4569846498

01.05.2017 Views

Modelling and analysis of suspension systems 179 2.0 1.0 Steer angle (deg) 0.0 1.0 2.0 Rigid joints Linear bushes __ __ __ __ Non-linear bushes Test data 3.0 80.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 100.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 Bump movement (mm) 60.0 80.0 120.0 100.0 Fig. 4.40 Front suspension – steer angle with bump movement 260.0 Roll centre height (mm) 240.0 220.0 200.0 180.0 160.0 Rigid joints Linear bushes Non-linear bushes 140.0 120.0 80.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 100.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 Bump movement (mm) 60.0 80.0 120.0 100.0 Fig. 4.41 Front suspension – roll centre height with bump movement. (This material has been reproduced from the Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, K2 Vol. 213 ‘The modelling and simulation of vehicle handling. Part 2: vehicle modelling’, M.V. Blundell, page 125, by permission of the Council of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers) Considering the merits of each modelling approach it appears from the curves plotted that for the range of vertical movement expected of a handling model there is little difference between models using rigid joints, linear bushes or non-linear bushes. The use of the non-linear model will significantly increase the effort required to model the vehicle. This is evident from Table 4.4 which compares the data inputs required to model the connection of the front suspension lower arm to the vehicle body.

180 Multibody Systems Approach to Vehicle Dynamics 30.0 20.0 Track change (mm) 10.0 0.0 10.0 20.0 30.0 Rigid joints Linear bushes Non-linear bushes 40.0 80.0 40.0 0.0 40.0 100.0 60.0 20.0 20.0 Bump movement (mm) 60.0 80.0 120.0 100.0 Fig. 4.42 Front suspension – half track change with bump movement 7000.0 6000.0 Vertical force (N) 5000.0 4000.0 3000.0 2000.0 1000.0 Rigid joints Linear bushes Non-linear bushes Test data Fig. 4.43 0.0 50.0 30.0 10.0 10.0 30.0 60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 20.0 Bump movement (mm) 40.0 Front suspension – vertical force with bump movement 50.0 60.0 4.8 Durability studies (component loading) 4.8.1 Overview Multibody systems programs can often be used to determine the loads acting on suspension components and the body pickup points as inputs to finite element models of the components or vehicle structure. These simulations are aimed to match the series of tests that a vehicle manufacturer would perform on the proving ground to test the durability of the vehicle and chassis components. Different manufacturers will implement their own

180 Multibody Systems Approach to Vehicle Dynamics<br />

30.0<br />

20.0<br />

Track change (mm)<br />

10.0<br />

0.0<br />

10.0<br />

20.0<br />

30.0<br />

Rigid joints<br />

Linear bushes<br />

Non-linear bushes<br />

40.0<br />

80.0 40.0 0.0 40.0<br />

100.0 60.0 20.0 20.0<br />

Bump movement (mm)<br />

60.0<br />

80.0<br />

120.0<br />

100.0<br />

Fig. 4.42<br />

Front suspension – half track change with bump movement<br />

7000.0<br />

6000.0<br />

Vertical force (N)<br />

5000.0<br />

4000.0<br />

3000.0<br />

2000.0<br />

1000.0<br />

Rigid joints<br />

Linear bushes<br />

Non-linear bushes<br />

Test data<br />

Fig. 4.43<br />

0.0<br />

50.0 30.0 10.0 10.0 30.0<br />

60.0 40.0 20.0 0.0 20.0<br />

Bump movement (mm)<br />

40.0<br />

Front suspension – vertical force with bump movement<br />

50.0<br />

60.0<br />

4.8 Durability studies (component loading)<br />

4.8.1 Overview<br />

Multibody systems programs can often be used to determine the loads acting<br />

on suspension components and the body pickup points as inputs to<br />

finite element models of the components or vehicle structure. These simulations<br />

are aimed to match the series of tests that a vehicle manufacturer<br />

would perform on the proving ground to test the durability of the vehicle<br />

and chassis components. Different manufacturers will implement their own

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!