Car No.

83

Union College SAE Baja Vehicle Design Report

Matthew Beenen, Jon Wilson and Ned Lincoln Union College Dutchmen Racing
Union College, Schenectady NY

ABSTRACT
An SAE Baja vehicle is a single-seat, all-terrain vehicle powered by a ten horsepower Briggs & Stratton engine. Undergraduate students at Union College from multiple academic fields collaborated to design and manufacture a safe, high-performance, cost-efficient Baja vehicle to serve as a prototype for mass production. The students utilized and refined both financial procedures and engineering analyses to complete this objective while conforming to the prescribed SAE rules.

F.O.S. FEA ft g HDPE ksi L lb Mpa MPH N RPM SAE TIG

factorofsafety finiteelementanalysis feet 2 accelerationduetogravity,m/s highdensitypolyethylene 1000poundspersquareinch,ksi length,m(ft) pound megapascal milesperhour newton rotationsperminute societyofautomotiveengineering tungstoninertgas[welding]

INTRODUCTION
The Union College SAE Baja vehicle was designed as a prototype for manufacture by an outdoor recreation firm. The ideal vehicle is safe, simple and inexpensive: safe for its occupant to be protected during use, simple for a novice rider to operate and maintain, and inexpensive to allow for general production and purchase. Additionally, the vehicle should be attractive to potential buyers in both its visual appearance and performance. These characteristics were considered in design of the following major vehicle systems: frame, drivetrain, flotation, suspension, steering, and braking.

VEHICLE DESIGN
FRAME Objective - The purpose of the frame is to provide a safe environment for the occupant while supporting other vehicle systems. Several steps were taken to ensure this objective was met. Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG) electric arc welding was used to guarantee solid joints and a rigid foundation to support the main components of the vehicle. In addition, extensive finite element stress analysis proved the car would remain intact and protect the driver under the most strenuous of crashes. The frame was designed to comfortably accommodate a sixfoot, three-inch tall driver. Overview of the Design In order to conform to the SAE frame requirements, major redesign was decided upon rather than alteration of the existing frame. For the 2008 season, several positive modifications were made to the frame, including a shortened wheelbase, a seven-inch front-end rake, and new cockpit layout. The front wheels were moved six inches back, reducing the cars turning radius and improving the weight distribution, which had previously been heavily rear biased. In the 2009 season, the team has redesigned the rear section of the frame to accommodate new rear suspension and drivetrain components. Figures 1 and 2 display the frame schematics from 2008 and 2009, respectively. The changes to the rear half of the frame can be seen. The elimination of the solid 1x1 steel slugs in the rear greatly reduces frame weight. 1

LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND SYMBOLS

Figure 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Description 2008FrameSchematic 2009FrameSchematic DrivetrainComponents FoamModel FrontSuspension TrailingLinkCosmos TrailingLinkAssembly RearSuspensionAnalysis TireSelection Page 2 2 4 6 7 8 8 8 10

Table 1 2 Description GearboxSpecifications FloatationCalculations Page 3 5

Symbol A % C.G. CV CVT Definition 2 aream percent centerofgravity constantvelocity[axel] continuouslyvariabletransmission

has a higher strength to weight ratio than the required material. These characteristics maintain the equivalent area moment of inertia and provide a reduction in weight. The rear frame section is made of the same material. The frame was TIG welded using Certanium 72 as filler rod. CosmosWorks, a Finite Element Analysis package, was used to ensure the frame could withstand a significant impact. There were three impact scenarios analyzed each with a 3g impact with a car weight estimation of 600lb; this provided for a 10,700N force. The max stress of any member was 18 ksi, while the yield strength of the steel is 80-90 ksi resulting in a factor of safety between four and five. The impacts were front, side, and rear, applied to the front lateral cross member, the side impact member, and the rear lateral cross member, respectively. Renderings of these data can be found in Appendix A, and confirm that the driver compartment would remain safe in the event of an accident. A more serious, worst case scenario type situation was also analyzed with a 10g force of over 20,000N and resulted in a maximum stress of 62 ksi or 323Mpa. This is lower than the yield strength of 435Mpa. See appendix A for figures. DRIVETRAIN Objective The drivetrain for this years car has been radically overhauled to improve overall car performance and correct vulnerabilities of previous designs. Past drivetrain designs have been double-reduction, openchain designs, based around a CVT, chains, sprockets and a jackshaft mounted in an open sub-frame. The system benefited from simplicity and low cost, at the risk of premature failure due to misalignment and direct exposure to water and dirt. Adhering to recommended wrap angles and center distances for chain drives requires the system to occupy a large volume, thereby increasing frame weight. Reducing the number of chains in the transmission was a logical choice to simultaneously address issues of reliability, performance and size. Additionally, the overall drivetrain ratio was re-examined to optimize top speed and acceleration, and a new chain tensioning system was designed to reduce misalignment. Discussion of Alternatives Reducing the number of exposed chains required some form of self-contained, st lubricated subsystem to take the place of the 1 stage open-chain reduction. The car still operates with a final st drive chain connecting the 1 stage system to the CV drive axles. Several alternatives were evaluated against the following design requirements:

Figure 1: 2008 frame schematic.

