Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 983020

Design of a Single Seater Racing Car

Suspension System
Andrew Deakin, Andrew Shovlin,
Peter Brooks and David Crolla
The University of Leeds, UK

Reprinted From: 1998 Motorsports Engineering Conference Proceedings

Volume 2: Engines and Drivetrains
(P-340/2)

Motorsports Engineering
Conference and Exposition
Dearborn, Michigan
November 16-19, 1998

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018

The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 1998 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018
Design of a Single Seater Racing Car Suspension System
Andrew Deakin, Andrew Shovlin, Peter Brooks and David Crolla
Copyright © 1998 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
ABSTRACT
This paper describes the integration of a selection of
techniques which can be used to design complex
mechanical systems such as racing car suspensions. It
covers aspects of their dynamic and static design with
particular reference to system analysis, the theory of
which is described within. Furthermore, the designs are
evaluated using sophisticated data logging and kinemat-
ics and compliance rig tests to assess the manufactured
design’s performance. The optimisation of racetrack
behaviour is then described using vehicle dynamics sim-
ulation to predict how performance improvements can be
achieved quickly. The examples given relate to on going
work on the University of Leeds Formula SAE Racing
Car.
INTRODUCTION
Engineers design mechanical systems using a variety of
techniques. Each technique can be shown to have cer-
tain qualities, which assist in the process. Actual suspen-
sion systems are complicated mechanisms, which
require engineering compromise to be made in the selec-
tion of their performance attributes. The performance of
a suspension can generally be defined in terms of its ride
and handling. Several techniques are used by different
authors in the selection of the compromise, namely
dynamic and static simulation and physical test. In prac-
tice, many engineers combine these techniques. The
integration of them to optimise a dynamic system’s
design with maximum efficiency is rarely described in the
literature.
Vehicle dynamics is extensively used in the development
of vehicle suspensions from cars, and trucks to off-road
vehicles and Formula 1 racing cars [1,2,3,4]. The desired
characteristics of each vehicle type depend upon its
operating requirements. For a passenger car, comfort
and therefore vehicle ride will be the priority, as long as
the vehicle is stable and exhibits at least adequate han-
dling performance. It can be shown that such designs
require suspensions incorporating springs that promote
reasonably controlled roll and pitch angles with dampers
selected to minimise whole body motions. Racing cars
on the other hand need only exhibit high performance in
1
983020
The University of Leeds, UK
terms of their handling ability, ride quality being generally
sacrificed. Springs are therefore made stiff which when
coupled to a low centre of gravity give highly controlled
body motions with damping rates set to optimise transient
vehicle response and dynamic tyre load. Vehicle dynam-
ics can be used to select appropriate spring and damper
rates as seen at the wheel, which promote the required
vehicle dynamic properties.
Once the desired wheel rates in terms of stiffness and
damping are established, a suspension system has to be
designed to exhibit those rates. Kinematics and compli-
ance analysis allows the movement of suspension com-
ponents to be studied so that actual wheel rates, effective
spring and damper rates and suspension geometry can
be determined [5]. Accurate control of the suspension
can provide significant performance benefits and an
understanding of how individual wheels move relative to
the vehicle body.
Comparing the dynamic and static analysis with physical
vehicle tests allows validation of the design to be con-
ducted. The vehicle dynamic analysis can be validated
through the application of data logging [6]. Following val-
idation, the vehicle dynamics can subsequently be used
to assist in the development of the vehicle’s performance
on the track. It enables quick assessment of the effect of
suspension setting changes on the vehicles ability to
negotiate handling manoeuvres. The data logging itself
can also be used to improve the vehicles performance by
accurately observing events and subsequently making
intelligent changes to promote improvements in vehicle
behaviour [7].
Similar validation of the kinematics and compliance anal-
ysis can be performed using pseudo static tests that eval-
uate how the suspension moves on a real vehicle [8].
Not only does it produce information on suspension
rates, and vehicle geometry but hysteresis and slack in
systems can be identified. This allows aspects of the
suspension, which exhibit poor characteristics to be
improved.
Bringing together all of these aspects of suspension
design enables a comprehensive understanding of the
role played by the suspension system, with the tech-
niques complementing each other and providing sub-
stantial information about a design. One technique alone
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018
does not allow all aspects of a design to be assessed
however integration of several methods goes some way
towards this.
THEORY
VEHICLE DYNAMICS – Early predictions of vehicle han-
dling behaviour are an important aspect of the design
process. This necessitates a model that can reliably sim-
ulate vehicle responses, while only requiring a limited
quantity of data [9].
The model used in the analysis, consists of eight degrees
of freedom and was developed using the VDAS toolkit
[10]. These include vehicle roll, yaw and lateral motions,
steering compliance and tyre vertical compliance.
For the analysis of passenger vehicles, it is often
assumed that the vehicle operates within the linear
regime (< 0.3g lateral acceleration). A racing car how-
ever, will be driven at the limits of its performance, mak-
ing such assumptions invalid. This requires that non-
linear components, such as tyres, are accurately repre-
sented. To enable this, a multi-variable tyre model was
developed where lateral force is a function of slip angle,
camber angle and vertical load.
To simulate manoeuvres, the vehicle model is run at a
constant forward velocity, and a handwheel angle input
as a function of time. Figure 1 describes such an input
and the lateral acceleration response. By changing the
appropriate parameters within the model, it is possible to
predict the effect of changes in the vehicle’s kinematics
and compliance properties.
J-Turn manouvre, steering input against modelled latacc response
2.00
1.80
1.60
1.40
1.20
1.00
0.80
0.60
0.40
0.20
0.00
0.00 0.10 0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50
Time, sec
Figure 1. Simulated vehicle J-turn response
SUSPENSION KINEMATICS AND COMPLIANCE
MODELLING – Understanding the kinematics and com-
pliance of a suspension is crucial to producing an effec-
tive design with the desired characteristics. These
characteristics can be analysed through the application
of kinematics and compliance modelling.
A tool to analyse double wishbone suspensions was
recently developed at the University of Leeds [11]. This
tool calculates the displacement of a four bar linkage rep-
resenting the suspension arms, body and upright as the
wheel moves through its range of travel. There is also a
steering rod joining the body to the upright and the rota-
tional motion of the upright is calculated concurrently.
This is achieved through the application of trigonometry
to one wheel station at a time. Subsequently the push-
rods motion, suspension cam and spring deflections are
calculated. This information allows suspension charac-
teristics such as bump steer, scrub, roll centre height and
wheel rates to be analysed.
A suspension can then be designed so that all its charac-
teristics fall within specified limits, giving desirable rates
and motions. An example of the type of output, the
amount of lateral tyre motion or scrub as the wheel
moves up and down is shown in figure 2.
Tyre scrub due to vertical wheel movement
25
20
15
Wheel displacement, mm
10
5
0
-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5
-5
-10
-15
-20
-25
Scrub, mm
Figure 2. Predicted suspension scrub rate.
Presently a full vehicle kinematics and compliance tool is
being developed. This new package will facilitate full
vehicle analysis.
VEHICLE EVALUATION
OBJECTIVE VEHICLE TESTING – Standard tests are
latacc, g
steer, rad
used by the automobile industry to evaluate vehicle han-
dling performance, these are documented in ISO and BS
standards [12,13,14,15]. The tests are generally applica-
ble to passenger car assessment, however adaptation of
them allowed the racing car to be evaluated using
manoeuvres similar to those experienced in competition.
0.60
The lane change test is a manoeuvre where the vehicle is
driven so that it moves from one lane to another parallel
lane, similar to negotiating a chicane on the racetrack.
The test was performed at constant speed; the steering
wheel input being approximately sinusoidal was made as
quickly as possible and performed in a similar manner to
that described in [12].
The J-turn test is a manoeuvre where the vehicle is ini-
tially travelling in a straight line, a steering input is then
suddenly put into the steering wheel, the input being
maintained until steady state conditions are reached.
Essentially this is a step input and was performed as in
[12]. This would be similar to entering a long corner fol-
2
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018

