I.

ASME Report Cover Page & Vehicle Description Form

Rio de Janeiro
July 27 – 29, 2018

Universidad de Celaya
Bulldog HPV
3

Aluminum
-
3

1.9442m 0.85m
0.7m 1.360m
10kg 30kg
40kg
26in 20in

X
X

This is a completely new design.

1
 II. Title Page

Bulldog HPV Report Title

Vehicle Number: 3

Team Members:

Member Contact Information

e-mail: 11830@udec.edu.mx
Gerardo Zavala López (Captain)
Cellphone Number: +52 1 4611044943
e-mail: 14014067@udec.edu.mx
Ana Karla Oliveros Botello
Cellphone Number: +52 1 4611719059
Rodrigo Martínez Aguilar
Gerardo Sánchez Rivera
Patricia Sánchez Ramírez
Nataly García Lojero
Gizeh Rodrigo Manzo Ordaz
Erik Mauricio Pucheta Cardona
César Armando González Ramírez
Rueben Serrato (Faculty Advisor) e-mail: ruben.serrato@udec.edu.mx
Cellphone Number: +52 1 4611178385

2
III. 3-View Drawing of Vehicle

850 mm

Figure 4; Isometric

Figure 1; Front Projection

Figure 2; Side Projection

Figure 3; Top Projection

3
IV. Abstract

Here is presented the design report of the Bulldog HPV, a completely new HPV design
developed by students from Universidad de Celaya, México. Part of the objective is the
design mission, which is to design an HPV capable of running on different surfaces (smooth,
rough, wet), providing safety and comfort to the driver with high standards of quality,
reliability, and innovation.
As it is presented in this report, we have implemented some complex engineering concepts
such as homokinetic joints and complex suspension systems.
By the day this report is written the HPV manufacture is not finished at all, we still working
in last details.
However, fortunately the results we have already got are the expected ones, any question
resulted from this report will be answered in the design presentation event.

4
 V. Table of contents

I. ASME Report Cover Page & Vehicle Description Form ....................................................... 1

II. Title Page ........................................................................................................................... 2
III. 3-View Drawing of Vehicle ............................................................................................. 3
IV. Abstract .......................................................................................................................... 4
V. Table of contents ................................................................................................................ 5
VI. Design............................................................................................................................. 6
a) Objective.................................................................................................................................... 6
b) Background ................................................................................................................................ 6
c) Prior Work ................................................................................................................................. 9
d) Design Specifications ............................................................................................................... 10
e) Concept Development and Selection Methods ........................................................................ 11
f) Description............................................................................................................................... 13
VII. Analysis ........................................................................................................................ 15
a) RPS Analyses ............................................................................................................................ 15
b) Structural Analyses .................................................................................................................. 15
c) Aerodynamic Analyses ............................................................................................................. 16
d) Cost Analyses ........................................................................................................................... 16
VIII. Testing .......................................................................................................................... 19
a) Developmental Testing ............................................................................................................ 19
IX. Conclusion .................................................................................................................... 20
a) Comparison .............................................................................................................................. 20
b) Evaluation ................................................................................................................................ 20
c) Recommendations ................................................................................................................... 20
X. References ........................................................................................................................ 20

5
VI. Design

a) Objective
To Design and Manufacture in a 6-month period, an ergonomic HPV of no more than 60kg
by applying complex engineering concepts such as homokinetic joints translated into a
high performance during its application. Considering safety aspects such as stopping from
a speed of 25 km/hr in a distance of 6m, turn within an 8m radius, and traveling for 30m in a
straight line at a speed of 8 km/hr.

Design Mission: To design an HPV capable of running on different surfaces (smooth,

rough, wet), providing safety and comfort to the driver with high standards of quality,
reliability, and innovation.

b) Background

For the Bulldog HPV development, the design idea is born from 2 known vehicles, these
are the conventional combustion car and the bicycle. Below is presented an investigation
and a brief review of prior art of some systems and components of these both vehicles,
this information was used as support during the design and development of the Bulldog
HPV.