Figure 2: 2009 rear frame schematic The decision to increase driver safety resulted in several frame improvements. The side impact members were widened and located higher from the bottom of the frame to better protect the driver from side impacts and ensure that taller drivers remain enclosed by the roll cage at all times. The new design also includes bracing that was not present in the previous frame design. This bracing in the rear eliminates the need for triangulation in the front. In addition to preventing visual obstruction, it also allows the driver to egress more quickly should he or she need to. Supports on the roof of the car and vertical reinforcements in the cockpit made the new frame safer in a rollover situation. At the front of the car, a sub-frame that had supported the pedals, brake master cylinder, and suspension was eliminated, placing the drivers seat farther forward and improving the use of space in the car. Lastly, the steering frame was rebuilt to accommodate a new steering layout and driver position. The frame is made of 1.25 inch 4130 Chrome Moly round tubing with 0.065 inch wall thickness which

1) Increased Reliability Over Open Chains: Protecting the first reduction stage from water and dirt is critical to decreasing wear. The new system must isolate the st components of the 1 reduction stage from the off-road environment. Shafts and bearings must be robust enough to handle the power and torque delivered by the engine-CVT combination. 2) Decreased Component Volume: Reducing the space requirements for drivetrain components allows the frame to be smaller, lighter and more resistant to buckling. 3) Precise Component Alignment: Misalignment in sprockets, chains and bearings dramatically decreases component life. Enclosing components in a machined case reduces the number of components that must be checked for proper alignment, and reduces the chance of misalignment. Alternatives: 1) Sealed, Lubricated Chain Box Enclosing the existing first stage reduction components would eliminate the potential for wear due to exposure to dirt and water. Chain tensioning would remain an issue, however. Additionally, the overall size of the drivetrain would not improve due to required sprocket center distances and diameters. 2) Enclosed Gears Gears are capable of higher operating speeds, load capacity and reliability compared to chains. The major tradeoffs are increased cost and manufacturing time, as the gears must be custom fabricated. Component volume is reduced over chain drives, but weight may not improve. The gains in drivetrain durability and efficiency are significant, however. Toothed belts were not given serious consideration due to reported issues with slipping / skipping from other teams. A helical gear train was ultimately chosen as the st new 1 reduction stage. The potential for car performance improvement outweighed the increase in cost. It is also important to keep in mind that gear manufacturing costs drop rapidly with quantity, so in terms of mass-production of a Baja vehicle, gear drives would not be out of the question and in fact, appear to be the teams best option. Overview of the Design A Comet 790 CVT transmits power from the Briggs & Stratton Intek 305 engine to a custom helical reduction gearbox. The CVT is capable of ratios from 3.38:1 (Low) to 0.54:1 (High) between its two st pulleys. 1 stage drivetrain components must be able to handle both the maximum input torque and RPMs of the secondary CVT pulley. Based on the Briggs & Stratton

specifications for their Intek 305 engine, maximum CVT torque is approximately 47 ft-lb, and maximum CVT speed is 7000 RPM. These occur at opposite ends of the CVT engagement range, low and high, respectively. The CVT secondary drives the integrated pinion-shaft of the custom helical gearset, designed in-house at Union th College. Unfortunately, a 4 Axis indexer was not available in Unions CNC mill in time for in-house production of the gearset. Kamar Industries in Buffalo, New York, was selected for gear cutting. Shaft machining was done in-house. The basic specifications of the gearbox are found below, in table 2 Table 1: Shows basic gearbox and drive specifications
DiametricPitch PressureAngle HelixAngle N,Pinion N,Gear Material MaxInputTorque MaxInputSpeed MinimumFactorofSafety,Bending MinimumFactorofSafety,Wear 12 20 15 16teeth 64teeth 4340HtTrtdStl 50ftlb 7000RPM 2.5 1.2(1000hrs)

