Car Number #47

Final Design Report

Bikash Jyoti Biswas Team Manager
Copyright 2014 BAJA SAE

Abstract
The SAEINDIA Baja competition is held annually in order to provide engineering students an opportunity to design and build a competitive off-road vehicle. This team Enigmatic Warriors Baja Racing focused primarily on a major redesign of a previous year vehicle, by determining it strengths and weaknesses through design reviews and field-testing. The team improved the following subsystems, identified as the weakest components of the car: drivetrain, steering, brakes, and suspension. Design efforts focused on reducing weight from last year, improving aesthetic appeal, optimizing geometrical aspects, and manoeuvrability beginning with the end in mind. The prototype meets SAE competition criteria and provides the future manufacturer with a proven product that is worth selling. All systems outlined in the report explain the purpose for chosen designs, specific design objectives, and also improvements over last years vehicle. An aspect of this competition is to compose a design documentation package that creates an overview of the vehicles construction elements.

design than last years vehicle. Since the 2014 car weighed around 380 kg, the target weight for this year was approximately 270 kg. The second goal was simple manufacturability and servicing of the vehicle. From the mistakes and errors learned from last year, another goal this year was to keep the design simple and easy to assemble. If a part was to fail such as the A-arm, the team would ideally have extra part manufactured to replace the failed part quickly. The fourth objective of the car was the overall performance of the vehicle. The performance of last years car was rather sluggish. Therefore, a lightweight design, which was our main goal, will improve the overall performance of the vehicle by increasing the power-to-weight ratio. All of these goals have been met by the end of the 2008 school year. By setting these goals from day one, Enigmatic Warriors Baja Racing feels that they will be very competitive in the 2014 SAE Baja Competition.

Chassis & Frame

The design of the Baja frame is structured around the safety rules established by Baja. The rules constrain the design of the frame in two main ways. First, the rules specify a minimum strength and thickness of the material used in the creation of the crucial support members of the frame. The rules also restrict the geometry of the shape of the frame in many ways. These rules were referenced many times in the material selection process, the overall design geometry, and all additional modifications to the original designs. The base of the frame was created by the suspension subsystems and drivetrain department. The frame was then designed around this basic frame in order to accommodate both the front and rear suspension. An out to in approach was taken as the primary consideration. This is not the traditional method of designing a frame, but was necessary due to the ranging heights and weights of team members while still ensuring capability in the suspension as well as keeping in mind the drivetrain integration with the frame. .

Introduction
The purpose of designing and manufacturing a Baja car was to create a prototype recreational off-road vehicle that could provide a fun, safe, and reliable experience for a weekend offroad vehicle enthusiast. In order to accomplish this task, different design aspects of a Baja vehicle were analysed, and certain elements of the car were chosen for specific focus. There are many facts to an off-road vehicle, such as the chassis, suspension, steering, drive-train, and braking, all of which require thorough design concentration. The points of the car that the Enigmatic Warriors Baja Racing decided to specifically focus on were the chassis, drive-train, and suspension. The most time and effort went into designing and implementing these components of the vehicle because it was felt that they dramatically effect the off-road driving experience. During the entire design process, consumer interest through innovative, inexpensive, and effective methods were always the primary goal.

Design Consideration
Frame Stiffness The suspension is designed to keep all of the tires on the ground when subjected to the dynamic loads of the vehicle. To do so, the frame is usually assumed to be a rigid structure.

Design Criteria
For the 2014 SAEINDIA Baja competition, Enigmatic Warriors Baja Racing planned to completely redesign the vehicle. The team compiled four main goals. The first goal was a lighter Page 1 of 8

Because this assumption is made, if the frame in actuality, is not a rigid structure, un-anticipated forces and degraded suspension performance can occur. This can lead to either lost vehicle performance in the best case or total frame failure in the worst. That being said, most frame designs walk the fine line between stiff enough to handle the loads yet light enough to deliver good performance. This is where most of the time spent on a design goes. Furthermore, due to the frame requirements set down by the rules committee, the frame should be stiff enough to withstand design loads so that it does not fail if crashed.