Constant-velocity joints: Also known as a homokinetic or CV joint is a mechanical system

that allows a drive shaft to transmit power through a variable angle, at constant
rotational speed, without an appreciable increase in friction or play. They are mainly used
in front wheel drive vehicles.
Constant-velocity joints are protected by a rubber boot, a CV gaiter, usually filled with
molybdenum disulfide grease. Cracks and splits in the boot will allow contaminants in,
which would cause the joint to wear quickly as grease leaks out.

Figure 4; Common CV Joint

A Rzeppa joint consists of a spherical inner shell with 6 grooves in it and a similar
enveloping outer shell. Each groove guides one ball. The input shaft fits in the center of a
large, steel, star-shaped "gear" that nests inside a circular cage. The cage is spherical but
with ends open, and it typically has six openings around the perimeter. This cage and gear

6
fit into a grooved cup that has a splined and threaded shaft attached to it. Six large steel
balls sit inside the cup grooves and fit into the cage openings, nestled in the grooves of
the star gear. The output shaft on the cup then runs through the wheel bearing and is
secured by the axle nut. This joint can accommodate the large changes of angle when the
front wheels are turned by the steering system; typical Rzeppa joints allow 45°–48° of
articulation, while some can give 54°. At the "outboard" end of the driveshaft a slightly
different unit is used. The end of the driveshaft is splined and fits into the outer "joint". It
is typically held in place by a circlip.

Figure 5; Representation of a Rzeppa joint

Triangles in Structures: The triangle is the only two dimensional polygon that if
constructed of rigid members with hinged corners is absolutely fixed in shape up to the
compressive and tensile limits of its members. A square, for example, can easily be mis-
shapen into a parallelogram.
All other polygons are similarly susceptible to flexing. However, other shapes can be
rigidized by rigidizing their internal angles through the use of triangles. The rigidizing
triangular members are often called “gussets” and, although they may not extend the
total length of the members they rigidize, they effectively make the two connecting
members into a single rigid component. When enough internal angles are rigidized in this
way, the overall polygon is reduced to a triangle and is, in fact, rigid.

Figure 6; The hexagonal object at the left can be easily deformed. The same
hexagonal object with the addition of triangular gussets becomes a virtual
triangle as connecting members are rigidized by the triangular gussets.

The strength of triangles also extends to the three dimensional world. A pyramid
comprised of four triangles is the three dimensional analog of the triangle in the two

7
dimensional world. Any three dimensional object that can be reduced to a collection of
triangles by adding triangular gussets, is similarly rigid.

Bicycle Disc brakes: "The disc, anchored to the wheel, is responsible for braking the wheel
thanks to the friction with the brake pads.The heat that this generates, in the disc itself,
reduces the braking power, so it is very important that its design and compounds
optimize its cooling, dissipating heat and maintaining optimal braking.
The operation of the hydraulic disc brake consists of a clamp, the junction in the fork and
the frame of the bicycle, in which some pads, in its interior, the disks placed in the wheels
and the wheels of the rotation of these.
In addition, the pads, inside the clamps, are pressed by symbols, which are pushed by the
pressure of a liquid, deposited in the brake pumps and circulating through a hydraulic
circuit, inside the bicycle wiring. "

Figure 7; Bycicle Disc Brakes

8
 c) Prior Work
Seat back: Initially, the seat back that was used on the previous year design was
considered, but the team made the to change the design in order to reduce weight in the
frame structure and in the same seat back considering that it was also heavier and more
robust. Figure 8 shows the draft design that was considered with the previous seat.

