Intake & Exhaust Team James Hogge Rebekah McNally Alisa Phillips Henos Woldegiorgis Front Upright Team Lloyd Outten Joseph Perry Rear Upright Team Josh Carroll Taylor Watkins

 Design Competition for Collegiate students  Represent ODU’s Engineering Department  8 part competition (8 Events)

[Car 106 Front Upright][Car 106 Rear Upright]

Flaws: Brake Bracket Needed to be ¼” more toward the outside to properly line up the caliper with the brake rotor Excess Material on Steering Bracket Flaws: Steering Bracket Not Double Shear Stepped Brake Bracket Eyesore and Possible cause for Failure [Model that was 3D Printed] Below ¼” added to the rear of the upright at top and bottom to support brake bracket

Corrections Made After Rapid Prototyping : -Threaded Hole Size For Brake Bracket -Height and Depth of Lower A-Arm Recess -Material Added Between Steering Bracket Tabs -Bolted Brake Bracket Advantages of Using Rapid Prototyping -Fast and Efficient Way of Reinforcing Design Dimensions -Relatively Cheap to Produce

Upper A-Arm Connection Brake Caliper Connection Spindle Connection Steering Connection Lower A-Arm Connection Brake Bracket Upper A-Arm Bracket [Left removable for camber adjustments] Main Upright Spec Sheet Material: 6061 Aluminum Total Assembly Weight: 2.28 lb. Total Assembly Volume: in 3 Weight by Part Main Upright 1.69 lb. Brake Bracket 0.44 lb. Upper A-Arm Bracket 0.12 lb.

 Initial Design ◦ Model of current upright ◦ Working design needing optimization  Reduce weight while maintaining strength  2.51 lbs ◦ Possible Changes  Remove Webbing  Reduce Thickness  Optimize Material  Al 6061 Alloy decided upon

 First Design ◦ Removal of webbing ◦ Slightly lighter than initial design  2.46 lbs ◦ Preliminary stress analysis reveal high factor of safety throughout part

 Second Design ◦ Reduced thickness of part by 0.25”  Bearing thickness remains the same ◦ 2.32 lbs ◦ Preliminary stress analysis revealed high factor of safety throughout part

 Final Design ◦ Combination of design one and two  Thickness reduced to 0.75”  Webbing removed ◦ Lightest of all designs  1.64 lbs ◦ Fillet added between feet and bracing bar to reduce stress concentration ◦ Resized after prototype test fit

System Component Part for Purchase Supplier Supplier Part Number SizeQtyPrice EachTotal Price Main Front Upright Aluminum 6061-T6 Online Metals 2.5” thick 4”x9.75” 2 $92.04$ Brake Bracket Aluminum 6061-T6 Online Metals.25” thick 12”x12” 1$28.54 Upper A-Arm Bracket Aluminum 6061-T6 Online Metals 1.25” thick 2”x1.39” 2$2.39$4.78 Rear UprightAluminum 6061-T6 Online Metals 2.5” thick 8.5”x9.5” 2 $190.57$ Total Price (without shipping and taxes, including a 10% discount) = $ Expected Cost Report

 Problem Statement: ◦ To design and build an intake that delivers maximum performance possible for our engine.  Accomplishments this year: ◦ Researched different intake styles and chose the most efficient style ◦ Created and revised design in Solidworks ◦ Ran design through SolidWork’s flow analysis program ◦ Revised our design in accordance to flow results (Still in progress) ◦ Researched material costs

 Research determined that a spherical collector upright intake was the most efficient design  (1). The taper of the cone collector should be between 3-7 degrees  (2). Optimal runner length of mm  (3). 20 mm FSAE mandated restrictor (3) (1) (2)

 Typical stock exhaust uses small diameter crush bent pipe or mandrel bent pipe. ◦ Crush bents are easier and cheaper to make however reduce the flow by 50%. ◦ To produce the most power exhaust should have minimal restriction on the exact flow.  Components: 4 headers and silencer canister (muffler)

◦ Preliminary design ◦ Revised (Final) Design  Goal of runners: Achieve maximum and even flow to all 4 cylinders

◦ Collector Version 1 (3 degree taper) ◦ Collector Version 2 (5 degree taper) ◦ Restrictor Version 1 (for 3 degree collector) ◦ Restrictor Version 2 (for 5 degree collector)

◦ Full Assembly (5 degree collector) ◦ Full Assembly (3 degree collector)

 Analysis ◦ Initial Testing using Solidworks FloXpress ◦ Tests one intake runner at a time ◦ Future testing with time dependent modeling across all four cylinders required for final analysis

System Component Part for Purchase SupplierSizeQuantityPrice EachTotal Price Air scoop/ Restrictor TBD Throttle Body Aluminum (Body) *Reuse from 2013 #109 Car Plenum Aluminum Bare Sheet 6061 T6 online metals.com.063” thick 2 sq ft$7.71$15.42 Intake RunnersAl round tube online metals.com 1.375” OD x.058” wall 6 ft $31.74 Intake Flange Aluminum Bare Sheet 6061 T6 online metals.com.125” thick 1 sq. ft $14.35 Exhaust Headeral round tube TBD 4 Exhaust Silencer/muffler *Reuse from 2013 #109 Car FREE Total Estimated Cost  $60

 Continue Flow Analysis  Ordering materials  Fabrication  Flowbench testing with fabricated intake to verify analysis results  Design of the exhaust once more components of the frame are assembled