Download presentation
Published byJeffry Wade Modified over 8 years ago
1
Design of an Off-Road Front Suspension and Steering System
OFF-ROAD INNOVATIONS Design of an Off-Road Front Suspension and Steering System GROUP M2: ANDREW SNELGROVE CALVIN HOLLOWAY JEREMY SHEPHERD KATE PRICE
2
Outline The SAE Baja Competition Problem Definition The Current System
Suspension System Validation Steering System Validation Design Methodology Design Targets Moving Forward Management Plan
3
The SAE Baja Competition
The Baja SAE Series is an international competition testing the limits of off-road vehicles designed and built by engineering students from around 100 universities each year.
4
Introduction to SAE Baja Competition
Suspension and Traction
5
Introduction to SAE Baja Competition
Rock Crawl Mud Pit
6
Introduction to SAE Baja Competition
Design Competition
7
Problem Definition Off-Road Innovations’ goal is to develop a front suspension and steering system for the Memorial Baja team that will: Provide more driver room Improve ground clearance Absorb frontal impact forces Maintain safety, reliability and low weight
8
2013 Memorial Baja Steering
The Previous System 2013 Memorial Baja Steering 2013 Memorial Baja Suspension
9
Steering System Validation
Manual Rack and Pinion Pro: Lightweight and Robust Con: More Effort to Steer
10
Steering System Validation
Recirculating Ball Gearbox with Pitman Arm Pro: Less Effort to Steer Con: Complicated and no driver feedback
11
Steering System Validation
Electric Power-Assisted Hydraulic Power-Assisted Pro: Less Effort to Steer Con: Complicated and Heavy
12
Steering System Validation
Criteria Rack and Pinion Recirculating Ball Gear Hydraulic Power-Assisted Electric Power-Assisted Score Weighted Score Cost (0.1) 5 1 4 0.8 2 0.4 Weight (0.2) 1.5 4.5 1.35 0.45 1.2 Manufacturability (0.2) 2.5 0.5 0.1 0.3 Performance (0.35) 0.375 3.5 0.525 Maintenance (0.1) 0.6 0.15 Weighted Total 4.275 3.55 1.625 2.725 Final Selection: Rack and Pinion
13
Suspension System Validation
To validate that the chosen system was the best choice for our application we compared alternatives using a decision matrix. Alternatives considered include: Swing Arm Double Wishbone MacPherson Strut Trailing Links Swing Axle Pro: Robust Con: Heavy Double A-arm Pro: Large Motion Range Con: Complexity
14
Suspension System Validation
Trailing Arms Pro: Compact Con: Difficult Mounting MacPherson Strut Pro: Simplistic Con: Limited Range
15
Suspension System Validation
Criteria Swing Axle Double A-arms MacPherson Strut Trailing Link Score Weighted Score Cost (0.1) 1 0.1 2 0.2 4 0.4 Durability (0.2) 0.8 5 3 0.6 Weight (0.2) Manufacturability (0.15) 0.3 0.75 0.15 Performance (0.35) 0.7 1.75 1.05 0.35 Maintenance (0.1) Weighted Total 4.9 2.95 2.5 Final Selection: Double A-arms
16
Design Methodology
17
Design Methodology Ackerman Steering Track Wheelbase
18
Design Targets Design Parameters Previous Design Clarification Value
Static Camber -4 deg Camber Change -6 deg Steering Axis Inclination 8 deg Scrub Radius 30 mm Static Toe 0 deg Toe Change (over travel) Static Caster Angle 3 deg 6 deg Leans into Turns Caster Change (over travel) Track 1350 mm Wheel Base 1558 mm 1450 mm Improves Handling Static Ride Height 230 mm 281 mm Raising Ground Clearance Vertical Wheel Travel (Jounce) 152.4 mm 200 mm Shock Compression Vertical Wheel Travel (Rebound) 100 mm Recessional Travel 0mm 51 mm Absorbs Frontal Impact Unsprung Weight 16.5 Kg
19
Moving Forward Next steps include: Finalizing geometry
Generating Models Simulation and FEA
20
Management Plan To mitigate the risks to driver safety and project completion: Closely follow SAE standards for the Baja SAE series Monitoring progress with respect to planned milestones
21
References
22
Questions? More information is also available at:
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.