Inside the gearbox, an integral 16T pinion-shaft engages a 64T gearwheel, mounted to a 5-bolt hub on the output shaft. An MITCalc design suite was used to aid gear design and analysis, The software references ISO 6336 and AGMA standards to calculate gear strength and wear characteristics. COSMOS FEA was also run on both pinion and gear to check tooth strength. Based on the heat treatment performed on the gears, expected yield strength is at least 150 ksi, giving a F.O.S of 2.5 or greater. All gearbox shafts are supported with precision ball bearings. 40 angular contact bearings handle the thrust loads generated by helical gears, and sealed radial bearings support the shafts on the zero thrust-load ends. The gear housing consists of two symmetrical halves machined from 6061 aluminum, and features grade 8 fasteners and an integral mounting bolt pattern. Oil addition is done via a side-mounted plug, and a breather valve allows for thermal expansion of the air inside the gearbox. Sealing is assured with a nitrile gasket between the two case halves and double-lipped shaft seals at the input and output. High gear speeds and the compact case make splash lubrication a sufficient mechanism for getting oil to the meshing teeth and open angular bearings. The output shaft was designed to carry a bore, 3/16 keyed sprocket. The gearbox output and rear driven sprockets are connected with 420 RK Gold Racing chain, rated at 3300lb, giving a factor of safety of 2.5 - 3 during maximum drivetrain torque. Chain load and 3

F.O.S. range slightly depending on rear sprocket diameter. The final drive shaft is mounted rearward of the gearbox, approximately 15.5 center-to-center from the gearbox output. Driven sprockets from 40 to 54 teeth can be mounted on the shaft hub, offering a wide range of ratios. New for this season is the Polaris Outlaw final drive system. This system integrates the CV shafts with the drive shaft to produce a single, easily serviceable and replaceable alternative to a custom setup. The shafts were lengthened by 3 to accommodate the wider track of the baja car. Figure 3 shows the assembly fitted to the frame with a tensioning mechanism very similar to the factory Polaris design. This system utilizes two large bearings with the drive axle built inside of a cast aluminum housing. This housing, mounted on the bottom with a single pivot axle, is easily tensioned using the upper mounting points. Tensioning is accomplished using a large bracket and bolt between the axle case and the rear of the frame. This allows up to 1.25 of forward/rearward travel. Previous designs used outdated Arctic Cat CV axles that were not only very worn, but were irreplaceable. The inboard female splines on those units are nearly obsolete now and needed to be replaced. Driven sprockets were purchased as blanks from Martin Sprocket. Bolt patterns and major weight removal patterns were cut using Unions abrasive waterjet. COSMOS analysis of the sprockets showed that by using these patterns, sprocket weight was almost halved with no significant loss in strength. The sprockets are mounted to the final drive system using the integrated bolt pattern and tapped holes. This integrated sprocket mount on the hub eliminates any trouble with alignment and any issues with slippage and the previous need for a custom axle.

Design Advantages Starting with a race-proven drivetrain from last season, this years improvements focus mainly on maintainability and integrating more modern systems. This will not only offer better performance and efficiency, but will also ensure that if a part of the system fails replacement parts will be readily available. Since only one chain is present in the new drivetrain, the new rear frame is smaller and more compact than any previous Union College Baja car. Cantilevered CVT and sprocket shafts in the gearbox make safety guards easier to construct, and more effective against the water intrusion that can cause CVT belt slippage. Chain tensioning is much more robust than in previous years, and a wide selection of chain ratios is available. The drivetrain is easier to work on, adjust and protect compared to previous years. Higher speed and acceleration is expected due to higher transmission efficiency, and the risk of chain failure has been more than halved by replacing previously used #40 chain with a 420 racing chain. This system is designed for at least 1000 hours of operation before the gears should be inspected for wear. Lastly, the drivetrain offers a continous range of overall ratios from 57.5:1 to 9.2:1. Such a wide range makes the drivetrain well-suited to off-road driving; one system can provide both a 30MPH top speed and over 800 ft-lb of axle torque at takeoff.

