quantities can be ignored.

As in all the other linearised analyses, the forward velocity of the tractor is considered
to have a constant value. A direct result of the latter assumption is that the forward
velocity of the semitrailer must also remain constant and therefore no braking or

23
accelerating forces can be applied to the towing vehicle. Another important aspect of
the equations for the linearised model is that the lateral and vertical motions are
uncoupled for situations in which the semitrailer and its load are symmetric in the
longitudinal and transversal planes passing through the semitrailer's centre of gravity.
Therefore, vehicle ride and handling can be investigated separately for most of the
situations found in practice.

Mikulcik [3] used his model to demonstrate the sequence of events which occur during
jackknifing. The rear wheels of the vehicle cease to provide a restoring force adequate
to maintain the vehicle heading and the vehicle yaws sharply with the trailer yawing
only slightly. He proved that jackknifing can occur either when braking or when
changing direction without braking. The application of braking forces is not required
for jackknifing to occur. It has been shown that "violent jackknifing occurred without
braking whenever the slip angles of the rear tractor wheels reached the value
corresponding to the maximum side-force". It was shown that the nonlinear model
predicted jackknifing whereas the linearised vehicle was stable. The reason for this
difference between the response of the two models is that "the stability of a linear
system is independent of both the input and the initial conditions of the system,
whereas the stability of a nonlinear system is dependent upon both". Instability of the
nonlinear vehicle model is not a problem for small steering inputs because the system
perturbation is small in these cases. This instability is rather attributed to the
deceleration of the tractor-semitrailer system by the components of the front steered
wheel side-forces which act in the system longitudinal direction, slowing down the
whole system. On the other hand, one of the main assumptions for the linearised
model was that the forward speed of the tractor-semitrailer system is constant and
hence the configuration of the vehicle in a steady-state turn depends on the forward
velocity. As a conclusion, for the nonlinearised model undergoing steering manoeuvres,
the would-be steady-state values of the system's configuration change continually and
the steady-state situation does not really exist.

Mikulcik [3] pointed out as one of the conclusions that: "the load should be placed
towards the front of the semitrailer whenever possible to provide for a maximum
availability of traction at the rear tractor wheels". This conclusion is questionable due
to the fact that if the load on the rear axle is increased, the load on the front axle will
decrease and this will affect the manoeuvrability. Therefore a compromise must be
reached for the percentage of the trailer weight that must be applied at the tow-ball
point and hence to the rear axle of the towing vehicle.

24
Another possible solution to overcome jackknifing is the introduction of a damping
device at the hitch point. This can be achieved by using a disc brake. Damping does
not eliminate jackknifing but it does reduce its rapidity, giving to the driver enough
time to take the necessary actions to avoid danger. Regarding the prevention of
jackknifing by antiskid devices, such devices must not just prevent the locking of the
tractor wheels, but must be capable of sensing the partial skidding.

1.3.4 The "Moncarz" model

Moncarz 116] considered the stability of a simply-articulated vehicle system for the
specific motion of constant speed in a straight line. The equations of motion for the
system were obtained by considering the motion to be comprised of small perturbations
from a reference state of rectilinear motion at constant velocity. It was assumed that
the towing vehicle and trailer each consisted of a sprung mass connected by means of
a suspension system to the unsprung mass. The motion of the unsprung mass was
constrained by the road while the sprung mass was coupled to the unsprung mass by
spring and damper elements. A frictionless tow-ball point was considered to connect
the towing vehicle and trailer.
No coordinates where required to describe vertical or pitch motions since these motions
were assumed to have negligible influence on lateral and roll motion when the
magnitudes of the initial disturbances were small. The model's mathematical equations
were linearised and using the formulated model, a parameter study was conducted to
determine the effect of various design parameters on the stability characteristics of the
combination vehicle. The principal aims of this study were to determine the effects of
roll steer, roll stiffness and roll damping on the vehicle combination stability.

A modal analysis was conducted and the stability characteristics of the articulated
vehicle were determined through a study of the manner in which the roots of the
characteristic equation varied with changes in design parameters. A conclusion of the
paper was that "the addition of the two roll degrees of freedom is necessary to
adequately determine the stability characteristics of the car-trailer system. This result
is primarily due to the coupling between the roll and directional degrees of freedom
caused by roll steer".
Another important conclusion was that the car directional mode can become unstable
if the car should possess inadequate understeer "as may derive from roll oversteer, rear
tyres with small cornering stiffness compared to the front tyres". However, the car

25
 directional mode is highly coupled to the trailer articulation mode due to the transfer
of lateral forces through the tow-ball point. High cornering car tyre stiffness,
particularly at the rear axle, will insure stability of the car directional mode. Therefore,
a car designed with too much understeer can lead to the instability of trailer swing.
Trailer design is also important in determining the damping of this mode. In any
design, an increase in the damping of the car directional mode generally decreases the
damping of the trailer articulation mode.
Trailer roll instability can be eliminated by "insuring that the trailer suspension springs
are stiff or the trailer shock absorbers have large damping constants". The existence
of dry friction in the tow-ball point adds damping to the system such that the damping
of the articulation mode would be greater than is indicated by the linear theory used
in this paper. Finally, the articulated vehicle's weight distribution and suspension
properties are considered to be highly interactive. Therefore, when investigating the
stability of a given car-trailer system this interaction must be taken into account.

1.3.5 Chassis stiffness

One aspect of articulated vehicle dynamics that has not received any attention, is the
effect of vehicle flexibility. Each part of the car/caravan system has generally been
modelled either as a rigid body that moves in a plane or as a combination of sprung
and unsprung rigid bodies connected by means of a suspension system. A relatively
flexible part on car/caravan combination systems is the tow-ball or the hitch point. The
current trend in caravan hitch development has been to make the hitchpoint more and
more rigid in the lateral direction. Some hitches appear to be designed mainly on the
basis of strength considerations and this has tended to lead to some very bulky and
rigid hitch assemblies for caravans. Furthermore, in most of the technical literature
related to car/caravan system dynamics the hitch point has been considered to be
simply the pivotal point between the caravan and the towing car.
The above mentioned trend towards greater lateral stiffness has sometimes been
supported and encouraged in the technical literature. For example, paper [251 dealing
with the lateral stability of road and rail trailers was concluded with the following
statement: "most hitches for trailers are usually applied on automobiles at the bumper
and are quite soft laterally. Trucks avoid this problem by having quite stiff lateral
springs and by pivoting very close to the axle". This leads the authors to believe that
tow-ball points, which are connected directly to the axle to take lateral thrust, are
better than those connected to the body "because of greater lateral stiffness".

26
However, these conclusions related to the increased lateral stiffness of the tow-ball
point are challenged in [26]. In [26] a simplified model is used to look at the effects of
tow-ball lateral stiffness and damping on the dynamic stability of trailers. This is
accomplished by introducing a hitchpoint degree of freedom in the lateral direction with
the movement being opposed by lateral springs and dampers. This in effect modelled
the lateral stiffness and damping at the hitchpoint of the towing car springs, dampers
and tyres as well as the lateral flexibility of the towing car hitch structure. This
approach 126] did not take into account tyre slip angles for which it is stated: "the
uncertainty of the tyre forces' magnitude, directions, and application points is
eliminated, and, therefore, the results are clearly not a function of the tyre theory or
tyre experimental data which might be used in the analysis".
Although the approach was a very simple one, the main purpose of this analysis was
Intended to "yield helpful insights on the effect of hitchpoint lateral stiffness and
damping on the trailer stability and on the conditions contributing to trailer control
loss". Lagrange equations for a one degree of freedom nonholonomic system with four
generalised coordinates and three constraint equations are used to derive the equations
of motion. However, using Lagrange's equations does not eliminate the tyre contact
patch forces from the equations. This is in contradiction with what is affirmed in [26]:
"Lagrangian methods which automatically eliminates the wheel constraining forces
from the equations". This maybe true as long as the forces are internal to the analysed
system. But, if the forces that apply to a system are considered as external for that
system, then the previous affirmation is false. Trailer asymptotic stability (in the
Lyapunov sense) for the uniform straight ahead forward motion may be established
using the Routhian procedure.

The most important conclusion of [26] was that the stability condition derived herewith
is not directly dependent upon the lateral tow-ball point stiffness given sufficiently large
stiffness and sufficiently small caravan mass and car/caravan trailer speed. Stability
charts are used to represent the stability of the car/caravan combination system. Some
caravan design parameters are considered as important for the stability. Examination
of stability charts reveals that increasing the lateral stiffness of the tow-ball point does
not improve trailer stability properties while increasing the lateral damping value does.
Other factors that have been highlighted as important in the stability analysis were:
- the trailer's mass, mass distribution and geometric construction:
- the percentage of trailer weight carried by the tow-ball point, i.e. tow-ball
point loading is very important to trailer stability. It was concluded in 1261 that
the greater the value of tow-ball point loading the smaller the trailer unstable

27
 region. This is a questionable conclusion regarding the decrease in the trailer's
front axle load and therefore a deterioration in trailer's manoeuvrability.
An example is also provided in (261. For a trailer which has a mass of M = 1800 kg, a
yaw moment of inertia of L=6100 kgm2 , wheel mass m=10 kg and a constant forward
velocity equal to v=20 m/s, the tow-ball stiffness is taken equal to k = 105 N/m it is
argued that the damping rate must be p>560 Ns/m in order to satisfy the stability
requirements for the car/caravan combination system.

The effect of drawbar flexibility on the stability of constant speed straight line motion
Is taken into account in [27]. The model developed in this paper was very similar to
other previous reviewed models. However the mathematical model that has been
developed is a simplified one, assuming that "vertical, pitch and roll motion do not
affect the lateral motions". Due to the simplicity of this approach, a complete
investigation of the model was considered inappropriate.

In 117) the influence of the drawbar flexibility is taken into account. Four mathematical
models are developed, each one having a different combination of roll freedom and tow-
ball point flexibility. The first model used, which is the least general, possesses neither
roll freedom nor tow-ball point flexibility. Only four degrees of freedom are used to
describe the system, "the rectangular coordinates of the mass center of the "powered
vehicle" and the yaw angles of both vehicles". The second model which is similar to that
used in 127/ includes the features of the first model plus an additional angle used to
model the flexibility of the tow-ball point. A third model includes the roll degree of
freedom for the "powered vehicle" and all the other characteristics of the first model.
Finally, the most general model that has been used in this paper, includes all the
features of the first model plus the tow-ball point flexibility as well as an angle
associated with the roll degree of freedom of the "powered vehicle".
For a particular set of parameters for the vehicle combination system a critical forward
speed exists above which constant speed motion in a straight line is unstable. The first
mathematical model (the least general one) is used in [17] in order to determine this
critical speed. Then using the second and the third models, the effects of the tow-ball
point flexibility and roll on the critical speed have been determined. The roll motion of
the "powered vehicle" was considered in respect to changes in roll stiffness, roll
damping or roll steer. By using the last model which includes the- tow-ball point
flexibility and the roll motion it was possible to determine whether or not the effects of
the tow-ball point flexibility and roll motion were independent. This was the main
purpose of this analysis.

28
In criticism of this work no roll degree of freedom was considered for the towed vehicle.
The justification given for this omission was "the resulting simplification of the present
analysis", despite the fact that the roll angles of both the "powered and the towed
vehicles" were considered to have an important influence on stability.
The tyre model used incorporates the assumption that lateral force exerted on the tyre
by the road is related to the slip angle of the tyre, and that for small values of the slip
angle, a simple relationship between force and lateral slip can be employed.
The model used to represent the flexibility of the tow-ball point is a lumped parameter
model. The tow-ball point is modelled as a rigid link hinged to the rest of the "towed
vehicle". The stiffness and damping of the tow-ball point are represented by a linear
torsional spring with spring constant k and a linear viscous damper with damping
coefficient c.
As one of the conclusions it was pointed out that the tow-ball point flexibility can be
either a stabilizing or a destabilizing influence. The tow-ball point stiffness k affects the
stability of the system, although the influence of tow-ball point damping c is more
significant. This was also confirmed in 126].

In [28] a simple model capable of reproducing the observed handling characteristics of

actual "automobiles towing recreational trailers" is described. The model was based
upon a similar model developed in l], modifications being made to take into account
the effects of tyre flexibility, automobile and trailer roll motion and aerodynamic forces.

The automobile was modelled as having four degrees of freedom as follows: the forward
and lateral velocity of the car's centre of gravity, yaw angle and roll angle. The trailer
was modelled as having two degrees of freedom: articulation angle, which represents
the angle between the longitudinal axes of the car and the trailer, and the roll angle.
Additional degrees of freedom were considered for the tyre contact patches to account
for lateral flexibility of the tyres, permitting lateral motion of the wheel centres relative
to the contact patches.

The equations of motion were derived using the Lagrange's equations and have been
presented in the form of nonlinear first-order differential equations. The system of
equations is integrated numerically to yield "simulations of vehicle behaviour such as
step steer, pulse steer and sinusoidal steer". The linearised equations of motion are
used to determine eigenvalues and eigenvectors of the vehicle trailer combination
system for exponential solutions. Due to the fact that the introduction of the
aerodynamic forces does not effect the number of degrees of freedom of the system and

29
 hence the computational work, it was considered that "it is worthwhile to include
aerodynamic forces in the model". As a conclusion, the roll degree of freedom in the car
and the trailer was considered an important effect via the coupling between the body
roll and the steering effects. This work was intended to make an extensive comparison
between car/trailer simulations and experimental data, since no pertinent data was
previously available. However, the work does not include any comparison with
experimental results, ending with the statement: "the simulation results are currently
being compared with recent experimental data". No other reports have been found
regarding the state of this work.

In 1291 a simplified analysis of the steady-state turning of articulated vehicles is

presented. The steady-state turning behaviour is formulated in a simplified manner
using the concept of a handling diagram. Although the slip angles are assumed small,
the tyre slip angle versus lateral force is considered nonlinear. The handling diagram
Is first developed for a single car, and then for a car towing a trailer. Attaching the
trailer will decrease the normal load on the front tyres of the car while the normal load
on the rear tyres will be increased. This will make a car which initially understeers less
so and a car which initially oversteers more so. The linearised equations are used again
to examine the stability of the steady-state motion of the car/trailer system. A simple
method for determining the jackknifing instability using the handling diagram is
presented. No information Is given about the flutter properties of the trailer. Although
the model presented made use of a linear dynamic model, the handling diagram
concept can be used on more elaborate linear models by making the necessary
adjustments for the tyre slip angles and stiffness.

In 1151 a computer simulation for the handling behaviour of an automobile towing a

caravan at high speed is demonstrated. The results indicate the proper range of design
and load parameters for best handling quality. A reference is also made to the design
parameters of the tow-ball point. The roll degree of freedom for both the car and the
caravan is neglected in order "to simplify the analysis". This assumption is
questionable if we are referring to the statement made after this assumption: " ...this
approximation does not materially alter the nature of system responses since the
yawing motions, which are of principal interest, are relatively independent of the roll
motion, so far as the stability of the system is concerned". It will be shown later in this
thesis that the roll of both the car and the caravan interact with the yaw motion of the
system. However, in order to compensate for the car's roll understeer as well as other
parameters which are omitted by the approximations, the front tyre cornering stiffness

30
on the car was reduced and the rear tyre cornering stiffness was slightly increased. The
result of these adjustments was a non-rolling car configuration with directional control
properties similar to those of-an automobile with a roll degree of freedom.

Four degrees of freedom are used for the mathematical model: yaw velocity, sideslip
angle, lateral acceleration and towing angle and a simplified system is used to analyse
the oscillatory behaviour of the car/trailer combination. Two main mathematical
models were developed:

- the first one considered the car to be a very large structure, and neglected any
Interaction between the car and the trailer:

- the second model was more complex and the towing vehicle had a sideslip
degree of freedom. No yaw motion was permitted. The need for this second
model was imposed by the fact that using the first mathematical model it was
Impossible to predict any instability of the system although it was apparent that
such can occur in real systems.
For the stability analysis the Laplace transform was used, obtaining the characteristic
equation. It was possible to demonstrate, using the second mathematical model, that
the system will, under certain circumstances, be unstable. The expression indicates
that at high speed, where the trailer damping factor is low, it is necessary for the trailer
centre of gravity to be forward of the trailer axle. The expression also indicates that
high trailer mass and inertia, low trailer tyre cornering stiffness and high car speed
contribute to oscillatory instability.

Another problem examined in 1151 was the directional steady-state response of the
car/trailer combination system to steering inputs. The variable used to describe the
steady-state behaviour in this case was the lateral acceleration gain which was defined
as the "steady state lateral acceleration that will result from a fixed unit input of
steering angle". If this gain is excessively high the vehicle system will be over sensitive
to steering inputs.

The criteria for minimum lateral acceleration gain as deduced in [15] are:

- low trailer mass:

- forward location of tow-ball point with respect to the rear car axle. This

31
 criteria is not usually met in normal car/trailer combination systems. Most of
the time, the tow-ball point is positioned backwards with respect to the rear car
axle. This criteria can be satisfied when semi-trailers are used;

- rearward location of the trailer centre of gravity. This condition is related to

the load that is applied by the trailer to the tow-ball point. A high tow-ball load
will have a negative influence on the car handling behaviour.

In 1301 approximate factors are provided, together with measurement techniques and
test procedures that can be used to determine the trailer stability being described. The
paper 1301 dealt with one of the most critical dynamic modes which was associated with
trailer swing. The most significant changes pertinent to trailer swing occur at low
damping ratios, i.e. from 0 to 0.3. where the oscillations are perceptible to the driver
and where safety implications arise.

The factors that influence the damping ratio of the car, trailer and car/trailer
combination system are analysed and the damping ratio is deduced as a simple
formula related to these factors. For the towing car itself, a damping ratio associated
with its directional yawing motion can be related to its understeer gradient at any
forward speed by the following expression:

1
CD- toti, car' (1.2)
ill +KU,;

where:
K understeer gradient per unit length [rads2/m2);
1.10- forward speed Im/s1.

The trailer also has a damping ratio, associated with its geometry. inertia values and
tyre properties. Effectively this will be the damping ratio that would be measured if the
trailer were pulled by a towing car of infinite weight.

11123Ce,
(1.3)
t; trailer aloner--

where:
Ca - cornering stiffness of trailer tyres on one side [N/rad1;

32
maximised when the trailer centre of gravity is located such that the "hookup factor"
is made equal to zero, or the towing car is infinitely heavy with respect to the trailer.
As a conclusion, the paper attempted to quantify trailer swing and explain its origins.
Due to its separation from the other vehicle dynamic modes the trailer swing
characteristics are well represented by a simple second-order system characteristic
that can be easily measured and identified. Improved trailer damping ratios can be
obtained by designs that stress low moments of inertia, long trailer wheelbase and
large car/trailer weight ratios.

In (311 the subject of offtracking is studied, i.e. understeer/oversteer, in steady-state

turns. A mathematical model with one degree of freedom, namely the articulation angle
between the car and the trailer, was used to show that there is a speed, well within the
driving range and independent of radius, at which there will be no offtracking in a
steady turn. At higher speeds the trailer will track outside the steady turn circle
(oversteer), and at lower speeds the trailer will track inside the steady turn circle
(understeer).
The trailer was considered to follow a moving tow-ball point, the subject addressed
being the ability of the trailer to follow the trajectory of the tow-ball point. Tyre self
aligning moments and roll steer were included in the nonlinear single degree of freedom
model. The tow-ball point was considered to have the velocity vector U which had a
constant magnitude. but a variable direction. The orientation and position of the trailer
was described in terms of the tow-ball point position and the articulation angle.

The results of the analysis are presented using a diagrammatic representation of the
offtracking phenomena. It was shown that trailers have a steady state offtracking speed
which depends only on trailer cornering stiffness and wheelbase. Several nonlinearities
will affect the results presented for the steady state motion due to the fact that a
linearised model was used for this analysis. These nonlinearities, which will become
significant in the presence of large load transfer or large tyre lateral forces, will lower
the lateral forces from the linearised model. However, at low trailer lateral acceleration
values, the results obtained using the nonlinear model are similar to those obtained
using the linear model.
Due to the approach used in [31] (towing car was not influenced by the trailer
movements) the system was highly damped, therefore stability in the mathematical
sense was not an issue.

34
 1.4 CONCLUSIONS FROM PREVIOUS WORK

A few important conclusions- can be drawn from previous work regarding caravan
design.
It has been generally agreed that certain design parameters have a predominant effect
on the stability of the caravan. Therefore, whenever it is possible, the following
guidelines should be obeyed:
- the caravan axle must be situated as far back as possible with respect to the
tow-ball point;
- the tow-ball point load must lie in a certain range (around 7%) of the caravan
overall weight. This tow-ball point load is related to the position of the caravan
centre of gravity in the longitudinal plane:
- the height of the caravan centre of gravity must be as low as possible;
- the caravan yaw, roll and pitch moments of inertia must have a low value
whenever possible.
With a high interrelation between the caravan parameters (Appendix B) it is likely that
a compromise solution is the best that can be achieved.

1.5 CAR/CARAVAN DYNAMICS MODELLING NEEDS

Numerous car/caravan dynamics simulation models have been developed during the
years as discussed above. Although a great deal of work has been carried out on
articulated commercial vehicles, coupled car and caravans have not been investigated
to the same extent. The most sophisticated models presented in the technical literature
disregard important degrees of freedom and often use simplified descriptions of tyre
and suspension characteristics. To the knowledge of the author, none of them
combined all the features required for accurate predictions such as:
- incorporation of all the main degrees of freedom that account for lateral
stability;
- flexibility in the representation of the sub-models that describe the model;
- ease of use;
- modelling of both ride and handling characteristics;
- use of measured characteristic data:
- efficient and rapid computation.
It was felt that a need existed for a new model combining all these features.

35
 1.6 RESEARCH OBJECTIVES

The primary objective of this work was to fully understand towed vehicle dynamics and
to formulate and develop a car/caravan computer model suitable for caravan design
studies. The study was to be as general as possible, the aim being to develop a set of
design rules and recommendations that will improve safety, thereby preventing
unnecessary accidents.

1.7 LAYOUT OF THE REPORT

Chapter 1 presents the introduction and a review of related work. It sets out the
research needs and the objectives of the work. In chapter 2 the mathematical
car/caravan ride and handling model on which most of the subsequent work is based
is presented. The simplifications and assumptions made in developing the model are
explained and the resulting limitations on model validity discussed.

Chapter 3 introduces the simulation environment and gives a detailed description of

the model's implementation and an analysis of data requirements. It explains the
Influence of the simulation environment on model structure. Chapter 4 gives details
of experimental work carried out to provide the necessary data for the model validation
and in chapter 5 the validation of the model, with its inherent limitations, is described.
Experimental and predicted results are presented and conclusions are drawn relating
model validity to the development objectives.

In accordance with the initial intent of the project, a sensitivity study is presented in
chapter 6, and recommendations are made. Chapter 7 analyses stability devices based
on the generation of yaw damping forces and draws conclusions regarding the utility
of such devices.
In the last chapter, a summary of the conclusions inferred from the preceding chapters
is presented.

References to other works are made providing a number in squared brackets. The
name of the authors together with the year of publication are given in .the references
list situated at the back of the report. Figures are presented in order at the end of each
chapter.

36
 CHAPTER 2 THE CAR/CARAVAN MATHEMATICAL MODEL

2.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes a caravan and car ride and handling dynamics mathematical
model for use in the investigation of lateral stability of car/caravan combination
systems. The car/caravan model has been developed as a general model suitable for
ride and handling analysis but has been used in the present work for handling studies
alone.
The objectives of producing the present car/caravan model, accuracy requirements and
constraints affecting the development process are discussed. Also the theoretical basis
of the car/caravan model and all the simplifying mathematical assumptions and
approximations made in the development are presented.

2.2 MODEL BACKGROUND

2.2.1 Two degree of freedom caravan model

As a first step in the project, a simplified caravan model was developed. An isolated
caravan model incorporating only two degrees of freedom was produced. The two
degrees of freedom were the yaw and roll angles. The unsprung masses were neglected.
The mass of the towing car was considered large in comparison with that of the
caravan. Therefore the interaction between caravan and car dynamics were neglected.

The model was developed in order to find out the principal characteristics of the
caravan that could influence its stability. The tyre load transfer was not taken into
account since the whole analysis was carried out considering only small perturbations
from the equilibrium position (small yaw and roll angles). A detailed analysis of the
caravan system dynamic behaviour was presented in (321.
The study revealed that a caravan is a lightly damped system with a low natural
frequency. Although the analysis did not point directly to any instability, it indicated
that high speed reduces damping and also low tyre cornering stiffness and high
caravan mass and moments of inertia are likely to cause low frequency and low
damping, neither of which are considered desirable in most dynamic systems.

37
 An extension of the caravan system model was considered necessary in order to predict
high speed instability.

2.2.2 Modelling objectives

The full model was designed to be used for the investigation of the car/caravan
handling characteristics under both transient and steady-state conditions. It was
intended to be computationally efficient and flexible such that it might be used in the
future also for ride studies. Further objectives were that the model should make use
of experimental data describing the car and caravan, some of which was already
available from external sources.

2.2.3 Factors affecting the car/caravan model

a) Development limitations: The time available for the present work was limited as
development was part of a short term project. Only limited car and caravan data was
available, mostly derived from experimental measurements. For the car secondary
suspension system, measurement facilities developed by Ford Motor Company provided
numerical data describing secondary suspension vertical stiffness characteristics.
wheel orientation kinematics and lateral compliance. For the caravan secondary
suspension system, no experimental data was available. Therefore, the require.d
secondary suspension main parameters, such as vertical stiffness and damping
characteristics were measured as described in Chapter 4. Additional measurements
provided data relating to total car and caravan masses and centre of gravity location.
For the car model, other useful information was provided by Ford Motor Company from
their own car modelling programme, describing damper characteristics, unsprung mass
and car engine mass, and inertial properties for the car sprung mass and engine. Tyre
experimental side force and self aligning moment data was available from Goodyear.

b) Model application: The model was designed to represent a Ford Sierra 1.8 LX towing
a standard caravan built onto a type B 1000-5 AL-K0 chassis. However, it was
Intended to use the validated car/caravan model to examine a wider range of passenger
car and caravan combinations. Limitations were set regarding the model application
to car and caravans exhibiting large roll and pitch angles. This restriction allowed
"small angle" based simplifications to be made within the model. The model was

38
 intended for implementation within the Bathfp simulation environment as described
in the next Chapter.

C) Model accuracy requirements: The primary requirement for models used in lateral
stability studies is to produce qualitatively correct behaviour under both transient and
steady-state manoeuvres, in response to driver inputs and external disturbances. The
model was developed for stability studies in towed vehicles and a general accuracy
requirement was set regarding the model achievements:
i) transient manoeuvres should be qualitatively correct with good prediction of
frequency and decay (damping) rates;
II) qualitatively correct steady-state predictions of acceleration responses to steering
Inputs.

2.2.4 Car/caravan model specification

If all possible parameters and degrees of freedom are included in the car/caravan
model, analysis becomes extremely difficult and the hope of reaching any general
conclusions becomes very remote. The determination of reasonable values for all
parameters is in itself a formidable task. On the other hand, if significant parameters
or degrees of freedom are omitted from the model, serious errors can result and invalid
conclusions can be drawn.
To achieve validity in representing fixed control directional dynamics in both steady-
state and transient manoeuvres, the factors that must be suitably accounted for are:
- caravan and car yaw, longitudinal and lateral accelerations;
- caravan and car yaw and horizontal velocities and positions;
- caravan and car roll motion states;
- tyre lateral force characteristics;
-tyre vertical load distribution;
- car steering system kinematics.
All these previous assumptions correspond to the case when fore/aft equilibrium is
assumed. If car/caravan longitudinal dynamics are to be also accounted for, then the
additional degrees of freedom required for the car/caravan model are:
- caravan and car tyre longitudinal force characteristics, including the interaction with
side force:
- car and caravan wheel spin dynamics (to calculate the tyre longitudinal slip);
- caravan and car brake torque distribution and car drive torque distribution.

39
Aerodynamic forces and moments are also important for high speed studies, but the
aerodynamic interaction between car and caravan is still not fully resolved.

If the model has to asses ride quality, then the following additional factors must be
accounted for:
- caravan and car sprung mass pitch and vertical (bounce) motions;
- caravan and car unsprung mass vertical dynamics.

Since the car/caravan model obtained after all the previous degrees of freedom have
been introduced is large and difficult to comprehend, most of the existing models
developed by previous workers account for either handling or ride, and furthermore the
roll degree of freedom is usually disregarded.

2.3 CAR/CARAVAN MODEL THEORY

2.3.1 Car/caravan modelling methods

Over the years there have been a number of different approaches to the development
of simplified lumped parameter car/caravan models for ride and handling dynamics.
For handling studies, the car/caravan combination system was treated as two bodies
constrained together at the coupling of the tow-ball point (also called the fifth wheel).
The tow-ball point has also proven a convenient origin for the equations of motion.
Three degrees of freedom have proven valid for constant forward speed analysis (yaw
velocity, car sideslip and articulation angle). When forward speed was included as a
variable, a large articulation angle was permitted and tyre non-linear characteristics
were used to examine the behaviour of the car/caravan system. The first non-linear
models were developed in the early 1960s and included four degrees of freedom:
forward speed, lateral velocity, yaw velocity and articulation angle.
For ride studies at normal driving speeds the models were required to account for both
primary and secondary suspension vertical characteristics. Therefore, only four degrees
of freedom were initially used. The latest models include car and caravan sprung mass
roll, pitch and independent unsprung mass vertical degrees of freedom accounting for
secondary suspension characteristics and tyre vertical properties.
The approach adopted in this work was to combine the two existing types of
car/caravan models.

40
2.3.2 Description of the car/caravan model

The car/caravan model uses alumped parameter rigid body approach. There are eight
masses in total that make up the system. The car is assumed to be comprised of five
masses: the car sprung mass and the four car unsprung masses.
The caravan is assumed to be comprised of three masses: the caravan unsprung mass
and the two caravan unsprung masses.

2.3.3 Approximations and assumptions

The mathematical assumptions that have been made derive directly from the models
intended area of application.

While the model accuracy requirements tend to promote the development of a highly
detailed model, there are a number of practical constraints which must be carefully
considered. For example, the limited availability of data relating to the properties and
dimensions of cars and caravans and the limited computational resources available for
the solution of the model, prevents highly complex analysis.

The following assumptions have been used:

a) The caravan and car sprung masses were considered as rigid bodies. Body flexibility
was neglected and the car engine and transmission mass were considered to be rigidly
attached to the chassis:
b) Caravan and car sprung mass roll and pitch angles are assumed to be small:
C) Changes in caravan and car sprung mass roll and pitch moments of inertia with roll
and pitch respectively, were neglected:
d) The caravan and car unsprung masses were treated as point masses acting at the
wheel centres. This eliminates two of the three rotational degrees of freedom associated
with each unsprung mass:
e) Lateral and longitudinal car and caravan unsprung mass dynamics were ignored.
since vertical wheel motion has the dominant influence upon both primary and
secondary suspension forces:
The caravan and car unsprung masses are constrained to move relative to the sprung
masses. Therefore, only the vertical displacement remains as an independent degree
of freedom. Also, the wheel hub spins were considered as independent degrees of

41
 freedom:
g) Caravan secondary suspension compliance and geometric steer effects were not
included;
h) Car secondary suspension compliance and geometric effects were included only as
static characteristics (tabulated experimental data was available):
i) The caravan and car sprung mass referenced coordinate axes were assumed to be
principal axes of inertia. This assumption reduced the number of inertial parameters
required for the models (since the products of inertia were all zero):
j) Caravan and car unsprung mass vertical displacement had no influence on the
centre of gravity location for caravan and car respectively;
k) The horizontal distances at which the caravan secondary suspension forces act on
the caravan sprung mass were assumed constant (due to small roll and pitch angle
approximations):
1) Tyre contact patch deflections and distortions were neglected. The contact with the
road was taken as point contact. Tyre vertical forces were assumed to act through the
unsprung mass centres, producing no moments. Tyre side forces were assumed to act
horizontally at ground level producing self aligning moments, proportional to side force
and pneumatic trail, about a vertical axis passing through the unsprung mass centres;
m)Tyre vertical stiffness and damping components were modelled linearly. The vertical
characteristics of the tyre were assumed to be independent of wheel orientation and
horizontal forces;
n) Tyre dynamic radial deflection is small and therefore negligible:
o) Tyre carcass compliance was ignored:
p) Tyre longitudinal force behaviour: braking and driving forces were assumed to act
horizontally, perpendicular to the wheel's spin axes and in the longitudinal plane, being
independent of speed and dependant upon tyre longitudinal slip, side force and vertical
force (vertical load):
q) Tyre lateral force behaviour: lateral forces were assumed to act horizontally
perpendicular to the wheel's longitudinal axis. Steady state levels of side force were
assumed to be independent of velocity and dependant upon slip angle, camber angle,
longitudinal force and vertical force (vertical load). Transient side force characteristics
were modelled as a first order dependency upon distance travelled:
r) Tyre brake/drive forces were assumed to act horizontally at ground level producing
moments proportional to tyre loaded radius about the wheels spin axes:
s) Caravan and car rolling resistance, including tyre drag, were neglected. A simplified
aerodynamic force was applied only to the car, being dependant upon speed, car frontal
area and aerodynamic coefficients. It was assumed that no aerodynamic yaw moment

42
was induced by the aerodynamic forces. The car aerodynamic forces apply only for the
car in isolation. No attempt was made to model the aerodynamic interaction between
the car and caravan. Therefore, the caravan aerodynamic effects were neglected in the
analysis;
t) Braking torques applied through the caravan and car wheels were balanced laterally
across the car. The same approximation also applies for the car wheel accelerating
torques;
u) Caravan and car wheel camber angles were assumed to be small;
v) The road surface was assumed to be smooth and levelled. This was considered a
sensible assumption when handling characteristics are investigated.