Analysis
Simulated loads within a computer program were placed on the frame model of the roll cage at critical points to simulate the amount of force that the vehicle would undergo from its own weight and a driver in the event of a rollover, side impact, front crash and other loading conditions acting on the frame due to the subsystems integrated in the chassis. To conduct a finite element analysis of the chassis, an existing chassis design was uploaded from the computer program SolidWorks to a finite element analysis program known as Ansys. The loading performed by the Ansys FEA software modelled the boundary conditions for the various loading conditions. The weight of the vehicle itself was assumed to be 250 kg. Then 100 kg more were added to the vehicle weight to simulate the weight of a driver. The combined values were used to model the loads exerted on the roll cage.The various loading scenarios along with the output of FOS and displacement is listed in Table 2. See figure 2 for analysis. Loading condition Front impact Side Impact Roll Over Front Bump Load 10 g 10 g 2.5 g 3g 3g Displacement 7.23 mm 12.77 mm 6.22 mm 3.7 mm 2.9 mm FOS 1.89 1.79 1.75 2.6 2.8

Material Selection
As for material selection is concerned the basic parameter on which the selection was done based on rules, strength, availability and cost. These above mentioned parameters restricted us to a very narrow choice over material. So, keeping in mind all the necessary parameters AISI 1018 was chosen as it provided strength advantage over other options available considering the price and availability factor. Comparison is shown in Table 1. Tensile Carbon Content Strength IS 3074 430 Mpa 0.16 .020 % AISI 1018 440 Mpa 0.14 0 .20 % ASTM 4130 690 Mpa 0.23 - 0.33 % Table 1. : Material Comparison Material Cost 180/kg 120/kg 750/kg

Design
The main components of the frame are broken into two groups: the chassis and the roll cage. The roll cage is made up of the RRH, RHO, FBM, LC. The chassis is made up of LBD, LFS, SIM, FAB, and FLC..

Rear Bump

Table 2. Analysis results

Suspension Subsystem
Objective

After getting the basic points and their dimensions from suspension subsystem and drivetrain were plotted and the design constraints from the given rules along with aesthetics and ergonomics considerations were plotted in terms of points. Now the main work was to connect the dots which will produce the basic foundation of our EWBR V3.0 chassis. The range of the variables of the chassis was also considered which provided flexibility to design the chassis based on strength and visual appeal as both are important. Triangulations were adopted which helped us to achieve both strength and weight reduction as compared to other ways of stress distribution. The design was iterated based on best possible ways to take advantage of the variables and come closer to the goal for the design. Manufacturing was also considered as jigs and fixtures were required for producing the exact design from paper to metal. Reducing the complexity of manufacturing was a challenging work and required many minute iteration to the joints and the joining of the pipes. This was achieved by using Solidworks to create the weldment profiles and thus creating profiles for each pipe so that they can be notched and the design can be transferred to the fabrication process to produce the exact dimensions. See figure 1 for the chassis design.

The objective of the suspension is to improve the stability and comfort of the vehicle through a variety of terrain. The main focus of the EWBR V3.0 suspension was to create an overall good performing suspension system that could perform in all terrains equally.

Design
Overall Suspension The static ride of the vehicle was designed to be 13inches high. Once a driver is positioned in the vehicle for operation, the suspension will sit at an optimal 12 inch ride height. This height was chosen for a combination of desirable ground clearance while maintaining a low centre of gravity. This combination was necessary to keep this off-road vehicle versatile in all terrain. The ground clearance gives the vehicle the ability to overcome high rocks, hills, and bumps. The lower centre of gravity will give it an ability to handle better in tight manoeuvring situations at high rates of speed. Front Suspension The front A-arms were designed to be as long as possible to get a suspension ratio of 2:1, improve suspension response,