FLOTATION AND PROPULSION Objective - The goal of the flotation system is to provide the buoyant force necessary to keep the vehicle and driver afloat in an aquatic environment. This must hold true at both a horizontal orientation and up to at least a 30-degree roll situation. While the car is floating, the rear wheels function as the means of propulsion, with the treads of the tires acting as paddle wheels. In the past, it was believed that fenders close to the tires were necessary for propulsion. We learned last year that thick mud can easily render these fenders not only useless, but harmful to the drivetrain. We have therefore decided against fabricating fenders tight to the tire. This is covered more carefully in the flotation section. Design Requirements - The flotation system must first and foremost support the weight of the car and driver when in the water. Second, it is important that the flotation system keep the rear wheels at an optimum height in the water without sacrificing ground clearance on land. Safety was considered the first priority over all other design requirements. The flotation and body should not impede a drivers ability to exit the cockpit in fewer than five seconds. There should be easy access to all the kill switches and there should not be sharp edges. 4

Figure 3: All major drivetrain components are present except for the engine. The chain side gearbox case has been hidden to show internal detail. A 10T/48T sprocket combination is shown.

The foam must be durable and protected from debris the car may encounter during routine use. The flotation system should be easily removable for repair and maintenance. The flotation material on the bottom of the car should not interfere with the full travel of the suspension, and the front and rear approach angles should be kept as high as possible. Finally, the flotation system must be integrated into the body of the car to produce a professional look to the vehicle, keeping in mind that the bottom should be streamlined to reduce drag in the water. Discussion of Alternatives Previous designs employed a flotation system involving Polystyrene billets. While this foam was successful in floating the vehicle for a short period of time, its physical characteristics proved ineffective over extended testing and abuse. The nature of the Polystyrene material caused the foam to hold water and weigh down the car. In addition, its fragile makeup did not withstand the rocky, unforgiving conditions of off-road terrain. For these reasons air filled pontoons were decided against, as a puncture would render the system useless. This years system is comprised of foam side pods and a block underneath the car, which attaches to the frame. Rather than using three separate blocks, use of one solid piece makes installation and removal easy. A foam piece underneath the drivetrain and behind the car adds additional support. Durable, water resistant Polyethylene foam was chosen. Polyethylene is a closed cell, rigid structure foam product. In addition, great emphasis was placed on optimal ground clearance. Previous designs performed exceptionally in the water, but lacked the necessary ride height to excel on land. As a result, calculations were performed to place the car slightly lower in the water, at a level where it propels efficiently and safely, but does not sacrifice clearance on land. See Appendix B for calculations and analysis. Overview of the Design - The final design was evaluated with safety being the most important factor followed by performance and styling. The car is designed to float in both calm water and adverse conditions with a driver having a maximum weight of 220 lbs. The foam planks used for the vehicle are particularly suitable for flotation. The system is comprised of Polyethylene foam commonly used in industrial applications. Two inch planks were heat treated together to form larger thicknesses. One cubic foot of foam will provide 60 pounds of buoyant force before considering the foams own weight. It will not hold water and will not lose its buoyant characteristics if

punctured. The foam is also resistant to chemicals and heat. Table 2: Shows calculations and figures for flotation design.
Foam Bouyancyoffoam(lb/sqft) CenterofGravity(infromfirewall) SurfaceAreaforwardofC.G. SurfaceAreabehindC.G. TotalSurfaceArea Distribution Front(%) Back(%) Volume DepthBelowFrame(ft) VolumeofFoambelowwaterline(ft^2) Distribution(ft^3) Front Back WeightDistribution MaximumDriverWeight(lb) Front(lb) Front(%) Back(lb) Back(%) Results FoamtobeplacedbehindC.G. Foamtobebelowwaterline(ft^3) 58 13 7.58 9.66 17.24 44 56 0.667 11.499 5.056 6.443 220.00 260.00 40.63 380.00 59.38 10.24 11.499

Buoyancy foam is located under the drivers compartment, under the engine compartment and rear suspension components, behind the engine compartment similar to a rear bumper, and on the sides of the drivers compartment. The foam in the side pods is the most essential part of the flotation system. The side pods not only provide a majority of the buoyant force but also provide transverse stability. The side pods allow the car to easily recover from a 30 degree induced tilt from either side. This is accomplished by keeping the buoyant force as close to vertical with the center of gravity even in a rolling situation. Submerging 3 the side pods in a roll will help do this. A total of 11.5 ft of foam is incorporated into the flotation system, which has been designed with the center of buoyancy directly under the center of gravity of the car. All figures from calculations are shown to the left, in table 2. The metacenter is found directly above both the center of mass of the car and the center of buoyancy. This is the point of pivot when the vehicle heels to one side or the other. During the analysis it was discovered that the tires also provide a buoyant force. The tires buoyant force will be considered a factor of safety incorporated into the design. Figure 4 shows a SolidWorks model of the undercarriage foam section.