2.3.4 Coordinate systems

When multi-body systems are considered, it is important that reference frames are well
defined. Three coordinate systems are employed in the analysis of the car/caravan
combination system:
- a fixed inertial reference frame;
- a stationary instantaneously caravan referenced frame;
- a stationary instantaneously car referenced frame.
All three systems are right hand orthogonal systems. The axes of the inertial frame are
labelled X, Y and Z. those of the caravan referenced frame x,,y, and z e and those of the
car referenced frame x,„y, and 4.
The caravan and car reference frames are non-pitching, non-rolling frames whose
origins lie on the inertial X-Y plane, such that the vertical ze and zy axes pass through
the caravan and car centres of gravity respectively. The orientations are such that the
caravan longitudinal axis lies in the x,-; plane and the car longitudinal axis lies in the
x„-z„ plane.
A schematic diagram of the three reference frames is given in figure 2.1.
For the caravan model all the motions are considered with respect to the caravan )(rye;
embedded reference frame. However, in order to identify the position of the caravan
with respect to the inertial frame, the tow-ball point horizontal inertial coordinates are
calculated.

43
2.4 MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE MODEL

The following sections present-the equations used to represent the characteristics of

the car/caravan model. A semi-empirical modelling approach was adopted, where
parametric data measured from a given car and caravan were combined with the
system differential equations and solved in the time domain. This approach provided
flexibility whilst avoiding the complication of a multi-body representation.
The car/caravan combination system is fundamentally twenty four degrees of freedom,
comprising of eight lumped masses.

Global state variables are defined for the caravan and car models and linked
kinematically through the tow-ball point.

2.4.1 Caravan motion states

The caravan model, in the most general case, can be modelled as a system of rigid
masses connected by complaint members. In this study, the caravan model is
represented as a three mass system where the sprung mass of the caravan has three
rotational and three linear degrees of freedom, and the unsprung masses have one
linear (vertical) and one rotational (wheel spin) degree of freedom. Therefore, the whole
caravan model has ten degrees of freedom.
In order to identify the position of the caravan within the inertial reference frame, the
caravan tow-ball point horizontal inertial coordinates were calculated.

The ten degrees of freedom describing the caravan are:

- u, = forward velocity of the caravan in the x, direction;

- ve = lateral velocity of the caravan in the y, direction;
- = caravan yaw angle about the vertical Z axis;
- 0, = caravan sprung mass pitch angle about y, axis:
- = caravan sprung mass roll angle about the roll axis;
- z, = caravan sprung mass vertical displacement (bounce):
- zel(1=1-2) = wheel hubs vertical displacement;
- D.„0,. 1-2) = wheel hubs angular velocity about the spin axis.

A schematic diagram of the ten degrees of freedom caravan model used in this analysis

44
 is presented in figure 2.2. The subscripts one and two refer to the right and left
caravan wheel stations respectively.
Additionally, caravan tyre longitudinal and lateral forces and self-aligning moments are
considered state quantities (F, 1_2 , F 1 _2 and AtItz1 _2). Rates of change of caravan model
displacement states (velocities) are also treated as state quantities.

2.4.2 Lagrangian equations for quasi-coordinates

The equations of motion for the caravan system have been derived using Lagrange's
equations. Lagrange's equations were used for two reasons:
a) they represent the most suitable way of solving the dynamical problem in
terms of the most economical coordinates, that is, suitably selected so that they
do not violate the physical constraints of the system. The subsequent number
of equations of motion derived are then equal to the number of degrees of
freedom - the constraint coordinates have been removed. Further, the
constraint forces do not appear in the problem, thus reducing the number of
unknowns:
b) the car model previously developed and implemented in Bathfp employed the
Newton-Euler approach which required the determination of the constraint
forces acting upon the car sprung mass, which represent the forces acting
through the car secondary suspension links.

After the equations of motion for the system as a whole have been deduced using
Lagrange's equations, the sub-components of the system can be analysed in more
depth using the classical mechanical approach. In this way it is easier to analyse only
the required sub-components of the system than to split up the whole system from the
very first stage of the analysis.

Classical Lagrangian equations for a system with n generalised coordinates are:

d aT
achaq, (2.1)

i= 1.. n

where:
T - kinetic energy of the system:

45
Q, - the external forces or moments applied to the system:
CL - the generalised coordinates for which the equation is being written.

This form of the Lagrangian equations may be applied correctly to a system for which
the knowledge of the n generalised coordinates, and the constitution of the system
together with the time t is sufficient to determine the position of any component in any
configuration of the system. However, for our caravan system the reference axes
embedded into the caravan body are not inertial since they are allowed to exhibit a
large yaw angle. Since not all the generalised components about the orthogonal body
axes can be integrated to obtain actual generalised coordinates, the associated
variables are referred to as quasi-coordinates [331. A full description of the Lagrange's
equations in terms of quasi-coordinates is given in Appendix A.

2.4.3 Derivation of the caravan equations of motion

The equations of motion for the whole caravan system are deduced in Appendix B. They
represent the complete dynamic equations of motion for the whole caravan system.
Using the assumption that the body centred coordinate system x eyezc is a principal
system, all the products of inertia for the caravan sprung mass are equal to zero:

lxy.s=lyx,s-'1.,r4s="Ivcs=ly„=Izy.s=0 (2.2)

Inserting previous equation into the Lagrangian equations, the mathematical equations
that should be used in the simulation programme are:

Mfic-r,(Muc+MAp)=Fxc-Fbci-Fua

MOc+MApc+Mucrc=Fyc+Fty,+Fw2

Izzi-c+ MAucpc=Fycac -(Ftyi +Fty2)(L- ad -(Mtzl+M)+(Foa-Fbe2)71 (2.3)

-Msg hcsin c-2 k(L- ad' k(L- ad (2z,- zc, -;2 + 2 hzo) -

- c(L-a)f2qc(L- ad +2tc-±c,-±c2-Bpj-Flcac- (Mix/ +mbc)

46
 (Msh; + „ )/3 c + M A Oc = Msghl sin(0,-1C_1(z„
1 - za + -

_c f(± i_k2+Bpd
2
Ms2c-Msg+ Fsc -2k0c(L-ad+k(zci +zc2-2;-2V-c[2±c +2q,(L-ac) -2c/ - 2,2]
h91+Ro
=intig-kEzci-;+(i)4 - 0 c(L- _ km] _ kpci _
nity21

-cr±c1-2c+pc4-qc(L-a)1-c(21-1ko)

m.,2 2 . mu g- Itiza- z - c 44 -0 ac) - hen1 -1c(za- h 2 +R)

q c(L- a)] -c(±c2- ho)

iYy .tAci ''Mbc1—Ft.viRti

IwtA2 = bc2- FoaRt1

The first two of the equations (2.3) are related to the translational movement of the
caravan. The following three describe the angular movements of the caravan sprung
mass (yaw, pitch and roll). The last five equations describe the caravan sprung mass
vertical (bounce) motion and the caravan unsprung mass vertical motions (wheel
vertical motions) and wheel spin.
In the next paragraphs the Lagrangian equations of motion will be presented
Individually, in relation to the caravan sub-component models to which they relate.
This was necessary because of the Bathfp simulation environment implementation
requirements.

2.4.4 Caravan sprung mass motion

The caravan sprung mass is the most complex model in the caravan suite. It
Incorporates six degrees of freedom, describing the motion in the general case.
The caravan sprung mass model is based on a lumped parameter rigid body
representation. Body flexibility is neglected. Constant inertial properties were
considered due to the assumption of small roll and pitch angles.
The horizontal distances at which vertical secondary suspension forces act on the
caravan sprung mass were assumed constant.

47
 Caravan longitudinal and lateral motions and yaw, pitch and roll accelerations are
evaluated:

a) Caravan linear longitudinal motion:

The longitudinal acceleration of the whole caravan system is:

Mit,— rc(Mvc+MshIpc)=Fx,-F„-F„ (2.4)

The tow-ball longitudinal force and the tyre longitudinal forces contribute to the
caravan longitudinal acceleration. If the aerodynamic drag force is known, an extra
term related to the aerodynamic longitudinal force can be added to the previous
equation.

b) Caravan linear lateral motion:

The caravan linear lateral acceleration is due to the tow-ball lateral force and tyre
lateral forces and is:

M6c +Ms hiPc +Muc rc Fyc + Fty I + Fty2

(2.5)

Once again, if the lateral aerodynamic force expression that acts on the caravan is
available, then the contribution of this force to the caravan lateral motion can be added
to the previous equation.

c) Caravan yaw acceleration:

Yaw acceleration is calculated for the whole caravan system:

Izzi-c+MAucpc-Fucac—(Fty1+Fty2)(L—ac)—(111m1+M„)+(F„—F„) B (2.6)

where:
13, - tyre contact patch track.

As can be seen, the tyres longitudinal forces, lateral forces and self aligning moments
and the tow-ball lateral force contributed to the whole caravan yaw acceleration. As
discussed above, if the yaw aerodynamic moment for the caravan is known, then its
effect can be added to the caravan yaw acceleration equation.

d) Caravan sprung mass pitch acceleration:

Pitch acceleration is calculated for the caravan sprung mass:

48
 -Msghesin0 c -2 k(L- ac)20 c - la- ad (22,-z„ -2+ 2 hen)
(2.7)
c(L- ac)[2qc(L-ac) +22c-±„±a-Bpj-Flcac-(Mbci+Mbc)

The pitch moment is generated by the tow-ball vertical force, caravan sprung mass
gravity force and secondary suspension forces. Brake torque also represents an
external input for the caravan system (brake torque demand) contributing to the
caravan sprung mass pitch acceleration.

e) Caravan sprung mass roll acceleration:

(Msh+1..)pc +MAtic =M9gh1 s1n(1)c -1c.12

2 (zc 1 c2 +13:1)c)-cL3(2 -2 +Bp) (2.8)
2 cl e2

Roll acceleration is given by the secondary suspension forces and caravan sprung mass
gravity force.

I) Caravan sprung mass vertical motion (bounce):

Ms2c-Msg+Fw-2k0c(L-ad+k(zc,+za-22c-2hed-c[22c+2qc(L-a)-tc1-±c21 (2.9)

The caravan sprung mass bounce motion is mainly due to the tow-ball vertical force,
caravan sprung mass gravity force and caravan secondary suspension forces.

2.4.5 Caravan unsprung mass vertical motion

The wheels were modelled as having only two independent degrees of freedom, namely
unsprung mass vertical motion and wheel spin.
It was assumed that the relative motion of the wheels with respect to the caravan body
In a vertical plane does not significantly influence the system centre of gravity position.
All other degrees of freedom, including the rotational degrees associated with the
unsprung mass were neglected. This approximation is consistent with previous work
which has shown that the suspension system lateral stiffness is high and as a result,
the linear lateral movement of the wheels can be considered as being the same as for
the caravan sprung mass.
The caravan unsprung masses incorporate the entire mass of the wheel. tyre hub

49
assemblies together with elements of the suspension linkage masses. All external forces
are considered to act at the wheel centres.
The equations describing the vertical movement of the caravan unsprung masses are:

InuA 1 'Inwg -kfz„-z,+4),._B2_ -0,(1.-ac)-hj-ki(zc1 -11.91 +Ru)-

±c + Per qc(L - cc)]

(2.10)
ma7c2'mug-ze-,1)c7
13 cUL- -liztn) -kt(Za-hs2+)-

cl±c2 -2c-peI
B - qe(L-ac)l- c,(2c2-

where: subscripts one and two refer to the right side and left side of the caravan
respectively.
The caravan unsprung mass vertical motion is generated under the influence of the
unsprung mass gravity forces, the caravan secondary suspension forces and tyre
vertical forces.

2.4.6 Caravan secondary suspension

The caravan secondary suspension system is assumed to be laterally symmetrical.

For the caravan trailing link suspension, the conventional roll axis, as outlined in (34),

is situated at the ground level and considered to be fixed (does not change its position
during roll oscillations).
The caravan secondary suspension system provides the couplings between the caravan
sprung and unsprung masses which are assumed to be rigid in all directions, except
the vertical one.

Secondary suspension properties are considered as functions of vertical sprung to

unsprung mass displacement and velocity. In order to evaluate the suspension forces
it is necessary to determine the suspension's deformations.
Relative unsprung mass to sprung mass velocities and deflections are calculated for
both sides of the caravan:

50
 B
ii.-[;-20+1/..,-0c-2.+0c(L-ad]
(2.11)
B
.1
7 2 .-- -[;-2,2 + hz„+4),,7.+0c(L-01

where:
km - initial vertical distance between sprung mass centre of gravity and wheel hub:
B- caravan secondary suspension track;
- subscripts one and two refer to the right side and left side of the caravan
respectively.

Experimental measurements conducted on the standard caravan axle revealed that the
caravan secondary suspension system had a linear characteristic.
The rubber used in the caravan secondary suspension construction provides both a
spring stiffness and damping effect. Since the rubber does not provide a different
damping rate under bump or rebound conditions as in hydraulic shock absorbers, a
constant damping rate was adopted.
The secondary suspension vertical forces are:

Fsuspl -2 — kl -211-2 + C1-2111-2 (2.12)

If the secondary suspension exhibits different spring stiffness or damping rates for
right and left sides, then the appropriate values can be used to describe the right and
left sides of the caravan.
Another way of expressing the secondary suspension forces contributing to the caravan
sprung mass roll motion is possible if the variation of the roll moment as a function of
roll angle and roll angular velocity is known:

am,„, (2.13)
F x
susp (track) = - (1) c + u Pc
a<t)c aPc

where:
IVIn,11 - is the secondary suspension roll moment;
4)e - secondary suspension roll stiffness:
aM itiii/ 3

aMn/ape - secondary suspension roll damping.

In this way it is possible to include all the effects that contribute to the roll stiffness
and roll damping, such as roll bars, parasitic moments generated by suspension
bushes, etc (were applicable).

51
2.4.7 Caravan tyre mathematical model

a) Caravan tyre vertical force: The tyre is modelled as a "vertical" spring and damper
used in compression. The spring stiffness and damping rate are assumed to be
constant. This is a common approximation that produces only small errors within the
normal load range of the tyre.
Therefore, tyre vertical load as a linear function of vertical deflection and rate of change
of vertical displacement are (for right and left sides respectively):

Ftz1=Is(z1+Rich91)+020-hgl)
(2.14)
Fiz2 = 1S(Ze2 + R h92) + C(±c2 — hg)

where:
Rtf tyre free radius (tyre under no vertical load):
- ground vertical displacement under right and left wheel respectively.

The tyre contact with the road has been taken as point contact. This neglects the finite
area and enveloping tendencies of the real tyre, but provides good approximation where
smooth road surfaces are considered.
The tyre is allowed to lose contact with the ground, at which point all tyre forces and
moments become zero.

b) Caravan tyre shear forces: Two tyre shear force functions are used in this work. Tyre
shear force is a function of vertical load, slip angle, camber angle and longitudinal slip.
In the first model, tyre lateral are self-aligning moment variation with slip angle,
camber angle and tyre vertical load is determined using a linear interpolation function
within a four dimensional array of experimental data. The second model is a full
computer implementation 135] of the Pacejka model outlined in [7].
Tyre longitudinal force variation is represented using the function suggested in [7]:
1
cxsx
F (bi n + b2F,) sin[ 1.65at (2.15)
1.65(kez + 132FE)

where:
cx = tyre longitudinal slip stiffness at zero slip:
b, = load dependency of longitudinal friction:
b2 = longitudinal friction level at zero load.

52
To account for tyre lateral and longitudinal force interaction a method proposed by
Bakker in 151 is used. A total theoretical slip quantity is computed combining the tyre
slip angle and longitudinal slip-components:

a 4,2r + tan2a (2.16)

1 + Sx

From the previous equation an equivalent tyre longitudinal slip and an equivalent tyre
slip angle are computed assuming zero longitudinal slip and zero slip angle:

6
Se
1+6 (2.17)
a, = -atan(a)

These are used in the evaluation of side force, self-aligning moment and longitudinal
force (as characterised above) yielding equivalent forces and moments, F,e, Fty, and Itike
respectively.
Finally a correction is made for the direction and magnitudes of the forces generating:

F„,
ftx(a, yc, se Ft) =
a(1 + s)
tan(a)Fy,
fty (a, yc, se Ft) = (2.18)
cr( 1 +s)

tan(a)Mze
f (a, y„ sx,
cr( 1 +s)

2.4.8 Caravan tyre force dynamics

Although the steady-state tyre characteristics are sufficient for most investigations, an
approximation of the transient tyre behaviour has also been included. The generation
of tyre forces is considered to be dynamically dependent upon distance rolled. This
accounts quantitatively for the finite tread and tyre carcass displacements required to
transmit shear forces through the tyre. •

A first order lag is used to represent the dynamic relationship between actual and
steady-state tyre forces:

53
 (2.19)

where:
Lr- caravan tyre relaxation length;
- travelled distance;
Ftyss - steady-state caravan tyre side force;
Muss - steady-state caravan tyre self aligning moment.

2.4.9 Caravan wheel spin

Caravan wheel rotation makes up two of the twenty four degrees of freedom of the
car/caravan combination system. Both caravan wheels are acted on by external brake
torques.
The equations describing the caravan wheel spin are:

/
cyy. tr
S./
c I = Mb, 1 - Fba Rctl
(2.20)
cyy J.-c2 = Alba - Ftx2R„i

where:
Itct, - caravan tyre loaded radius;
caravan tyre spin inertia;
M bc1(1. 1 -2) - caravan wheel brake torque demand.

The brake torque distribution is considered to be constant and evenly spread between
right and left caravan wheels.

2.4.10 Tow-ball mathematical model

In most technical literature related to caravan dynamics. the tow-ball point has been
considered to be simply the pivotal point between the caravan and the towing car.
In the present analysis, the tow-ball point has been modelled as a flexible connection

54
between the caravan and the car models. It consist of a stiff compliant link modelled
using three springs and three dampers, each one parallel to the reference set of axes
xeycz, embedded in the caravan body. Therefore, limited movement is allowed inside the
tow-ball point.

The forces that act on the tow-ball point are:

- the traction force Fw parallel with the Ox, axis;

- the reaction force Fy, parallel with the Oy e axis;
- the normal force F w parallel with the Oz, axis.

The reaction force Fy , is mainly due to the yawing movement of the car and caravan,
whereas the normal force Fw is related to the tow-ball point load and car/caravan
combination system pitch and bounce motions. All the moments that may act in the
tow-ball point, e.g. friction moments, are neglected.
Another function of the tow-ball point is to kinematically link the caravan and the car
models. The velocity of the tow-ball point must be the same whether it is described in
terms of caravan or car variables.
Since the XY, x cy, and xvy,, axis systems are co-planar, the tow-ball point velocities in
the fixed coordinate system may be related to velocities in the moving coordinate
systems as seen from the caravan or from the car.
Regarding the tow-ball point as part of the caravan system, its velocity is (Euler's
relation for velocities):

ure-Fcg+TA
(2.21)
— 7 7
V cg= Uct + VJ

Hence:

lic
(2.22)
vtcy = acpc

And:

Vwc = vt „cos y e - utcysinw e ucc oskire- ( vc- acpc) sin we

r

(2.23)
Vrey= vwxsimve+ utcycostve= ucsin ye+ ( vc- acp) cosmic

In a similar way, the velocities of the tow-ball point as part of the car system can be

55
determined:

Iftioc= vu.wcosyv- Ruysinw,- ttvcosvv-(R,- Sup)sinwv

(2.24)
vftwsin wv+ vcosy t,= upsinyv+ (vv- Supdcoslifv

where:
S„ - longitudinal distance between the car centre of gravity and the tow-ball point.

Equations (2.23) and (2.24) describe the velocity of the tow-ball point.
Thus:

lItcX=VtuK
(2.25)
Iitcy=Vm,

2.4.11 Car motion states

Two classes of models were combined to provide a ride and handling model of
minimum complexity. Thus the model combined seven ride with seven handling
degrees of freedom. The degrees of freedom describing the car are:

- uv = forward velocity of the car in the xv direction;

- vv = lateral velocity of the car in the y,„ direction;
- = car yaw angle about the vertical Z axis;
- Ov = car sprung mass pitch angle about y v axis;
- = car sprung mass roll angle about the roll axis:
- zv = car sprung mass vertical displacement (bounce);
- zvi1=1 -4) = wheel hub vertical displacement;
- nvi(1=1 -4) = wheel hub angular velocity about the spin axis.

Within the model, car centre of gravity linear displacement with respect to the XYZ
inertial frame is described by the linear coordinates X v and Yv and the car yaw angle
Wv.

The vertical displacements of the sprung mass eyebrow points Z._

— vm(1 = 1 -4) are used to

represent the car sprung mass roll and pitch angular displacements. The subscripts
one to four refer to the front right to rear left wheel stations respectively.

56
As in the caravan sprung mass model (2.4.4) car tyre longitudinal and lateral forces
and sell-aligning moments are considered state quantities IF F and M,1_4). Rates
of change of car model displacement states (velocities) are also treated as state
quantities.
The constraint forces relating car sprung and unsprung masses were evaluated on the
basis of a static analysis. ignoring linkage inertia dynamic effects. These dynamic
effects were ignored primarily to simplify the analysis.
The next paragraphs will give a succinct presentation of the car model sub-
components. No equations are displayed, since the car mathematical modelling has
been described in depth in [36] and [37].

2.4.12 Car sprung mass motion

Car sprung mass roll and pitch accelerations and bounce vertical acceleration were
estimated as a result of the gravity forces, secondary suspension forces and external
forces action. As presented in the previous paragraph (2.4.11), they are transformed
to yield car sprung mass eyebrow point vertical accelerations.
External drive and brake torques contribute to the car sprung mass pitch motion.
Yaw acceleration was calculated for the whole car system, whereas roll, pitch and
bounce were evaluated for the car sprung mass.

2.4.13 Car unsprung mass vertical motion

The car unsprung masses are acted upon by secondary suspension forces and tyre
vertical forces.
Unsprung mass includes wheel and hub mass plus a percentage of the moving
secondary suspension component masses.

2.4.14 Car secondary suspension

Car suspension properties are considered as functions of vertical unsprung to sprung

mass displacement. To facilitate this, the independent car sprung mass roll, pitch and
bounce motions are replaced by the car sprung eyebrow vertical displacements.
Bounce forces are functions of relative vertical displacement and damper forces are

57
functions of relative vertical velocities:

zusia)

F„sci=f,, tusta) (2.26)

where: fr 1 -4.

The suspension forces are the sums of the previous two components, plus another term
due to roll bar stiffness which is function of the right and left wheel displacements.
Details of the functions used to represent car secondary suspension characteristics are
given in Appendix C.

2.4.15 Car wheel spin

Car wheel rotation make up four of the twenty four degrees of freedom of the
car/caravan combination system. Both car axles are acted on by external drive and
brake torques.
A similar equation to that presented in 2.4.9 can be used to describe the car wheel
spin:

luyy,u, M I tx I R oti
(2.27)
LI Mbv2 - Mdv2 - Ftx2Rvtl

where:
Ryti - car tyre loaded radius:
Ivyy.w - car tyre spin inertia:

M bvI(I=1 -4) - car wheel brake torque demand:

M dvI(I=1- 4) - car wheel drive torque demand.

The car drive and brake torque axle distribution is considered to be even. Front to rear
torque distribution is defined using constant coefficients.

2.4.16 External forces and disturbances

The external forces acting on the car and caravan are due to: tyre shear forces and
moments and vertical tyre reaction forces. Aerodynamic forces are implemented only
for the car model. The treatment of aerodynamic forces is highly simplified. They are

58
 assumed to act horizontally through the car centre of gravity. No other motions such
as yaw, pitch, roll or vertical movements are induced by the aerodynamic forces.

Car aerodynamic drag and side force are defined as:

1
Da„=__ pV2 CD A
2
(2.28)
1
S = _pV2 Cs A
2

where:
Dam - car aerodynamic drag;
Saero - car aerodynamic side force;

CD - car aerodynamic drag coefficient:

Cs - car side force coefficient (function of the relative wind angle);

A - car frontal area;
V - total wind velocity;
p - air density.

It would not have been a problem to introduce aerodynamic forces for the caravan
system in isolation (such as those introduced for the car system). However, the main
problem with the aerodynamic forces acting on a car/caravan combination system is
the influence of the interaction between the car and caravan on the total force. To the
knowledge of the author, insufficient work is available to describe the aerodynamic
effect on a car/caravan system. Therefore, the aerodynamic forces were assumed to act
only on the car system as if it was in isolation (using an increased value for Daer.).

The disturbance inputs to the car and caravan are:

- drivers steering wheel an gl e 8drv;
- car drive and brake torques Mdv1(1.1 -41 and M bv)(1= I -4);
- caravan brake torque Mbel(i=1-2)•

If the model is to be used for ride analysis, ground vertical displacement inputs can be
made in velocity form and integrated. They may be functions of time or car/caravan
combination system displacement in the inertial reference frame.

59
2.4.17 Caravan and car wheel orientation

Prior to the calculation of tyre side forces, for both the caravan and car, wheel
orientations and velocities must be determined. Since no caravan secondary
suspension experimental data, such as suspension geometric steer compliance, was
available, the only effect taken into account for the caravan wheel orientation was the
wheel camber angle. However, for the car model, The Ford Motor Company supplied
a large set of experimental data, from their own research programme, related to
secondary suspension kinematic and force compliance. The data was available in
tabulated format, and computer routines were used to fit polynomial functions to the
given data (Appendix C).

a)Slip angles and longitudinal slip:

Slip angles for the car and caravan are determined by considering the car and caravan
centres of gravity longitudinal and lateral velocity components and tyre contact patch
velocities relative to the centres of gravity. The latter comprises of components due to
yaw, roll and pitch and for the car model, of wheel centre track width and camber
variations with wheel to body vertical displacement. Car wheelbase variations are
Ignored in the analysis. In order to calculate tyre longitudinal slip, which is given as
the ratio of tyre slip velocity to the velocity component in the direction of wheel's
longitudinal axis, the wheel's angular velocity at the wheel centre was determined.

Hence the expression for the tyre slip angle is:

a =-8 +
wci (2.29)
cid( dm
ul)toddi

and for the tyre longitudinal slip:

Row -1 (2.30)
2,00. Vwc(
(cosuoti) lu, Lit

where:
6dn, - car steer angle:
Rem„ - tyre loaded radius (assumed to be the effective rolling radius);
- wheel hub angular velocity (for caravan and car respectively):
1401, - wheel longitudinal velocity (for caravan and car respectively);
- wheel lateral velocity (for caravan and car respectively);

60
The subscript i takes values one and two for the caravan model and from one to four
for the car model. A positive longitudinal slip value results if a driving torque is applied
to the wheel.

b) Camber angles:
For the caravan wheels, since no suspension steer compliant information was
available, the wheel camber angle was considered equal to the caravan sprung mass
roll angle. This was valid for the trailing arm secondary suspension used.
For the car, absolute wheel camber angle comprises of camber relative to car sprung
mass (described as a nonlinear function of car vertical sprung to unsprung mass
displacement) and roll angle. To simplify the analysis, the influences of lateral forces
and steering wheel angle on camber were neglected.

Car wheel steer angle Od,, is evaluated relative to the car longitudinal axis using a
polynomial function that accounts for steering rack compliance (data supplied by Ford
Motor Company).

2.4.18 Auxiliary variables

Supplementary variables were calculated from the state quantities:

a) car and caravan absolute speed:

Vv=g-T
(2.31)
Vv=1T.,-7v
)

b) car and caravan course angles:

(2.32)
Vv=

61
C) car and caravan attitude angles:

pc=wc-v,
(2.33)
13„--wv-vt,

Also car roll angle (I),, car roll rate p„, car pitch angle 0,, car pitch rate q, and car
sprung mass centre of gravity height are calculated as functions of the car sprung
mass eyebrow vertical displacements and car dimensions.

2.5 CONCLUSIONS

A car/caravan simulation model incorporating ride and handling dynamics has been
presented. It was developed for handling and stability studies and incorporates all the
necessary features for predicting handling characteristics. The model can also be used
for ride analysis (an appropriate tyre model should be employed).
Small angle approximations were used for caravan and car roll, pitch and wheel
camber angles. Wheel orientation and car steering system dynamics were not modelled.
Provision was made for car driver steering, brake and drive torque inputs.
Simplifying assumptions were employed to express the constraint equations relating
sprung and unsprung mass positions for both the caravan and the car. The roll axis
concept was used to calculate load transfer.
State of the art tyre models using experimentally measured caravan and car tyre
characteristics were incorporated. Polynomial functions were used to represent car
suspension kinematic and geometric characteristics. Complete lateral symmetry was
assumed for the caravan and the car models.
Caravan and car sprung mass models incorporated all six possible degrees of freedom.
Independent vertical degrees of freedom were used for the caravan and car unsprung
masses together with wheels spin degrees of freedom. In conclusion, the whole
car/caravan was modelled using eight lumped masses incorporating twenty four
degrees of freedom.

62
 X

0 Z z z axes Into plane of paper

i v Y

Figure 2.1 Coordinate systems.

Figure 2.2 Caravan sprung and unsprung mass descriptions.

63
CHAPTER 3 SIMULATION OF CAR/CARAVAN SYSTEM DYNAMICS

3.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the Bathfp simulation software environment 140-41] in which
the car and caravan handling models have been developed, the structure of the models
and the implementation. The caravan model is presented in detail whilst the car
simulation model, being based on the car model developed for Bathfp as part of a
project dealing with active suspension systems [36-37], is considered in less depth.

3.2 THE Bathfp SIMULATION ENVIRONMENT

The simulation package Bathfp has been developed over a number of years by the Fluid
Power Centre at Bath University, for the prediction of fluid power system dynamics.
However, in the last few years, the package has been extended to many types of
systems including vehicle dynamics.
The package runs on a SunSPARCstation in an X-Windows/UNIX environment and
provides a state of the art user interface using windows, icons, menus and pop-ups.
The principal incorporated features are:
a) a mouse driven graphical interface, through which all the steps required for
a full simulation, such as system layout (circuit sketching), definition and input
of parameters and initial conditions, and results displayed, can be performed;
b) an extensive library of computational object codes (sub-component models)
representing the dynamic behaviour and performance characteristics of a wide
range of hydraulic, pneumatic, mechanical, electrical and control components;
c) a code generator, capable of interpreting circuit definition schemes and
producing an executable simulation programme;
d) an advanced collection of modern integration algorithms [42] with an
automatic mechanism to select the most appropriate:
e) sophisticated graphical analysis tools for results and a facility for rapid
circuit reconfiguration;
I) utilities to allow the user to add new models to the package. -

64
3.2.1 Modelling approach

In common with the general philosophy of the Bathfp simulation package, circuits can
be represented by combinations of relatively simple models. A subdivision and
simplification approach has been adopted. This is achieved through the natural
division of circuits into individual components, the so called sub-models.
Each individual model can be described parametrically, geometrically or dynamically
and developed to represent the generalised characteristics of each type of component.
In order to match specific component characteristics, the user is able to define known
dimensional or performance parameters.

3.2.2 Causality constraints on the modelling process

Causality governs the solubility of any system represented by two or more interacting
individually soluble models. This problem has been widely debated 1431 in relation to
the Bond Graph systems representation. The causality principle implies that if two
models are directly dependent upon each other for information that must be obtained
within the other model at the same instant in time, then neither of the models can be
solved first. In such a case, the resulting system is insoluble. This problem is called an
algebraic loop and within Bathfp automatic checks are performed to ensure that no
algebraic loops are formed in the simulation process.