Figure 8; Design considering a bigger seat back

Stubs: For the manufacture of the stub axles (part to join the traction system with the brake
system), the development of a design on an aluminum plate was defined, which, later, would
lead to a bending process.
This design proposal failed because some factors of aluminum resistance were not considered,
causing a fracture of the material as shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9; Stub axles fracture

To manufacture the stub axles correctly they were turned from an aluminum solid

9
d) Design Specifications
Among the many design specifications the team took the decision by using QFD method
(Figure 10) to:

• Use standard Aluminum for the frame and HPV parts

• Add a fork suspension
• Include disc and crab brakes
• Design an aluminum RPS that prevents body contact with the ground
• Manufacture a sectionable HPV with semi-permanent unions

QFD

-
- -
+ - -
- + - -

Good suspension
Light Material

Good braking

Reliable RPS
How's

Disassembly
Importance

What´s

To runs well 4 9 6 0 6 3
Confortable 2 3 9 0 3 0
To be safe 5 3 6 9 9 3
That is beautiful aesthetically 1 0 0 0 3 0
Easy to trasnport 3 6 0 0 6 9
Technical Importance 75 72 45 96 54
STD
Aluminum
RPS t hat
Disc and Semi-
STD Fork prevent s Technical
crab permanent
Aluminum suspension body Especificatio n
Brakes unions
cont act
wit h
ground

Figure 10; QFD method used to decide some design specifications.

10
e) Concept Development and Selection Methods

Once the most import design specifications were defined, the team evaluated three HPV
potential designs to be manufactured. The team has supported by the Pugh´s concept
selection technique to decide which of the three designs was the best considering the
most important systems. The comparison reference was made against the last year HPV
design.
The three evaluated designs are the following;
Design 1: This design is based on an HPV design that was manufactured on December
2017 as an engineering subject project by a team member. This is a 4-wheel HPV, steel
frame, monoshock rear suspension of damper and spring, solid shaft front suspension and
mass brakes. Pictures, of this HPV are shown in Figure 11.

Figure 11; HPV proposal Design 1

Design 2: This is a 3-wheel HPV design with the front wheels diameter bigger than the
rear one, aluminum frame and aluminum RPS, homokinetic joints, fork suspension, disc
and crab brakes, and sectionable with semi-permanent unions. Figure 3 shows parts of
design 12.

11
 Figure 12; HPV proposal Design 2

Design 3: This is a design similar to the design number two, but with difference to be a 4-
wheel HPV.
Table 1 shows the Pugh´s concept selection technique used to select the best design
between the three proposals.

Table 1; Pugh´s Selection Technique used to decide the HPV Design

The team made the decision to use the design proposal number two because it was the
one that best satisfies the evaluated systems.

12
f) Description
To obtain better results, a simple triangular chassis design with star and chain
transmission, spring suspension and front and rear shock absorber was chosen, with the
innovation of front-wheel drive by using constant velocity joints to transmit the power to
the both front wheels while they maintain the direction of the vehicle.
To lighten the weight, it was chosen to use 1-inch aluminum tubes and ¾ inch aluminum
tubes for the frame and RPS.
The front suspension resembles a separate steering with upper and lower forks, but with
the difference that it is operated with a spring-loaded central shock absorber.
Brake discs with 5-inch slotted discs with 1-piston mechanical calipers were used in the
front, while a conventional gripper system was used for the rear.
One of the most important points is the transmission of the vehicle in which a rod of
170mm is used for the part of the pedals, and in the front, a shaft with a 50mm star that
transmits the power through the constant velocity joints to each one of the front tires.
The diameter of the rims was chosen by a ring of 26 inches in the front and 20 inches in
the rear. The steering consists of a steering wheel with circular movement at chest height,
on the steering wheel are located the brake levers that will control with the right hand
the front disc brakes and with the left hand the rear crab brakes.
By the day this report is being written, the team is working with the RPS, in order to
prevent body contact with the ground in case of an accident. This is a solid aluminum RPS
anchored to the frame. The RPS that we are installing, will allow us to adapt a good fairing
later.
Whit this design, the Bulldog HPV can run on smooth, rough and wet surfaces with no
problem. Weather conditions is not a problem neither, the solid suspension system allows
the HPV to run on almost any surface.
Components and systems were selected and designed to meet the stated objectives. As
shown on point VI e. the team has used the Pugh´s concept selection technique to select
the optimal designs, components, and systems, considering always safety and quality
aspects to prioritize decision making.