contact patch in any driving situation. The front and rear suspension must work as a unit to keep the tires on the ground as well as possible so that the drivetrain can continue moving the car with maximum efficiency and the driver can comfortably control the car. Discussion of alternatives The main options considered for the front suspension were a few variations on the double a-arm suspension setup. These included parallel a-arms, un-parallel a-arms, equal length and unequal length. These offer various pros and cons. The main goal is to keep the tires planted firmly on the ground in all driving conditions. To do this, the tire and wheel need to gain negative camber in a rolling situation, keeping the tire flat on the ground. This leaves only a limited number of options, the best being unparallel double a-arms. For the rear suspension several alternatives were considered. These included independent unequal A-arms, trailing link with locators, and swing arm designs. A rear swing arm consists of a solid axle which is connected to the wheel at either end. This design is strong and simple but yields a combination of poor ground clearance, unruly camber change and high unsprung mass, all of which make it less than ideal. Independent unequal length A-arms are widely accepted as one of the best alternatives for off-road suspension due to the fact that camber change can be nearly eliminated. A-arms can provide large amounts of travel and usually match the front suspension set up which is almost always an A-arm type. A-arm systems can add unwanted unsprung mass to the suspension and are prone to failure due to the number of parts involved. The suspension type chosen for this vehicle is a trailing link with locating links. This simple design is comprised of a pair of arms (trailing links) which are connected to the chassis just behind the driver on the lower part of the rear roll hoop. These extend outward and back to the position of the output shaft where it connects to the drive axle. Additionally, there are two locating links attached to the hub end of each trailing links. These links can be adjusted so that the system acts similarly to a double aarm system, geometrically. A 2006 Polaris Outlaw 500 hub and bearing carrier is integrated into the end of the trailing link. This accommodates the use of the Outlaw final drive as well as more standard wheel sizes. The dampers are connected to the arm and mounted to the roll cage above. This system is ideal because it provides a combination of significant ground clearance, relatively low unsprung mass, simplicity, and better access to drivetrain area. Overview of the design The vehicle features front unequal length A-arms that attach to the frame with a rake of 15 degrees from the horizontal. This provides better transmission of shock forces when the vehicle lands after jumps and when approaching steep inclines. 6

Figure 4: Foam underbody model To ensure that the system is durable, it has been fitted with an HDPE (high density polyethylene) shell. Not only is this shell extremely durable, but being smooth as it is, it will greatly reduce drag caused by the un-sealed foam cells on the surface of a cut. An aluminum angle sub-frame that bolts directly to the main frame supports the entire system. With this flotation system bolted to the car securely, an individual is able to stand on the flotation pods with no risk of harm to the vehicle. This frame makes the system both structurally sound and easy to remove should repairs or modifications need to be made. Propulsion is a key part of this vehicles design. With the tread of the tires providing the thrust, the car is able to move and steer in the water. Using fenders mounted above the rear wheels, the car is able to convert the energy created by the water being kicked up by the tires into a useable amount of thrust. These fenders are constructed of HDPE, a durable, lightweight alternative to aluminum of fiberglass. In addition to helping with propulsion, the fenders help guard the engine from the inevitable splashing that the tires create. Steering is done using the steering wheel. While other methods can be used, the added complexity and opportunity for failure far outweigh the benefits. The shifting of the drivers weight can also be used to aid in cornering. With more of the outside rear tire/wheel in the water, the turn is completed more quickly. Sometimes overlooked by previous teams, flotation and water maneuverability are very important to performing well not only in a competition setting, but in a recreational setting as well. SUSPENSION Objective The objective of the suspension system is to provide the vehicle with the means to keep all four wheels planted on the ground with the maximum tire

The front shock absorption is supplied through two independent Fox Air Sox 2.0 shocks that have 8.5 inches of travel. Opting for a non-coil-over setup provides significant weight reduction compared to a more conventional coil spring design and increased travel. The front spindles come from a Polaris Predator ATV. They were chosen for their high strength-to-weight ratio based on their cast aluminum design: using a prefabricated spindle allows for easy brake and steering integration. The A-arms are fabricated with 1 inch 4130 Chrome Moly tubing, which is a strong, lightweight, and workable material. This adds durability to the suspension, thus improving the reliability and safety of the vehicle. A finite element analysis was run in CosmosWorks with the same force as the rear and the 1 inch tubing proved to be more than adequate with a factor of safety of well over 1 for both the front and the rear. The ball and helm joints are attached to the tubing using tube ends of their respective diameters and thread sizes. These A-arms can be seen in Figure 5.