lowing a long straight on the racing track, however the MIRA’s K&C rig shown in figure 5, is a suitable machine
racecar driver would generally try to execute the to carry out tests to evaluate the kinematics and compli-
manoeuvre as smoothly as possible. The test was again ance of a vehicle. This machine can move the body in
performed at constant speed. bounce, pitch and roll whilst being able to move and force
each tyre contact patch in a horizontal plane.
The steady state test requires the vehicle to be driven
round a constant radius circle whilst the speed is gradu-
ally increased. The test is described in [13] which gener-
ally suggests a minimum radius of 30m. A 30m radius
corner is bigger than the largest corner likely to be
encountered at the Formula SAE competition therefore, it
was decided to adapt the standards and use a circle with
approximately a 10m radius.
In order to measure the vehicles response to the
manoeuvres, the racing car was equipped with a Pi
Research System 1. data logger. This was used to
record among other things, speed, lateral and longitudi-
nal acceleration and steering position. Some of the mea-
surements for lateral acceleration for the different
manoeuvres are shown in figures 3 & 4.
Figure 5. MIRA K&C Rig Schematic & Axis System
1.2
The suspension can be analysed in several ways as the
0.8 wheels are moved. When moving the body vertically, the
motion derivatives of bump steer, scrub, and camber can
0.4 be measured. Similarly, the forces exerted at the tyre
contact patch can be measured to give spring rates and
Latacc, g