The equations that were written for the car/caravan combination system were implicit
first order differential equations. Since the equations of motion were implicit, despite
the fact that the number of equations was enough to solve the problem, the simulation
programme gave warnings of the appearance of algebraic loops and refused to start.
This problem was overcome by using a tow-ball point model that broke the implicit
algebraic loop, since it did not require any initial secondary states information from the
adjoining models.

3.2.3 The representation of systems

A circuit drawing facility is provided by Bathfp to assist the user in the circuit building
process. A typical circuit layout, representing a car/caravan combination system, is
shown in figure 3.1.

65
The interface allows the user to build up a circuit in an intuitive fashion by selecting
and positioning icons representing system components.
Ports visible on the icons are used to attach components to one another. All the
subsequent aspects of the simulation process are dealt with reference to the initial
circuit drawing. Individual icons are selected to perform the following tasks:
a) select mathematical models associated with that specific icon from the
supplied model library:
b) examine and alter the model parameters and the initial state values
associated with individual components:
c) plot any of the variables associated with the individual components during
and after a simulation run.

No limitations are imposed on circuit complexity or on the number of recorded

variables. During a simulation run a results file is created which contains the time
history values of all the input, output and specified internal variables associated with
each individual component. Facilities are provided within the simulation environment
for further data manipulation and hardcopies.

3.3 THE Bathfp CAR/CARAVAN HANDLING SIMULATION MODELS

3.3.1 Model formation and implementation

In line with the general Bathfp modelling philosophy, consideration was given to the
formation of the models, especially to the way in which the car/caravan combination
system as a whole might be divided up into individual component models without
violating the causality constraints.

The objectives of splitting the car/caravan combination system into discrete component
models were:
a) to reduce the level of complexity of the whole model, by representing the
complex car/caravan system as an assembly of individual models that have
lower complexity. The primary objective of this division was to simplify model
development and verification:
b) to split up the data set used to model the car/caravan system parameters.
Due to the nature of the models and the fact that a large amount of parameters

66
 are required for the car/caravan combination system definition, it is beneficial
to divide them up. It is easier to manipulate the parameters in a local context;
C) to achieve a high grade of flexibility in the mathematical modelling of
individual component characteristics. It is important to provide adaptable
models that can be used for different simulation requirements such as ride or
handling.

3.3.2 Factors affecting the separation process

A number of factors were taken into account when the component separation operation
was undertaken. These were:
a) Component individuality: it is desirable that individual models should
represent real identifiable components;
b) Causality: this is a major consideration, since the causal relations that exist
among the models are dependent upon both the way in which the system is
divided into components and the way that these components are modelled;
C) Parameter distribution: to avoid errors when different parameters are
modified in the simulation process, great care was directed towards the
parameter sets associated with individual components. The main aim was to
have independent parameter sets for separate components.

3.3.3 The caravan component models

In producing the subroutine code, emphasis was placed upon structure and efficiency.
Fortran 77 was used to implement the individual component models and each specific
model was identified by a short code (for instance the caravan sprung mass model was
CRV02). In order to minimise the total number of system components. a single model
was used to represent each of the similar components on the opposite sides of the
caravan and car. Using this approach it was possible to reduce the computer
simulation time, since the information transmitted among these models was
represented by vectors of length two (right and left sides respectively). In addition to the
main car/caravan component models other miscellaneous interface models were
developed for car driver control purposes.

67
 The caravan was represented using the following components:
a) Caravan sprung mass (caravan body);
b) Caravan unsprung masses:
C) Caravan secondary suspension elements;
d) Caravan tyres.

3.3.4 Caravan sprung mass model (CRV02)

The caravan sprung mass model was the most complex model in the caravan suite. The
model has three ports, being connected to the caravan secondary suspension model.
the tow-ball point model and the caravan tyre model. The connection to the caravan
tyre model was necessary in order to transmit caravan forward speed, slip and camber
angles and used to assess the caravan tyre behaviour as presented in the previous
chapter (2.4.7).
The main function of this model was to determine the whole caravan linear and yaw
angular accelerations in the horizontal plane and the vertical linear acceleration and
roll and pitch angular accelerations of the caravan body. It also determined the slip
and camber angles necessary for the caravan tyre model.
The subroutine performs the following tasks:
a) evaluates the caravan rigid body horizontal and vertical velocity derivatives;
b) sums forces in the instantaneous caravan reference frame and transforms
them into forces in the inertial (global) reference frame;
c) determines wheel orientations and wheel centre horizontal velocities.

The model required parameters to describe the sprungmass centre of gravity location,
total mass, geometrical and inertial properties. However, the yaw moment of inertia was
defined for the whole caravan (since the wheels do not have any lateral independent
degrees of freedom).

The following inputs were received from other models:

a) caravan secondary suspension vertical forces (received from the caravan
secondary suspension model);
b) caravan tyre lateral and longitudinal forces and self aligning moments
(received from the caravan tyre model);
d) tow-ball longitudinal, lateral and vertical forces (received from the tow-ball
point model).

68
 The model outputs to the other models were:
a) caravan sprung mass centre of gravity vertical displacement and vertical
velocity (transmitted to the caravan secondary suspension model);
b) brake torque (transmitted to the caravan unsprung mass model through the
caravan secondary suspension model);
c) caravan forward speed, slip and camber angles (transmitted to the caravan
tyre model);
d) caravan sprung mass centre of gravity yaw and pitch angular displacements
and angular velocities. Also sprung mass centre of gravity vertical displacement
and longitudinal, lateral and vertical linear velocities (transmitted to the tow-
ball point model).

Slip angle, absolute speed and angular accelerations were displayed internally. Figure
3.2 shows the icon associated with the caravan sprung mass model.

3.3.5 Caravan unsprung mass model (CRV21)

This model determines the vertical acceleration of the caravan unsprung mass in
response to tyre and secondary suspension forces. The angular acceleration of the
wheel was also calculated. The code accompanying the model performed the following
tasks:
a) calculated caravan unsprung mass vertical displacements and velocities and
angular velocities derivatives;
b) summed up the external forces and torques.

No account was taken of independent lateral motion of the caravan unsprung mass
and all the external forces were considered to act at the wheel centre.
The unsprung masses incorporated the combined mass of the caravan wheel, tyre hub
assemblies together with elements of the trailing link arm secondary suspension mass.
The user defined parameters corresponded to the caravan unsprung mass value and
wheel hub inertia.
The model had two ports and was connected to the caravan secondary. suspension
model and to the caravan tyre model (figure 3.1).
The model inputs were:
a)caravan tyre vertical load (received from the caravan tyre model):
b) caravan secondary suspension vertical forces and brake torque (received

69
 from the caravan secondary suspension model).

The model outputs were:

a) wheel absolute vertical displacement and vertical velocity states (transmitted
to the caravan secondary suspension and tyre models);
b) wheel spin speed (transmitted to the caravan tyre model).
The icon associated with the caravan unsprung mass model is shown in figure 3.3.

3.3.6 Caravan secondary suspension model (CRV12)

The primary function of this model was to determine the caravan secondary suspension
vertical forces.
Following the experimental measurement of the caravan secondary suspension
characteristic (4.5.3) it was decided that a linear function relating suspension force to
displacement and velocity was sufficient.
The model has two ports and was connected to the caravan sprung mass and
unsprung mass (figure 3.1).
The model inputs were:
a) caravan sprung mass centre of gravity vertical position and velocity, roll
angle and angular velocity (received from the caravan sprung mass model);
b) caravan unsprung mass vertical displacement and vertical velocity (received
from the caravan unsprung mass model).

The model outputs were:

a) the vertical secondary suspension forces (transmitted to both the caravan
sprung and unsprung mass models);
b) the brake torque (this model merely provided a path for the brake torque
demand from the caravan sprung mass to the unsprung mass model).

The icon associated with the caravan secondary suspension model is presented in
figure 3.4.
It should be pointed out that the iconic representation was intended to show that the
caravan secondary suspension model was of a trailing arm type, and not that it
contained a roll bar, as can be sometimes inferred from the iconic representation.

70
 3.3.7 Caravan tyre model (CRV33)

The tyre model was a compound model, generating both forces and states. Its function
was to determine tyre vertical force, lateral and longitudinal forces and self aligning
moments developed at the contact point between the tyre and the road surface. The
code contained in the model related to:
a) tyre side force, longitudinal force and self aligning moment derivatives (all of
which are defined as functions of caravan forward speed, primary suspension
forces, wheel slip angle. camber angle. angnlar velocity and current force and
aligning moment states):
b) the definition of the tyre as a function of relative caravan unsprung mass to
road surface vertical displacement and the rate of change of displacement.

The model utilised raw experimental data, contained in an array initialised from an
external data file (tyrdatc.dat). Instantaneous tyre side force and self aligning torque
values were calculated as functions of tyre vertical load, slip and camber angles by
means of a linear interpolation technique within the measured data array. In this way
the need for a complex tyre mathematical model was avoided, full advantage being
taken of the availability of suitably formatted tyre test data.
The model had two ports and the following inputs:
a) unsprung mass vertical displacement and vertical velocity and wheel hub
angular velocity (received from the caravan unsprung mass model);
b) caravan forward speed, slip and camber angles (received from the caravan
sprung mass model).

The model outputs were:

a) tyre vertical force (transmitted to the caravan unsprung mass model);
b) tyre lateral and longitudinal force and self aligning torque states (transmitted
to the caravan sprung mass model).
Tyre longitudinal slip was an internal variable. Figure 3.5 presents the icon associated
with the CRV33 tyre model.

3.3.8 The standard car component models

The car is represented using the following components:

a) Car sprung mass (car body);

71
 b) Car unsprung masses;
C) Car secondary suspension elements;
d) Car axles;
d) Car tyres.

Once again the individual component models were implemented as Fortran 77 coded
subroutines, having exactly the same characteristics as those used for the caravan
model.

3.3.9 Car sprung mass model (CARAVCO2)

This model is similar to the car sprung mass model developed for Bathfp [36]. However,
a few modifications were made to the existing model in order to accommodate the tow-
ball point linkage between the car and caravan sprung mass models. This involved the
addition of an extra port at the back of the car sprung mass model allowing the
connection to the caravan model (figure 3.1).
The model determined the linear and angular accelerations of the car in the horizontal
plane. The vertical accelerations of the body eyebrow points were also included. This
model also calculated wheel hub linear horizontal speed, slip and camber angles.

The main functions performed within the model code were:

- evaluation of the horizontal displacement and velocity derivatives (for the car
as a whole rigid body);
- conversion of forces defined with respect to the instantaneous car reference
frame into forces in the inertial reference frame:
- calculation of aerodynamic drag and side forces acting on the sprung mass;
- instantaneous suspension geometry definition;
- wheel orientations and hub horizontal velocities;
- suspension linkage force calculation:
- car sprung mass eyebrow vertical displacement and vertical velocity derivative
calculation.

Parameters to describe the geometrical, inertial and mass properties of the sprung
mass were required. Polynomial coefficients were used to describe the suspension and
steering system kinematic and compliance properties.

72
 The model had nine ports (figure 3.1) and received the following inputs:
a) forces F, Fr" F,„ that act on the car (received from the tow-ball point model);
b) suspension vertical forces (received from car secondary suspension model);
C) steering
wheel angle brake and drive torques (received from the driver model):
d) unsprung mass vertical displacement (received from the car axle model):
e) tyre longitudinal, lateral and self aligning moments (received from the car
tyre models).

The model outputs were:

a) the car centre of gravity location and velocity with respect to the XY inertial
frame, the car yaw angle 41,,, and yaw angular velocity r (transmitted to the tow-
ball point model);
b) eyebrow points vertical displacements Z.-vs1(1=1-4) and vertical velocities ksrsI(I=1-4)
(transmitted to the car suspension model and tow-ball point model);
C) vehicle horizontal plane displacement and velocity states (transmitted to the
driver model);
d) car suspension linkage vertical forces and drive/brake torques (transmitted
to the car axle model);
e)wheel hub linear horizontal speed, slip and camber angles (transmitted to the
car tyre model).

The model also displays internally the slip angle, absolute speed, steering wheel torque
and roll moment due to suspension linkage forces. An extra port labelled "states" is
provided for the output of car sprung mass linear and angular accelerations, velocities
and displacements. The icon associated with the car sprung mass model is shown in
figure 3.7.

3.3.10 Car unsprung mass model (CA25)

The main function of this model is to determine the vertical acceleration of the car
unsprung mass and wheel hub angular acceleration.
There are some differences between this model and the one developed for the caravan
unsprung mass. The first, is the fact that this model has three ports instead of two,
since it must also accommodate the connection of the car axle model. Another
difference relates to the fact that the car must provide the traction force for the
car/caravan combination system. As a result, the model can also receive drive torque

73
 demand.
The user defined parameters are the car unsprung mass and wheel hub inertia.
The model inputs are:
a) car secondary suspension linkage vertical force and drive/brake torque
(received from the car axle model);
b) car tyre vertical load (received from the car tyre model);
C) car secondary suspension vertical forces (received from the car secondary
suspension model).

The model outputs are:

a) vertical displacement and vertical velocity states (transmitted to the car axle,
secondary suspension and tyre models);
b) wheel spin speed (transmitted to the car tyre model).
The icon associated with the car unsprung mass model is presented in figure 3.3.

3.3.11 Car secondary suspension model (CA11)

The car secondary suspension model is similar to the caravan secondary model
(CRV11) described in 3.3.6. The model's main function is to determine the secondary
suspension vertical forces, employing 5th order polynomial functions to describe
secondary suspension forces dependant upon relative sprung mass to unsprung mass
vertical displacements and velocities. The secondary suspension elements include
spring, damper and anti-roll bar models. The polynomial coefficients are user defined
model parameters.
The model has two ports and the following inputs:
a) sprung mass eyebrow point vertical displacement and vertical velocity
(received from the car sprung mass model);
b) unsprung mass vertical displacement and vertical velocity (received from the
car unsprung mass model).

The model outputs are:

a) the vertical secondary suspension forces (transmitted to the car sprung and
unsprung mass models).

Additional internal variables are used for recording the velocity, vertical and angular
displacement dependent components of the forces.

74
 Two car secondary suspension models are used (CA1 lA and CA11B) that rely entirely
on the coding from the CAll model, but use default parameters associated with the car
front and rear secondary suspension.
The icon associated with the car secondary suspension model is presented in figure
3.8.

3.3.12 Car axle model (CA40)

This model provides a path for the transmission of brake and drive torques and
secondary suspension linkage forces from the sprung mass to the unsprung masses.
It also provides the sprung mass with vertical displacement and velocity information
from the unsprung masses. This is used within the sprung mass model to determine
the instantaneous secondary suspension geometry. The axle is therefore a direct
transmission model, passing all the inputs directly to the output without modifications.
Figure 3.9 shows the car axle model icon.

3.3.13 Car tyre models (CA33 and CA35)

Two models have been developed for the car tyre. Both are compound models
generating states and forces.
The model CA33 utilises raw experimental data contained in a data file array
(tyrdatv.dat).
The same icon as that presented in figure 3.5 is used to represent the car tyre model.
The other model (CA35) is a full computer implementation [35] of the tyre model
developed in [7]. The model uses special tyre force functions and parameters to
describe in an analytical but empirical way the forces and moments generated at the
contact point between the tyre and the road. The main advantage of this model stems
from the smooth continuous characteristics generated for lateral forces, brake forces
and self aligning moments for both pure and combined slip situations. However, the
model still requires a set of 53 tyre dependent coefficients to describe tyre behaviour.

3.3.14 The tow-ball point model (LINK02)

This model was developed to overcome algebraic loops in the simulation process.

75
The tow-ball point represents the connection between the caravan sprung mass model
and the car sprung mass model. It was designed as a stiff compliant link.

The model has two ports and the following inputs:

a) from the caravan sprung mass model eight scalar variables: the caravan
centre of gravity vertical coordinate 4 and velocity Zc , caravan velocities tic and
ve, and the caravan yaw and pitch angles (4,,, o) and angular velocities (re, qc);
b) fourteen scalar variables are received as inputs from the car sprung mass
model: the car centre of gravity location and velocity with respect to the XY
Inertial frame, the car yaw angle 41„ and yaw angular velocity r y and the car
eyebrow heights Z 1(1=14)
-4) and eyebrow velocities 2.„„., _ 4) .

The model outputs are:

a) forces F„, Fr and F„ that act on the caravan model (transmitted to the
caravan sprung mass model);
b) forces transmitted from the tow-ball point to the car sprung mass model: F„,
Fr, and F.

The tow-ball point was modelled as a massless flexible connection between the caravan
and the car models. Three springs and three dampers were used to account for the
tow-ball point stiffness, each one being parallel to the coordinate system axes related
to the caravan.
The absolute coordinate locations of the tow-ball point (in the inertial frame) are
represented as internal variables. Figure 3.6 presents the icon associated with the tow-
ball point model (LINK02).

3.3.15 Linkage of the caravan and car models

Three coordinate systems, two of which are mobile, are used to describe the motion of
the car/caravan combination system (figure 3.10). and the forces that are transmitted
from the tow-ball point to the caravan and car models are expressed into their local
coordinates. Therefore, the forces F„, Fyc and Fze are parallel to the Oxeye; coordinate
axes and the other set of three forces F x , Fy„ and F„ are parallel to the Oxvyze. The tow-
ball point model is used to kinematically link the caravan and car models.
Since the car model was developed as part of another research programme, it was
easier to express the forces transmitted to the caravan model as a function of the forces

76
 transmitted to the car model:

Plc= Fcos(y - Fyosin(vv-yd

Fir = FloCOS(41„-1 + Fmsin(yy-wc) (3.1)

where:
w„ - car yaw angle (absolute);
we - caravan yaw angle (absolute);
F. F„, Fr, and F„, have been presented above.
As can be seen from the previous equation, the angle (wy-w) represents the relative
angle between the car and the caravan.

3.3.16 Car driver models (DRIV1 and DRIV2)

Two driver models were developed within Bathfp. They provide steering angle, drive and
brake force inputs to the car model.
The first model (DRIV1) is simply an interface used to connect and convert the units
of any of the large duty cycle database input models. The main function of the model
Is to convert dimensionless inputs into appropriate units to represent the car steering
wheel angle, drive and brake torque outputs. This enables the user to specify the time
histories of these outputs in any desired format. The icon associated with DRIV1 is
presented in figure 3.11.

The second model (DRIV2) is more complex and intended to control the car/caravan
combination system during steerpad tests. Its main function is to steer the car/caravan
system on a constant, user specified, radius path while driving the vehicle at a required
speed. The information received by the model is demand speed, car horizontal
displacement, forward velocity, heading and car yaw rate. The model outputs steering
wheel angle, drive and brake torque to the car sprung mass model. The speed
requirement is dictated by an external input model, and follows a user specified time
history. To achieve speed control, the drive torque output is proportional to the error
between the car forward speed and the required speed input. The constant of
proportionality used is a model parameter. The brake torque output from this model
Is set to zero.

The other variable, namely the car path is controlled in a more complex manner. The

77
 radial velocity of a point lying at a specified distance ahead of the car on its
longitudinal axis, relative to the fixed path centre, is calculated. TO calculate the radial
path error, the previous radial velocity is integrated twice. Summing all these three
terms (in proportions that are user specified in the model parameters) the car steering
wheel angle output is determined. Figure 3.12 presents the icon associated with DRIV2
model.

3.4 CAR/CARAVAN MODEL CAUSALITY

The flow of information between the caravan and car models is presented in figure
3.13.
Duty cycle inputs are used as inputs to the driver model. They are predefined and
known for all the time. Therefore, the driver model can be solved independently at any
Instance in time. All the inputs to the tow-ball point model are primary state variables
with initial values defined prior to the solution of the system. During the simulation
run their values are maintained, renewed and supplied by the integrator. Therefore,
these two models do not encounter any causal restriction and can be solved
Individually at any moment in time. Next, the sprung mass models from both the car
and caravan models are causally dependent only on the associated secondary
suspension models. They become soluble once the secondary suspension models are
solved. The same principle applies to the car and caravan tyre models which are
causally dependent only on the associated sprung mass models. Having the solution
of the tyre models, the car and caravan unsprung mass models can be finally solved.

3.5 CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of the Bathfp car/caravan combination handling model has been
described and the important features of the individual models used to describe the
caravan and the car presented.

The main problems arising in the simulation of car/caravan handling dynamics have
been identified and considered. By working within a specialised simulation
environment the problem of manipulating large numbers of differential equation sets
and parametric data has been overcome. Acceptable simulation run times have been
achieved by using efficient integration algorithms.

78
 (71

oc13 1

are

1
v i 't+
g.
,Z
,
• •••
...• •/
rig

Figure 3.1 The Bathfp user interface and the circuit drawing (model of the car/caravan
combination system).

79
 Figure 3.2 The caravan sprung mass icon.

in '112,

C]
Figure 3.3 The caravan and car Figure 3.4 The caravan secondary
unsprung mass icon. suspension icon.

Figure 3.5 The car and caravan tyre

icon. Figure 3.6 The tow-ball point icon.

80
 Figure 3.7 The car sprung mass icon.

Figure 3.8 The car secondary suspension Figure 3.9 The car axle icon.
icon.

xA

Z, zo, zvemee Into plane of paper Y

Figure 3.10 Coordinate systems.

81
 a

speed

STEER
PAD

Figure 3.11 The driver input interface Figure 3.12 The steer pad driver icon.
icon.

Fu, A
< >
F. F;

VL'

c
u„ v„ Z„ i ov„ r„ O.

0<
I— 03

X„ y„ tg„ t„, r,, Z„.1,

F, F, NI(

vul , ±vui

Figure 3.13 Block diagram of the car and caravan models showing information flow
between component models (state variables are in bold type).

82
 CHAPTER 4 EXPERIMENTAL MEASUREMENTS

4.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes experimental work that has been carried out in order to acquire
trailer parametric information and car/trailer handling data. The objectives of the work
are given together with details of the test methods adopted and the hardware used.
Part of the acquired data is also included.
An adjustable frame was built on to a standard caravan chassis, allowing for the mass
and inertias of the towed vehicle to be adjusted. This mobile test bed was fully
instrumented and the dynamic behaviour assessed,

4.1.1 Objectives and test requirements

The main objective of this work was to obtain experimental data in order to validate the
theoretical car/caravan combination system handling model developed for use in the
current investigation and to supply parametric data to be used in the caravan
computer simulation model. The aspects of primary concern were the trailer
parameters such as moments of inertia, total mass and suspension characteristics for
which little information was available. It was anticipated that these would have a
significant influence on the car/trailer combination system dynamic response to
external disturbances. The test objectives were therefore to gather data describing the
motion of the car and trailer resulting from known steering inputs and to obtain
estimates for unknown trailer parameters.

4.2 TRAILER AND CAR PARAMETERS

4.2.1 Trailer general description

An adjustable frame was built on to a standard type B 1000-5 AL-KO caravan chassis
(figure 4.1) provided by Bailey's Caravan Company of Bristol.
The main reason for building this mobile test bed was to have a trailer that simulated
the caravan and, at the same time allowed changes to be made to the mass and inertial

83
 properties. The adjustment of trailer's mass and inertial properties was achieved using
circular weights, each with a mass of my7-23.8 kg. A total of 20 weights, mounted at
various locations on the trailer's frame, were used to simulate a full scale caravan.
Being an open structure, the trailer was little influenced by aerodynamic forces.
The trailer was equipped with Bridgestone 165R13 82T tyres in good condition with an
equal pressure of 36 psi (cold).

4.2.2 Trailer moments of inertia, mass and centre of gravity position

The trailer was unloaded (no circular weights were mounted onto the frame) since it
was much easier to handle a lightweight trailer.
The yaw and pitch moments of inertia of the chassis and frame were measured using
a "see-saw" pivoting frame. The trailer axle was supported on a steel section which was
pivoted through either a yaw or a pitch axis.

For the yaw moment of inertia measurement, the trailer tow-ball point was suspended
on a long wire (figure 4.2). The trailer was then set into its resonant frequency.
Assuming that the friction forces were small, the oscillation frequency will be the
system natural frequency. Using the simple harmonic motion equation the natural
frequency is:

(4.8)

where:
Tb - tow-ball point load:
- horizontal distance between tow-ball and trailer axis;
trailer moment of inertia about the Oz rotational axis.

The previous relation was deduced assuming that the trailer's centre of gravity does not
move vertically when the trailer swings on the platform. This was a reasonable
assumption since the length of the wire used to suspend the tow-ball point was around
seven metres.
Introducing the numerical values into equation 4.8, the yaw moment of inertia was
measured as: 4=877 kgre. Using the parallel axis theorem, the yaw moment of inertia
around the axis through the trailer centre of gravity can be deduced:

84
 lz=lz,g + Md2(4.9)

where:
M - total mass of the caravan simulator (M =428.7 kg);
d - distance between the Oze axis through the centre of gravity and the actual Oz, axis.
Hence:

Cg =1.-Md2 (4.10)

The numerical value for the yaw moment of inertia around the Oz axis through the
centre of gravity was: Iwg=854 kgm2.

The trailer pitch moment of inertia was measured by suspending the tow-ball point on
a spring instead of the wire used for yaw measurements. Once again friction forces
were neglected and the pitch natural frequency of the trailer was determined. It was
assumed that the pitch axis was through the trailer axle. The numerical value obtained
for the pitch moment of inertia was: Im=775 kgm2.

It was not possible to measure the roll moment of inertia due to the fact that once the
trailer was suspended underneath the axle, the whole system acted like an inverted
pendulum, making small oscillations around the equilibrium position very difficult to
achieve. As a result, an estimated value based on the measurement of suspension roll
natural frequency was used. This value was: I = 448 kgm2.

In order to confirm the experimental results, the moments of inertia were also deduced
by calculation, assuming that the frame was made of linearly distributed masses. The
moments of inertia of the chassis itself were approximated. A full description of the
calculation is given in Appendix D. Good agreement between experiment and theory
was achieved.

The total mass of the trailer was found by measuring the static vertical load
underneath each wheel of the trailer (tyres vertical load Z, and Z2) plus the tow-ball
point load. The total weight of the trailer was measured as M =428.7 kg with a tow-ball
weight of K=35 kg. The tow-ball weight of the trailer represents 8% of the total mass
of the trailer. However, this was the basic form of the trailer, more weights being
required to make up the full practical weight.

85
 The centre of gravity height was determined following the test procedure suggested by
MIRA in 1441. The longitudinal location of the centre of gravity was determined from the
knowledge of axle and tow-ball point load.
Table 4.1 presents the estimated trailer parameters (trailer without any additional
weights).

Trailer parameter Measured value

CG height, h [m] 1.06
Yaw moment of inertia, lz [kgm2 ] 854
Roll moment of inertia, I,„ Ilcgm21 448
Pitch moment of inertia, ly, fkgm2) 775
Axle load [kg) 393.7
Tow-ball load [kg] 35

Table 4.1 Estimated trailer parameters (unloaded).

A "C" computer programme was written to find the final values of mass, moments of
inertia and centre of gravity position once the frame was fully loaded. The only input
data required by the programme was the initial parameters of the trailer (as measured
experimentally) plus the number of weights added with the exact location of each of
them with respect to a locally defined tow-ball coordinate system (figure 4.3). The
added weights were assimilated as material points, only with mass properties and no
individual moments of inertia. The values resulting from the "C" programme were used
In the car/trailer combination Bathfp simulation model.

4.2.3 Trailer secondary suspension spring rate

The trailer secondary suspension is a triaxial rubber medium type. The static spring
characteristic was determined using a simple load cell and displacement transducer,
enabling the acquisition of forces and static deflections. The left and right secondary
suspension spring characteristics at the wheel are shown in figure 4.4.,
Since the secondary suspension system uses mainly rubber for shock attenuation, it
was believed that the characteristic of the spring would be non-linear. However, the
experimental results showed that the characteristic of the secondary suspension spring
was almost linear.

86
4.2.4 Car parameters

The car used for testing was a 1991 Ford Sierra 1.8 LX which carried a full load of fuel
and oil. Vehicle loading consisted of one driver and approximately 10 kg of data
acquisition equipment mostly situated around the front passenger seat. Tyres were
Michelin 185/65R14 86T in good condition with an equal pressure of 26 psi (cold) at
front and rear.
No other car parameters were measured, since all the necessary information was
available for a 1990 Ford Sierra which was already fully tested as part of another
research project [36].
The test car inertial properties, axle loads and centre of gravity height are presented
In table 4.2.

Car parameter Estimated test condition value

CG height, h (m] 0.465
Yaw moment of inertia. 4 [kgm2] 2625
Roll moment of inertia. L, (kgm 21 289
Pitch moment of inertia, I 2114
Front axle load [kg] 807
Rear axle load [kg] 727

Table 4.2 Estimated car parameters at the test condition.

4.3 DATA ACQUISITION

4.3.1 Instrumentation

Transducers installed on the car and trailer for recording the parameters of interest
included the following:

1. Three capacitive accelerometers (Access AMD-CK/0-A10 ±10g) mounted as

presented in figure 4.5. The first was connected to the middle point of the front
frame base (point A on figure 4.5). The second was connected on the rear end
of the frame base (point B on figure 4.5). The third was connected to the middle

87
 point of the upper side longitudinal member of the frame as seen from the back
(point C on figure 4.5). All three accelerometers were aligned such that their
principal axis of sensitivity was parallel to the trailer ye-axis. They were used
to determine the roll, yaw and lateral acceleration of the trailer.

2. A hybrid track linear displacement transducer (Penny and Giles

HLP1905A1.200.8K/S) was mounted between the moving and non-moving
sections of the car steering rack. In this way, road wheel steered angle could be
measured.

3. A linear wire extension displacement transducer (Houston Scientific 1850-0010)

was mounted between the car and the trailer at the tow-ball point as presented
in figure 4.6. This measured the relative angle between the car and trailer.

4. A Hall effect rotary pulse generator (Ford Motor Co. 6183090) was mounted in-
line with the car speedometer cable to generate pulse signals in proportion to
the car/trailer combination system forward speed.

4.3.2 Signal conditioning

The transducers were supported by an eight skit card frame cnataining signaZ
conditioning boards and a stabilised power supply. Power to the card frame was
provided from a 240V DC/AC inverter (Victron Atlas 12/750) which in turn was
connected to the car's 12V battery supply. Each of the cards was equipped with second
order low pass Butterworth filters to prevent unwanted high frequency noise from
Interfering with the signals of interest.

4.3.3 Data capture

Digital data capture was performed with a PC based data acquisition system. A Toshiba
T4400C 80486DX laptop was connected via a data port to an external expansion box
containing a Keithley DAS58 A/D-D/A board (figure 4.7). Finally, the DAS58 board was
connected to the analogue outputs of the card frame via an interface. All acquisition
software ran under Microsoft!'" Windows and included Signal Spy (University of Bath)
for data acquisition and recording and Microsoft"' Excel for instant graphical data

88
analysis. The installation allowed operation of the system from the driver's seat. To
facilitate constant speed testing, an adjustable throttle stop mechanism was fitted.

4.3.4 Sampling frequency considerations

The objectives of the testing established a suitable frequency band over which
information was required and thus sample frequency requirements and system
bandwidth. To prevent aliasing, a 200 Hz sample rate was used.
Sampling was performed over a 5 second period, resulting in the collection of 1000
data points for each measured variable. The minimum frequency for which information
was contained in the sampled data was 0.2 Hz.

4.3.5 Calibration

Calibration of the instruments was conducted as described below:

-accelerometers:
gains were determined by linear regression of readings taken at +lg. Og. -1g. Offsets
were resolved from readings taken with the accelerometers mounted on the stationary
trailer;

-steering potentiometer:
the transducer gain was determined by linear regression of readings taken at steering
wheel angles of -360°, 0°, +360°. Checks were performed for the linearity of results
and the offset was ascertained with the steering wheel set at 0°:

-car/trailer relative angle displacement transducer;

the gain was determined by linear regression of results obtained at different angles
between the car and trailer. Offset was resolved by taking reading for the 0° relative
angle (car and trailer aligned):

-speed transducer:
the gain of the speed transducer was obtained by linear regression of results taken at
steady-state speeds of 30, 40, 50 and 60 mph, measured by the dashboard
speedometer. The results were checked for linearity and the offset found by

89
interpolating back to 0 mph.