Page 2 of 8

and to have the greatest vehicle stability. These A-arms give the vehicle a front track width of 55 inches. The suspension ratio signifies the number of inches the wheel travels vertically compared to the number of inches the shock compresses. The 2:1 ratio was chosen because it gave the best combination of a soft and stiff ride. The ratio is able to do this through shock efficiency. As the suspension ratio gets closer to 1:1 the more effective the shock, creating a stiffer ride. As the suspension ratio surpasses 2:1, the shock effectiveness gets exponentially smaller, giving the A-arms the ability to move more freely, creating a softer ride. The front suspension design is shown in figure 3. The upright and hub assembly were from an ATV which was used off the shelf and integrated into our design. We considered it as fixed points for the suspension geometry and then the remaining geometry was created. We optimized our geometry to have camber gain per degree of roll and the ratio is kept close to 1:1 which provide better stability and traction for the vehicle. To aid the steering ability of the vehicle a castor of 5 degrees is incorporated into the design. An anti-dive angle of 6 degrees for the front is maintained to have better stability during deceleration. The graphs for roll vs camber and camber vs bump is shown in graph 1 and graph 2. The shock has been designed according to the inputs of the geometry where the travel and the angle of the shock was decided. Now according to the motion ratio, suspension ratio and loading the spring was designed along with the damper which has adjustable length as well as stiffness. The front assembly featured our innovation which is an anti-roll bar system having a simple linkage using bell crank rather than conventional sway bar or torsion bar. The ratio is 2:1 which provided an equal distribution of force between both the wheels while cornering and maintaining maximum contact patch with the ground. The details for the front suspension is given in Table 3. Static Camber 2.63 degrees Castor 6 degrees Toe 12 mm Motion ratio 0.6 Spring rate 93.64 lb/in Table 3. Front suspension Specification Rear Suspension The rear suspension was more difficult to design, on the basis that the drive-train components needed to be integrated into it. The rear suspension was designed to accommodate a slightly lesser track width than that of the front suspension. The rear track width was designed to be 53 inches wide and create a slight over-steer in tight cornering situations, which allows for easier manoeuvrability at higher speeds. Many of the same principles were utilized in designing the rear suspension as in the front suspension. The objective and reason for keeping the trailing arm as long as possible is to reduce the change of wheelbase. The 2:1 ratio was also maintained in the rear suspension as it was in the front suspension, for the same reasons. The upright and hub assembly is designed according to the requirement of the geometry and the other interdependent Page 3 of 8

subsystems like brakes and drivetrain. The design is modified according to the mounting of a dual calliper assembly which is an innovative feature for the brakes. The upright design is shown in figure 4. The details for the front suspension is given in Table 3.

Static Camber 0 deg Castor 0 deg Motion ratio 0.6 Spring rate 159.81 lb/in Table 3.Rear suspension Specification

Analysis
To maintain the structural integrity of the suspension subsystem and the mounts in the chassis, analysis was conducted according to the various loading conditions that the suspension system may face at off road terrains. Simulation those situations are a primary target for us to validate the design and make sure it will not fail. The boundary conditions are determined and divided on the basis of real time scenarios that they are subjected to.

Wheels
The selection of tires was based on the terrain that the vehicle has to negotiate. Off road tires were preferred as they are built with specific purpose in mind. The size of the tires was selected based on availability and calculation done by the drivetrain department for achieving required speed and torque output. The size chosen for the vehicle is given in Table 5. Front 20 x 7 10 off-road tubeless tyres Table 5. Tire specification Rear 22 x 7 10 off-road tubeless tyres

Steering
The steering system is designed to withstand the stress of safely maneuvering the vehicle through any type of terrain. .

Design
Simplicity and safety were the main design specifications for the vehicles steering system. A small, lightweight rack with a 12:1 ratio was chosen as the main component of the assembly. The small size of this rack allows the geometry and joints of both the suspension arms and tie rods to align perfectly and completely eliminate bump steer. Custom clevises provide a strong, corrosion resistant link between the rack and the custom stainless steel tie rods featuring opposing threads for easy adjustability. Steel tubing was used for the steering column due to the torsional loads it will need to withstand. A universal joint provided easy redirection of the steering column as it extends from the rack, along with a safety feature. The steering assembly was designed to reduce the no of components attached from the steering wheel to the rack

thus minimizing steering play. The steering system design is shown in figure 5. The various parameters and performance specification the steering system is detailed in Table 6. Turning radius Ackermans angle Tie rod length Ackerman percentage Table 6. Steering Specification 3.12 m 41.6 degrees 22 inches 110 %

The primary focus of the design is to create a reliable and rugged system which performs and all possible terrains and also give maximum control to the driver to manoeuvre in all. terrain.

