You are on page 1of 28

# Finite Element

Method
Final Project
Rear
SuspensionDouble A- Arms

Jaime Taha T.

2003

April 29th

Mini Baja

track.
Suspension must

## React and perform well.

Protect the driver from impacts from the rough terrain.
Be strong enough to survive the track

More pictures.

## As we can see, is very feasible

could be hit by another one, or
could hit a rock, bumps, etc.

that
that

the cars
the tires

Problem Statement

## The Rear Suspension of the Mini Baja car

must be able to withstand the rough
terrains associated with the competitions
motor cross track.

Problem Statement

## The Rear Arm Suspension consist of 3 parts: Top

Arm, Bottom Arm, and a Hub.
Using the material properties for 4130 Chromoly
Steel.
The tubing is a 1 diameter and 0.058 thickness.
In this project the Top arm was analyzed.

FEA Analysis

## 3 Scenarios were analyzed (Worst Case

scenarios)
Arm Moving
Tire hits a rock, wood, bump, etc.
Tire hit from the side

2 & 3 Scenarios

F=820 lb

Impact Force

## This force is applied in the second and

third scenarios where:

## Another car traveling at 30 MPH hits our car

and comes to rest at one second
The car hits an object traveling at 30 MPH

## Vi=30 MPH, Vf=0 MPH, Time (t) = 1

second,
Mass (m) = 600 lb

V f Vi a t
a(impact )

V f Vi

t
F m a (impact )
F 820lbf

## Forces acting in the

system
Weight of the car, Stress of the Spring/Damper force
acting on both arms

Car Frame

## Reaction force of the weight of the

structure acting on both arms

Pro E Model

Impact
Force
=
820 lbf

Spring/Damper
Spring Force = 175
lb/in
Damper Force (C) =
10.2 Lbf

Top Arm

Spherical
Joints

Assumptions

## Welded zones where neglected

The actuator in the tire simulates the displacement of
the tire-arm when the car is driven.
The spring-dash is acting in the as a distributed load
(Pro E model image.)
Spherical joints were used where the arm is attached
to the cars structure, also the car frame was assumed
that doesnt move (Cars frame doesnt take any load.)
To simulate the impacts in the car, a ramp function
was used.
The reaction force of the tire is calculated as a worse
case scenario where all the weight of the car is
applied only in one tire 600 lb, as a distributed
force.

## Finite Element Modeling

Scenario 1 Arm moving.

Stress Analysis

## Stress Analysis 0.02ft

Max. Value = 8.6 e8
alue in a specific point = 7.03e8 Pa

## Stress Analysis 0.03ft

Max. Value = 7.46e8
Value in a specific point = 6.03e8 Pa

## Finite Element Modeling

1 Arm moving.
Factor of Scenario
Safety

FS-0.03

FS-0.0

FS-0.03 - Front (above) and Back (below) views of Factor of Safety (Mesh size o
FS-0.02 - Front (above) and Back (below) views of Factor of Safety (Mesh size o

## Scenario 2 Tire hits a rock, wood,

bump, etc.
Using 0.02 ft. Mesh

## Max. Value = 8.62e8 Pa

Value in a specific point = 6.71e8 Pa

## Scenario 2 Tire hits a rock, wood,

bump, etc.
Using 0.03 ft. Mesh

## Max. Value = 7.68e8 Pa

Value in a specific point = 4.66e8 Pa

bump, etc.
Using 0.04 ft.
Mesh

## Max. Value = 1.42e9 Pa

Value in a specific point = 1.12e9 Pa

bump, etc.
Factor of Safety

FS 0.02ft

FS 0.03ft

## Finite Element Modeling

Scenario 2 Tire hits a rock, wood,
bump, etc.

## Simulation of stress analysis

tire-arm with movement

in the

## Max. Value = 6.7e8 Pa

Value in a specific point = 5.06e8 Pa

## Max. Value = 1.27e9 Pa

Value in a specific point = 8.25e8 Pa

## Finite Element Modeling

Scenario 3 Tire hit from the side.

## Simulation of stress analysis

tire-arm with movement

in the

## Movement and stresses

Improvement - Pro E
Drawings.

## Adding the pipe showed, the stresses

concentration could be distributed.

Previous

Possible Alternative

Cont

## The addition of the pipe decreases the stresses

and also distribute the stress concentration
Point2

## Stress Analysis 0.03ft

Stress Analysis 0.03ft
Max. Value = 7.46e8 Pa
Max. Value = 1.4e8 Pa
Value in a specific point = 6.03e8 PaValue in a specific point1 = 2.9e7 Pa
Value in a specific point2 = 1.1e8 Pa

## Finite Element Modeling

Scenario 1 Arm moving.

Actual part

a pipe)
of the pipe,

## As explained before, with

the
stress concentration decrease and also was distributed
(Mesh size 0.03 ft). An increase is notable in the new model
(right image) in the Factor of Safety from 0.54 to 3.46.

## Finite Element Modeling

Scenario 3 Tire hit from the side.

Actual part

a pipe)

In this scenario, the addition of the pipe also affect the factor
of safety, as we can see the red zones from the figures.

while doing my project.

Pro E
Drawings
Cut the inside of the pipes
Verify units
Geometry settings/connection to Visual
Nastran (Why doesnt work???)

while doing my project.

Visual Nastran
Meshing the part play with the mesh size.
The use of H-Adaptivity is hard to run it because
thin structure and other elements (such as
spring, actuator, etc)
Verify the restraints, forces, springs, actuators,
motor, etc.
Verify Joints (also is very important to verify the
While running the FEA with motion theres no
way to stop it.

## 3 scenarios were analyzed

H-Adaptivity was not used because of the
complexity of the part and the thickness.
A possible alternative of adding a pipe between
the arms with the purpose of decrease stress
concentration and also distribute the load. In
fact the results showed that by adding the pipe,
the stresses slightly reduce
FEA is a time consuming process, it can be
improve if the analysis is run on a more capable
computers.
Further work:

## Verify the pipes diameter/thickness and do FEA

Acknowledgem
ents
Dr. Arturo Fuentes
Mini Baja Team
Classmates