4.4 ACCELERATION MEASUREMENT

The principle of using three caravan chassis mounted accelerometers derived from the
desire to measure the lateral acceleration of the trailer at the centre of gravity.
However, since the frame was adjustable the centre of gravity position varied during
the tests, and it was not possible at all times to position an accelerometer at the centre
of gravity point.
The three linear accelerometers were positioned such that their axes were parallel to
the 0y, axis of the trailer, but due to their mounting positions on the chassis frame
they recorded a compound signal made up of yaw, lateral and roll acceleration
components.
The velocity of the trailer sprung mass centre of gravity had the following components
along the )(eye; axes:

i7c9,-(uc)T+(vc+pA1174-21c (4.1)

Since the lateral accelerometers were positioned on the sprung mass and aligned
parallel to the trailer ye-axis, only the first two terms in equation 4.1 were retained.
The accelerations of points A, B, C were determined first in the simplified case for the
plane model of the trailer. In addition, an extra term relating to the roll motion of the
trailer was added to the equations to obtain the accelerations for the full model of the
trailer.

For the plane trailer model the centre of gravity was assumed to have a linear
longitudinal velocity ue and a linear lateral velocity ye:

17e9= 11.e1A- Vei

(4.2)

The next step was to use Euler's equations to relate the velocity of the accelerometer
positions as a function of the centre of gravity's velocity.

The velocities of points A, B and C had the following components along the Ox e and 0y,
axes:

90
 17A- ucl.+(vc+rca)J

17B-- uci+ (vc-rcb)j (4.3)

L-
c=ucT+
I7 Ivc-r,(4-a)ji

where:
the total length of the frame (figure 4.3);
af - distance between the front end of the frame and the centre of gravity of the trailer;
131 - distance between rear end of the frame and the centre of gravity of the trailer;
tic - trailer longitudinal velocity (along Ox., axis connected to the trailer);
vc - trailer lateral velocity (along Oye axis connected to the trailer);
- yaw angular velocity of the trailer.

Having the velocities of the point A. B and C. the accelerations were obtained by
differentiating the previous set of equations:

_ crvA al7,4
a =_=_+7- x (4.4)
A dt at c A

where:
dV/dt - velocity differentiation with respect to a fixed coordinate system (inertial);
ay /at- velocity differentiation with respect to the mobile coordinate system (attached

to the trailer);
rc - yaw angular velocity of the trailer.

Using equations 4.3 and 4.4 the accelerations of points A, B and C were:

[du
uA = (vc+ rca)rc 7 te +ajtc+ uerc
dv_

[du - [dv (4.5)

aB = Itc-(vc-rci)-1)1".
- + -ble+ucrc

[due1.„ 1- [ du L I
= - - r -af)] i + ucr, j
at " 2 dt 2

To account for the roll movement of the trailer sprung mass, an extra term was added

91
 to the equations.

From equation 4.1 it can be seen that the term NI, relates to the lateral acceleration
due to the sprung mass roll movement. The roll axis of the trailing link secondary
suspension configuration was the line connecting the tow-ball point and the middle
axle ground point. As a result, the vertical distance h i between roll axis and each of the
A, B and C points had different values.

The lateral accelerations recorded by the three accelerometers were only the j-terms
from equations 4.5:

dy
AccA = e +aftc +uc rc +pchA
dv
AccB= --d r c rc
c+u p hias
c
(4.6)

dv L,
-a)tc+ ucrc+pchc

where:
hA, hB, h - the vertical distances between the roll axis and the A, B and C points
respectively.

Since the lateral acceleration of the sprung mass was influenced by the roll lateral
acceleration of the sprung mass, the lateral acceleration of the trailer's centre of gravity
point was:

dv
Lata,„,=—i+uerc+Pctii (4.7)

Equations 4.6 represent a system of three equations with three unknown. Therefore,
by solving the system it was possible to find the lateral acceleration of the trailer at the
centre of gravity. This was one of the values required to assess the transient and
steady-state behaviour of the car/trailer combination system.

4.5 EXPERIMENTAL TEST DETAILS

Three types of measurement were used in order to acquire data:

1. Stationary tests, in which the stationary trailer was subjected to known single

92
 frequency disturbances. This form of testing was used to conduct frequency
response tests in order to obtain an estimate of the trailer's suspension
damping rate.

This testing was carried out using the four axis, vertical input road simulator
test facility at Bath University shown in figure 4.8. This comprised a
hydraulically powered computer controlled four axis suspension test rig capable
of providing independent simultaneous vertical motion inputs to the two wheels
of the trailer in the 0 to 25 Hz frequency range and 0 to 125 mm amplitude
range. The trailer was subject to small amplitude sinusoidal ground pitch
inputs at discrete single frequencies ranging from 0.4 to 11.0 Hz using a 0.1 Hz
step. Trailer sprung mass absolute displacement data was acquired at each
frequency. Figure 4.9 shows the hybrid track linear displacement transducer
used in the experiment.

2. Transient handling response tests, in which the moving car/trailer combination

system was subject to a known steering disturbance. These were predominantly
high speed steering impulse tests carried out at nominal speeds between 13.5
m/s and 21.5 m/s (30 mph and 50 mph) in order to asses the stability of
car/trailer combination system. Steering wheel angle inputs were in the 0 to
180 degrees range. Testing was carried out at an airfield to ensure that enough
space was available in emergencies. Car steering rack displacement, speed,
trailer body accelerations and relative angle between the car and the trailer
were measured. All tests were carried out in dry conditions and the road
surface was level coarse grained asphalt. The tyres were warmed up prior to
testing by driving over a distance of 15 km.

3. Step steer tests, in which the moving car/trailer combination system was
subject to a known steering disturbance. These were low speed tests carried out
at nominal speeds of 5.8 m/s (13 mph) with steering wheel angle inputs of 360
degrees. Tests were carried out for both left and right hand turns. Once again,
car steering rack displacement, speed, trailer sprung mass accelerations and
relative angle between the car and the trailer were measured.

93
4.6 TEST RESULTS

4.6.1 Frequency response tests using a four poster road simulator rig

The first purpose of the frequency response tests was to check the overall stiffness of
the chassis frame and to ensure that the structure was stable when subjected to rough
road inputs. Another major factor of interest was the estimation of the trailer's
secondary suspension damping rate, since no suspension data was available for the
validation of the simulation programme.
In order to measure the effective damping rate, the tyres of the trailer were removed
and the trailer wheel hubs were rigidly connected to the rear road simulator rig
actuators (figure 4.10). The trailer was set in a bouncing mode by driving the rear road
simulator actuators in phase. The only spring and damping effects were provided by
the secondary suspension system of the trailer.

A vertical linear hybrid track displacement transducer was connected between the
trailer's sprung mass and the ground, measuring the absolute displacement of the
sprung mass and comparing this displacement with the actuator position feedback.
The ratio of the sprung mass displacement over the unsprung mass displacement was
used to construct Bode plots. In order to calculate the secondary suspension damping
rate, the resonant and natural frequencies of the system were compared.

For frequencies less than 4 Hz it was observed that the secondary suspension did not
deflect a great deal. Instead, it was observed that the whole chassis flexes and at about
3 Hz a resonant frequency is encountered. At this resonant frequency the trailer has
a pure pitch motion, the oscillation origin being the connection between the main and
towbar trailer members.
For frequencies higher than 4 Hz the suspension started to move significantly and at
about 5 Hz another resonant point was reached. In this case the chassis was more
rigid than at the previous resonant peak, the secondary suspension being the elastic
element in the system.

From the Bode plots of figure 4.11 it can be seen that at the frequency of 3 Hz an
amplitude peak is reached, and the phase starts to drop. However, there is not a
change of 180 degrees in the phase. However, for the 5 Hz frequency, the amplitude
peak is accompanied by a phase shift of 180 degrees which indicates that a resonant

94
 frequency point has been reached.

A full presentation of the equations used in the frequency response analysis is given
In Appendix E. The effective damping rate of the secondary suspension at the wheel
was estimated as c=344 Ns/m (this is approximately 114 th of that used on passenger
cars).

4.6.2 Transient handling response tests

The tests conducted for the evaluation of the car/trailer stability and handling
characteristics were based on guidelines described in BS AU 247:19931451 and BS AU
230:1989 1461. The car/trailer combination system was driven in a straight line at
constant speed and a sharp steering input at the car steering wheel was applied. Such
tests were performed at various speeds and with varying magnitudes of steering input.
Only limited test results are given here, thus avoiding duplication of those presented
in the next chapter.
In this section the dynamic handling behaviour of the instrumented car/trailer
travelling at 13.5 m/s is presented. The moments of inertia, mass distribution and
centre of gravity position of the trailer are given in table 4.3.

Trailer parameter Measured value

CG height, h Inil 1.27
Yaw moment of inertia, k ficgm21 1078
Roll moment of inertia. 1,a, fkgm21 706
Pitch moment of inertia. J 1184
Axle load [kg' 753
Tow-ball load [kg] 56.7

Table 4.3 Estimated trailer parameters at the test condition.

The car steering wheel input time history is given in figure 4.12. The small steering
wheel angle oscillation following the desired steering wheel impulse input was caused
by the kinematic and compliance characteristics of the secondary suspension and
steering systems. The compliance displacement was transmitted to the steering
transducer, despite the fact that the driver maintained the steering wheel in a locked

95
 position after the required impulse. This oscillation was amplified as the testing speed
was increased.

Figures 4.13, 4.14 and 4.15 show the accelerations measured by the three
accelerometers mounted on to the trailer frame. Noise resulting from road disturbances
is apparent on all the recorded signals.

Figure 4.16 presents the recorded relative angle between car and trailer, while figure
4.17 shows the recorded forward velocity of the car/trailer combination system.
A large relative angle is exhibited due to the nature of the steering input and the high
forward speed.

4.6.3 Step steer tests

Limited step steer tests were carried out at the nominal speed of 5.8 m/s. A typical
steering wheel input time history is given in figure 4.18. This shows a good signal with
little noise. The acceleration signals measured by the three accelerometers mounted
on the trailer frame are presented in figures 4.19, 4.20 and 4.21. Once again, noise
resulting from the ride disturbances is apparent on all the recorded acceleration
signals.
Figure 4.22 presents the recorded forward velocity of the car/trailer combination
system, while figure 4.23 shows the recorded relative angle between the car and trailer.

4.7 CONCLUSIONS

Using a fully instrumented car/trailer combination the lateral stability of the system
was assessed as recommended in [45] and [46]. Experimental data was acquired in
high speed steering wheel impulse tests and, for the stationary trailer, road excitation
was examined using a road simulator test rig. The mass and inertial properties of the
trailer at the test condition were determined through experimental measurements. It
was not intended to achieve trailer instability during the high speed testing sessions,
but to acquire sufficient data for computer model validation purposes.

96
Figure 4.1 Adjustable frame built onto a standard AL-KO chassis.

/7/ 7//

N\N\N\\\\\\NNN\NNN\ \'.\\'.\\\\\NN.\\S.&:\\NN:\\
a
c

Figure 4.2 Test set-up for trailer yaw moment of inertia measurement.

97
 1he frame dimensions are:
- 3.08 m
Li =1.56m
fj 0.85 m
I = 1.22 m
h= 1.5 m
h = 1.3 m

X y. 16 b3w-ball centred
th m
coordinate system

Figure 4.3 Trailer frame dimensions.

mean suspension stiffness k=88.82 1:N/rn

Displacement [mm]

Figure 4.4 Measured trailer secondary suspension spring characteristic.

98
 point A

point C
middle of the frame)

.,,/
,,. point B
(rear end of tie frame)

Figure 4.5 Position of the accelerometers on the trailer.

car

tow bar
displacement
transducer
disc of radius R
tow-ball point

trailer

Figure 4.6 Car to trailer relative angle measurement.

99
 Figure 4.7 The in-car handling data acquisition system.

411.4tr==,4=deffaffiffmr:
AmrIMIAIVAIWAIMMiNih==
IIIIVAIVANINIAIVIIIMIr r Pr
#
Aw4moremMEMA MCW,

Figure 4.8 The University of Bath four poster test rig.

100
 Figure 4.9 View of the hybrid track linear displacement transducer used in
frequency response tests.

A
y (body)
(trailer)

0
ix (road)

•---
artuatora
Figure 4.10 Experimental measurement of trailer frequency response (hub rigidly
connected to road).

101
 Frequency response analxsis
20

EcT 10

z 0
0. solid line - experimental results
...tc -10 - dotted] theotetical results

-20
10-1 10° 101 102
Frequency [Hz]

0
-50
-100
410

-/50
a. solid line - experimental results
-200 dotted line L. theoretical-results

-250
10-1 100 101 102
Frequency [Hz)

Figure 4.11 Trailer frequency response.

05 75 1 45 4 41. 5 WS 44 7 25
rem 050 liove

Figure 4.12 Typical steering wheel angle Figure 4.13 Signal measured by the
impulse. trailer's front accelerometer.

102
 12

10

.y 2

-2

-4

0:5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3:5 4 4.5 -110 0:3 1:3 2 25 3 33

Time141 Time
Figure 4.14 Signal measured by the Figure 4.15 Signal measured by the
trailer's middle accelerometer. trailer's rear accelerometer.

otoliofroN*
T 12
ill

6Figure 4.16
-0 0.5 1.5

Recorded relative angle

2 2_5
Time141
3 3.3 4.5 7Figure 4.17
0 0.5 1 1.5 2

Measured forward velocity

25
Time 1.1
3 3.5 4 4.5 5

between car and trailer. for the steering wheel impulse input test.

U.S 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 33 4 4.5 5

0.5 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 45 5
Time lei Time isi

Figure 4.18 Steering wheel angle input Figure 4.19 Signal measured by the
recorded in the step steer test. trailer's front accelerometer.

103
 -10 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 45 5
.20 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 33 45
Time lel Time fel
Figure 4.20 Signal measured by the Figure 4.21 Signal measured by the
trailer's middle accelerometer. trailer's rear accelerometer.

% 0:5 1:3 25 3 3.5 4 4.5 SLI 0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5

Tune lel lime Fel
Figure 4.22 Measured forward velocity Figure 4.23 Recorded relative angle
for the step steer test. between car and trailer.

104
 CHAPTER 5 MODEL VERIFICATION AND VALIDATION

5.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes the verification and validation of the Bathfp car/caravan
combination model. Since the mathematical model only approximates reality, many
assumptions are made in the modelling process. Therefore, it is very important to
understand the influence of these assumptions and their effect on model accuracy and
applicability.

5.1.1 The need for verification

There is a very high probability that errors will be introduced in the analysis and in the
computer coding when a complex system is modelled. The aim of the verification
process is to identify and eliminate such errors.

5.1.2 The need for validation

The model used to describe a system's behaviour is always less complex than the real
system. Therefore, validation is required in order to assess the accuracy with which the
model represents the system within the given operating range.

5.2 VERIFICATION PROCESS

The verification process was aimed at exposing errors in the analytical derivation and
implementation of the car/caravan combination model equations. Quantitative
verification was performed on the individual component models and qualitative
verification of the complete system of models representing the car/caravan combination
system was performed.
Simple simulation circuits were set .up, such that the component model under
Investigation was connected to simple models capable of supplying the inputs required
by the component. Since some car component model parameters were determined from
component performance data, the verification process tested the methods used in

105
 deriving the parameter values.
After the correct operation of all the individual component models was established, the
complete car/caravan combination model was examined qualitatively. The procedure
used was to set up the complete simulation circuit, set realistic parameter values for
all models and then examine the car and caravan responses during simple
manoeuvres.

5.3 VALIDATION PROCESS

The purpose of the validation process was to prove that, within the chosen operating
range of the car/caravan combination system. the computer model predictions agreed
with the real response to within acceptable levels of accuracy.

5.3.1 Acceptable levels of accuracy

Levels of accuracy were set taking into account the intended area of application of the
results obtained from the simulation model. The car/caravan model was developed
primarily to investigate system stability together with limited handling characteristics.
Therefore. it was considered necessary that the car and caravan model response to
steering inputs in the 0 to 5 Hz range should produce only small errors in sprung mass
and wheel steady state amplitudes.

A general requirement was that the damped natural frequencies of the car and caravan
motions should be reasonably correct and not significantly lower than those of the real
car and caravan. The car/caravan combination model was not intended to be used as
a mathematical prototype for any particular car/caravan combination. Therefore, it was
not necessary that the car/caravan model should predict the exact behaviour of the
combination system, but the behaviourial trends in response to design parameter
variations and external inputs.

5.3.2 Validation methodology

The stages involved in the validation process were:

106
a) measurement of the test car and trailer parameters;
b) the acquisition of experimental data describing car/caravan combination
system behaviour under the desired operating conditions:
C) the setting of car and caravan model parameters to represent the car/trailer
combination test system:
d) the simulation of the car/caravan model behaviour using the computer model;
e) comparison between measured and simulated results;
make conclusions regarding the car/caravan combination model validity.

5.3.3 Limitation to the validation process

The aim of the validation process was to compare the simulated and experimentally
measured car/caravan system response data. For a complete validation, such
comparisons should be made in both time and frequency domains over the whole range
of car/caravan combination system inputs and operating conditions. In reality, such
extensive validations of car/caravan models are rarely possible due to a lack of
appropriate experimental response data. This situation can be attributed to the almost
infinite number of car/caravan combinations and to the very high costs associated with
the experimental measurements, even if the equipment is available. For the purpose
of this project, no external experimental data was available for validation purposes.

The car simulation model used in the project was individually validated as part of
another project. The data related to a four wheel drive Ford Sierra. Unfortunately, the
available data covered only a limited range of operating conditions and was incomplete
because not all the vehicle variables of interest were measured. Most of the car testing
was carried out by external organizations. Estimation of measurement errors was not
possible due to the insufficient amount of experimental data which was related to a
limited range of handling manoeuvres.
Given the above limitations, only a small number of comparisons with experimental
responses were possible.

5.4 PARAMETRIC DATA FOR CAR AND CARAVAN MODELS

Models parameters were derived principally from measured data and manufacturers
specifications.

107
5.4.1 Caravan parametric data

A limited amount of caravan parametric data relating to chassis and secondary

suspension system dimensions was available from external sources.
Since caravans are assembled by small companies from a kit of parts, and the
emphasis is mostly directed towards interior styling and design, no technical data such
as moments of inertia and centre of gravity height, was available.
The caravan mass, centre of gravity height and moments of inertia were determined
experimentally as described in Chapter 4. The unsprung mass values were calculated
from the mass properties of individual components, apportioning the component
masses between the sprung and unsprung masses.
No caravan secondary suspension data was available despite the fact that the author
tried on more than one occasion to contact the manufacturing company. Therefore, no
kinematic or compliance characteristics were available. The secondary suspension
spring characteristic was measured at the University of Bath and the damper rate
inferred from frequency response tests as presented in Chapter 4.

Tyre force characteristics: The caravan was equipped with Bridgestone 165R13 82T
tyres. No experimental data was found available for this tyre. However, data describing
tyre side force and self aligning moment variation with slip angle, camber angle and
vertical load for a similar Goodyear tyre was used. This data, describing tyre forces and
moments over the following range. was obtained by Goodyear using a flat belt tyre
measurement machine:
slip angle: -19 to +19 degrees;
camber angle: -6 to +6 degrees:
vertical load: 836 to 7853 N.
The data also provided linearised tyre lateral, longitudinal slip and vertical stiffness
and damping values derived from measurements.

5.4.2 Car parametric data

Most of the car parametric data used in the simulation model was derived principally
from measured data supplied by The Ford Motor Company who carried out the work
at their research centre at Dunton. Measurements of the car secondary suspension
properties were done using a static suspension geometry test facility. The measured
data described the wheel kinematic and vertical force characteristics over the whole

108
range of wheel to sprung mass displacements (from bump to rebound), compliance
characteristics (wheel toe and camber angle changes with lateral and longitudinal
forces) and wheel toe and camber angles changes with steering wheel displacement. It
was observed from the steering characteristic diagram that over the steer angle range
of interest, from 0 to 10 degrees, there is no significant change in total wheel toe angles
with steer angle. The effective steering ratio was calculated from specified
characteristics and dimensions of the steering system. The car simulation model used
a linear steering rack, represented as a constant gear ratio.
The car's nonlinear secondary suspension characteristics were represented in the
simulation model using polynomial functions. The coefficients of these polynomials
were obtained using a least squares curve fitting algorithm to match, as close as
possible, the discrete measured or specified points describing the particular
characteristic. MATLAB was used to perform this process. Repeated evaluations were
used to optimise the polynomial's order.
Car secondary suspension damper force/velocity characteristics were available and
were once again approximated using polynomial functions. Separate polynomials were
used to describe the damper force characteristics in compression and extension.
The damper/wheel lever ratio was calculated from secondary suspension drawings.
The car mass and inertia properties were based on information provided by The Ford
Motor Company describing the mass properties and locations of individual
components. The wheel spin inertias were obtained by summing the specified inertias
of the coupled components.
The car track width and wheelbase were taken from manufacturer's drawings.
Finally, the car frontal area and drag coefficient were taken from previously published
information.

Tyre force characteristics: The car was equipped with Michelin 185/65R14 86T tyres.
Once again, data describing tyre side force and self aligning moment variation with slip
angle, camber angle and vertical load for a similar tyre was available from Goodyear.
The measurements were performed using a flat belt tyre measurement machine. The
tyre forces were described over the same range as presented in 5.4.1.

5.5 SIMULATION

For all the simulations, the following general conditions apply:

a) the road surface was perfectly flat:

109
 b) the friction characteristics of the road surface were the same as those
exhibited by the Goodyear tyre test machine;
C) no external aerodynamic disturbances, such as wind gusts, were applied to
the car/caravan combination system;
d) the initial steering wheel angle was 0 degrees.

Car and caravan parameters were set to the values given in Appendix F. The car
parameters were unmodified during the tests. However, the trailer's moments of inertia
and centre of gravity height were changed during the steering wheel impulse input
tests in order to assess the influence of trailer parameters on behaviour. The trailer
parameters that were modified are presented in the relevant section.
These tests were intended to reproduce the experimental tests carried out at both The
University of Bath and a local airfield.

5.5.1 Steering wheel impulse input test procedure

The car/caravan combination system simulation started in a straight ahead trim

condition, at the nominal test speed and was subject to a steering wheel impulse input
corresponding to that recorded in the experimental test being simulated. The steering
wheel impulse input was set to occur after an elapsed time of 1 second, such that any
initial transients affecting the car/caravan system would have had sufficient time to
decay to a low level before the beginning of the test. All tests were of right hand turns.

5.5.2 Step steer test procedure

As in the previous test case, the car/caravan combination system simulation was
subject to a steering wheel input matched to that recorded in the experimental test
being simulated. Once again, the steering wheel input was set to occur after 1 second,
thus allowing any initial attitude transients to decay to a level that will not significantly
Influence the results of the simulation. Right hand turns were performed.

5.6 COMPARISON OF TEST RESULTS

Comparisons were made between the experimental and simulated test results,

110
conclusions being drawn regarding the accuracy of the results.
The steering wheel inputs recorded from the test car were used to drive the simulation
model. It was not possible to achieve good consistency in the experimental tests due
to difficulty in generating repeatable inputs. This problem became worse as the testing
speed was increased. For clarity, it was decided to present the results together with the
relevant steering wheel angle input.

5.6.1 Steering wheel impulse input tests

Three different trailer configurations were used in this experimental study. Additional
weights, mounted on the trailer's frame, were positioned in different locations on the
frame, such that the moments of inertia and the trailer's centre of gravity location were
varied.
The parameters used for the first trailer configuration are presented in table 5.1. All the
other parameters were maintained at the values presented in Appendix F.

Trailer parameter Predicted value

CG height, h [ml 1.27
Yaw moment of inertia, k [kgml 1078
Roll moment of inertia. I, 706
Pitch moment of inertia, I. [kgm21 1184
Axle load [kg] 753
Tow-ball load [kW 56.7 ri
Table 5.1 Estimated trailer parameters at test condition 1.

Figure 5.1 presents the steering wheel input recorded during experimental tests. This
was used to drive the simulation model. A subsequent steering wheel correction in the
opposite direction, used to return the car to its initial path, can be seen on the steering
wheel input time history graph. The forward speed of the car/caravan combination was
14 m/s. The relative angle between the car and caravan is shown in figure 5.2. In
comparison with the acceleration measurements, the relative angle signal is free from
high frequency noise.
Good agreement was found between the experimental and simulated car/caravan
relative angle. However, there is a small initial oscillation of the simulated relative angle
that is not captured in the experimental results. This can be attributed to the initial

111
 small oscillations present in the recorded steering wheel input signal (figure 5.1).
Figures 5.3 and 5.4 present the caravan lateral and yaw acceleration. Ride disturbance
Induced noise is apparent on both acceleration signals. Good correlation between the
simulation and experimental results is obtained. The simulation does not match the
peak values seen on the experimental acceleration graphs. The experimental caravan
lateral acceleration response peaks exceed the simulated values. In contrast to the
caravan lateral acceleration, the predicted caravan yaw acceleration response peaks
exceed the measured values. However, all the differences were contained within a 10
% tolerance range, the general trend of the dynamic behaviour of the caravan being
closely matched in all cases.
Figure 5.5 shows the steering wheel input used in a 16 m/s forward speed test. The
recorded steering wheel input signal is more distorted than the low speed test
presented in figure 5.1. This distortion was amplified as the testing speed increased,
being mainly related to the compliance characteristics of the car and aerodynamic
disturbances.
The relative angle between the car and caravan is presented in figure 5.6.
The predicted response slightly leads the actual response. The predicted peaks are
higher than those actually recorded. However, the frequencies of car/caravan relative
angle oscillation appear to coincide.

Figures 5.7 and 5.8 compare simulated and experimental caravan lateral and yaw
accelerations. An initial lag is apparent in the experimental caravan lateral acceleration
response. The caravan predicted yaw acceleration exhibits an initial peak in the
opposite direction to that shown experimentally. However, the amplitude of this peak
is quite low.
Figures 5.9 to 5.12 show the comparison between predicted and experimental
car/caravan relative angle, caravan lateral and yaw accelerations for a 17 m/s forward
speed. Again, good correlation is found between simulation and experiment. The same
general comments such as lower predicted caravan lateral acceleration peak levels and
higher predicted car/caravan relative angle levels apply for this case.
Finally, for the test condition 1, figures 5.13 to 5.16 present the results for a 21 m/s
forward speed. The recorded steering wheel angle input for this case (figure 5.13) looks
like a sinusoidal input of one period with an 80 degrees amplitude and 0.5 Hz
frequency.
Adjusting the weights located on the trailer's frame modified the caravan yaw moment
of inertia. The new values of the trailer parameters are given in table 5.2.

112
 Trailer parameter Predicted value
CG height, h [m] - 1.27
Yaw moment of inertia, I, [kgm 2] 961
Roll moment of inertia, I,. [kgml 706
Pitch moment of inertia, Ir [kgm2] 1067
Axle load [kg] 753
Tow-ball load [kg] 56.7

Table 5.2 Estimated trailer parameters at test condition 2.

Similar tests to those carried out for test condition 1 were conducted. The recorded
steering wheel input is shown in figure 5.17. The forward velocity for this test was 16
m/s. The comparison between experiment and simulation is presented in figures 5.18
to 5.20.
The trailer's parameters were once again adjusted by shifting the weights onto the
frame. Table 5.3 presents the new values for the trailer's parameters. This time the
trailer yaw moment of inertia was unchanged (as in table 5.2) and other parameters
such as caravan centre of gravity height and roll moment of inertia were modified.
Figures 5.21 to 5.24 present the results for a 16 m/s forward speed. Once again, there
was good agreement between experimental and simulated results.

Trailer parameter - Predicted value

CG height, h (ml 1.11 (
Yaw moment of inertia, 4 [kgrn2] 961
Roll moment of inertia, I,. [kgm2 ] 490
Pitch moment of inertia, l 850
Axle load [kg] 753
Tow-ball load [kg] 56.7

Table 5.3 Estimated trailer parameters at test condition 3.

5.6.2 Analysis of steering wheel impulse test results

The caravan model underestimated lateral acceleration peak levels by up to 10 0/oat all
testing speeds. Some of the differences observed between simulation and experiment

113
 may be due to the omission of steering system dynamics from the car model.
A 4 Hz oscillation was identified in the peak regions on the caravan lateral acceleration
graphs. The oscillation was initially thought to have been caused by external
disturbances, but since it was apparent on all lateral acceleration experimental results
this explanation was discarded. It was believed that the 4 Hz oscillation was related to
the trailer frame's flexibility which was omitted from the simulation model. Tests
conducted at the University of Bath using the four poster road simulator rig confirmed
that the frame used in the experimental work was flexible in the lateral direction.

5.6.3 Step steer tests

Step steer tests were conducted, keeping the parameters of the car and caravan at the
values presented in Appendix F and table 5.1.
Simulated and experimental low speed step steer responses for two different tests are
presented in figures 5.25 to 5.30. The tests were conducted at 5.8 m/s and 5 m/s
forward speed respectively. The steering wheel input had a magnitude of 360 degrees.

a) Relative angle between the car and caravan: Figures 5.25 and 5.28 present the
experimental and simulated relative angle between the car and caravan for the two test
cases. They are closely matched.

b) Lateral acceleration: The resulting experimental and predicted lateral acceleration

responses are shown in figures 5.26 and 5.29. The simulation model's lateral
acceleration increases more slowly than the car/caravan combination test system. The
simulated lateral acceleration presented in figure 5.26 also exhibits a lag. The steady
state values are accurately predicted in both cases.

C) Yaw acceleration: Analyzing the yaw acceleration responses which are presented in
figures 5.27 and 5.30, it can be seen that there is a good agreement in terms of the
timing between the experimental and simulation results. However, the steady state
levels of the simulation are lower than those measured.

5.6.4 Analysis of step steer test results

The caravan lateral acceleration responses to step steering inputs are less rapid than

114
 those measured and for the 5.8 m/s forward speed test there is also a lag in the
simulated lateral acceleration results. However, the caravan lateral acceleration steady
state values are in good agreement for both test speeds.
At low forward speeds the effects of lateral acceleration are low and the attitudes of the
car and caravan are governed by kinematic considerations. Also the amount of tyre
drag present at low test speeds can be neglected. This was reflected in the car/caravan
relative angle which was a good match in both test cases, confirming the correct
modelling of the basic car steering system and car/caravan system geometry.

5.7 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY

Due to the complexity of the system, a large amount of work has been devoted to
parameter sensitivity studies. Some of the parameters used to describe the caravan
and car models were estimated since measurement was not possible. The effects of
errors in these parameters on the validation variables were assessed. It has not been
intended to repeat this work here.

The elimination of the car secondary suspension compliance properties produced the
largest change in car/caravan dynamic behaviour. For the caravan secondary
suspension no compliance data was available. It was therefore not possible to gauge
the effects of this compliance on the car/caravan dynamic behaviour. Another
parameter investigated was the tyre relaxation length. Since this was a dynamic effect
it only influenced transient handling performance. Reducing the tyre relaxation length
from its initial value of 0.6 m to 0.01 m, the tyre forces were generated instantaneously
at all forward speeds. The omission of tyre force dynamics produced only small
changes, but an increase in yaw damping was apparent. As a conclusion, all the
changes increased the initial rate of response. The largest behaviourial change was
caused by the elimination of the car front axle compliance characteristics, which are
the least accurate of the car compliance parameters. This was due to the limitations
of the test procedure used to evaluate the compliance characteristics which measured
individual wheel toe variations in response to equal and opposite loads applied to the
wheel centres on both sides of the car. Therefore the compliance parameters do not
take into account the steering rack mounting compliance or Steering column
compliance, no net side force being applied to the steering rack. Also the car front axle
compliance characteristics do not include the effect of tyre self aligning torque on car
front tyre toe changes.

115
The parameters investigated only affected the car/caravan combination system
horizontal dynamics and could be satisfactorily assessed on the basis of lateral
accelerations and yaw velocities response under transient tests conditions.

5.8 CONCLUSIONS

Having obtained a good correlation between simulation and experiment, it was

concluded that the car/caravan simulation model represented the dynamic behaviour
with acceptable levels of accuracy for the purpose of handling and stability studies.
In general, a good correlation in tern-is of the timing and magnitude of the response
peaks was observed.
If a thorough validation process is to be carried out, more specialised equipment
should be used to acquire experimental data. In order to obtain mean values and
standard deviations, which allow a more concise interpretation of the experimental
results and an estimation of measurement errors, it is important to achieve consistency
In the steering wheel angle input. This was not possible in the present experimental
tests.

The car model was validated as part of another project. In general, the car model's
response was faster than the actual response. However, the dynamics of the car change
when the caravan is attached. Therefore, if sufficient instrumentation had been
available it would also have been sensible to monitor some of the car parameters that
are important in defining the handling and stability characteristics of the car/caravan
combination system.