0 stiffnesses of motions. Hysteresis in the plot indicates

38 38.5 39 39.5 40 40.5 how much friction is present in the system.
-0.4

-0.8

-1.2
Time, sec

Figure 3. Lane change manoeuvre lateral acceleration

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3
Figure 6. Measured vertical rate of front wheel
Latacc, g

-0.2

-0.4 Figure 6 shows a typical result that can be derived from

the rig tests. This result was obtained from testing of the
-0.6 Formula SAE racing car. The graph is produced by mov-
ing the vehicle in the vertical direction and recording the
-0.8
resulting tyre contact forces. As can be seen, the effec-
-1
tive wheel rate can be measured, the hysteresis in the
Time, sec suspension is clearly evident and the slack between the
point where the friction acts and the spring starts to be
Figure 4. J-turn manoeuvre lateral acceleration, g compressed can be measured. Such detail of results can
rapidly point to design changes that can improve suspen-
KINEMATICS AND COMPLIANCE TESTING – By mov- sion properties, and can assess whether the design stiff-
ing a vehicles wheels relative to the body and measuring nesses where achieved in the realisation.
the forces and displacements in each direction, the rates
and derivatives of each component of motion can be
derived.

3
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018

CORRELATION
J-Turn, predicted lateral acceleration against measured

1.20
VEHICLE DYNAMICS/OBJECTIVE RESULTS – Using
the developed vehicle model and the recorded vehicle 1.00
speed and steering input, a comparison can be made
between the recorded test results and simulation. In this 0.80

Lateral accn, g
respect, the three dynamic tests performed where com-
modelled
0.60
pared to vehicle simulation. measured

Figures 7, 8 & 9 show a comparison of the simulated and 0.40

measured test results. Looking at the steady state

0.20
results, although there is some noise in the measured
results, the average appears to be very similar to the sim- 0.00
ulated results. With the sinusoidal response or lane 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
Time, sec
change results, the magnitude of actual response is simi-
lar to that simulated, however there is a slight difference Figure 9. Correlation of J-turn lateral acceleration
in phase. Good correlation is also obtained with the com-
parison of the j-turn manoeuvre. This time however, KINEMATICS ANALYSIS/K&C RIG TEST – The results
there appears to be no lag between the responses. from both the rig testing and the computational analysis
were brought together for validation. An example of this
Steady state lateral acceleration, predicted against actual can be seen in figure 10 where the derived and experi-
1.40 mental wheel rates are compared.
1.20

Wheel force against deflection for calculated and measured results

1.00
Lateral accn, g

0.80 1.6
modelled
measured 1.4
0.60
1.2
Wheel force, kN

0.40
1

measured
0.20 0.8
calculated

0.6
0.00
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
0.4
Time, sec
0.2

Figure 7. Correlation of steady state lateral acceleration. 0

-15 -10 -5 0 5 10 15 20
Wheel deflecton, mm
Lane change manouvre, predicted against actual
Figure 10. Comparison of rig and computationally
1.50
derived K&C results
1.00
It can clearly be seen that the gradient of the graphs is
0.50 very similar, however there is a difference in the two plots
Lateral accn, g

due to the levels of friction present in the actual design.