13
Figure 13; Bulldog HPV General final design

Figure 14; Direction & Transmission System

14
VII. Analysis

a) RPS Analyses
By the day this report is being written, the team is working with the RPS, this analysis is
not ready but will be presented in the design presentation.

b) Structural Analyses
For the HPV design we began with a straight chassis with 2 triangulations which was
designed to support a load of 1200N (92 kg maximum of the driver) at its center of mass,
with a total length of 800mm at its points of load at the ends. This chassis was built with
an aluminum tube 1 inch in diameter and with a Schedule of 3mm. From here, the center
of mass was taken 80 cm from the front end of the vehicle.
Beneath the triangulations are the transmission and rear suspension axles, which consist
of a 55mm shaft for the mass of the connecting rods and a 30mm shaft for the
attachment of the rear suspension.
All welding of the chassis made with MIG welding with Argon gas, this welding provided
extra material to the joints without leaving scum or rust marks.
The part of the suspension has 12 moving parts and a spring system. The front suspension
will support a load of 980N, counting the weight of it. CV joints as they are taken from an
internal combustion vehicle are designed to withstand more than 180 lb / ft, according to
the manufacturer of the parts.
Since most of the components are removable by means of a safety nut, the screws were
torqued at 20 lb / ft.
For the spring forks and fins, carbon steel welding of ER70S-20 was used.
In order for the suspension to have an independent movement to each rim, rotulas with
free movement on the axle were used, and with degrees of freedom upwards and below
30 ° taking the center as the point of rest.
For the address, a terminal system with a rotula with a straight axle and inverted
positions on the ends was used, so that all of the suspension works properly. To transmit
the movement of the handwheel to the terminals, an axis was used that rotates as a
whole of the handwheel that ends at the junction by a triangle to the terminals.

15
 In the rear suspension, a horizontal spring system was used that was designed to
withstand a load of 220N. The union is removable and has a steel scissors that holds the
20-inch rim.
Brake systems are supported by suspension handles and features 5-inch ventilated discs
and jaws from a mechanical piston. The force for these calipers are directly applied by the
levers located on the back of the steering wheel, these levers are divided into 2, which
control the front and rear brakes.

c) Aerodynamic Analyses
No fairing is included in this design, so the aerodynamic results were not reliable,
aerodynamic analysis will be developed for the next challenge as it is planned to include a
fairing.

d) Cost Analyses

This section presents the cost analyses of the Bulldog HPV, in terms of capital investment,
tooling, parts, materials, and 3rd party labor costs.
Figure 15 and Table 2 show general cost analysis data.

Figure 15; General Cost Analysis Chart

16
 COST ANALYSIS COST (USD) COST (BRL)
Tooling $ 89.42 $ 345.43
Materials $ 206.82 $ 798.94
Parts $ 259.21 $ 1,001.33
3rd party labor costs $ 263.50 $ 1,017.90

CAPITAL INVESTMENT $ 818.94 $ 3,163.60

Table 2; General Cost Analysis Data

The specific costs breakdown analysis is presented below by concept in Table 3, Table 4,
Table 5 and Table 6.