The apparent differences found during the validation process are likely to occur due
to the approximations made in the modelling process. This will include errors in the
static and dynamic wheel orientations and the exclusion of secondary suspension
internal friction forces. However, the dominant errors are most likely to be caused by
Inaccuracies in the modelling of tyre characteristics. Reliance on tyre test machine
measured data limits the accuracy of the model in representing the car/caravan
combination system on real road surfaces. Experimental tyre measurements conducted
by Goodyear have indicated that limit tyre sideforce levels may in reality be 10% to 15%
greater than the values measured using a flat belt test machine.

116
 13 2 25 3 33 4 45 5 03 1 13 2 25 3 33 4 43
Time 1.1 11030 f•1

Figure 5.1 Steering wheel impulse - test Figure 5.2 Simulated and experimental
condition 1, 14 m/s. car/caravan relative angle - test
condition 1, 14 m/s.

1.5

03
$7,

g °
1 Los
.1 -2
solid lime -etperima001
-4 d•sbed - gmbdoe
-1.3

-20
0.5 I 1.5 2 7_5 3 33 • 03 I IS 2 25 3 13 4 43
TIME NI Time141

Figure 5.3 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.4 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 1. 14 m/s. 1,14 m/s.

00 I 13 2 15 4 •
-410 ns1:k1
0 0. 3 1.5 1 25
Time rs1
3 3.3 4 45 5 Figure 5.6 Simulated and experimental
Figure 5.5 Steering wheel impulse - test car/caravan relative angle - test
condition 1. 16 m/s. condition 1. 16 m/s.
117
 25 3 33 4 4.5 0.5 1 1.3 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time sl Time 131
Figure 5.7 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.8 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 1, 16 m/s. 1, 16 m/s.

y. 0

-2-

.4

SO 0.3 1 1.3 2.3 3 33 4 4.5 5

Time Isl
" so 0.i 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5
Time ill Figure 5.10 Simulated and experimental
Figure 5.9 Steering wheel impulse - test car/caravan relative angle - test
condition 1, 17 m/s. condition 1, 17 m/s.

13

.43

solid hoe . expesimenmi

dashed liee • simulation

2
0.3 IS 2 2.5 3 3.3 4.3 US I 1.3 2 2.3 3 33 4 4.3 5
Time 1.1 Time 1.1

Figure 5.11 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.12 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 1, 17 m/s. 1, 17 m/s.

118
 100

SO

300 05 15 2 2.5 2 33 4 4.5

Time lai

Figure 5.13 Steering wheel impulse -test Figure 5.14 Simulated and experimental
condition 1. 21 m/s. car/caravan relative angle - test
condition 1, 21 m/s.

-4

solid lb.. -experimental

dashed line omulanon

solid line -experiments/

dashed fine. Mmulanon

u .20 0.5
o 0.5 15 2 2.5 3 3,3 4 4.3 5 1.5 2 15 3 35 4 45 5
Time 1.1 Time 121

Figure 5.15 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.16 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 1, 21 m/s. 1, 21 m/s.

" e"Nitinprrn, 1
I

1.5 2 2.3 3 3.5 4 4.3

110.0 1.1

WO 0.3 1.5 2 2_5

Time 151
33 Figure 5.18 Simulated and experimental
Figure 5.17 Steering wheel impulse - test car/ caravan relative angle - test
condition 2, 16 m/s. condition 2, 16 m/s.

119
 experimental
solid line -
dashed tin, - simulation

25 3 33 4 4.5 -20 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4.5 5

Time (.1 Tune 1st
Figure 5.19 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.20 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 2, 16 m/s. 2. 16 m/s.

IS 2 25 3 3.5 4 4.5
1.5 2 25 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 rune (s1
Time MI Figure 5.22 Simulated and experimental
Figure 5.21 Steering wheel impulse - test car/caravan relative angle - test
condition 3, 16 m/s. condition 3, 16 m/s.

1.5

mlid line experimental

dashed lion - simulation
-1.5

2.5 4 4.5 .20 0.5 I /.5 2 25 33 4.5

Time ml lime 101
Figure 5.23 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.24 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 3, 16 m/s. 3, 16 m/s.

120
 30

25

20
14 1
13
is

lo

solid line - paimenel

deified line -
-2
-SO 0.3 1 1.5 2 25 3 33 4 45 3 0 0.5 1.5 2 2.5 3.3 4 4.5
Tonels1 Time N1

Figure 5.25 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.26 Simulated and experimental
car/caravan relative angle - test caravan lateral acceleration - test
condition 1, 5.8 m/s. condition 1. 5.8 m/s.

15

10

solid -
dashed Ii... 'insulation

0.5 I 1.5 2 2.5 3 33 4 45 5 13 2 2_5 3 3.5 4 43 5

Time Col Time N1

Figure 5.27 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.28 Simulated and experimental
caravan yaw acceleration - test condition car/caravan relative angle - test
1. 5.8 m/s. condition 1, 5 m/s.

1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 43

Ti... Isl Time 1.1

Figure 5.29 Simulated and experimental Figure 5.30 Simulated and experimental
caravan lateral acceleration - test caravan yaw acceleration - test condition
condition 1, 5 m/s. 1.5 m/s.

121
CHAPTER 6 SENSITIVITY STUDIES USING THE COMPUTER MODEL

6.1 INTRODUCTION

This chapter describes simulation sensitivity studies carried out to assess the lateral
stability and handling characteristics of car/caravan systems. The computer model
used for this study was validated in the previous chapter and a good level of agreement
was obtained between experimental and simulation results. It was concluded that the
computer model predicted all the major factors influencing the lateral stability and
handling of the car/caravan combination system.

6.2 GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Directional control of cars and car/caravan combination systems involves both the
mechanical properties of the car and caravan and the control skill of the driver. It is
up to the driver to provide adequate guidance control inputs. The performance of the
whole system, including both the driver and the car/caravan combination system, is
called 'handling". Car/caravan system dynamics refers only to the mechanical
properties of the system itself.
Unfortunately it is very difficult to model the interaction between the driver and the
mechanical system. Therefore, in the present analysis, only fixed control directional
dynamics of the car/caravan combination system will be investigated Abe dyiver
provides only the initial system disturbance).

6.3 THE NEED FOR SENSITIVITY STUDIES

For specific car and caravan combinations, equipment and loading specifications are
well known and are available to the purchaser-user. However, there are still many
users that prefer (are not aware or just ignore advice) to load up their caravan until it
exceeds the maximum authorised total mass as regulated by ISO 1176. By loading up
the caravan, both the total mass and the moments of inertia and tow-ball vertical load
are modified. The static tow-ball load is again regulated by ISO 4114 and maximum
and minimum permissible static loads on the coupling ball are recommended. It was
therefore considered important to conduct a series of sensitivity studies using the

122
 computer model in order to asses the influence of caravan geometrical and inertial
properties on the. overall car/caravan system stability and handling properties.

6.4 PRELIMINARY STABILITY AND HANDLING ASSESSMENT

It is very difficult to gauge the complex interaction between the driver and the car. The
present work will consider only the "open-loop" behaviour of the car/caravan-driver
system. Therefore, the driver, through the steering wheel, will provide the initial
disturbance to the car/caravan system, without any subsequent attempt to intervene
in order to control the car/caravan motion.

All parameter alterations will be made in relation to the estimated caravan parameters
as presented in table 6.1.

Caravan parameter Measured value

Longitudinal distance between 3.35
tow-ball and caravan axle, Le [m]
CG height, h [m] 1.27
Yaw moment of inertia, l z [cgm2] 1078
Roll moment of inertia, 1,, ficgm21 706
Pitch moment of inertia, I,. fkge] 1184
Axle load ficgl 753
Tow-ball load [kg] 56.7

Table 6.1 Estimated caravan parameters.

To conduct preliminary tests two forward speeds were chosen, namely 50 mph (22.22
m/s) and 70 mph (31.11 m/s). Figure 6.1 shows the steering wheel input applied after
one second from the start in both cases. The car and caravan yaw angles for a 50 mph
forward speed are presented in figure 6.2, and it can be seen that the caravan yaw
angle has greater overshoot than the car yaw angle. It is shown that, as expected, the
car yaw angle leads the caravan yaw angle since the car must respond before the
caravan is excited by movement of the tow-ball point.

The car impulse response is considered in isolation (no caravan connected) at a forward
speed of 50 mph (figure 6.3). The car yaw angle oscillation is heavily damped when the

123
 caravan is not coupled and the steady state value of the yaw angle for the car alone is
less than the yaw angle for the car/caravan combination system: Figure 6.4 presents
the car yaw angle with and Without the caravan, for the second test forward speed of
70 mph. In this case it can be seen that the car yaw angle, when the caravan is
connected, is under damped, but stable, decaying with time. Once again, the steady
state level of the car alone is less that when the caravan is attached. This behaviour
can be explained only if the car steering characteristic is taken into account. For the
car alone, an understeering characteristic is expected as presented in figure 6.5.
However, when the caravan is coupled, since the coupling is behind the car rear axle,
there is an increase of 14.5% in the car rear axle load, while the front axle load is
reduced by only 6.1%. The main consequence of the caravan coupling is a reduction
of car rear cornering stiffness coefficient. Therefore, as is expected, the understeering
characteristic of the car alone is altered in the direction of neutral steer by connecting
the caravan. The driver perceives this from the steering wheel angle and yaw
oscillations. The car understeering behaviour will still be maintained throughout the
whole region of the lateral acceleration.

Before drawing too many conclusions from this study, it should be realised that due
to nonlinearities present in the system, the actual response of the car alone and
car/caravan combination system will also be dependent upon the steering wheel angle
Input. Figures 6.6 and 6.7 present the comparison between the car yaw angle with and
without the caravan for two levels of steering wheel inputs: 60 degrees and 120 degrees
respectively. The amplitude dependency shows that it is not only the forward speed of
the car/caravan combination system that will influence the behaviour.

Despite the fact that the differences in steady state levels are not significant, the
handling characteristics of the car are changed when the caravan is connected,
especially in limit manoeuvre situations (large and violent steering wheel inputs) when
the handling characteristics of the car are radically affected. A great majority of car
owners are used to the car handling characteristics, but not aware of the changes that
a towed caravan can cause.

The relative angle between the car and caravan is an important factor in assessing the
stability of the car/caravan system. The car passengers can feel all the 'movements that
the car undergoes, but can not asses the caravan movements. They can however detect
the relative angle between car and caravan. It can be seen from figure 6.8 that the
relative angle oscillation is increased as the forward velocity rises. The damping ratio

124
 of the relative angle oscillation (as described in paragraph 6.4) is D =0.23 for 50 mph
forward speed and D=0.14 for 70 mph. It can be seen that for an increase of only 20
mph (9 m/s) the car/caravan relative angle damping drops significantly. In addition,
the relative angle amplitudes reached during the 70 mph oscillation are much higher
than in the 50 mph case, increasing the danger of accidents associated with large
oscillations (caravan may leave the initial designated lane).
Figure 6.9 presents the caravan yaw angle for the two forward speeds. It can be seen
that for the 70 mph forward speed. the initial yaw angle has a value of thirty degrees
which is quite unacceptable for most public roads. The car roll angle with and without
the caravan at a forward speed of 50 mph is shown in figure 6.10. For the car alone,
the roll oscillation is damped, whereas for the car towing the caravan the roll angle
exhibits an under damped oscillatory behaviour due to the tow-ball forces received
from the caravan.

Another problem associated with caravans and general systems exhibiting high centres
of gravity positions is the tendency to roll over. For articulated semi-trailers which are
widely employed for commercial purposes, the steady-state lateral acceleration level
rarely exceeds 0.4g because the unit will roll over due to the ratio of centre of gravity
height to track width. For caravans, roll over problems are not so severe, since the ratio
of centre of gravity height to track width is lower. A basic calculation reveals that the
caravan used in this study can attain a steady state lateral acceleration level of 0.6g-
0.7g.

Maintaining the ninety degrees steering wheel input (figure 6.1) and increasing the
forward speed from 70 mph to 80 mph it can be seen in figure 6.11 that the caravan
wheel vertical loads have a large variation, approaching the zero limit (when tyre losses
contact with the ground). Figure 6.12 presents the caravan centre of gravity lateral
acceleration for this limit manoeuvre. For a forward speed of 85 mph and the same
ninety degrees steering input, the caravan rolls over. Figure 6.13 presents the caravan
roll angle which increases sharply gaining an eighteen degrees level in less than 0.5 s
(caravan rolls over). The simulation stops at five seconds due to simulation programme
integrator convergence problems.

Therefore, in assessing the stability of car/caravan combination systems it is important

to ensure that the steering wheel impulse applied to perturb the car/caravan system
will generate a maximum lateral acceleration at the caravan centre of gravity in the
region of 0.4g±0. 1g. avoiding the roll over problems associated with high caravan centre

125
of gravity lateral acceleration levels.

6.5 METHODS USED TO ASSESS CAR/CARAVAN SYSTEM LATERAL STABILITY

Quantitative measures of stability are defined as the times for the yaw angles and
articulation angle to decay within a specified fraction of their initial values. The
following values are used to asses the car/caravan system stability:
a) Damping of the car/caravan articulation angle oscillation: from the time
history of articulation angle, the mean value of the amplitude ratios can be
calculated using the following formula:

1 [A l +A2 + 142 +A3+ A3 +A 4 An_2+An_11

r
n-z A2 +A 3 3
A +A 4 4 3
A +A An_ +An

where:
A1(1= I -n) oscillation amplitude:
r - mean value of the amplitude ratios.
The value of (An_ l +k) should be at least 10% of the value of (A1-1-A2).
The damping, D, is calculated according to:

int
D-
V7c2 + (it) 2

b) Zero damping speed the zero damping speed is defined as the speed at
which the damping equals zero. It can be determined from the plotted values
of damping speed versus test speed by linear curve fitting using the following
regression:

D=Ci + C2 v.d= 0

vzd = -

where:
C1 and C2 - the regression coefficients;
vzd - zero damping speed.

126
 c) Reference damping speed: reference damping speed is defined as the speed
at a damping level of 0.05. It can be determined in the same way as the zero
damping speed using the following formula:

0.05-C,
0.05 =
C2

where again C 1 and C2 are the regression coefficients.

d) Reference speed damping: reference speed damping is defined as the

damping at a speed of 80 km/h (50 mph). It can be determined as being:

„a-C1+80C2

MATLAB M-files were written to perform the previous calculations.

Both the damping and amplitude of oscillation will be important with respect to safety.
If the damping of the articulation angle has a large enough value, it is also important
that the oscillation's amplitude is confined to some limit values. Otherwise, the caravan
can leave the designated lane, increasing the danger of accidents.

6.6 PARAMETER SENSITIVITY

Caravan manufacturing industry coinprises of many small companies assembling units

from a kit of parts. Little technical expertise is usually available to them and the design
process is based mainly on experience accumulated over the years.
It is important to conduct a parameter sensitivity study in order to asses the influence
of different car/caravan design parameters on the overall performance of the system.
In this work only the caravan parameters were investigated. No attempt was made to
investigate the influence of different car parameters upon system stability. The main
car parameters used in the present investigation are presented in table 6.2.
A more detailed description of the parameters used for the car simulation model is
given in Appendix F.
The caravan geometrical and inertial properties have been modified in order to perform
sensitivity studies. Only one parameter was modified at a time, all the other values
being maintained at their initial values (table 6.1). In reality, modifying only one
moment of inertia cannot easily be achieved, but it was considered the most
appropriate method of assessing the influence of individual parameters on the overall

127
car/caravan system behaviour.

Car parameter - Default value

CG height, h [m] 0.465
Car wheelbase, L. [m] 2.61
Yaw moment of inertia, 4 [k 2] 2625
Roll moment of inertia, Ixs [kgml 289
Pitch moment of inertia, lys [kgru2 ] 2114
Front axle load [kg] 807
Rear axle load [kg] 727

Table 6.2 Estimated car parameters.

As a general rule, parameter values were halved and doubled, although other variations
were considered where appropriate.

6.6.1 Caravan total mass

It is usually accepted that caravan weight should not exceed car weight. However, this
recommendation is easily overlooked by caravan users, resulting in an reversed weight
ratio.

Table 6.3 presents the damping D of the relative angle between car and caravan for
different forward velocities of the system, when the caravan total mass is modified.
In table 6.4 all the car/caravan stability variables are displayed. Since the total mass
of the caravan was modified, this is presented in the first column of table 6.4.

It is apparent that stability is relatively insensitive to mass when the caravan is

significantly lighter than the car. When the caravan mass is greater than the car the
stability reduces, especially at high speed. The variation in damping with small mass
should not be interpreted as a reduction in stability. It is more likely that the linear
regression method shown in figures 6.14 and 6.15 is responsible for the apparent
change in damping. The linear fits for the three cases considered in the analysis
(different caravan total masses) are shown in figure 6.16.

128
 Forward speed, u [m/s] Total mass, M [kg] Damping, D [-]
405 0.47
15 810 0.43
1620 0.31
405 0.30
20 810 0.28
1620 0.20
405 0.19
25 810 0.18
1620 0.14
405 0.14
30 810 0.15
1620 0.08

Table 6.3 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

It is not only damping that is important when assessing the stability of the car/caravan
combination system. The absolute values of the oscillation angles should also be
considered. Figure 6.17 displays the relative angle between the car and caravan for a
forward speed of 30 m/s and a steering wheel angle impulse magnitude of 60 degrees.
As expected, the amplitude of oscillation when the caravan total mass is 1620 kg is
much higher than for the standard mass and the detectable oscillation period is
extended. Figures 6.18 and 6.19 present the caravan and car yaw angles respectively,
for a forward speed of 30 m/s and a 60 degrees steering input with two caravan
masses of 810 kg and 1620 kg.

Total mass, M [kg] vzd [m/s] v0.05 IM/SI D80t ki

405 35.1 32.8 0.28

810 36.3 33.6 0.27
1620 34.3 31.1 0.18

Table 6.4 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

For a mass of 810 kg, the zero damping speed value was 36.2 m/s. At a forward speed
of 40 m/s, the relative angle between the car and caravan will present an unstable

129
behaviour (figure 6.20). The car yaw angle shown in figure 6.21 reveals a sustained
oscillation, whereas the caravan yaw angle (figure 6.22) exhibits the same unstable
behaviour. Therefore, the linear regression technique used to approximate the zero
damping speed vzd yields satisfactory results.
As a conclusion, it has been shown that increasing the total mass of the caravan above
that of the car affects the overall stability of the car/caravan combination system,
leading to reduced relative angle damping and increased oscillation amplitude values.

6.6.2 Caravan yaw moment of inertia

The yaw moment of inertia represents one of the caravan system features unanimously
accepted as having a great influence on the car/caravan system lateral motion
dynamics.
Once again, the caravan and car geometrical and inertial parameters were maintained
at the values presented in tables 6.1 and 6.2. The caravan yaw moment of inertia was
modified, and it's influence upon the lateral stability assessed.
Table 6.5 presents the car/caravan relative angle damping D for a range of caravan
yaw moments of inertia.
The results show that stability is greatly affected by yaw moment of inertia, the larger
the inertia, the more oscillatory the behaviour. As before, the system becomes less
stable at high speed and for the largest yaw inertia 1,=2156 kgm 2 the system is
unstable at 30 m/s.
Even a lower steering wheel angle input cannot stop the divergent oscillation. Figure
6.23 shows the relative angle between car and caravan for a 30 m/s forward speed,
when the steering wheel input is 40 and 60 degrees respectively. In this situation both
the car and the caravan develop oscillatory motions which are under damped and are
Increasing with time (figures 6.24 and 6.25). It can be seen that the amplitude of the
caravan yaw angle oscillation is very high, increasing the danger of accidents even if
the car still runs on its initial lane. No roll over problems are likely to occur, since they
are usually associated with higher forward speed or bigger steering wheel input levels.

Table 6.6 presents the variables associated with the car/caravan combination system
stability.
As can be seen from table 6.6, the zero damping speed is reduced by almost 10 m/s
(22.5 mph) when the caravan yaw moment of inertia is double the initial value.

130
 Forward speed, u [m/s] Yaw inertia, Iz [kgm2] Damping, D [-I
539 0.52
15 1078 0.43
2156 0.35
539 0.33
20 1078 0.28
2156 0.18
539 0.23
25 1078 0.18
2156 0.09
539 0.17
30 1078 0.15
2156 unstable

Table 6.5 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

In conclusion, the yaw moment of inertia plays an important role in the lateral
dynamics of the car/caravan combination system. The linear fits for the three cases
considered in the analysis (different caravan yaw moments of inertia) are shown in
figure 6.26.

Yaw inertia, 4 [kgm21 vul [m/s] v0.05 [m/s1 D80f [-1

539 36.1 33.9 0.32
1078 36.3 33.6 0.27
2156 28.3 26.4 0.15

Table 6.6 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
f damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

6.6.3 Caravan roll moment of inertia

The caravan sprung mass roll moment of inertia did not have a major influence on the
car/caravan lateral stability. However, effects related to a high roll inertia were
Identified in the roll angle developed by the caravan, and the caravan tyre vertical
loads. As presented in figure 6.27, the increase in roll moment of inertia leads to bigger

131
variations in tyre vertical loads after the same initial steering wheel input of 60 degrees
was applied. Increased load transfer is associated with a decrease in the caravan tyre's
cornering power. Therefore, car/caravan lateral stability is influenced, but to a small
extent. The roll angle also influences the wheel orientations, such as camber angle and
roll steer characteristics. When small roll angles are present, this effects can be almost
overlooked. However, when the roll angle has a significant value, the effect of roll on
wheel orientation cannot be neglected. Figure 6.28 shows the change in sprung mass
roll angle when the sprung mass roll inertia is increased.
"Roll over" tendency is also increased when the caravan sprung mass roll moment of
Inertia is increased (associated with larger tyre vertical load variations).
Figure 6.29 presents the effect of roll inertia on car yaw angle. The overshoot of the car
yaw angle is not affected by the roll moment of inertia variation.
The car/caravan relative angle variation for different caravan sprung mass roll
moments of inertia is presented in figure 6.30. Once again, there is not a very
significant influence on the relative angle other than a slightly reduced damping level
and a reduced frequency of oscillation.
Again it can be seen from table 6.7 that a small roll moment of inertia provides a high
relative angle damping, ensuring stable motion.

Forward speed, u [m/s] Roll inertia, Ix, [kgm2] Damping, D [-]

353 0.52
15 706 0.43
1414 0.43
353 0.33
20 706 0.28
1414 0.28
353 0.21
25 706 0.18
1414 0.18
353 0.17
30 706 0.15
1414 0.08

Table 6.7 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

Table 6.8 presents the car/caravan lateral stability variables. The system is relatively

132
Insensitive to roll moment of inertia. Figure 6.31 presents the linear fits for the
car/caravan relative angle damping when only the caravan's roll inertia is modified.

Roll inertia, Im [kgm2] vzd [m/sl v0.05 [m/s1 Deot [-]

353 35.8 33.6 0.31
706 36.3 33.6 0.27
1414 33.2 31.1 0.25

Table 6.8 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

6.6.4 Caravan centre of gravity vertical position

The height of the centre of gravity influences the lateral load transfer (figure 6.32) and
increases the caravan's roll.
Table 6.9 presents the relative angle damping ratio for a series of centre of gravity
heights. As can be seen, the centre of gravity height does not have a major influence
on the lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system.
Figure 6.33 shows the linear fits for the three different centre of gravity heights.

Forward speed, u [m/s] CofG height, he Em] Damping, D [-I

1.0 0.44
15 1.2 0.43
1.4 0.42
1.0 0.30
20 1.2 0.28
1.4 0.27
1.0 0.19
25 1.2 0.18
1.4 0.17
1.0 0.15
30 1.2 0.15 -
1.4 0.14

Table 6.9 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

133
The caravan roll angle is also influenced by the centre of gravity height as shown in
figure 6.34. All the lateral stability variables are presented in table 6.10.

CofG height, he [m] vzd Im/s1 v0.05 [m/s] D80t I-1

1.0 36.7 34.1 0.27
1.2 36.3 33.6 0.27
1.4 35.8 33.1 0.26

Table 6.10 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 iml/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

It is clear that the height of the centre of gravity does not have a significant influence
on lateral stability, but affects the tyre vertical load transfer, caravan roll angle and roll
over tendency.

6.6.5 Caravan tow-ball load

The tow-ball vertical load allowed for a car/caravan combination system is restricted
by the car manufacturer for a number of reasons:
- The car fixing points specified by the car manufacturer as being suitable to
attach a tow-bar have a limited stiffness. For the car used in the present
Investigation, the permissible vertical tow-bar weight, measured at the coupling
point, must not be less than 25 kg or greater than 50 kg;
- The handling of cars is designed without considering caravans. Therefore any
additional vertical load will have an effect on the vehicle's handling. For
Instance, if the tow-ball load is too high, the car front wheels will lock earlier
than expected during braking.
The tow-ball vertical load is associated with the longitudinal position of the caravan's
centre of gravity. For this study the tow-ball load was adjusted in the simulation
programme by modifying the longitudinal location of the centre of gravity.

Table 6.11 presents the damping of the relative angle with increased tow-ball load and
speed. It was interesting to observe that increasing the tow-ball load will increase the
lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system. However, it is not practical to
have a high tow-ball vertical load due to the reasons previously presented.

134
 Forward speed, u [m/s] Tow-ball load, Tb [N] Damping, D [-]
0 0.36
15 355 0.41
546 0.43
1068 0.53
0 0.20
20 355 0.26
546 0.28
1068 0.34
0 0.09
25 355 0.15
546 0.18
1068 0.25
0 0.02
30 355 0.11
546 0.15
1068 0.18

Table 6.11 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

Table 6.12 presents, once again, the lateral stability variables when the tow-ball load
Is varied. Figures 6.35 and 6.36 show the influence of the tow-ball load on the car and
caravan yaw angles respectively. It can be seen that stability increases as tow-ball load
rises.
Figure 6.37 shows the linear fits for different tow-ball loads, including the case when
the tow-ball load is zero.

Tow-ball load, Tb [N] vul [m/s] v0.05 ['nisi D80t [-I

0 29.9 27.8 0.18

355 34.2 31.7 0.24
546 36.3 33.6 0.27
1068 36.7 34.5 0.33

Table 6.12 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

135
The zero damping speed decreases as the tow-ball load is reduced. Therefore, it is
beneficial to maintain a high tow-ball load in order to ensure stability at high speed.
Clearly, the limits prescribed by the car manufacturer should not be exceeded.
Unfortunately, the increase in tow-ball load can have a negative effect on the car
handling characteristic. When the tow-ball load is increased, the vertical load on the
car rear axle load is increased and front axle load decreased. Figure 6.38 presents the
car handling diagram when the car is driven on a constant radius of R=32.2 m with the
forward speed increasing from 2 m/s to 15 m/s over a period of 50 s. It can be seen
that the car alone exhibits an understeer characteristic. With a caravan attached the
tendency to understeer is reduced although even with a high tow-ball load the car
understeers.
The braking performance of the car can also be influenced by the level of the tow-ball
load and the caravan centre of gravity height. For a car without caravan, during
braking the load on the car front axle is considerably increased due to the braking
deceleration. When the caravan is coupled, this tendency is counteracted by the
increasing load on the coupling from the caravan. Therefore, the car rear axle load will
be higher than in the case when the caravan is not connected.
As a conclusion, all the factors affected by the tow-ball load should be judged and a
compromise solution achieved.

6.6.6 Caravan secondary suspension system

The requirements of the caravan secondary suspension are different to those of a car.
The present standard type B 1000-5 AL-KO chassis used by most U.K. caravan
manufacturers has a very stiff secondary suspension elastic element (almost four times
the stiffness of the spring used for a passenger car). Using a very stiff secondary
suspension elastic element, the caravan sprung mass roll angle is minimised, therefore
no great damping value is required. Having a stiff suspension is acceptable if the road
surface is flat and levelled. Otherwise, on rough roads, the tyres will lose contact with
the ground, a phenomenon often observed on caravans. In the past, the caravan
secondary suspension system was similar to that used in a car (a trailing link arrn
using conventional coil springs and shock absorbers). However, the elastic element was
softer than the present one, allowing a greater travel space for the caravan wheels. This
meant that the wheel boxes were quite deep, restricting the interior space of the
caravan. Using the new triaxial rubber suspension system, the wheel travel was
reduced and the whole axle unit can be produced at much lower costs.

136
a) Spring rate:

Measurements carried out at the University of Bath, revealed a high secondary

suspension spring stiffness. Decreasing the spring stiffness, and taking into account
the fact that the damping rate provided by the secondary suspension is low, the
car/caravan stability will be reduced. Table 6.13 presents the relative angle damping
with different secondary suspension spring stiffnesses. Clearly, the increase of spring
stiffness has a stabilising effect on the relative angle between the car and caravan.
Figure 6.39 shows the increase in caravan sprung mass roll angle when the secondary
suspension spring stiffness is reduced to half the initial value, the damping rate being
maintained at its initial value of c=344 Ns/m.

Forward speed, u [m/s] Secondary susp. Damping, D [-I

spring rate, k [N/m]
44410 0.40
15 88820 0.43
177640 0.54
44410 0.24
20 88820 0.28
177640 0.34
44410 0.13
25 88820 0.18
177640 0.22
44410 0.05
30 88820 0.15
177640 0.18

Table 6.13 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

An increase in roll angle results in a larger variation of the tyre camber angle and
accentuates the roll steer characteristic. It also slightly increases the tyre load transfer
which in turn results in a reduced tyre cornering power with the effect of increasing the
yaw oscillation as shown in figure 6.40.
The linear fits for different secondary suspension spring stiffness are presented in
figure 6.41.

137
 Secondary susp. vzd [m/s1 v0.05 Em/s1 D80t [1
spring rate, k [N/m]
44410 31.4 29.3 0.21
88820 36.3 33.6 0.27
177640 35.5 33.4 0.32

Table 6.14 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

b) Damping rate:

From the experimental measurements carried out at Bath University, the caravan
secondary suspension damping rate was found to have a low value when compared to
the damping rate provided by a hydraulic shock absorber. This was not unexpected,
since it was anticipated that the only damping was generated by the caravan secondary
suspension rubber hysteresis.
The compromise solution adopted for the caravan secondary suspension low-cost unit
meant that the value of the damping rate had little effect on lateral stability, since the
roll oscillation of the caravan sprung mass did not have a high enough level to require
significant damping rates. Different conclusions regarding the importance of damping
would be reached if vehicle ride was considered.
The damping of the car/caravan relative angle oscillation is little influenced by changes
In the level of the caravan secondary suspension damping rates, as presented in table
6.15.

Figure 6.42 emphasises once again the fact that for the secondary suspension spring
stiffness used in the caravan system, the damping rate does not have any influence on
the lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system.
In conclusion, the present caravan secondary suspension layout is a good compromise
In terms of low-cost satisfactory performance, as long as the road surface does not
present significant irregularities. On uneven roads this type of secondary suspension
Is likely to cause problems relating to loss of grip by the tyres, and caravan structural
fatigue, shock loading and vibration due to irregularities of the road surface.

138
 Forward speed, u [m/s] Secondary susp. Damping, D [-]
, damping rate, c [Ns/m]
172 0.43
15 344 0.43
688 0.43
172 0.28
20 344 0.28
688 0.29
172 0.18
25 344 0.18
688 0.18
172 0.15
30 344 0.15
688 0.15

Table 6.15 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

Secondary susp. v v0.0.5 [m/s] 1380t [-I

damping rate, c [Ns/m]
172 36.3 33.7 0.27
344 36.3 33.6 0.27
688 36.3 33.7 0.27

Table 6.16 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

6.6.7 Caravan wheel track

Up to this point, only caravan mass, inertial and suspension properties have been
modified and their influences upon the car/caravan lateral stability assessed. The
other parameters that should also be considered concern chassis geometry. The next
section will explore the influence of caravan wheel track and wheelbase on lateral
stability.
As can be seen from table 6.17, the relative angle damping will rise as the wheel track
is increased. However, legal and practical restrictions will apply to geometrical

139
dimensions and only a limited range of sizes are possible.
When the caravan wheel track is reduced, the secondary suspension track will also
decrease. Therefore, during 'roll a higher restoring force will be required from the
secondary suspension springs to compensate for the decrease in suspension track.
Figure 6.43 shows the increase in sprung mass roll angle with the decrease of wheel
track.
The vertical load for the caravan tyre is presented in figure 6.44. As can be seen, an
Increase in wheel track will reduce both the load transfer and caravan sprung mass roll
angle.