latacc pred
0.00
latacc act
0.00 0.50 1.00 1.50 2.00 From such comparisons, flaws in the design can be
-0.50 readily seen and in this case, it was identified that low
friction suspension cams were required to improve the
-1.00 suspension response. Similar correlations, such as with
the graph showing tyre scrub figure 2, were found
-1.50
between calculated and measured characteristics, it was
time, sec
therefore assumed that the suspension analysis tool was
Figure 8. Correlation of lane change manoeuvre lateral an accurate method of predicting performance.
acceleration
FURTHER USES OF VEHICLE DYNAMIC
The results appear to correlate well, and it was therefore SIMULATION
assumed that simulated results would be representative
of what would happen to the actual vehicle. Similar Validation of the correlation between simulation and
results were obtained for the same manoeuvres with dif- objective results allows vehicle dynamics to be used to
ferent speeds and suspension roll rates. rapidly improve a vehicle’s suspension performance by

4
 Downloaded from SAE International by Univ of Nottingham - Kings Meadow Campus, Saturday, August 11, 2018

analysing the effect of changes in suspension parame- ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

ters.
MIRA - Use of their K&C test rig
Figure 11 shows the change in vehicle roll response with
different levels of damping in the vehicle suspension. It PI Research - Use of System 1. Datalogger
can be seen that the vehicle with the low damping rate
exhibits some overshoot in the vehicle roll response. REFERENCES
Conversely, the highly damped vehicle exhibits what
appears to be an over-damped response. The medium 1. MacAdam, C.C.: ‘The Interaction of Aerodynamic Proper-
damped vehicle appears to exhibit the best response in ties and Steering System Characteristics of a Passenger
transient roll. Car’ IAVSD, Aug 26-30 1991, pp.26-30.
2. Bevan, B.G.: ‘The Development and Application of a Novel
If similar results are produced with respect to other Hydropneumatic Suspension for Commercial Vehicles’
attributes of vehicle response then a better vehicle set up Smart Vehicles. pub. Swets & Zeitlinger, 1995.
3. Quirt, R.C.; Anderson, R.J.: ‘Comparison of a Linear with a
can be identified. As correlation with actual results
Non-Linear Multibody Simulation of an Off-Road Vehicle’
exists, simulation of new set ups is a method by which IAVSD, Aug 21-25 1989, pp 391-404.
new configurations can quickly be developed without 4. Milliken, W.F.; Milliken, D.L.: ‘Race Car Vehicle Dynamics’
extensive on track testing. pub. SAE
5. Sohn, H.; Shin, H.; Lee, H.: ‘The Improvement of Handling
Performance Through the Sensitivity Analysis Validated by
Body roll angle with different suspension damping
the K&C Test’ SAE 980898
1.0 6. Chen, D.: ‘Subjective and Objective Vehicle Handling
Behaviour’ Ph.D. Thesis, The University of Leeds, Sept.
Soft 1997.
Medium
0.5 7. Fey, B.: ‘Data Power: Using Race Car Data Acquisition’
Hard
Towery Publishing inc 1993.
Roll angle, deg

8. Best, T.; et.al: ‘Design and Operation of a New Vehicle

0.0
Suspension Kinematics and Compliance Facility’ SAE
0 1 2 3 4 5 970096
9. Anderson, R.J.; Hanna, D.M.: ‘Comparison of Three Vehi-
cle Simulation Methodologies’ IAVSD, Aug 21-23 1989, pp.
-0.5
21-
10. Horton, D.N.L.: ‘Vehicle Dynamics Analysis Software’ Ver-
sion 3.4, The University of Leeds, Feb 1992.
-1.0 11. King, R.: ‘Design and Analysis of a Racing Car Suspeni-
Time, sec son’ MSc project, The University of Leeds, 1996
12. Anon: ‘Road Vehicles - Lateral - Transient Response Test
Figure 11. Using vehicle dynamics to improve response Methods’ ISO 7401, First edition 1988-05-01.
13. Anon: ‘Road Vehicles - Steady State Circular Test Proce-
CONCLUSIONS dure’ ISO 4138 - 1982(E)
14. Anon: ‘Road Vehicles - Test Procedure for a Severe Lane-
Change Manoeuvre’ ISO 3888, 1975-09-01.
Vehicle dynamics has been successfully used to produce 15. Anon: ‘Road Vehicles - Transient Open-Loop Response
a suspension design through parametric analysis of Test Method with Pseudo-Random Steering Input’ ISO
design parameters. 8726 : 1988 (E)

Kinematics analysis has subsequently been used to

achieve the desired suspension design parameters.
Both the vehicle dynamics and kinematics analysis have
been validated through the use of objective testing and
kinematics rig testing.
It has been shown that vehicle dynamic analysis can be
used as a development tool when optimising a vehicles
performance.