Design
The drivetrain design focuses on being highly variable while also staying very efficient and easily serviced. The gear box chosen for the drivetrain is Mahindra alpha 4 speed synchromesh gearbox. The choice was made based on speed, torque, adaptability, availability and cost. The primary objective is to give the driver maximum controls of the vehicle which can only be done when it has a manual gearbox as the driver can select gears according to terrain and driving conditions. The maximum speed calculated is 52 kmph. The speed vs rpm at various ratio is shown in Graph 4. The gear box was coupled with the engine using a spacer and a coupling shaft which connects the engine shaft to the clutch to transmit power to the gearbox. The design and analysis is carried out to make sure the shaft will be able to withstand the torque the engine produce and the spacer be able to take the load of the transmission and the twisting motion it creates. The drive shaft were fabricated by modifying the shaft that is used with the gearbox to be able to couple with the custom made hubs. Calculations for the performance are detailed in Table 8. Engine power Engine toque Acceleration Tractive effort Top speed Table 8. Drivetrain specification 10 hp 19.6 N-m .18 g 657.6 N 52 kmph

Brakes
The purpose of the brakes is to stop the car safely and effectively. In order to achieve maximum performance from the braking system, the brakes have been designed to lock up all four wheels, while minimizing the cost and weight. An additional innovative feature of cutting brake with dual calliper setup is incorporated in the vehicle.

Design
The braking system is mainly designed for maximum safety and performance. The main objective is to design a system which best serves the goal for the braking system. The brake system consist of disc brake for all four wheels with floating callipers at the front and fixed callipers at the rear. The front assembly is from an ATV which is used off the shelf and the rear has been custom made according to requirement. The callipers used are fixed callipers which provide better braking. The rear rotors were designed and analysed to meet the require specification. A dual master cylinder setup for the primary braking circuit is designed along with bias bar mechanism for brake biasing. The cutting brake design is an innovation in which the rear assembly features dual callipers in which one calliper is used for the primary braking circuit and the other calliper is used for the cutting brake. This setup gives and edge by allowing the driver to use different combination of braking based on his comfort. The cutting brake is actuated using hand levers placed in the left side of the driver cockpit. One wheel can be braked individually for tight cornering and will help us to manoeuvre much quicker. The detailed parameter and performance characteristics has been mentioned in Table 7. The graph for stopping distance has been shown in graph 3. Stopping Distance Braking Force Brake pressure Pedal ratio Brake Bias Deceleration Table 7.Brakes Specification 4.94 m ( at 45 kmph ) 8927.1 N 1.4 bar 5:1 52:48 1.8 g

Conclusions
Once all the design aspects have been combined into one complete vehicle, the result is profound, safe, reliable, fast, aggressive, and just plain fun to drive what the EWBR V3.0 is all about. The suspension creates a ride that is comfortable, yet aggressive when handling corners at high speeds. This vehicle only has a 10 HP engine, but as a result of effective design techniques it has the ability to conquer the most difficult terrain. Through weight reduction, increasing drive-train efficiency, and calculating and tuning the suspension accurately, the power restraint is a minimum factor in this vehicles off-road ability. Not only will the performance catch a consumers interest, but features such as a comfortable seat, a sleek body design, practical electronics, and cost effectiveness will impress even consumers that are not avid off-road vehicle enthusiasts. The careful design and the technology that went into this vehicle will prove itself during manufacturing, in the show room, and of course, at the track.

Drivetrain
The drive-train is a very important part of the Baja car, taking into consideration that all of the cars power is transferred through the drive-train system to the ground. The challenge is to harness the engines 10 horsepower from Briggs and Stratton 1450 which is provided by Baja to every team and distribute it to the ground in the most efficient way. The drivetrain needs to be able to operate in the lowest and highest gear ratios while performing in all of the different aspects of the competition. Page 4 of 8

Figure 1. Chassis EWBR V3.0 Graph 1. Roll vs Camber

Figure 2. Frame analysis Graph 2. Bump vs Camber

Figure 3. Front suspension assembly

Graph 3. Stopping distance vs speed

Graph 4. Speed vs RPM Figure 4. Rear assembly

Page 5 of 8

Page 6 of 8

Page 7 of 8

Page 8 of 8