Forward speed, u (m/s} Wheel track, 13,1ml 1 Damping, D ‘-} [

1.4 0.40
15 1.7 0.43
2.2 0.52
1.4 0.25
20 1.7 0.28
2.2 0.34
1.4 0.13
25 1.7 0.18
2.2 0.21
_ 1.4 0.05
30 1.7 0.15
2.2 0.14
I
Table 6.17 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

Table 6.18 presents the lateral stability parameters when the wheel track is varied, and
the linear fits associated with different caravan wheel tracks are shown in figure 6.45.

Wheel track, B, [ml vzd [m/s1 vo.„ [m/sI Dsof [-I

1.4 31.5 29.7 0.22
1.7 36.3 33.6 0.27
2.2 34.8 32.8 0.31

Table 6.18 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

140
6.6.8 Caravan axle to articulation point

The caravan axle to articulation point is defined as the longitudinal distance from the
caravan wheel axle to the tow-ball point. It is thought to be an important caravan
parameter that influences the lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system.
Table 6.19 presents the relative angle damping for different caravan axle to articulation
point values. It can be seen that at high speed (30 m/s) a small axle to articulation
point could result in instability.
A basic explanation of this important behaviour is as follows:
- Assume that the tow-ball is fixed, moving in an axial direction unaffected by caravan
dynamics. If this is the case, the caravan will yaw around the tow-ball point. The
moment that will restore the caravan to axial motion and will prevent the caravan
becoming unstable is generated by the tyre lateral forces multiplied by the caravan axle
to articulation point distance and tyre self-aligning moments. Therefore, it can be seen
that the caravan axle to articulation point plays an essential role in the generation of
restoring torque. Decreasing the caravan axle to articulation point and maintaining the
same tyre characteristics, the level of the restoring torque available will decrease.
Should the caravan axle to articulation point distance be reduced, in order to maintain
the same characteristics of caravan lateral motion, it would be necessary to use tyres
that exhibit an increased cornering stiffness.

Forward speed, u Im/sI Axle to art. pt.. Le [ml Damping. D [-I

2.5 0.27

15 3.4 0.43
4.0 0.55
2.5 0.15

20 3.4 0.28
4.0 0.37
2.5 0.07

25 3.4 0.18
4.0 0.26
2.5 unstable

30 3.4 0.15 •
4.0 0.18

Table 6.19 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

141
Figure 6.46 presents the relative angle between the car and caravan for different
caravan axle to articulation point distances. As can be seen, the major differences
appear when the axle to articulation point distance is decreased to 4 = 2.5 m. The car
and caravan yaw angles are presented in figure 6.47 and figure 6.48, respectively.
From table 6.20 it can be seen that the zero damping speed vzd drops almost 10 m/s
(22.5 mph) when the axle to articulation point distance is adjusted from 4=4.0 m to
4=2.5 m.

Axle to artic. point, 4 [m] vz, [m/s1 Aram [M/ SI 1380f H

2.5 28.1 25.7 0.12

3.4 36.3 33.6 0.27
4.0 36.5 34.5 0.35

Table 6.20 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
f damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

The linear fits associated with different caravan axle to articulation point distances are
presented in figure 6.49.

6.6.9 Caravan tyres

The primary control forces on cars and in particular on car/caravan combination

systems arise from the tyre-ground contact. Therefore, the tyres play an essential role,
providing the most-important nonlinear factor in the lateral and longitudinal control
of the car/caravan combination system.
Under normal operating conditions, there are a multitude of factors, such as road
conditions and inflation pressure that will influence the tyre cornering stiffness. In
many situations, the tyre will meet conditions not experienced during experimental
tests. Therefore, it is important to examine the influence of the tyre cornering stiffness
on the lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system.
In order to assess the influence of different tyre cornering stiffnesses, for a given tyre
operating conditions (given slip angle, camber angle and vertical load) the lateral force
and self aligning moment generated by the tyre have been multiplied by a scaling
coefficient.
Table 6.21 presents the relative angle damping when the caravan tyre cornering
stiffness is varied. The variation of the tyre cornering stiffness is presented as a
percentage of the initial caravan tyre cornering stiffness.

142
As was expected, an increase in the tyre cornering stiffness will have a positive
influence on the lateral stability of the car/caravan system.
The explanation given in 6.6:8 for the influence of the caravan wheelbase can be also
extended for this case. As the cornering stiffness of the tyre decreases, a higher value
Is required for the slip angle in order to generate the same lateral force and self aligning
torque (providing that the tyre camber angle and vertical load have the same level).
It is well known that road conditions influence the behaviour of tyres. In wet
conditions, the tyre cornering power is reduced. The tyre inflation pressure also affects
the cornering stiffness of the tyre. Experimental measurements 1471 have shown that
the tyre cornering stiffness is reduced when the tyre pressure is less than the nominal
pressure recommended by the manufacturer.
Figure 6.50 presents the influence of the caravan tyre cornering stiffness on the
caravan yaw angle. It can be seen that the caravan yaw oscillation is increased when
the caravan tyre cornering stiffness is decreased.
The car yaw oscillation, presented in figure 6.51 is little affected by the increased
caravan yaw oscillation.
The relative angle between the car and caravan is displayed in figure 6.52. The graph
shows that for a decrease of only 20 0/0 in the caravan tyre cornering stiffness, the
relative angle oscillation frequency is decreased, and the amplitude doubled.

Forward speed, u [m/s] Tyre cornering stiffness Damping, D [-]

Ca Pk of default value]
80 0.40

15 100 0.43
120 0.49
80 0.26

20 100 0.28
120 0.33
80 0.16

25 100 0.18
120 0.25
80 0.13

30 100 0.15
10 0.17

Table 6.21 Relative angle damping at 15, 20, 25 and 30 m/s forward speed (1 m/s =
2.25 mph).

143
Table 6.22 presents the lateral stability variables when the caravan tyre cornering
stiffness is varied, and the linear fits associated with different caravan tyre cornering
stiffness are presented in figure 6.53.

Tyre cornering stiffness vzd [m/s] v0.05 [m/s] D80t [-]

C,, 1% of default value]

80 35.3 32.6 0.24

100 36.3 33.6 0.27
120 37.4 34.9 0.32

Table 6.22 Variables associated with the stability of car/caravan combination system.
t damping at 80 km/h (22.2 m/s) forward speed.

It can be concluded from these results that the tyres have an important role in the
lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system. Therefore, great care should
be exercised by the user in the maintenance of correct tyre pressures.

6.7 CONCLUSIONS

The validated computer model has been used to assess the lateral stability of
car/caravans. The caravan mass, inertial and geometrical parameters were modified
and their influence on the lateral stability established. The car parameters were not
modified during the sensitivity studies.
The caravan parameters can be divided up into two categories:
a) The caravan chassis dimensions and caravan secondary suspension characteristics:
b) The caravan mass and inertial properties.
The caravan manufacturer can influence the parameters presented in b). whereas the
parameters in a) are dictated by the caravan chassis manufacturer.

Regarding the caravan secondary suspension properties, it was found that the existing
design which has a very stiff elastic element and very low damping is a good
compromise solution as long as the road is smooth and level. The other parameters
relating to the caravan chassis, such as caravan wheel track and wheelbase should
be as high as possible, since it was shown that an increased wheel track and
wheelbase have a stabilising effect on the lateral oscillations of the car/caravan
combination system (6.6.7 and 6.6.8).

144
The caravan mass and inertial parameters that have the greatest influence on the
lateral stability of the car/caravan combination system were identified as being the
caravan total mass and caravan yaw moment of inertia (6.6.1 and 6.6.2). Both of these
should be minimised whenever possible. Reducing the yaw moment of inertia implies
that all the heavy components that make up a caravan should be placed towards the
caravan vertical axis Oz, passing through the centre of gravity. In addition, any extra
load carried in the caravan should be positioned near the centre of gravity. The total
mass of the caravan should not exceed the manufacturer's recommended value. The
caravan sprung mass roll moment of inertia and the height of the centre of gravity
influence the lateral stability but to a lower extent, mainly through an increased
caravan tyre load transfer and an increased roll over tendency. In order to achieve good
lateral stability of the car/caravan system the tow-ball load should be as high as
possible without exceeding the car manufacturer's recommendations for the tow-ball
vertical loadings.

It should be appreciated that the results and recommendations presented in this

chapter have been based solely on the consideration of car/caravan lateral stability.
This does not mean that they represent the best solution for all forms of use.

It is very difficult to explain the complex interaction between the car and caravan, but
it would appear that when the caravan parameters such as total mass and yaw
moment of inertia are much higher than the car, the oscillations initiated by the car
and transmitted to the caravan are more difficult to contain. It is reasonable therefore
to follow the recommendations made by manufacturers that the caravan should not be
heavier than the towing car.
The caravan tyres have a very important influence on the lateral stability of the
car/caravan combination system. The lateral stability is improved when the caravan
is equipped with tyres of high cornering stiffness (such as low profile tyres which
provide improved performance).

145
 90

no

70
12
.164
5
;4o
0.6
wild line . ear uggle
01 30
4
dulled line - samosa yaw angle
20

10

Oa -20 3 4 3 ; 9 10
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10
Time ill lime i.1

Figure 6.1 Steenng angle input. Figure 6.2 Car and caravan yaw angles
at 50 mph forward speed.

16
12 -
14
10-
12

Solid line air without caravan

'
Dmhed line. mewith mow

6
Solid line . mewlthont onetone
Dashed hen . car with tam=
6

2-

Da go
1 2 4 5 6 7 6 9 10 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10
Time 1.1 Time 1.1
Figure 6.3 Car yaw angle (with/without Figure 6.4 Car yaw angle (with/without
caravan) at 50 mph forward speed. caravan) at 70 mph forward speed.

16
7

14
6

12

g 10
solid lien . mowllhont eaman
CU without samosa at the following "cede
dallied lien. car with ammo
9 solid lino - meet 70 mph fonvard mimed
63
dashed line cat m60 mph forward speed
6 &Ado line m SO mph forward speed
point line. ear M40 mph forward speed
4

2 3 4 $ 6 7 8 9 10
Tlsne
O
D 2 3 4
lime
2
isl
6 7 I 9 10 Figure 6.6 Car yaw angle (with/without
Figure 6.5 Car yaw angle for forward caravan) at 40 mph forward speed and 60
speeds between 40 and 70 mph. degrees steering input.

146
 10

V 0
10 4

solid Urn • ear ',Ohm =WIWI

dashed line - =with =man A

-10
4 solid line - femme' speed 50 mph
-15 dashed Ii... (award speed 70 mph
2

00 3 6 7 9 10 2 3 • 6 7 JO
2 4 2°'
Thee Time fel

Figure 6.7 Car yaw angle (with/without Figure 6.8 Relative angle between car
caravan) at 40 mph forward speed and and caravan at 50 mph and 70 mph
120 degrees steering input. forward speed.

33

solid line fonosed speed Somph

3 dashed 6.0- forward speed 70mph

25 r

s 15

solid - mewieho.. memo

dashed II..- media memo

.5 4 3 6 7 3 4 5 7 10
0 3
Time lel Tune fel

Figure 6.9 Caravan yaw angle at 50 mph Figure 6.10 Car roll angle (with/without
and 70 mph forward speed. caravan) at 50 mph forward speed.

11000

7000

5000 • 2

400D _0
9

-4 -

1000

2 9 10 4 5
Time NI Time NI

Figure 6.11 Caravan wheels vertical load Figure 6.12 Caravan CofG lateral
(right and left side) for a 80 mph forward acceleration for a 80 mph forward speed
speed and 90 degrees steering input. and 90 degrees steering input.

147
 IS

16

14

_20 0:5 1 1.5 2 25 3:5 45 5 20 22 24 26 28 30

21.64 Forward weed 10081
Figure 6.13 Caravan roll angle at 85 Figure 6.14 Linear fit used to estimate
mph forward speed and 90 degrees the damping of the relative angle between
steering input (roll over situation). car and caravan.

0.45

0.4

0.35

0.3

0.23
3
0.2

0.15
49/19 him . emcvao ten1 91444 84= 1620 kg
0.1 &OM fine - maws Mai man 8.4 .810 kg
cloned - corm. 09181614.4 M.405 kg
20 22 24 26 28 30
Formrd weed 16141 00514 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Figure 6.15 Linear and quadratic fit for Figure 6.16 Linear fits for three different
Fomard weed rail

relative angle damping, when the total caravan total mass.

mass of the caravan is M=810 kg.

-10 - 80119 Ilse • =ma Wel slaw M410 kg

\I Oohed line - camas Weal gnus M =1620 kg

-15u 9 10
2 3 4 5 6 7 10
Tim 1.1 Time 141
Figure 6.17 Relative angle between car Figure 6.18 Caravan yaw angle for 30
and caravan at 50 mph forward speed m/s forward speed and 60 degrees
and 60 degrees steering input. steering input.

148
 15

ID

90

.
wild Um • env= mod mem P4 1110 kg
.10
choked Ilee • mum mei mum M . 1620 kg
-15

.20

2 3 4 5 6 25.
7 0 9 ao 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10
nine f.1 Time NI

Figure 6.19 Car yaw angle for 30 m/s Figure 6.20 Relative angle between car
forward speed and 60 degrees steering and caravan at 40 m/s forward speed.
Input.

2 30

25
10

2.0

•
V

2
-10

2 3 4 3 6 7 I 9 10 -15 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 I 9 1
nue 1.1 Time Ill

Figure 6.21 Car yaw angle at 40 m/s Figure 6.22 Caravan yaw angle at 40
forward speed. m/s forward speed.

30

30

y
a 0

•10

-20
p olid line seeming wheri impulse of 40 deg

-30 p 6
da hod line - Heed og wheel impube 01 0 deg.

-40
2 3 4 3 6 7 P 9 10
Thee Ill

Figure 6.23 Relative angle between car Figure 6.24 Car yaw angle at 30 m/s
and caravan at 30 m/s forward speed forward speed (caravan yaw inertia
(caravan yaw inertia 1,=2156 kgm2). 1,=2156 kgm2).

149
 SO 0.5
mild Ii.. - nearing wheel Impulse of 40 deg.
40 - dulled line- sleedrg wheel impulse .1 60 deg 0.45 mild One . 12=2156 k109=2
daabed line- 10=1071 009n62
0.4 doued line -12=539 k4$o62
30

0.35
20

;.--; 0.3
k 10
Z 0.25
I0
0.2
-10
0.15
-20 0.1

300 0.05.
2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10 16 111 20 22 24 26 IS 30
Time 1.1 Forward peed 1.4.1
Figure 6.25 Caravan yaw angles at 30 Figure 6.26 Linear fits for three different
m/s forward speed (caravan yaw inertia caravan yaw moments of inertia.
4= 2156 kgm2).

6000

5500 -

5000

4500

4000
3
• 3500 \7
ei 3000 -

2500 -

2000 -
carman roll Inertia.: caravan roll inertias:
' SW solid Ii... 10=707 l9rn62 • solid line - 160707 009062
&abed line lx = 1414 lerun62
dashed line 10=1414 ICan062
• •
I 2 3 4 5 6 7 B 9 lo 6 7 I 9 10
Time IC lime .1
Figure 6.27 Caravan right side tyre Figure 6.28 Caravan sprung mass roll
vertical load at 30 m/s forward speed. angle at 30 m/s forward speed.

solid line • caravan roll inertia lx =70.1 krAM2

dashed line • caravan roll inertia 6,1414 ligm62

solid line . mann roll .091. 10=706 1109nr2

dashed line • caravan roll inertia lx = 1414 lquo62

.80
2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10
Time (s1
Figure 6.29 Car yaw angle at 30 m/s Figure 6.30 Relative angle between car
forward speed. and caravan at 30 m/s forward speed.

150
 351,0
0.5
rt sold liso - caravan Carta height IN-1.0 re
0.4%
dashed ens - caravan Cola trier* hc-12 m

4500

am*

;. 3500

3000

solid line .caravan roll Wentz 11 = 1414 krun.2

dusted line caravan roll inertia 10 0 707 Ittrors2
2500
Polled too. CIUMV.A1 n.H inertia 1.0353 kgni02
0.

09 4 4 5 10
14 la JR 20 22 24
Fonvard speed finist Tome Isl

Figure 6.31 Linear fits for three different Figure 6.32 Caravan right side tyre
caravan roll moments of inertia. vertical load at 30 m/s forward speed.

0.43

0.

0.33 -

10401 - caravan 0010 hatahl IN-1 am

deehod Ine - caravan 0e43 hanati lic-12

dotted One - earmean GAG nemnolle-1 0 m

2.50
114 In IB 20 22 24 2. 20 Iu 2 3 4 5 A 7 10
Fonvard speed mil Time IN

Figure 6.33 Linear fits for three different Figure 6.34 Caravan roll angle at 30 m/s
caravan centre of gravity heights. forward speed.

It

solid line caravan load 712245 ON

dashed - semen low-ball load Tb=10,7.3 N
solid linn . cancan 110W -ban load 177=543.0 N
dmhed line - caravan low-trall load Tb-1007.5 N

3 II' 2 3 4 5 II,
2
Time IN
Time IN

Figure 6.35 Car yaw angle at 30 m/s Figure 6.36 Caravan yaw angle at 30
forward speed. m/s forward speed.

151
 0.5

0.4
- nolid ii... or without =Evan
dashed line • ear with caravan Ilt.54.5.6N)
doned . ear with ausvan (lb. 50017.5 N)
03

.1 0.2
0.1
solid On.. annmm kns.brill load TtwON
dashed line - mann cowbell load 7b=545.6 N
0
doned In.- aravsn row-ball load ltm3.55.11N
dashdot Hon - maven sow-ball load 71=1067.5 N

54
O.
Id Ii 20 22 24 r 2! 30
Cu lateral acceleenion imhe21
Forward axed lo5/11
Figure 6.37 Linear ills for four different Figure 6.38 Car handling diagram
caravan tow-ball loads. (forward velocity is increased from 2 m/s
to 15 m/s over 50 s. Path radius is
R=32.2 m).

16

14
4
12
2
10
o
t
I2
1
a 4

2
solid Ifite Becondary ramp axing rue 0 =811.11 kN/n1
nnlidIme - secondary map. spring rme 0411.8 1220n 0 dashed tine- menden/ sump sluing cate kN/m
dashed Ii... secondary !lap. wrius tou 0644.4 kN/m

2 3 4 5 7 -20 4 0
9 10 2 3 7 9 le
Time Isl Tim..)
Figure 6.39 Caravan roll angle at 30 m/s Figure 6.40 Caravan yaw angle at 30
forward speed. m/s forward speed.

03 0.43

0.45
0
O.4

0.35 0.35

0.3
▪ 03

ra; 0.25

0.23
a 01

0.15 0.2
U.I • solid One . secondary aspersion awing rare 0=177.6 kN/m y am)0 damping ram c=344N50m
solid inn . secondar
dashed inn . wuronehuy anspernion springI.ln k, PP.8 kNnn O.
0.05 dotted lion . meoadary =pension spring me 0=44.4 kN/ra dashed Inn . secondary nap dampingnOn ernsaa wen,
domed lin.. wcondaq majo damping ram 0 . 172 Nwm
14 le II 20 22 24 26 28 30 ° A14 le 19 20 22 24 20 26 30
Fonvard speed WO Forward armed ImMi
Figure 6.41 Linear fits for three different Figure 6.42 Linear fits for three different
caravan secondary suspension spring caravan secondary suspension damping
stiffness. rates.

152
 3500

$000 -

4500

aoo

000

3000

It

2300 - solid line - caravan wheel track B =22 m

solid hoe • wawa wheel track B=22 dashed line - maven wheel hack B=1.7 no
dashed hoe • cam= wheel hack B . i.7 m
20000 7 9 10
. 2-50 2 3 4 3 A 7 9 to 1 2 3 4
Time Time id

Figure 6.43 Caravan roll angle at 30 m/s Figure 6.44 Caravan right side tyre
forward speed. vertical load at 30 m/s forward speed.

0.5 40

wlid Ii..- earsvna whaelbese Lca3.4 m

0.45
30 - dadtedlitte - maven Meacham tc=2.5 m
dotted . caravan ',hlven La=4.0
0.4
20
035

1 10
z 0.3

0.25

1‘ 0.2

0.15
-20
0.1 - aohd line . caravan wheel track Be 2-2 no
dashed line cam00 wheel deck B=1.7 in -30
005 dotted line . caravan wheel back 13=1.4 m

14 20 22 24 20 28 30 3 4 9 7 8 9 IV
18 18
f mantel speed Wel Thee fel

Figure 6.45 Linear fits for three different Figure 6.46 Relative angle between car
caravan wheel track. and caravan at 30 m/s forward speed.

12

.0
0

wheelbme Lew3.4 m
trend line .00.00.000.10.01000.
dashed line caravan wheelbase tr ./5 no
tinned line - cantaan wheelbese Lc-ale en -10
solid - alman wheelbase L0=3.4

.20 dadted Bee . caravan wheetase Le=2.5 m

40904 1190 - caravan wheelbase Lc =4 0 m

0 0 2 3 4 5 A 7 9
4 5 7 9 9
.311 Time fel
Time fel

Figure 6.47 Car yaw angle at 30 m/s Figure 6.48 Caravan yaw angle at 30
forward speed. m/s forward speed.

153
 0.35
solid line - trecorneting wiffstas hammed by 20%
0.5 Meted line - default Ire:tom:eft sdffnem

0.4/ 15 - dotted line - tyre cornering %Einem dectemed by 20%

•

0.4

0.33 ID

0.3

0.23 3 -
11
0.2

0.13

0.1

0.0514 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 -SO 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 10
rimmed weed fed.) Time Pi

Figure 6.49 Linear fits for three different Figure 6.50 Caravan yaw angle at 30
caravan wheelbases. m/s forward speed.

12 10

10

v 0

a 4 maid Ii.. tyre tomering Minbes, lammed by 20%

2
Mated line default tyre cornering stiffnes.
4,061 11... ere cornering stiffness decreased by 20%
-10 solid line - tyre cornering stiffnem increased by 20 %
2
dasbed Doe . daub tyre oornedng niffoess

4.061 1.,,... ire corm:sing trdffneas decreased by 26%

uo
2 3 4 5 6 7 9 9 10 2 3 4 5 6 7 0 9 10
Tune 1.1 ilate 1.5
Figure 6.51 Car yaw angle at 30 mis Figure 6.52 Relative angle between car
forward speed. and caravan at 30 m/s forward speed.

0.45

0.4

0.35

-e-; 0.3

E 0.23

0.2

0.15
solid H.... tyre cornering niffness lammed by 20%
- dulled line . default tyre cornering stiffness
dotted line . lyre comelier MdYneas deenmed by 20%
0.01.4
le II 20 22 24 2., 20 30
Foownrd speod !mist

Figure 6.53 Linear fits for three different

caravan tyre cornering stiffness.

154
CHAPTER 7 STABILITY DEVICES

7.1 INTRODUCTION

All car/caravan combination systems will have a flexible connection between the car
and caravan in order to allow for manoeuvres and independent movement of the two
vehicles due to road irregularities. This is usually provided for by a ball and socket
joint with a ball of 50 mm diameter.
Even though the caravan is free to swing on its connecting ball, under most road
conditions, a well-matched car and caravan will not encounter stability problems.
However, it cannot be assumed that all the guidelines regarding caravan use will be
rigorously followed and, as a result, stability devices have been developed.

7.2 THE NEED FOR STABILITY DEVICES

It is often argued that it is best to restrict the otherwise free movement of the caravan
hitch on the tow-ball in order to reduce caravan oscillation. In some circumstances
these oscillations can become excessive, leading to car instability and associated
dangers. In order to damp the caravan swinging motion, a stabiliser may be fitted.
However, the stabiliser is only an aid and will not overcome the impossible handicaps
of a badly balanced caravan or one unsuitable for its towing car. When the correct
car/caravan combination system outfit is achieved, the stabiliser will damp out small
oscillations, reducing their tendency to grow.

7.3 TYPES OF CARAVAN STABILISER

Caravan stabilisers can be divided into two main categories:

a) Stabilisers designed to reduce caravan yaw oscillations:

These generate a friction force when a relative motion between the caravan and the car
is present. A standard AL-KO coupling head is replaced with one which generates a
friction force with stabiliser pads that grip the side of the ball, affecting the yaw and
roll of the caravan. Because the pads cannot rotate, there is also some. damping in

155
pitch. The standard 50 mm balls are either dry or lubricated, depending on the
requirements of the stabiliser manufacturer. Special materials such as teflon coating
and brake lining friction materials are used to achieve the stabiliser's friction force
characteristic.

b) Stabilisers that act both horizontally and vertically:

In this category are included stabilisers that reduce caravan yaw oscillations and
decrease the tow-ball point load by redistributing a part of this weight between the car
front axle and, to a lesser extent, onto the caravan axle. The tow-ball load transfer is
achieved using a cantilever leaf spring attached between the car and the caravan. It is
claimed by some manufacturers that the tow-ball 1oad is reduced by I kg, wilb a
kg car front axle, and a 4 kg caravan axle load redistribution. The friction moment
required to damp the caravan yaw oscillation is obtained using a friction pad.
For this type of stabiliser, linkages are used to connect the car and caravan either on
one side of the drawbar or on both sides. The problem with most existing stabilisers
that employ linkage connections is their effect on the overrun brake. This is due to the
extra linkage between the car and caravan which tends to keep the two units apart due
to friction. This can slightly delay the overrun mechanism, and consequently, the onset
of braking.
Due to the tow-ball load transfer properties of such stabilisers, care needs to be taken
In their use. They are particularly useful when the caravan has an inherently high tow-
ball load which is above the maximum recommended by the car or hitch manufacturer.

7.4 INVESTIGATION OF A CARAVAN STABILISER

The effects of a stabiliser that generates a resisting yawing moment were investigated
In the present work.

7.4.1 Stabilising moment levels

The stabiliser's resisting moment is determined by the yawing moment required to

generate relative movement. For existing stabilisers, the resisting moment can be set
to a value between 200 Nm and 300 Nm. However, the maximum moment value is
recommended only if the car/caravan combination system is likely to be subject to

156
strong perturbations such as high speeds or strong sidewinds.
The moment generated by the stabiliser will add extra strain on to the tow-ball point
which already has strict limite concerning its loading parameters.

7.4.2 Implementation as Bathfp model

The existing Bathfp tow-ball point model was modified to include the effect of the
stabiliser on the car/caravan combination system dynamics.
The stabilising moment was implemented as an internal moment generated within the
tow-ball point model. Therefore, the tow-ball point model supplies the stabilising
moment to both the caravan and the car through their connecting ports. Since the
stabilising moment is an internal moment when the car/caravan combination system
Is considered as a whole, the value of the moment transmitted to the car is equal and
opposite in sign to that transmitted to the caravan model.
Due to the complexity of the car/caravan model and the slow simulation run times, the
Implementation of the stabilising moment was simplified. It was assumed that the
stabilising moment opposed, at all times, the caravan yawing movement. No attempt
was made to model the stiction present in the stabiliser or any velocity dependent
characteristics.

7.4.3 Effects of the stabiliser on the overall car/caravan stability

The effects of the stabiliser on the car/caravan stability were investigated using the
computer model. The car and caravan parameters were set at the values presented in.
Appendix F and stability was examined for test condition 1 (table 6.1).
Figure 7.1 presents the relative angle between the caravan and car for a forward speed
of 30 m/s when the car is subjected to a steering wheel impulse input similar to that
used in the investigation presented in the previous chapter. The stabilising yawing
moment generated by the stabiliser was varied during the investigation.
The car/caravan combination system is stable even if the stabiliser is not present
(Mst=0 Nm). However, the introduction of the stabiliser has a positive effect, reducing
the amplitude and damping out the oscillations much faster than in the case when the
stabiliser was not present. The car/caravan relative angle damping increased when the
value of the stabilising moment was raised.
When a stabiliser is used, it can be seen that a small relative angle is still present even

157
after the oscillation has decayed. This relative angle value was due to stabiliser
Coulomb friction and could lead to the driver continually correcting the car path even
during straight line driving. Figures 7.2 and 7.3 show that both the caravan and car
yaw angle oscillations are decreased as a result of the yaw stabilising moment at the
tow-ball.
Figure 7.4 shows the relative angle between car and caravan for a forward speed of 40
m/s. This speed corresponds to the zero damping speed of the standard caravan
configuration (table 6.1). Once again, the presence of the stabiliser has a beneficial
effect. Introducing the stabiliser into the car/caravan combination system, the
previously unstable oscillation is transformed into a damped oscillation. Increasing the
damping moment generated by the stabiliser, it can be seen from figures 7.4. 7.5 and
7.6 that the oscillation amplitude is reduced, while the frequency of the oscillation is
Increased. However, the most important achievement is the fact that the initially
sustained oscillation is transformed into a damped oscillation. Figure 7.5 shows that
the amplitude of the caravan yaw angle oscillation is reduced by almost 50% when a
300 Nm stabilising moment is applied. The car yaw angle oscillation is not influenced
a great deal (figure 7.6).
Whilst it has been shown that stabilisers improve high speed stability there is a limit
to the maximum restraining moment recommended by manufacturers. It is therefore
important that the required restraining moment for a range of cars be considered. As
an example. consider the case of a caravan with a yaw moment of inertia 4 =2156 Kgm2
(double the default value). At a forward speed of 30 m/s it has been shown in Chapter
6 that the car/caravan combination system is unstable, irrespective of the steering
wheel angle input applied as the initial disturbance to the system. Figure 7.7 shows
the car/caravan relative angle for different values of stabilising moment. Without a
stabiliser it is obvious that the oscillation is out of control, increasing with time.
Introducing a stabilising moment of M 8 =300 Nm (the maximum value recommended
by the manufacturer), it can be seen that although the oscillations are reduced, the
caravan and car are still unstable. A moment M 8 =400 Nm was sufficient to prevent
increasing oscillation, while a restraining moment of M 9 =450 Nm was necessary for the
oscillation to decay in magnitude. This is 50% higher than the maximum recommended
value and therefore it cannot be assumed that a standard stabiliser will guarantee
stability in all operating conditions.

158
7.5 CONCLUSIONS

The computer model has been used to study the influence of a yaw stabiliser on car
and caravan stability. During the investigation it was found that the stabiliser had a
positive effect on the car/caravan lateral stability, reducing the amplitude and
Increasing the frequency of oscillation, leading to shorter settling time. Most notably,
It was found that the unstable oscillatory motion developed by the caravan, when the
zero damping speed was reached or exceeded, can be changed into a damped
oscillatory motion. The only requirement in achieving a damped oscillation relates to
the value of the moment generated by the yaw stabiliser. This value is normally limited
by the car manufacturer who sets limits regarding the tow-ball loads.

An important practical point to consider relates to the tow-ball design. Most stabilisers
available on the market require a mounting point on the car towing bracket and are
generally designed to fit the standard two-bolt removable tow-ball. For some types of
tow-ball, special adaptors may be required in order to use a stabiliser.
Another important factor to be considered is the effect of the stabiliser on the action
of the overrun brakes. Any additional device which introduces friction in the
longitudinal direction between the car and the caravan will, to some extent, affect the
instantaneous action of the overrun brakes. It is likely that too much friction will cause
a shunting motion between the car and caravan.

The overall conclusion of this analysis is that stabilisers can improve car/caravan
lateral stability and damp out small oscillations due to wind buffeting or road
excitation. However, a proper balance between the car and caravan must be obtained
and appropriate values set for the stabiliser parameters 11 a good handling and stability
characteristic is to be achieved. Stabilisers on their own are insufficient to guarantee
satisfactory operation.

159
 wild line - stebilber moment )1,1=300 Nm
; damned line - mobilises moment Inst-AiNm
, doted line - stabiliser =meet 34..-200 Wm
•

it 0
9

-4-
4
solid line. weblike, moment 14./.300 Nm
2
&lobed lb. - nabilbee moment Nbt*:tlint
4 doned See - nabilisee moment Wt.-200N= 0

-loo
4 5 6 9 10 20 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 S 9 10
ilnee 1.1 Time 1.1

Figure 7.1 Relative angle between car Figure 7.2 Caravan yaw angle for
and caravan for different stabilising different stabilising moment values at 30
moment values at 30 m/s. m/s.

14
20 -

12

10 -

-10 •
wad line - gabber moment Mero300 Not
-15 - &Indies moments:
damned line . nebilieee moment Mateo Non
solid line - M.P300Nm
2 dotted line - emblem:enrolment 1.s7=203Nm tingled line - Mem, Nm
.„ dotted (i.e - Me0-200
O 1 2 3 • 3 6 7 10
2 3 4 37 10 Time
lime (.1
Figure 7.4 Relative angle between car
Figure 7.3 Car yaw angle for different and caravan for different stabilising
stabilising moment values at 30 m/s. moment values at 40 m/s.

solid titm - and bee rOOSIMINMW300Nm

-$ - Minna, momen11. &shed nee- nb.iIlb0.loWeln Mem) Nm
solid line - M.F300 Nat demi line - emblem =man M.1.200 Nm
10 -
dmbed nee M.14..74m
dotted One -1.1.1• 20D Net
-0 1 2 3 6 10
Time fel

Figure 7.5 Caravan yaw angle for

different stabilising moment values at 40 Figure 7.6 Car yaw angle for different
m/s. stabilising moment values at 40 m/s.