strength because it is not required to transmit forces to the shock. This led to mounting the upper A-arms 5 inches above the lower A-arms using heim joints instead of bushings. This allows for easy camber adjustment. Like the lower A-arms, the uppers also are bent to provide a more level mounting angle with the spindle. The ball joints are mounted on the spindle 1 inch further apart than the mounting points on the frame to reduce the overall camber change throughout the working arc of the suspension. The shocks are connected as close to the spindle as possible to help decrease body roll and stress on the arms. The Fox Air Shox 2.0 provides gas pressure specialization that is not available in a standard coil spring. They permit specific pressure adjustment based on the weight distribution of the car and the desired spring rate. This allows the suspension to compensate for the additional weight of the driver while still providing the user a comfortable ride over rough terrain. The shocks have been re-valved to accommodate the approximate 128 pounds per wheel sprung weight estimate. The vehicle obtains a maximum unloaded ground clearance of 14 inches without flotation and 10 inches when the flotation is attached. The rear suspension uses a trailing link design and has many positive characteristics, one of which is the significant weight savings over the alternatives. The links are constructed from the same 1-inch diameter, 0.065-inch wall thickness Chrome Moly tubing that the front a-arms are made of. This provides more than adequate strength and durability without the added volume and bulk of similar aluminum trailing links. A simple and effective system was designed and built with minimizing unsprung weight in mind. Two symmetrical parts were TIG welded together to form the arm portion of the link. Additional tabs and mounting brackets are found at the hub end of the arm. The members were modeled using SolidWorks 3-D solid modeling software. FEA analysis was then conducted using CosmosWorks modeling software. The members were subjected to shock loading of 90,000n assuming a bottomed out shock and very high impact on a single trailing link. The member was also subjected to a simulated 4 G rear impact, which could occur if another car hit the vehicle at full speed. Both of these modes of loading produced a factor of safety in excess of 3. The stress plot of the shock loading analysis can be seen in Figure 6:

Figure 5: View of front suspension The front suspension setup was designed and modified from starting parameters based on the cars ride height and track width. Such a methodology makes certain the car is as stable and efficient as possible. The lower A-arms are designed with force transmission as their main priority. Thus they are the main structural members of the front suspension. The lower a-arms are th further reinforced using a 1/8 inch plate to not only strengthen the part, but to also provide a flat, solid mounting point for the front shocks. Their connection with the frame is made through two unidirectional bushings for rigidity. The ball joint that is used to connect the lower A-arm to the spindle has a limited amount of travel. To maximize the cars suspension capabilities and travel, a bend of 20 degrees was placed in the A-arm to allow for a more horizontal relationship with the spindle mounting point. This ensures that the travel of the front suspension is not hindered by the limited travel of the ball joints. A similar approach was taken when designing the upper A-arms; however adjustability was considered more important than

figure 8. Appendix B contains a figure showing the car in a hard left turn, demonstrating how the rear suspension reacts and keeps maximum tire contact with the ground. Not only does this increase the stability, it increases the tire patch on the ground, increasing cornering ability.

Figure 6: Cosmos Stress plot with 90000N shock loading and deformation scale of 22. Max Stress = 20KSI The locator links were constructed using the same tubing mentioned above, with ultra high-strength heim joints at each end. These allow for smooth, easy travel and up to 2.5 inches of length adjustability. This allows the team to carefully tune camber change and track width using only a single crescent wrench. This member, in addition to the wheel, hub and locator links, constitutes the entire unsprung weight of the rear suspension. The links are shown installed on the chassis in figure 7:

Figure 8: Rear suspension shown at full droop and full bump To compensate for excessive body roll, the dampers used are highly adjustable Fox 2.0 Airshox. These dampers use internal nitrogen gas pressure to determine spring rate as opposed to conventional steel springs. The stock nitrogen pressure in these shocks is 200 psi. The necessary pressure to achieve 8 inches of ride height with all flotation components has been estimated 180 psi. This is based on gross vehicle and driver weight as well as expected fore/aft weight distribution in the chassis. This adjustable damper set up is absolutely necessary with the trailing link suspension and allows the user to adjust ride characteristics at will. Another benefit of the trailing link system is the ground clearance that can be achieved. As shown in Figure 1 the closest component to the ground at full droop is the end of the trailing link. This is an improvement over double a-arms where a drop angle can occupy otherwise free ground clearance. STEERING Objective - The main objectives of the steering system are to provide the driver with an accurate, predictable, and reliable method for navigating a Baja vehicle over rough terrain. A small turning radius provides the driver with a responsive and controllable ride. The rack and pinion system is a proven method of steering that is direct and reliable. The tie rods must be protected from impacts and move with the two A-arms while the wheel stops limit the steering radius and reduce wear on the system. In addition, the steering system does not interfere with the suspension, allowing for optimal negotiation of off-road conditions. Discussion of Alternatives - The steering linkage system had two options. The first option was to place the tie rod attachment point in front of the spindle, and the second 8