TOOLING COST (USD) COST (BRL)

2 cutters of 3 mm $ 23.72 $ 91.64
Tap $ 5.93 $ 22.91
Blowtorch $ 47.44 $ 183.29
Carnaza gloves $ 6.24 $ 24.10
Lima M. Caña Bastarda $ 6.08 $ 23.49
Subtotal $ 89.42 $ 345.43
Table 3; Tooling Cost Analysis Data

MATERIALS COST (USD) COST (BRL)

Aluminum $ 127.81 $ 493.80
Welding for aluminum $ 30.67 $ 118.49
Sandpaper $ 2.58 $ 9.96
Tow $ 1.49 $ 5.75
Stainless steel polishing paste $ 5.42 $ 20.93
Chemical adhesives $ 9.41 $ 36.35
Xilol $ 1.96 $ 7.57
Paint $ 15.70 $ 60.65
Wool piece $ 4.50 $ 17.38
White foam $ 7.29 $ 28.16
Subtotal $ 206.82 $ 799.04
Table 4; Materials Cost Analysis Data

17
PARTS COST (USD) COST (BRL)
Rear Axle $ 5.11 $ 19.74
Star part $ 2.56 $ 9.89
Connecting rod $ 15.34 $ 59.26
Safety belt $ 40.90 $ 158.00
Bearing $ 6.14 $ 23.72
Tires $ 24.24 $ 93.64
Cameras $ 6.43 $ 24.84
Screws $ 15.87 $ 61.31
Seat $ 23.01 $ 88.85
Shock absorbers (3) $ 19.17 $ 74.05
Bike spokes $ 11.09 $ 42.84
Ring part $ 14.83 $ 57.29
7-star multiplier $ 4.09 $ 15.80
Chain $ 6.39 $ 24.68
Rear mass 36 M $ 2.69 $ 10.39
Disc brakes $ 61.35 $ 236.99
Subtotal $ 259.21 $ 1,001.29
Table 5; Parts Analysis Data

3rd PARTY LABOR COSTS COST (USD) COST (BRL)

Aluminum welding $ 92.02 $ 355.47
Parts machining $ 153.37 $ 592.85
Wheel scratch $ 18.10 $ 69.92
Subtotal $ 263.50 $ 1,018.24
Table 6; 3rd party labor cost Analysis Data

18
VIII. Testing

a) Developmental Testing
When doing the load test, we noticed a deformation in the center of the crossbar, due to
the long length of this.
The transverse measurement was modified and adjusted to a 650 mm end-to-end
measurement of the chassis and reinforced with a bar parallel to 100 mm.

Figure 16; Crossbar frame deformation

Another of the important tests was the amount of friction applied between the CV joints
and the handles, the elements to the tempered steel in contact with the aluminum, these
tended to heat, expand and therefore increase their friction, for this they were machined
by points bronze
This material helped us maintain lubrication and low temperature levels. So also they
were given a sanding and polishing treatment to both pieces to reduce friction more.
The ergonomics test required a more adaptable design for each type of driver since the
difference in height of each driver varies between 10 and 15 cm. For this a measure of the
point of the lowest fall in the heel was standardized, to have a better pedaling and to take
better advantage of the force. This test showed that the best shot taking into account the
center of the crankshaft would be 30 cm high and 40 cm long, for the most comfortable
position of the hip.

19
IX. Conclusion
As the team is finishing the HPV, this part will be completed and presented until the design
presentation event.

a) Comparison

b) Evaluation

c) Recommendations

X. References

Medina Flores, Bertha, et al. Variación proporcional y funciones lineales. Taller de

impresiones , CCH Sur, UNAM. México. 2001. pp 49 y ss. 13
WIN autopartes, Manual técnico de juntas homocinéticas
http://winautopartes.com/catalogos/2017/Manual_puntas_25022017.pdf consultado el
día 2018-06-28
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, triangulación de estructuras, Archivo PDF,
https://www.feriadelasciencias.unam.mx/anteriores/feria15/triangulacion.pdf consultado
el día 2018-06-28
Comunidad biker, Frenos de disco hidráulicos, mecánica, funcionamiento, tipos,
http://www.comunidadbiker-mtb.com/frenos-de-disco-hidraulicos-mecanica-
funcionamiento-tipos/ consultado el día 2018-06-29

20