160
 30
e
solid line - stsbithes moment Mst 300 Nm
.
4/3 - &abed 1019 stabiliser moment Mas 0 Nm =
dotted line • stabiliser moment Marmon Nat
30 dathdot 10.- stabiliser moment M1
9=t450 Nm

20

10

-10

-20 .20. solid II... atabiliser moment 04n=300Nm

dambdot line • stabiliser moment 0411=450 Nm
-30 .30- dotted line - stabiliser moment Mat--400Nm
.
&Med line stabiliser moment Mo n Nin o
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 I 9 10 0 2 3 4 S 7 8 9 I0
Tbne 1.1 Time Ill

Figure 7.7 Car/caravan relative angle for Figure 7.8 Caravan yaw angle for
different stabilising moment values at 30 different stabilising moment values at 30
m/s (caravan 4= 2156 kgm2). m/s (caravan 4=2156 kgm2).

14

12

10

4 solid Jim- stabiliser moment Mst=300 Nnt

.
dasbdot line • stabilises mome07iNsm450Nm
dotted km matins. moment M1,400 Nm
dashed line - sublimer moment 14st.3 Nm
2

O.
2 3 4 7 8 9 10
Tune

Figure 7.9 Car yaw angle for different

stabilising moment values at 30 mis
(caravan 4=2156 kgm2).

161
CHAPTER S CONCLUSIONS

The conclusions drawn from this thesis are summarised and recommendations for
further work are made in this chapter.

8.1 CAR/CARAVAN MODELLING

8.1.1 Mathematical model

A complex, multi-degree of freedom, car/caravan combination system intended

primarily for the study of lateral stability and handling behaviour has been developed.
Since it incorporates all six degrees of freedom for the sprung masses and independent
vertical degrees of freedom for the unsprung masses, the model can also be used for
ride analysis. Polynomial functions were used to represent car suspension kinematic
and geometric characteristics. State-of-the-art tyre models using experimentally
measured caravan and car tyre characteristics were incorporated. Aerodynamic effects
were highly simplified in the analysis due to the almost Infinite number of possible
car/caravan combinations. Complete lateral symmetry was assumed for the caravan
and car models.

8.1.2 Model implementation

The car/caravan combination system model has been implemented within the Bathfp
simulation software environment. Providing a state-of-the-art user interface, an
extensive library and advanced integration algorithm, this package offers distinctive
advantages in comparison with other simulations available in the automotive industry.
The implementation provides a high degree of flexibility, overcoming the problem of
manipulating large numbers of differential equation sets and parametric data. The
causality constraints arising among the models have been discussed and the main
characteristics employed to describe the caravan and car systems are presented.

162
8.1.3 Experimental measurements

Experimental work was carried out in order to provide data for the car/caravan
combination system validation process and to supply parametric data to be used in the
car/caravan computer simulation model. Experimental data was acquired in high
speed steering wheel impulse tests and described caravan lateral, roll and yaw
acceleration together with the relative angle between the car and caravan, steer angle
and forward speed. The mass and inertial properties of the caravan at the test
condition were determined through experimental measurements.

8.1.4 Model verification and validation

The aim was to assess computer model accuracy and applicability by comparing the
simulated and experimentally measured car/caravan system response data. Good
qualitative correlation was found from the analysis of the steering wheel impulse test
results, although there were some quantitative differences. The car model was
separately validated against independent test data supplied by The Ford Motor
Company.

The sensitivity of the car/caravan model to basic parameters was explored and the
effect of errors in these parameters on the validation process was evaluated.
Comparing the simulated and experimental step steer test responses at low speed, the
car/caravan combination system kinematic modelling was considered adequate. The
model was regarded as appropriate for the purpose of the present study.

8.2 SENSITIVITY STUDIES

The primary objective of this work was to fully understand towed vehicle dynamics and
so improve safety, thereby preventing unnecessary accidents. It was intended for the
study to be as general as possible, the aim being to assess the influence of caravan
geometrical and inertial properties on the overall car/caravan combination system
stability and handling properties. Quantitative measures of stability were defined for
the system yaw and articulation angle. The initial disturbance of the system was
provided through the steering wheel.
The results and recommendations were based exclusively on the consideration of the

163
car/caravan lateral stability. Therefore, it should be appreciated that they might not
represent the best solution for all forms of use. It was shown that caravan mass, yaw
inertia, tow-ball load, axle position, wheel track and tyres were important factors in
determining lateral stability. Secondary suspension damping, caravan roll inertia and
the height of the centre of gravity had a small influence on stability, mainly through
an increased caravan tyre load transfer and an increased roll over tendency.

8.3 STABILITY DEVICES

The main types of stability devices currently available were presented. The fundamental
operation of a yaw stabiliser was investigated using the computer model. The
implementation was simplified, no attempt being made to model the stiction present
in the stabiliser or any velocity dependent characteristics.
It was found that the stabiliser had a positive effect on the car/caravan lateral stability,
reducing the amplitude and increasing the frequency of oscillation, leading therefore
to shorter settling time. The most important finding relates to the fact that the unstable
oscillatory motion likely to be developed in limit situations can be changed into a
damped oscillation motion. However, it was shown that the success in controlling the
car/caravan oscillation lies with the level of the moment generated by the stabiliser.
Since limits are imposed on the maximum values of the moments generated by the
stabilisers, it was proven that for an improper balance between car and caravan, the
stabiliser could not contain the unstable oscillations.

8.4 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FURTHER WORK

a) Improvements to the car/caravan simulation model:

The car/caravan simulation model may be extended by providing the following

Improvements:
- a more detailed model for the caravan secondary suspension system and the
incorporation of compliance data (if available). The resolution of all the caravan
secondary suspension forces might prove useful in the study of dynamic load;
- a separate body representing the car engine can be introduced into the car computer
model. This is likely to enhance the model's accuracy for ride studies;
- steering system dynamics should be included. The handling studies might benefit

164
from this improvement, studies of the driver-car interaction becoming more realistic:
- a more accurate tyre model that might include tyre lateral compliance. It is widely
accepted that the primary limitation to the accuracy of computer model prediction
comes from the tyre model. It was observed that the tyre exhibits a large lateral
compliance, which has not been modelled in any way and it is likely to be responsible,
In part, for the discrepancies observed during the validation process:
- caravan chassis torsional compliance. It was observed during the experimental work
that the rigid body assumption adopted might not be totally adequate since the caravan
chassis exhibits a large torsional compliance. It is likely that improvements can be
gained by including this factor in the model:
- incorporation of aerodynamic effects that appear in the car/caravan combination
system. The effect of various aerodynamic disturbances on the system stability could
be investigated.

The largest limitation to some of the improvements suggested above relates to the
shortage of experimental data.

b) A more extensive experimental study:

More experimental work is required in order to fully comprehend the car/caravan

combination system behaviour. Car behaviour should be measured more fully since it
appeared from the study that the car dynamic performance changes when a caravan
is attached. A comprehensive parametric sensitivity study of the car/caravan
combination model may also be useful. If some of the parameters are judged to have
an insignificant effect, then they may be excluded. This will make it easier to obtain the
necessary input data.

C) Ride studies using the simulation model:

Since it incorporates all the necessary degrees of freedom, the car/caravan

combination model can be used for ride analysis. A peculiarity of the ride of an
articulated vehicle that might be interesting to study is the fore and aft shaking that
occurs as a result of the relative heights of the centres of gravity and the tow-ball point.

d) Combined cornering and braking manoeuvres:

The usefulness of the car/caravan simulation model can be further extended by

165
studying the behaviour of the car/caravan system during combined cornering and
braking manoeuvres. It would be of interest to examine a range of driver actions that
might be used to stabilise a cal' should snaking occur.

166
Appendix A THE LAGRANGIAN EQUATIONS FOR QUASI-COORDINATES

Classical Lagrangian equations for a system with n generalised coordinates are:

d [a I_ aT=Q
a4, • (al)

i=1..n

where:
T - kinetic energy of the system;
Q, - the external forces or moments applied to the system;
- the generalised coordinates for which the equation is being written.

This form of the Lagrangian equations may be applied correctly to a system for which
the knowledge of the n generalised coordinates, and the constitution of the system
together with the time t is sufficient to determine the position of any component in any
configuration of the system. This may be expressed by saying that ch q. qn are "true
coordinates" of the system. In other words integrating the true velocities q, with respect
to time yields the corresponding coordinates q,.
Since no assumption is being made that the variables (generalised coordinates) are
"true coordinates", we shall find the form which is taken by the equations when the
variables used are no longer restricted to be the "true coordinates" of the system.
Let co l , 0)2 •.0)n be n independent linear combinations of the time derivatives of the true
coordinates,
This linear combination will help to define the quasi-velocities as:

co r a 1rVra2,-42 + +an//,,
(a2)

where:
azi ann are given functions of q, q2 qn.

In a similar way, n independent linear combinations of "true coordinates" differentials

may be written as:

167
 chrr a rdqi + a2rd92+ +anrdqn
(a3)

where:
the coefficients a1 1(111..n) are the same as in the previous set of equations, and it

denotes quasi-coordinates.

Using matrix formulation, equation (a2) could be written as:

(0))=INII I(1) (a4)

where:

a ll a 12 a1 n

a21 a22 (12 n

(a5)

a n/ an2 nn_

If matrix [MI has an inverse IN] (INI = UMn -1 ) then from equation (a4) we can obtain:

( WI T( IMI T ) -1 [MV()

( IMI T ) -1 (o)) = (4)

(a6)

[NI ( w) ()

Similarly, equation (a3) could be written in matrix form and solved for dq:

LIV1(thr) =(dig)
(a7)

This last equation (a7) could be directly integrated if the relationships:

Oak, aanir
(a8)
aq. aqk

were satisfied for all values of k, r and m.

168
In that case the variables (it) would exist, and would be true coordinates.

If it is assumed that the equation (a7) is not necessarily integrable, so that (drc) will not
necessarily be the differential of (70; we shall call (d7c) the differential of quasi-
coordinates.

Returning to Lagrangian equations (al) and multiplying each equation by N(1.r),

N(2,r) N(n,r) respectively, yields:

N d al
agi &it`rt.'
N1'fr (a9)

The virtual work done by the external forces on the system in an arbitrary
displacement is EQ,aq,, and substituting the relationship for aq given in equation (a7)
yields:

E Qaqi-E QiNtrairr (a 10)

The quantity EQ,Nirarcr is the work done in a displacement in which all the quantities
are zero, except arCr•
arc

Therefore the work done by the external forces or external moments on the system (WI,
W2,.. .W) referenced to the quasi-coordinate system, for an arbitrary virtual
displacement arc2,...arcd, is:

wl air 1 +w2a7c2 +....+Kagn =E E Nfrgiarr

r (all)
i=1...n r=1...n

If only the r-th equation is considered in equation (all) we have:

147,d1cr- Nfrigprcr

W7tr ô1tr Nirrgi (a12)

wr.E

169
 Introducing equation (a16) into equation (a9) the result is:

v. Acr[d [ a ]_ al.w
Ui act oqt (a13)
i=1....n

However, the kinetic energy T in equation (a13) is a function of generalised true

coordinates q, and C. and may be called "true kinetic energy".
But Wr was defined with respect to the quasi-coordinate system, and therefore we must
express the kinetic energy T in terms of quasi-coordinates in order to be able to write
the Lagrangian equations in terms of quasi-coordinates.

Initially let us consider the true kinetic energy T containing the true-velocities 4. Using
equation (a6), the kinetic energy T could be written as a function of co and 4, which we
shall denote as ICE, the kinetic energy written for quasi-coordinates.
Thus, the partial derivative of true kinetic energy is equivalent to:

aT aKE
__.E _Afts (al 4)
a 4, . aws

Substitution of expression (a14) into the Lagrang,ian equation given in equation (a13),
yields:

E Nir { d 1\--, aKE misi _ arlw

I -ai 4: awsaqt (a15)
i=1....n

or rearranging:

E N [E m d IaKE}v, aKE d (4)-al_w

i ir s is Cit aws 4.-sd ows dt aq
t - r (a16)

i=1....n

By definition, the product of [NJ and WIT is the identity matrix (rIVIIMI T= (II). Hence we
can conclude that:

170
 E NtrE 4.5= 1 for : s

(a17)
E ivirE Mis =0 for : rs
5

Using equation (a17), the Lagrangian equations may be further reduced to:

d [aKE
..7_
0
alCE
+E E Nu.• d (Mis)_ -E N aT
=w
t o r is aws aqi r (a18)

i=1....n

Looking at One form of equation (a18) it can be seen that this equation still contains
one kinetic energy term which is a function of generalised true coordinates

Using equation (a7) and following the same general procedure, an expression for the
remaining true kinetic energy term can be derived:

aT = aicE + aKE[a()si (a19)

aqi aqi aqi

or:

aT = aKE +E co [am
E a_ICE _iics,
i) (a20)
aqi aq, smos

Substituting equation (a20) into the Lagrangian equation (a18) yields:

d [a KE am (a21)
E Nir d (Md aKE _E Nr [aKE E aKE[-n1) 4m
aw r I - 0-)s aws aqi
aq, s m r

or using the identity:

clqm dqm d amis

dt=77 , (a22)

171
the equation (a21) will become:

wr (a23)
7,)
[7- , EE ] q,,,[amL5
aimaqm
[—
aco s
am.
Nu. _ q,
a/cE

In the Lagrangian equation (a23) we can still find references to generalised "true
coordinates" q, which must be eliminated.
From equation (a7) we have:

Nir=.57
Er (a24)

Using the previous identity (a24) we can write:

ENir [aaq
l = E [all aqi_aKE (a25)
i aqi "rn y. airr

Substituting equation (a25) into equation (a23) yields:

d (aKE
+EEEN
aKE) [ amisalms)
-
aKE (a26)
7(7, rit &O s aqm aqt am,. r

To simplify equation (a26), it is convenient to define the term:

amt., amms )
(a27)
5 .=EE NtrNmi (7F-
im

The term is independent of the motion of the system and only depends upon the
relationship between the true and quasi-coordinates.
Using equation (a27), the Lagrangian equation (a26) could be written as:

d [aKE) + v. \--% ors, 0) [aKE)_ aKE 1,17

dt &or 4,-"T' aws aTc r r
(a28)

172
These n equations (a28) are the equations of motion expressed in terms of the quasi-
coordinates.

The difference between these equations (a28) and the classical Lagrangian equations
is the middle factor, which can be denoted as c rsi, where:

oicE (a29)
C .-- ES Et 5rs lc°1 (---)
rst
aws

When the quasi-coordinates are true coordinates, the quantities 8, are all zero, since
the conditions (a8) are satisfied, all creg (equation (a29)) are zero and the equations are
reduced to the classical Lagrangian equations which are:

d [al _ aT _w

-T 7 77 C, 7 7- Fr - r (a30)
r=1....n

Until here the general Lagrangian equations for "quasi-coordinates" have been
presented.
In Appendix B the Lagrangian equations will be developed for a caravan system, and
In a similar way it is possible to develop the Lagrangian equations for a car system.

173
Appendix B DERIVATION OF THE CARAVAN EQUATIONS OF MOTION

The caravan dynamic equations of motion are developed in this Appendix.

In order to develop Lagrangian equations, we need to define the generalised coordinates
for the caravan system.
A presentation of the true and quasi-coordinates is given in table B.1.

True Quasi Quasi

coordinates coordinates velocities
ch = xc El = IC co, = U,

C12 = Ye 7r2 = Ye (02 = V,

C13 = Wc ir3 = Vi e 0)3 = re

c14 = e e E4 = e e 0)4 = cle
c15 = 4)e 7(5 = (i)e 0)5 = Pc
q6 = ze it, = ze (06 = te
q7 = zo 7E7 = zci W7 = icl

q, = zc.2 7E8 = Za (08 = 2,2

C19 = eel 119 = °el W9 = ncl

(110 = Oc2 R10 = °c2 W10 = nc2

Table B.1 Caravan true and quasi-coordinates.

Since the XY and the )(eye axis systems are co-planar, velocities in the fixed coordinate
system are related to velocities in the moving coordinate system:

1-1e =gecos We + kesirlWe

(bl)
vc=-iCcsimpc+ kccosw c

Using the definition of quasi-velocities given in equation (a2) and the relationships
between forward and lateral velocities given in equation (1)1), a matrix relationship
corresponding to equation (a2) can be expressed:

174
 1 lic‘
C436.0 611100 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0"
ye tc
-thillre Millie 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
re Ire
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
qe oc
0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
PC
=
0 0 0 0
1 0 0 0 0 0 k (b2)
4 0 0 0 0
0 1 0 0 0 0 4
id 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 id
42 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 1 0 0
id
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0
lad
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1_ eel
o
% a
,6 a

Looking at the Lagrangian equations theory (Appendix A), by definition, EMI is:

(b3)
[ MIT =

175
Then the matrix (M e corresponding to equation (b3) is:
_
cos,v -sinwe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
sing cosy', 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0 0 (b4)
[ Mc =
0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1 0
- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1_

Since matrix NI is defined as the inverse of EMI T (see equation (a6)), matrix NI can be
written as:

e -simile 0 0
COstil 0 0 0 0 0 0
sinwecoswe 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0 0 (b5)
IN =
0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 ,0 1_

Referring to the Lagrangian equations for quasi-coordinates it may be seen that for the
caravan model which has ten degrees of freedom the coefficient c varies between one
and ten.

The solutions for the Lagrangian equations (a28) will be next developed for the caravan
system.
The analysis of the Lagrangian equations will commence by evaluating the middle term
from equation (a28) that appears because the coordinate system is not an inertial one:

KE) (b6)
=
r c EE
s 1
8 .10)1 [aaws

176
Using the matrices [M] and [NI for the caravan system, öcs, can be calculated, and the
values for F, can be found:

ams amms
8 Eesi- , m
E 1 v icNrni*, - ,..TJ (b7)

For the caravan equations we have [M] =[M], and 11•1]=1N),:

_
costv, -sinw, 00 0 0 0 0 0 0
sinw, cosw, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 10 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0 0 (b8)
DM=
0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 1

and:
1
00
cosw, -stilly, 0 0 0 0 0 0
sinw, cosw, 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 01 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 1 0 0 0 0 0 (b9)
1M =
0 0 00 0 1 0 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 1 0 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 1 0 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 1 0
0 0 00 0 0 0 0 0 1_

For 1>3 or s>3 or m>3 it can be seen from the matrices [MI, and [1\1], that:

am s =0 . am
ms =0 (b10)
aqmaqi

177
Then:

33 amis 13M
Ei wnis)

3 altt s ags am2s amis am2s

ocsi,T Nip (5-.!!)+N21 (! + N aq3 -
- 5--)) +N3i( aqi )1 (b11)

am am am amIS
S cst= N ICA13 Is +N2cN3 25 -NuN2 2s -N3cNI
aq3aq3 aci2 aq3

Rearranging:

am am2 am
8 es1=N31(N I i s +N2 1-N3c(IVI am is i-N2 25) (b12)
aci3 aq3
aq3aq3

And:

r c-EE ocs+a—
aKE)
5 I

v_, i( am2 (313)

r c = 2., 2... 8cs /w aKE ,N3-, aKE I-N„( NI 17—
cL
aM is 4. N21W ) (j) 1 -
S 1.1 7o—
s t
s aw s

amis 22--2.)0 am2

-N3c(N1w3.. +N am2 ) 2 +N33( Nic +N2c73.731(031
aq3

Hence:

aKE
F KE -N3 0 2 + (N2 ce ostv c -Nicsinyd(0 31+.._[N3 p ,-(N2csinyc+Niccosydo.)31
(02 (b14)

where: c=1 10

Calculating all the re for c=1 10 we obtain:

aa
r = KE I-N3 0) 2 +(N21 C0Sy c -NlI siny ck031 ICE 31 -(N2 i Sinyc+ cosy) coal
aw l" 2

aKE [N32(.01-(N22sinyc+IVI2cosyda)31
F2= a KE [ -N32(02 + (N22Cosyc-Ni2siny)(031+ _ (b15)
ao) 1 80)2

aa
f3 = KE E -N33 0.)2+(N23cosy c -NI3 sin kg )(0 31+-7E
KE -(N23sinc+Ni3cosy)o31
0 IN33 u) 1y
-2

178
Rearranging previous identities (b15) we obtain:

aKE
1- 1 =-6) 3 30)2

aKE
f2
=0)3 awl (b 16)

aKE aKE
F =0.) -CO
3 I aC°2 2 awl

All the others F e for c=4 10 are equal to zero.

Then summing up:

_ __ alCE_ aKE
1i- (03.02 - - re—a—cr
e

,.. _ aKE_ aicE

1 2 -0O3 awl - re7trc

F _ u alcE„ aKE (b17)

3- c avc c auc

F4=0

rp3=0

The Lagranglan equations are:

d [510E) + r -
aKE (b 18)
-al aw, c arcc
= Wc

where: c = 1 10

The next step is to calculate the kinetic energy (ICE) for the caravan system.
SAE conventions regarding the signs of the displacements, velocities and forces will be
used (+ve "z" is downward vertical).

The kinetic energy of the caravan is the sum of the kinetic energy of the sprung mass

179
and the kinetic energy of the unsprung mass.

The kinetic energy of the sprung mass:

- translational and angular velocities
contribute to the kinetic energy of the sprung
mass. Using the definition of the kinetic
energy for a rigid body:

Ks..,71my+710).H. (b19) Z
c

where:
Ms - sprung mass weight (Kg):
Hs - angular momentum of the sprung mass Figure B.1 Caravan body centred
coordinate system
(Kg*In2/s).

Assuming that body roll angles will not be large enough to invalidate the use of a
small-angle substitution for lateral velocity due to roll velocity, the sprung mass centre
of gravity velocity could be written as:

I7s---(u)i+(vc+pchili+2c17 (b2O)

where:
h1 - distance between sprung mass centre of gravity and roll axis.

The dot product of velocity represents the translational component of the sprung mass
kinetic energy:

17s17s-Euci+(vc+pchig+±A[uci+(ve+pchi li+±lci=Le+Le+2vcpchi +/;.t.t+e (b21)

The angular velocity component of the sprung mass consists of roll, yaw and pitch
velocity, such that:

0) s= Pc 1+ v +rek (b22)

The angular momentum Hs can be written as:

180
 1-1,=1 I Wo, (b23)

where:
[II = matrix of the moment of inertia.

The above expression can be written as:

Hx, to4s —/
A7A8
-'1s pc
Hy, qm,c,s I -Iy„ qc
(b24)
Hzsi zy.s rcz

or:

H„,93 c Ixy,s-rc

Hys= -pc Iy„ + qc Iyy. ,- rc Igzs (b25)

H„--pc Cs-qc 1,1„+r,

The angular velocity component of the sprung mass kinetic energy is:

(7) sils --Tc lizs +qc Hyseits

+r
(b26)

Introducing the values for Fis (b25) into equation (b26) and adding we obtain:

(73s17/s'--Pc2tocs+
elyy.s+ re2Izz.s -2Pcqc1xy.s -2Pc rcixs.s — 2 gcrclyz.s (b27)

The total kinetic energy of the sprung mass can be written as:

K.Es=..xis(u vc2 +2vcpcii1 +pc2 71. e)+4(pc2ixx.s+ s+ e

(b28)
-21)cgclx,,,s-213crclxz,s-2qcrciyz)

This kinetic energy is written in terms of quasi-coordinates.

The kinetic energy of the unsprung mass:

- it is possible to determine the unsprung mass kinetic energy by following a similar

181
procedure to that used for the sprung mass.
The kinetic energy will be:
1
KEu=7 m1v+_ 05.1
1-,, 1 (b29)
2

The translational velocity of the unsprung mass consists of:

17 = u i+ LC/
u c (b30)

The dot product of velocity V will be: u

i7u C7.11 = Vc2 (b31)

Using the assumption that the unsprung mass roll motion is negligible compared to
the roll motion of the sprung mass, the angular velocity of the unsprung mass can be
written as:

05 u = rci-
C (b32)

The angular momentum for the unsprung mass has only the yaw component. hence:

11.--rcizg.u rc (b33)

The kinetic energy of the unsprung mass can be written as:

ICEM
1 12 1 2.2
2 2 1 (S12
u 7(Lie +v
c )+ rci +—m (2 1 +z 2)+_Iyy.u,
u 72,11 2+Sea)
tit C C 2
(034)

The last two terms in the expression of the kinetic energy of the unsprung mass are
due to vertical movement of the wheels and wheel spin.

Total kinetic energy of the caravan:

The total kinetic energy of the caravan can be written as the sum of the two kinetic
energies written before (equations (b28) and (b34)) for sprung and unsprung masses:

182
 KE= KE,+ ICE,

1 2 2 ,2 .,2 % 1 , 2, 2 2
-2pcqc/„y.s-
KE= M
7 s(tic + ve +2ticp hi +pc2ni + zr) + tPc i s+ qc
c , 7 xx.
+rc lz, s
Iyy.s (b35)

-2/31c/„.. 5-2qcrcly,si,+71viut uc ' ue ) - 7' c I zz.+7-1,,'0/2c'2 +2c2.2)+ 1. 1 (.2,+ .2c. )

1 , , f . .2 , . .21 _,) . ...2 i

2 in"" c

Setting the z-axis of the unsprung mass and sprung mass parallel, the unsprung and
sprung moments of inertia Liz,„, I„.. can be summed into an overall moment of inertia
I„.
Izz= Izz.u + 1=s (b36)

Performing the operation (equation (b36)) and combining the terms, the total kinetic
energy of the caravan in terms of quasi-coordinates will be:

KE...livAti+v)+ 1..r.c2 izz 4. 1mst,pcw+k)+Msucpchi

2. 2 2
+1(p% s+ e I -2p cqcl -
2 2 2 2 . YY's xij's
(b37)
-2perAms-2qcrc/y...)+4,,(2c,,,+/,,,,.u,,t+,2%)

where:
M=Mu+M8 is the total mass of the caravan.

The last step in solving Lagrangian equations is to evaluate the generalised force terms
In the Lagrangian equations.

The tow-ball connection forces F„, and F taken with respect to x„ and y„ which is
the car body centred coordinate system. This is done in order to simplify the work
Involved in the modification of the car system which has been previously developed.

The expressions for F„, Fyc and F„ as seen from the caravan centred coordinate system
are:

183
 t
F",c--Fxvcos(y„-wd - Fw sin NI ,,-xlid

y . apin N u - xvd
Fyc= F ,cos (141,-yd + F, (b38)

Fzc--Fzu

The potential energy of the system is defined as:

V-- VI + V" (b39)

where:
V - potential energy due to the sprung and unsprung weight:

V" - strain energy due to the suspension springs and tyre stiffness.

The potential energy V is the sum of the potential energy of the sprung mass and that
of the unsprung mass:

V' =(Visp,+(Vi tins (b40)

The caravan centre of gravity vertical displacement (figure B.2) is:

eh.- -1;+/;(1-coscp c)-hc(1-cosO)] (b41)

Using the previous relation (equation , (b41)) the values for (Vi sp, and (\nuns are:

(VI spr-Msgeh= - Msg[zc + hi (1 -cos4) ) -hco -cosedi

(b42)
(v),...-mag(zci+za)

where:
11 1 - distance between caravan sprung mass centre of gravity and roll axis:
he - distance between caravan sprung mass centre of gravity and Ox, axis.

The total potential energy V is:

IP , - Msg[zc + hi (1 -cos) -hco -cosodl-mug(zo + z) (b43)

To evaluate the strain energy V' of the caravan suspension springs and tyre stiffness

184
It is necessary to determine the deformations of the elastic elements.
The vertical suspension springs deflections are:

il l = -Eze-zci +hzin -(1)

B'
_+0,(1..-ad]
c2 (b44)
B
1 2 = -1;-;2 + hzin +4) c-2- +0 c (L- NJ

where:
kin - initial vertical distance between sprung mass centre of gravity and wheel hub
(suspension unloaded).

The vertical tyre deflections are:

13= -(zel+Rtchgl)
(b45)
11 4 =-(za+R0.- h9)

where:
RI- - tyre free radius (tyre unloaded);
hgI(I= 1 -2) - ground vertical displacement under right and left wheel respectively.

The total strain energy V" is the sum of the partial strain energies (equations (b39)):

v„ =lice + 1 k4+ 1 kri 2 + 1 ki2

(b46)
2 2 2'3 t4

where:
k - caravan suspension stiffness;
lc, - tyre vertical stiffness.

The total potential energy of the caravan system is:

V=1/1 + V" - -1119gfze+ hi (1 -cos(p) - hp -cosed] -m,g(z„+;)+

(b47)
1 ie.,n 2 1_2 1 1, 2 1 ie 2
+—n-111+ —n•112+—,n3+—.-14
1
2 2 2' 2'

185
The dissipative function of the system is defined as:

1 .2 1 .2 1 .2 1 •2 (b48)
+ — c112 + — c113 + —c ri4
2 2 2 2

where:
c- caravan suspension damping ratio:
- tyre damping rate.

For the other non-conservative forces and moments that are acting in the caravan
system (F,,, Fze, F,1_2 , Ft3,1 _2, Ft. 1-2, Mtz1-2, Mbc1-2) the generalised forces and moments
are written using the virtual work principle.

As can be seen from figure (B.2) the vertical reactions F,,, Ftz2 at the contact point
between the tyres and the road make no virtual work for any virtual displacement.

For the other forces acting in the caravan system, the virtual works are:

(SL)„=F„Evcc-Fw&x,-Fc,,25xc

(81.,)yc=FycSyc+FryiSyc+FEy2Syc

(SL)wc=-FwacOxiic-(Fw,+F,J)(L-ac)Syc-(Mtc,+Mtz)wc+(FDa-F)_eptirc

(81,)ec=-F.cac80c-(Mbei+Mbc)80c

(81,)0c=0 (b49)
(OL)„=F.c82,

(OL),c1=0

(8/-kc2=0
(8L)oci= Mbc 1 8° cl FtxiRteSe

(8L)9c2=Mbc280c2-FlaRti8Oc2

186
For these virtual forces, the corresponding virtual forces are:

gc=Fyc+Ftyi+FEy2

Qvc=Flicac-(Ftyl+Fty)(L-ad-(Mtz1+Mtz)+(F1-Ft,a)_21

Qec=-Ficat-(Mbci+Mb)

Q.c=0 (b50)
Qzc=Fzc

Qzcl=0

Qzc2=0

Q0c1=Mbc1—Ftx1Rt1

CA3c2-1'1bc2—Ftz21t1

Having calculated all the terms that form the Lagrangian equations (a28) the last
problem is to actually write the Lagrangian equations.

For the kinetic energy ICE it can be seen that:

al(E=o
&TC c (b51)
c=1....10

The other terms that must be calculated are:

A _ d[aicE)
0c
c--cE-57 (b52)

c=1.... 10

187
For c= 1....10 the values of ne are:

d[aicsi =itia
"a7 aw l c

d[aKEI +M P c-M6
WI 7..07 c A

T
d [ i.)3
81(E )--4
. t
c
--1,, spc -I . 4
li .s c

d[ aKE =1 Ac -i • 1 •
.sPc— yz.src
WI a T, 4T inj.

d [ aKE
=M*MA
s c
+O +1),„ spc -i„ysoc -Ixz t

(b53)
d KEi=ms2,
7-
06
[a
d[aKE) =in
dt a(07

d[aKE) =rn
dt w'‘c2

d[aKE) =1 .
dt 3(09 YY.u0
"ci

d [aKE p c2
yy.0 "

For the right side of the Lagrangian equations (a28) we need to determine:

w aV — to
- C = &cc c+ C
(b54)
1....10

The values for Qc (c=1....10) are deduced in equations (b50).

For small roll angles (usually roll angles are less than 3 degrees) it is possible to
approximate sin ac-ct., and cos ac.- 1.