Figure 7: rear trailing link members on chassis. Most standard trailing link suspension designs have one major drawback. The angle of the tire relative to the trailing link never changes. This means that excessive body roll will effectively induce unwanted camber change at both wheels. The suspension designed and built for the 2008 season eliminates this issue by using two locator links on each side. Instead of using a bushing and hinge type attachment to the frame for the trailing link, an ultra high-strength heim joint has been used. As stated earlier, this allows adjustment of static and dynamic camber change. A demonstration of camber change (gaining negative camber) is shown in

option was to place it on the back side of the spindle. The tie rods are attached to the rear of the spindle to provide more protection from impact and easy integration into the Polaris knuckle. Overview of the Design - A 14 inch rack and pinion system was selected for the steering of the vehicle. This industry-proven steering method is reliable and was chosen to ensure the safety of the driver. The position of the steering rack was carefully positioned for minimal movement over the suspensions entire arc. This was accomplished by modeling all the components in SolidWorks. This gave a base for optimizing under both bump and droop conditions. The wheels were aligned forward and the displacement of the rack was measured at both extremes. This procedure was repeated iteratively for a matrix of potential steering rack positions. By following this procedure the position of minimum bump steer was determined. The three-dimensional modeling programs SolidWorks and COSMOSWorks, and a two-dimensional modeling program, Working Model, were used to perform a stress analysis of the tie rods. This test determined that the rods will endure expected conditions. An axial compression force of 1200 lbs. was applied, giving a factor of safety of 3. Analysis of the buckling force also showed that with this design, neither buckling nor axial failure will be an issue. Design Characteristics - In order to properly achieve the main objectives, numerous technical aspects were considered. Camber and toe setting were other important issues addressed. The camber is adjusted to a slight inward, or negative, tilt of two degrees from static ride height. This setting optimizes the tires contact with the road surface, maximizing steering feel, response, tracking, and tire life. Through threaded rod ends and heim joints, the system is adjustable to optimize steering geometry and performance. To enhance the turning radius, the wheel base was minimized. With a shorter wheel base and wide track the car is both stable and steers as directly as possible. BRAKING Objective - The brakes are one of the most important safety systems on the vehicle. The car uses three disc brakes, one on each front wheel and one on the rear axle, to bring the vehicle to a quick and safe stop regardless of weather conditions or topography. Discussion of Alternatives - A braking system that acts on all four wheels was chosen for optimum safety and performance. Two methods for accomplishing this objective were considered. Both options made use of dual front disc brakes, but the rear setup could vary. The first option with regard to the rear system wasthe

use of a single disc brake located inboard of the wheels. It would act to stop the rear tires by braking the final drive axle. The second alternative was locating the disc brakes at each rear wheel. The first option was chosen because it simplifies the rear trailing link design and fully utilizes the capabilities of the Outlaw 500 final drive system. Additionally, it converts the rear brakes from previously unsprung weight to now sprung weight. With newer, pre-fabricated CV axles and hub, a single rear disc brake can be used without worrying about the ability of the axles to withstand the added torque, similar to the Polaris Outlaw 500 ATV. Overview of the Design - The braking system uses two CNC master cylinders of the same bore size to supply hydraulic pressure to the brake calipers. All three calipers are driven by a 5/8 inch bore. The front two share one cylinder while the rear has its own A balancing bar at the pedal allows for the allocation of front and rear braking pressures. The dual cylinders and reservoirs are easy to access, providing ease of monitoring and maintaining brake fluid levels. The brake calipers are connected to the master cylinders by a combination of both hard line and flexible braided brake line. The steel braided lines are used for their flexibility and resistance to wear. Thus, they are located in sections where suspension travel occurs. Both the hard lines and braided lines are protected from possible damage because they are placed inside the roll envelope. The independent front and rear brakes systems ensure that there should always be at least one mode of braking in the case of a line or caliper failure. Additionally, the system is properly sealed such that it will remain fully functional in the event of a collision or roll. The disk brakes, calipers, and caliper mounts are made by Polaris. The rear calipers are designed for an Outlaw 500; a vehicle of similar size and weight while the front calipers can be found on a 2006 Polaris Predator. The spindles are also from the Predator and were chosen for their availability and proven design strengths. Utilizing parts already in production reduces cost and lessens the cost of repair for the end user, should something break. The tie rod mounts, and caliper mounts were designed and manufactured in-house. These parts are composed of 4130 steel for strength. Design Characteristics - It was deemed critical that the front and rear brakes lock up at the same rates. This would maximize deceleration, prevent front-end dive, and offer the best vehicle control. All brake calipers and discs are mounted to factory mounts on a Predator ATV and an Outlaw ATV. This is for a couple of reasons. The first is that it ensures that the pieces are designed to withstand a very significant force. The second is that it 9

makes replacement and maintenance much easier should a part need to be replaced. A brake fluid analysis of the different bore sizes of master cylinders was completed. From this analysis, the best combination of braking forces for the front and rear brakes was selected. TIRE SELECTION The rear tires are a 25 outer diameter by 10 wide ITP Mud Lite model mounted on aluminum rims. They are the lightest six-ply rated tires available which give the durability needed to withstand rugged terrain. The large outer diameter of the tire provides an increase in ground clearance which is vital in traversing off-road conditions. The treads provide ample water propulsion when mounted correctly, which means the tires are used in their proper orientation for optimum traction on rough terrain. These tires were also chosen for their ability to perform in mud, a clear requirement when off-road in anything but a very dry terrain. The front tires are Maxxis Razr tires mounted on 10 aluminum rims. Aluminum wheels were chosen for their durability with minimal weight. Minimizing the amount of unsprung weight on the car is a major goal when designing suspension components and saving weight anywhere possible allows for added strength elsewhere. The Razr features a wide tread pattern to reduce tread squirm and the sipes tighten up under acceleration and braking forces. These sipes are small cracks in the tread, designed to move water away from under the tire quickly. Under a sliding force, they lock together and prevent the treads from shifting. These front tires have a less aggressive tread pattern than the rear tires. A 10-inch wide rear tire was chosen for its capabilities in mud and water. This size was chosen over the available 12-inch model to reduce the amount of friction the car must overcome in cornering. Without a rear differential, the outside tire must drag across the ground, or break loose in aggressive cornering. The ITP mudlite offers an excellent middle ground, as proven in the mud pit of the 2007 competition. The chosen tires, both front and rear, are shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9: Rear Mud Lite tire & Maxxis Razr

CONCLUSION The Union College Mini Baja vehicle has been designed to appeal to customers and manufacturers by effectively meeting the initial objectives and offering a safe, affordable recreational vehicle to fill an otherwise empty market segment. The current frame yields high factors of safety and drive comfort. The drivetrain was improved upon to further optimize the vehicles performance and enhance reliability and ease of maintenance. The flotation system has been revised and lightened to effectively traverse water without sacrificing land maneuverability. The steering systems design yields a responsive and controllable car with no noticeable bump steer. The braking system affords maximum overall braking force on the front and rear wheels. The suspension has been designed to provide ten inches of ground clearance with the flotation, ample for nearly any off-road terrain. The tires were selected to run on nearly any terrain. The resulting vehicle is safe, attractive, reliable, economical and fun to drive.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Brad Bruno - Union College Mechanical Engineering Faculty Paul Tompkins Union College Machine Shop Technician James Howard - Union College Machine Shop Technician Roland Pierson - Union College Machine Shop Technician Quality Drive System Alhambra CA, Parts Distributor

REFERENCES
1. http://students.sae.org/competitions/bajasae/ (3/05/09) 2. http://parts.polarisind.com/Browse/Browse.asp (3/05/09) 3. http://www.hoffcocomet.com/ (3/05/09) 4. http://www.martinsprocket.com (3/05/09) 5. Callister, William. Material Science and Engineering th an Introduction. 7 edition, 2006

CONTACTS
Matt Beenen beenenm@union.edu Jon Wilson wilsonj@union.edu

10

Appendix A:

10G Frontal Impact (29430N) Max Stress = 62 KSI

4G Side Impact 10700 N. Maximum Compressive Axial Stress = 16,140 PSI Maximum Tensile Stress = 7,133 PSI

11

Rear Impact, 4G 10700 N Max Stress (compression) = 18,330 PSI

Rear Impact 125000 N Max Deformation (buckling) = .0006m Deformation scale = 181.694

12

Static Load 90,000 N Max Deformation (deformation scale 22.6)= .0021m

Static Load 90,000 N Max Stress = 20.5 KSI

13

Appendix B: Suspension Roll Analysis

14