188
The other differentials from the previous equations (b54) are:

a y av
= --0
arc, axc

av av
= =0
arc 2 ayc

av= av 0
&TC 3 allic

av = av=M9ghcsinec+2k(L-ac)20,+k(L-ac)(2;-za-zc2+2h)
ana aec

8v _ av B
=-Msghi sincl) +1c,_(2 i-za+apd
al1 5 (34)c c 2c
(b55)
ay av
= =-M9g+21c0c(L-ac)-10„+;2-2;-2hEfri)
aic6 azc

av, av =
- mag+14;,-;+ #:1)c-Oc(L-ad -hz,l+Ict(zci-ttgi+Rd
arc, a;,

av= av =
- 2 7 c-0,(L-ac)- hen1+1c,(;2-1192+R)
m 9 + 1(1; - z,- B 4)
this azc2

av= av
o
ag9 a%

av av
= =o
at m a0C2

And:

ae ae
= =0
aw l auc

aA = 8A_0
80)2 a vc

8,6, 8L (b56)
= =0
80)3 arc

aA ae
= _=c(L-ac)[2qc(L-ad+22c-±ci-±c2-BPd
8(04 aqc
ae ae B
=
80)5 apc re—(20-±c2+Bp)
2

189
 ae a e
aw6 +2q
= ak =c(22c c (L-a) -±ci -±c2)

ae ae B
= = cl2c, - 2c+ -Ipc- q,(L- ad] +ct(ki-hg)
a(0 7aki

ae ae B
= =c[2 -± -__p• -q (L-adl + ct(2e2- lig)
&Ds a2c2 c.2 c 2 c c

ae aA
= =o
aco g anci

aA ae
= =o
aw l.) an c2

Finally the I-ggrangian equations for the caravan system are:

Mit,- rc(Mvc + M shiP ) = F„c- Fla -F

Mtie+ MA PC + Muere= Fix+ Few + Ftg2

Bt
I zete-1„, j;se- l+ M Aux e= Fucae- (Ftgi + Fty)(L- ad -01,1+.111,z2)+(Fba-F)7

luy. A — Ixy.sp c — limstc= - A/1,g hesinec-2k(L- ac) 2 0 c - k(L-ac)(2zc-zci - ;2+ 2V -

- c(L-ac)[2qc(L-ac)+2±c-±c, - 2- Bp,I - Feecte- (Mbci + A 1 bc)

(Alsii.+/xx.․)pc+Mshi bc-/xy,sqc-Ixistc-Msghi sinch c_4(zci _za+Bod _

-4(±ci-±c2+Bp)
(b57)
M s2e= 11,19g + Fee-2 ke c(L- a) + k(zci +;2-2 -2/-cEn)-c[2±c+2qc(L-ac)- ±c 1 - ±c 2]

mu,2 1 =mwg-lc[z, i - zc+4)4-0,(L-ac)-v-Ict(ze1 - h91 +R ) -

B
- ci±c1 -±c+PeT -qc(L-ac)[-ctf
-c( ± 1 - lid

mw2c2=rnag-142-2c-4) ,-B
2- -0 ,(L-a„)-V-kt(ze2-hg2+Rd-

B
- c[2e2 -±c-pe---qe(L-ae)] - cE(±c2 - lig)
2

I yy.uPc1 -. Mbcl — Ftri R a

illy. fic2 .-2 M bc2 — Ftx2REI

190
The Lagrangian equations (b57) represent the complete dynamic equations of motion
for the caravan system. The first two are related to the translational movement of the
whole caravan system (sprung and unsprung mass). The following three describe the
angular movements of the sprung mass (yaw, pitch and roll). Again the yaw movement
is considered for the whole caravan system. The fifth equation describes the caravan
sprung mass vertical (bounce) motion. The last four equations are related to the
caravan unsprung masses (wheel vertical movement and wheel spin).

191
 —-7
ze2\T- c
0 \fiZc VIVI
Ct

F F
tid
F
4 s le)
F v&F tY1
tz2 hi

Figure B.2 Caravan sprung and unsprung mass descriptions.

192
Appendix C FUNCTIONS USED TO REPRESENT CAR CHARACTERISTICS

Car secondary suspension characteristics are represented using polynomial functions

as detailed below. This method was employed due to the following reasons:

a) Ease of fitt to experimental data: Automated algorithms are readily available to

optionally fit polynomial curves to experimental data (for example MATLAB):

b) Flexibility:Variation of polynomial order allows constant, linear and non-linear

characteristics to be modelled:

C) Smoothness: Polynomial functions and their derivatives are smooth and continuous
and thus do not introduce numerical integration difficulties. Furthermore
differentiation to obtain function derivatives is trivial.

Name Description Arguments Bathfp Method

Model
f, tyre shear tyre slip, camber, CA33 Linear
fy forces longitudinal slip and interpolation
farm tyre load from
experimental
data array
CA35 Special
function
Interpolation
,
fy wheel camber wheel centre to CARAVCO2 2nd order
change relative eyebrow relative polynomial
to body displacement
./.5 wheel steer wheel centre to CARAVCO2 2nd order
relative to body eyebrow relative polynomial
displacement tyre side for each
and longitudinal argument
forces, steering wheel
angle
fY wheel centre wheel centre to CARAVCO2 2nd order
lateral eyebrow relative polynomial
displacement vertical displacement
relative to body
centre-line
(1/2 track
change)

193
 Name Description Arguments Bathfp Method
Model
fk vertical ' wheel centre to CAll 5th order
suspension eyebrow relative polynomial
force, vertical displacement
single wheel
fkt, suspension roll left and right side CAll 3rd order
characteristics polynomial
(including
effect of main
springs)
.fe vertical wheel centre to CAll separate 5th
suspension eyebrow relative order
single wheel vertical velocity polynomials
damping for
compression
and rebound

Table C.1 Functions used to represent car characteristics.

194
Appendix D THE FRAME MOMENTS OF INERTIA CALCULATION

The purpose of this calculation was to ensure that the experimental moments of inertia
obtained for the whole chassis (basic chassis plus frame) have sensible values.
The actual frame consisted of two different channel-section bars. The base of the frame,
a rectangle mounted directly on the chassis floor, was made up of channel with a
linearly distributed mass of pm=10•73 kg/m. The rest of the frame had a linearly
distributed mass ofprn=6.65 kg/m.
The moment of inertia for a linearly distributed mass around Oy axis is (figure D.1):

(dl)

where:
1 - length of the analyzed component;
p - linearly distributed mass value.

Since I.=13, the moment of inertia around the z-axis which is perpendicular to the xy
plane is:

z = Ix + ly = P1L (d2)

Having the moment of inertia from the previous equation and using the parallel axis
theorem, it was possible to calculate the moments of inertia of the frame with respect
to the coordinate axes passing through the caravan's centre of gravity.

The location of the caravan centre of gravity was known. Therefore, the moments of
inertia around the axes through the centre of gravity were:

/.,,,g= [._13
6 + 2Ljy+2(1+LJ)2 Pm+
(d3)

+ [ 13+2(1+L)(h-z1)2421(111
7 - zi ) 2 +2(4h+ Li) y
+ 4h3+4/.47h_ zi)2+0{ 111
2 _ zi)2 pm

195
 L
lucg=[...6_+be +2Lf(4-42+1(Lf-42 +2z(1+ L}] pm+

2h3+81.4_h_z )2 +2/(hi -z1 )2 +(14-2h)(1-xi -fi r +(1+211)(xi -Jr + bd iim+

4. [±i.+_ (d4)
6 3 2 1

L,
2
[2(i+L)gh-z 1 ) + aLf-X1 ) +27±
14 2 1-X1 )2Pm

1 3 +Li 2 L 9
) -1PM
izo9 =[ /(Lf-42 + 2Lfy +

+ [24+84 2 +2(Lf-,0 2 +2(x1 -ifi 2 +2(L1-x1 -fi )2] pmh+ (d5)

[ 213+117 )2 P m
+bcr+2Liy+ 1(Lf -x ) 2 + 214 f + 1(x1-_,)2+1(L
f -x 1 -f1
6

where:
X1 g Z1 position of the caravan centre of gravity as measured with respect to the
front side of the frame (x 1 = 1.38 m: 3/ 1 =0.61m; z1=0.7m);
1, /41, h, h 1 , f, f, - dimensional values for the frame configuration as presented in
figure D.2.

Inserting the numerical values into equations d3, d4 and d5, the moments of inertia
for the basic metal frame had the following values:
1,04=313 kgrn2; lycg=427 kgm2; Img=373 kge.

These moments of inertia can be modified by accounting for the position and
magnitude of the additional weights mounted on the frame.

196
 X
>

ly=(ML2)/12;M=pL

Figure D.1 Calculation of uniformly distributed beam moment of inertia.

the IMMO dimension are:

Li = 3.08 m
kw 1.86 m
f1 = 0.85 m
I- 1.22 m
h= 1.5 m
h 1.3 m

X tblt, Z.,- low-ball centred

w i0
coordinate system

Figure D.2 Frame dimensions.

197
Appendix E FREQUENCY RESPONSE ANALYSIS MATHEMATICAL DESCRIPTION

In order to interpret the experimental frequency response road excitation results a

mathematical model was developed.
A linearised second order system was used to describe the motion of the trailer on the
road simulator. The trailer was set in a bouncing mode by driving the rear road
simulator actuators in phase. The absolute sprung mass displacement was measured
using a displacement transducer (LVDT) connected between the stationary rig and the
caravan's sprung mass. The sinusoidal system input signal was the actuator's position
feedback, since the wheel hubs were rigidly connected to the rig's actuators. A diagram
of the mathematical model used is presented in figure E.1.
One of the main assumption made was that sprung mass of the caravan behaves as
a rigid body. This assumption explains why the mathematical model did not perfectly
match the experimental results for frequencies around 3 Hz, where the chassis
represented quite a large flexibility.
If the absolute displacements of the sprung mass and the unsprung mass are denoted
by y and x respectively (figure E.1), the equation of motion is as follows:

mg -2 k(x- y) + 2 c(..ic- 0) (el)

where:
M - sprung mass of the caravan;
k - caravan suspension spring rate;
c - caravan suspension damping rate.

Using the Laplace transformation the previous equation becomes:

(Ms' +2cs+2k1Y=(2cs+21c)X (e2)

The ratio of the output over the input (which defines the transfer function of the second
order system) is:

Y 2cs+2k (e3)
X Ms' +2cs +2k

198
For frequency analysis s =j0). Therefore, the system transfer function becomes:

2colj+2k
M(j(0)2+2a0j+2k
2c 0) . + 2k (e4)

- 0)2 + 2cwj + 2k
MM
Using the notations:

(O_
j
2k : 2c T4 .4(.0,1
(e5)

where:
w n- bounce motion natural frequency:
- suspension damping ratio.
The transfer function P(j(0) becomes:

2oxoj+coo2,1
PUwl-
-(02 + c4+24Rorij

-) j
1+2a_ (e6)

+2C. (3j
(Un

The absolute value (modulus) and the phase of the above transfer function are:

IP I=

(e7)

2 (0
(w) = atan [2C1--° - atan

The amplitude and phase equations can be plotted against frequency and the results
compared with the experimental values. This comparison is presented in figure E.2.
From the amplitude equation, considering w as the variable, the value of the frequency
corresponding to the amplitude peak can be identified by differentiating the amplitude

199
function with respect to co and cancelling the derivative (only the nominator of the
amplitude function is accounted for):

IctioA y = cillt)lwn

(e8)
.(24 jo) [1-4 + (2 - [1+ (24 (1) ji 24)20) _ 26) [i ( co
( (13 n J]]
(.4 Wn

The amplitude function peak condition is:

I PV0)1 / =0
(e9)
:. 1 - (13 =2C2[..L
°
Wni

The only valid solution of the previous equation is:

1/-1+\1 1-3C2 (e 1 0)
(1)mamWn

which represents the value of the frequency for the amplitude peak (o)=27cf).
Since in the equation (e10) there are two unknowns, namely 0.)„ and C, the phase plot
should be used to identify the natural frequency of the system. When co=o)n, the phase
expression becomes:

Ow n) = atan(4) - It (el 1)

Using iteration a damping ratio of C =0.15, a natural frequency of con=5.1 Hz and a

damping rate of the caravan secondary suspension of c=344 Ns/m was found to fit the
experimental results presented in figure E.2.
For a passenger car, the mean damping rate is around 1200 Ns/m. On a passenger car
we have four dampers that act in parallel when the car bounces, therefore giving a
combined mean damping rate of 4800 Ns/m. On the other hand, for the caravan there
are only two dampers (left and right of the caravan axle), therefore the combined
damping rate for a caravan in bounce is only 688 Ns/m.
It can be seen that the damping rate provided by the caravan was only 1/7u, of the
damping provided by a normal passenger car. This was not an unexpected finding.

200
 A
y(body)
(trailer)

(road)

- actuators

Figure E.1 Experimental measurement of trailer frequency response (hub rigidly

connected to road).

Frequency response analysis

20 • I I

solid line - expenmental results

-10 - dotted: line thëoi.eticàl results

-20
10° 102
Frequency [Hz]

0
-50
7:Tri
,S -100
4.)
c̀13 -150
a. solid line - experimental results
dotted line theoretical results
-200

-250
10-1 10° 101 102
Frequency [Hz)

Figure E.2 Trailer frequency response.

201
Appendix F CARAVAN AND CAR PARAMETRIC DATA

The values of the parameters used in the car/caravan modelling process plus those of
the controller used to regulate car speed and course during steerpad test simulations
are given in this appendix.

Fl Caravan model

F1.1 Sprung mass parameters

a) Initial conditions:
sprung mass vertical displacement: -1.270000e+00 [m]
sprung mass roll angle: 0.000000e+00 [rad]
caravan yaw angle: 0.000000e+00 [rad]
caravan pitch angle: 0.000000e+00 [rad]
b) Basic dimensions:
sprung mass: 7.621000e+02 [kg]
yaw moment of inertia (about CofG): 1.078800e+03 [kgm2]
sprung mass pitch moment of inertia: 1.184300e+03 1kgm21
sprung mass roll moment of inertia: 7.067000e+02 [kgrr121
distance betw. sprung mass CofG
and roll axis: 1.170000e+00 [m]
distance L betw. tow-ball and tyres: 3.350000e+00 [m]
distance a, betw. tow-ball and CofG: 3.120000e+00 [m]
secondary suspension track B: 1.430000e+00 [m]
track between tyres contact patches: 1.700000e+00 [m]
F1.2 Unsprung masses parameters
unsprung mass vertical displacement: -3.000000e-01 [m]
unsprung mass: 2.400000e+01 [kg]
spin inertia about axle axis: 1.000000e-01 [kgm2]
F1.3 Secondary suspension parameters
secondary suspension spring rate: 8.882000e+04 [N/m]
secondary suspension damping rate: 3.440000e+02 [Ns/m1
secondary suspension track: 1.430000e+00 [m]
static secondary suspension preload: 3.465300e+03 [N]
F1.4 Tyres parameters
linear vertical spring rate: 1.300000e+05 [N/m1
vertical damping coefficient: 5.000000e+03 [Ns/m]

202
 tyre free radius: 3.000000e-01 [nil
relaxation length: 6.000000e-01 [nil
longitudinal stiffness factor: 3.000000e+01 IN]
longitudinal force relaxation length: 3.000000e-01 [ml
initial static tyre preload: 3.700800e+03 [NI
Tyre Test Data: Goodyear 165 R13.

F2 Car model

F2.1 Sprung mass parameters

a) Initial conditions:
sprung mass eyebrow height (front): -6.30000e-01 1ml
sprung mass eyebrow height (rear): -6.27000e-01 [m]
b) Basic dimensions:
nominal track width: 1.460000e+00 [m]
nominal wheelbase: 2.610000e+00 1ml
front eyebrow height above rear at zero pitch: -0.30000e-02 [m]
horizontal distance from front axle CofG: 1.185000e+00 [ml
distance between CofG and tow-ball point: 2.310000e+00 [ml
sprung mass: 1.358400e+03 [kg]
yaw moment of inertia (about CofG): 2.625000e+03 [kgm2]
sprung mass pitch moment of inertia: 2.114000e+03 [kgm21
sprung mass roll moment of inertia: 2.890000e+02 [kgml
sprung mass CofG height above eyebrow plane: 1.000000e-01 1ml
nominal steering ratio: 1.920000e+01 [-I
front/rear brake torque split: 2.000000e+00 [-I
car frontal area: 2.000000e+00 [m21
coefficient of aerodynamic drag: 5.900000e-01 [-I
C) Suspension kinematic properties:
- ride height at reference condition:
front: 3.780000e-01 [ml
rear: 3.880000e-01 [ml
- wheel centre lateral displacement polynomial (with ride height):
front: constant: 7.280000e-01
1st coefficient: 2.919000e-03
2nd coefficient: - 1.32210e+00
rear: constant: 7.310000e-01

203
 1st coefficient: -1.45400e-03 [-I
2nd coefficient: -4.02100e-01 Im- 11
- wheel camber polynomial (with ride height):
front: constant: -1.10000e+00 [deg]
1st coefficient: 2.648600e+01 [deg/in]
2nd coefficient: 9.723600e+01 [deg/M21
rear: constant: -6.90000e-01 [deg]
1st coefficient: -4.52800e+01 Ideg/ml
- toe polynomial (with ride height):
front: constant: 2.000000e-01 [deg]
1st coefficient: -5.41280e-01 Ideg/m1
2nd coefficient: 8.508400e+01 Ideg/rn21
rear: constant: 1.900000e-01 [deg]
1st coefficient: -7.31140e-01 Ideg/M1
2nd coefficient: -4.22980e+01 Ideg/rni
d) Compliance properties:
- toe polynomial (with side force):
front: coefficient: -4.40000e-04 Ideg/N1
rear: coefficient: -1.00000e-04 [deg/N1
- toe polynomial (with longitudinal force):
front: coefficient: -5.00000e-04 [deg/NI
rear: 1st coefficient: -1.96000e-04 Ideg/N1
2nd coefficient: -1.82000e-08 Icleg/N1
F2.2 Unsprung masses parameters
a) Front:
unsprung mass vertical displacement: -2.76000e-01 [m]
unsprung mass: 5.830000e+01 [kg]
- spin inertia about axle axis: 1.000000e-01 [kgm21
b) Rear:
unsprung mass vertical displacement: -2.79000e-01 [m]
unsprung mass: 3.580000e+01 [kg]
spin inertia about axle axis: 1.000000e-01 [kgin21
F2.3 Secondary suspension parameters
a) Front:
- Damper parameters:
damper end to wheel movement ratio: 9.000000e-01 [-]
1st compression polynomial coefficient: 1.294000e+03 [Ns/m]

204
 2nd compression polynomial coefficient: -2.42520e+03 IN(s/m)9
3rd compression polynomial coefficient: 2.720400e+03 [1\1(s/m)3]
4th compression polynomial coefficient: -1.31980e+03 IN(s/rn)41
5th compression polynomial coefficient: 2.309000e+02 IN(s/n1)51
1st rebound polynomial coefficient: 4.014800e+03 IN(s/m)1
2nd rebound polynomial coefficient: 3.805200e+03 11•1(s/N9
3rd rebound polynomial coefficient: 2.376700e-4-03 IN(s/111)31
4th rebound polynomial coefficient: 7.087300e+02 [N(s/111)4J
5th rebound polynomial coefficient: 8. 020800e+01 IN(s/M)9
- Bounce force polynomial (single wheel with mean ride height):
constant: 2.126000e+03 [NJ
1st coefficient: 1.871200e+04 IN/m]
2nd coefficient: 2.110000e+04 IN/m21
3rd coefficient: -1.77570e+06 IN/m31
- Roll stiffness (single wheel with front ride height difference):
roll rate constant: 5.740000e+02 [N/deg]
b) Rear:
- Damper parameters:
damper end to wheel movement ratio: 1.100000e+00
1st compression polynomial coefficient: 8.658900e+02 ENs/m1
2nd compression polynomial coefficient: -1.07210e+03 [N(s/m)2]
3rd compression polynomial coefficient: 1.247800e+03 [N(s/M)31
4th compression polynomial coefficient: -5.46570e+02 [N(s/m)4]
5th compression polynomial coefficient: 8.399300e+01 [N(s/m)51
1st rebound polynomial coefficient: 3.166200e+03 [N(s/m)]
2nd rebound polynomial coefficient: 3.098000e+03 [N(s/n1)21
3rd rebound polynomial coefficient: 3.457900e+03 11•1(s/rn)i
4th rebound polynomial coefficient: 1.511900e+03 [N(s/m)4]
5th rebound polynomial coefficient: 2.338700e+02 (1\1(s/m)51
- Bounce force polynomial (single wheel with mean ride height):
constant: 2.453000e+03
1st coefficient: -2.55620e+04 [N/m]
2nd coefficient: 3.427600e+04 [N/m21
3rd coefficient: -2.06460e+06 IN/m3]
- Roll stiffness (single wheel with front ride height difference):
roll rate constant: 3.100000e+02 IN/deg]

205
F2.4 Tyres parameters
linear vertical spring rate: 1.840000e+05 [N/m]
vertical damping coefficient: 5.000000e+03 [Ns/m]
tyre free radius: 2.980000e-01 [m]
relaxation length: 6.000000e-01 [m]
longitudinal stiffness factor: 3.000000e+01 [N]
longitudinal force relaxation length: 3.000000e-01 [m]
Tyre Test Data: Goodyear 185/65 R14.

F3 Tow-ball model

a) Initial conditions:
Inertial OX coord. of the caravan tow-ball point: 0.000000e+00 [m]
Inertial OY coord. of the caravan tow-ball point: 0.000000e+00 [m]

b) Dimensions:
tow-ball longitudinal OX spring stiffness: 1.000000e+05 [N/m]
tow-ball lateral OY spring stiffness: 1.000000e+05 [N/m]
tow-ball vertical OZ spring stiffness: 1.000000e+05 IN/m]
tow-ball longitudinal OX damping coefficient: 4.000000e+02 [Ns/m]
tow-ball lateral OY damping coefficient: 4.000000e+02 [Ns/m]
tow-ball vertical OZ damping coefficient: 4.000000e+02 [Ns/m]
initial tow-ball height above the ground: 3.600000e-01 [m]
distance between car CofG and the tow-ball point: 2.310000e+00 [m]
vertical dist. betw. car rear eyebrow and tow-ball: 2.660000e-01 [m]
tow-ball point initial static preload: 0.514000e+03 [N]
stabilising moment value: 3.000000e+02 [Nm]

F4 Steer pad controller

a) Steering controller
reference point vehicle x-axis displacement: 5.000000e+00 [m]
derivative gain: 5.000000e-02 [s]
proportional gain: 1.000000e+00 [-]
integral gain: 3.300000e-02 11/s]
output gain: 2.500000e+01 Icleg/m1

206
b) Speed controller
proportional gain: 5.000000e+02 [Ns]
Integral gain: 0.000000e+00 [NI

207
REFERENCES

1. Kurtz,E.F., Anderson.RJ., "Handling Characteristics of Car-Trailer Systems: A

State-of-the-Art Survey". Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.6, pp.217-243, 1977.

2. Darling,J., Ross-Martin,T.J. and Woolgar,R, 'The Prediction of Vehicle

Handling Dynamics using the Force Roll Centre Concept". FISITA Congress
London, C389/047, pp.55-62, 1992.

3. Mikulcik,E.,C., "The Dynamics of Tractor-Semitrailer Vehicles: The Jackknifing

Problem". SAE Congress, January 11-15, 1971.

4. Ellis,J.R, "Vehicle Dynamics". Business Books, London, 1969.

5. Pacejka,H.,B., Bakker,E., Nyborg,L., "Tyre Modelling for Use in Vehicle

Dynamics Studies". SAE Transactions, Vol. 96, Section 2, pp. 190-204, 1987.

6. Moore,D.,F., 'The Friction of Pneumatic Tyres". Elsevier Scientific Publishing

Company, New York, 1975.

7. Bakker,E., Pacejka,H.,B., Lidner,L., "A New Tire model with an Application in

Vehicle Dynamics Studies". SAE Transactions, Vol. 98, Section 1, pp. 290-301,
1990.

8. Bergman,W., Clemett,H.,R, 'Tire Cornering Properties". Tire Science and

Technology, ASTM, Vol. 3, No. 3, pp. 135-163, August, 1975.

9. Gough,V.,E., Allbert,B.,J., "Tyres and the Design of Vehicles and Roads for
Safety". Proc. Auto. Div. I. Mech. E., Vol. 183, Pt. 3A, pp. 154-163, 1968-1969.

10. Bergman,W., Beauregard,C., 'Transient Tire Properties". SAE Paper Nr.740068.

11. Ellis,J.R, "The Ride and Handling of Semi-Trailer Articulated Vehicles".

Automobile Engineer, December, 1966.

12. Saibel,E.A. and Chiang,S.L., "A Dynamical Analysis of a Towed Two-Wheel

208
 Trailer".Vehicle System Dynamics. Vol.1, pp.211-225, 1972.

13. Jindra,F., "Tractor and Trailer Handling". Automobile Engineer, Vol.55, pp.60-
69, 1965.

14. Taylor,D.L., Kane,T.R., "Effects of Drawbar Properties on the Behavior of

Articulated Vehicles". Paper No. 76-WA/Aut-10, ASME Winter Annual Meeting,
New York, December, 1976.

15. Bundorf,R.T., "Directional Control Dynamics of Automobile-Travel Trailer

Combinations". SAE Transactions. Vol. 76, pp. 667-680, 1967.

16. Moncarz,H.T., "Parameter Study of the Stability of an Articulated Vehicle in Five

Degrees of Freedom". Proceedings of the Third International Conference on
Vehicle System Dynamics, pp.84-111, Blacksburg, VA, August 12-15. 1974.

17. Johnson,D.B., Huston J. C. and Gray T.A.. "The Influence of Drawbar Flexibility
and Roll Steer on the Stability of Articulated Vehicles". Dynamics of Wheeled
Recreational Vehicles, SAE Congress, February 1979.

18. Radt,H.,S., Mffiiken,W.,J., "Motions of Skidding Automobiles". Paper 205A

presented at SAE Summer Meeting, Chicago, June, 1960.

19. "The Dynamics of Vehicles During Braking". Symposium on Control

of Vehicles During Braking and Cornering. Proceedings, London, 1963.

20. Ellis.J.R., Guenther,D.A. and Maalej, "Suspension Derivatives in Vehicle

Modelling and Simulation". Int. J. of Vehicle Design, Vol. 10, No.5., pp. 507-518,
1989.

21. Sharp,R.S. and Hassan,S.A., "The Relative Performance Capabilities of Passive,

Active and Semi-Active Suspension Systems". Proc. Instn. Mech. Engrs., Vol.
200, No. D3. pp. 219-228, 1986.

22. Sharp,R.S. and Hassan,S.A., "An Evaluation of Passive Automotive Suspension

Systems With Variable Stiffness and Damping Parameters". Vehicle System
Dynamics, 15, pp. 335-350, 1986.

209
23. Crolla,D.A. and Abdel-Hardy,M.B.A., "Active Suspension Control: Performance
Comparisons Using a Full Vehicle Model". Vehicle Systems Dynamics, 20, pp.
107-120, 1991.

24. Willumeit,H.P., Neculau.M., Vikas,A. and Wohler.A., "Mathematical Models for

the Computation of Vehicle Handling Dynamic Behaviour During Development".
SAE Paper 925046, 1992.

25. Dibol,W., Hagen,D.,H., "Lateral Stability of Road and Rail Trailers". Journal of
Engineering for Industry, Transaction ASME, Vol. 91, pp. 1069-1074, 1969.

26. Robe,T.,R, "Effect of Hitchpoint Lateral Stiffness on Trailer Stability". Dynamics

of Wheeled Recreational Vehicles, SAE Congress, February 1979.

27. Taylor,D.L. and Kane,T.R., "Effects of Drawbar Properties on the Behavior of

Articulated Vehicles". Paper No.76-WA/Aut-10, ASME Winter Annual Meeting,
New York, December 1976.

28. Anderson,R.J., Kurtz,E.F., "Dynamic Stability of Automobiles Towing Trailers".

Proceedings of the Sixth Canadian Congress of Applied Mechanics, Vancouver,
May 29- June 3. 1977.

29. Passerello,C.E., "A Simplified Analysis of the Steady-State Turning of

Articulated Vehicles". SAE Transactions, Vol. 81, pp. 423-430, 1979.

30. Klein,R.H., Szostak,H.T., "Determination of Trailer Stability Through Simple

Analytical Methods and Test Procedures". SAE Transactions, Vol. 79. pp. 443-
450, 1979.

31. Bernard,J.E., Vanderploeg,M., "Static and Dynamic Offtracking of Articulated

Vehicles". SAE Transactions, Vol. 80. pp. 463-470, 1980.

[32] Fratila,D., "Caravan Road Dynamics. Modelling the Horizontal-Transversal

Stability". School of Mechanical Engineering, Report No. 222, University of
Bath, UK, 1992.

133] Meirowitch,L., "State Equations of Motion for Flexible Bodies in Terms of Quasi-

210
 Coordinates". Dynamics and Controlled Mechanical Systems IUTAM/IFAC
Symposium Zurich, Switzerland, 1988.

1341 Dixon,J.C., "The Roll-Centre Concept in Vehicle Handling Dynamics".

Proceedings of the IMechE, Vol.201, NaD 1, 1987.

[35] Hickson,L.,R, "Implementation and Development of an Active Roll Control

Suspension", MPhil/PhD Transfer Report, School of Mechanical Engineering,
Report No. 074, University of Bath, UK, 1993.

1361 Ross-Martin,T.J., Darling,J., "Passenger Car Active Suspension Research Using

Computer Simulation". School of Mechanical Engineering, Report No. 1095,
University of Bath, UK, 1990.

[371 Ross-Martin,T.J., "Improvements to the Bathfp Model for Simulation of

Passenger Car Ride and Handling Dynamics". School of Mechanical
Engineering, Report No. 1020, University of Bath, UK, 1990.

[381 "Vehicles Dynamics Terminology". SAE J670d, July 1975.

[391 MATLAB User's Guide, The MathWorks, Inc.. Natick, Massachussetts 01760,
USA, 1992.

[40] Richards, C.W. and Tilley, D.G.T., "Bathfp - A Second Generation Simulation
Package for Fluid Power Systems". Proc., BHRA 9th Int. Fluid Power
Symposium. Cambridge, UK, 1990.

[41]- Richards, C.W. and Tilley, D.G.T., Bathfp Manual, Vol.2, Ch.4, 1991.

[42] Petzold, L., "Automatic Selection of Methods for Solving Stiff and Non-Stiff
Systems for Ordinary Differential Equations", Siam J. Sc!. Stat. Comput. Vol.4,
No.1, pp.136-148, 1983.

[43] Margolis, D.L., "Bond Graphs for Automated Simulation and Control of
Nonlinear Vehicle Systems". SAE Paper No. 871558 ,1987.

[44] "Car-Caravan Stability Guide to the Preparation of Data Required for Use of the

211
 Computer Simulation Program". MIRA Report No. K242640 Supplement, UK,
1987.

[45] BS AU 247:1993, "Lateral Stability of Passenger Car/Trailer Combinations".

British Standards Institution, UK, 1993.

[46] BS AU 230:1989, "Lateral Transient Response Behaviour of Passenger Cars".

British Standards Institution, UK, 1989.

[47] Heinz Heisler, "Advanced Vehicle Technology". 1989.

[48] El-Gindy,M., Wong,J.Y., "A Comparison of Various Computer Simulation

Models for Predicting the Directional Responses of Articulated Vehicles", Vehicle
System Dynamics, Vo1.16, pp.249-268, 1987.

[49] Bevan.B.G., Smith,N.P. and Ashley,C., "Some Factors Influencing the Stability
of Car/Caravan Combinations". Proceedings of the IMechE, C132, 1983.

[50] Ervin,RD. and Mallikarjunarao,C., "A Study of the Yaw Stability of Tractor-
Semitrailer Combinations". Proceedings of 7th IAVSD Symposium on Dynamics
of Vehicles on Roads and Tracks. Cambridge, UK, 1981.

1511 Fancher,P., 'The Static Stability of Articulated Commercial Vehicles", Vehicle

System Dynamics, Vol.14, pp: 201-227, 1985.

1521 Verma,M.K. and Gillespie.T.D., "Roll Dynamics of Commercial Vehicles", Vehicle

System Dynamics, Vol.9, pp.1-17, 1980.

[53] Starr,P.J., "A Personal Computer-Based CAD System for Investigating Lateral
Stability of Vehicle-Dolly-Trailer Combinations", Int. J. of Vehicle Design, Vol.
14, nos.2/3, pp.194-204, 1993.

[54] Uffehnann,F., "Automotive Stability and Handling Dynamics in Cornering and

Braking Maneuvers", Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.12, pp.203-223. 1983.

[55] Vlk,F., "Lateral Dynamics of Commercial Vehicle Combinations - A Literature

Survey", Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.11, pp.305-324, 1982.

212