See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/271989089

Design Considerations for Automobile Chassis for Prevention of Rolling over

of a Vehicle

Article · August 2014

DOI: 10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.612.41

CITATIONS READS

4 10,589

4 authors:

Jatin Rajpal Sandeep Thorat

MAEER`s MIT College of Engineering MAEER`s MIT College of Engineering
3 PUBLICATIONS   6 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Basavaraj S Kothavale Swapnil Hatwalane

MAEER`s MIT College of Engineering MAEER`s MIT College of Engineering, Pune
18 PUBLICATIONS   66 CITATIONS    8 PUBLICATIONS   4 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Presently, I am working on Reliability analysis of CNC turning center. View project

Presently working on Noise Control In Vehicle by designing Muffler View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Basavaraj S Kothavale on 14 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 612 (2014) pp 41-49
© (2014) Trans Tech Publications, Switzerland
doi:10.4028/www.scientific.net/AMM.612.41

Design Considerations for Automobile Chassis for Prevention of Rolling

Over of a Vehicle

Jatin Rajpal1,a,Sandeep G. Thorat2,b,Basavaraj S. Kothavale3,c

Swapnil S. Hatwalane4,d
1,2,3,4
MITCOE,Kothrud, Pune, Maharashtra, India.
a
jatinrajpal3292@gmail.com , b sandeepgthorat@gmail.com ,cbasavaraj.kothavale@mitcoe.edu.in ,
d
swapnilshatwalane@gmail.com ,

Keywords: Active Bogies, Rolling Over, Toppling, Weight Reduction

Abstract. The first part of this paper deals with the structural analysis of automobile frame and
design modification to reduce weight of the chassis, the second part is the study of rolling over
effect and the multiple axle drives with active bogies for chassis levelling and the final part is the
implementation of the active bogies and multiple axle drives for the prevention of rolling over. A
method has been suggested to overcome the rolling over by design modification of the chassis.
Active weights are used in order to prevent the rolling over of a vehicle.

Introduction

Automobile chassis refers to the lower body of the vehicle including the tires, engine, frame,
driveline and suspension. Out of these, the frame provides necessary support to the vehicle
components placed on it. Also the frame should be strong enough to withstand shock, twist,
vibrations and other stresses. The chassis frame consists of side members attached with a series of
cross members Stress analysis using Finite Element Method (FEM) can be used to locate the critical
point which has the highest stress. This critical point is one of the factors that may cause the fatigue
failure. The magnitude of the stress can be used to predict the life span of the truck chassis. The
accuracy of prediction life of truck chassis is depending on the result of its stress analysis.

Literature Survey

An Electronic Control Unit (ECU) was designed which calculates the risk of rolling over and
then a lateral acceleration is produced in a direction opposite to that of rolling over to prevent the
effect (Yoon, Cho, Koo, Yi, 2009). But, this was more prone to accidents as the car went in
opposite direction as intended by the driver. So, A Unified Chassis Control (UCC) System was
designed which calculates the risk of rolling over and then calculates the braking force required to
stop the vehicle and the brakes are applied to prevent rolling over (Yoon, Cho, Kang, Koo, Yi,
2009). A study on active bogies is done for chassis levelling in order to keep the centre of mass
intact (Pijuan, Comellas, Nogues, Roca, Potau, 2011). Design modification for reduction of weight
was studied by (Vijaykumar Patel,2012). Besides this, the NHTSA has given a report of the number
of roll over accidents and the fatal injuries and thus has also proposed a rolling over index for
different vehicles, which tells us about the tendency of various vehicles to roll over.

Design Modification for Weight Reduction

The existing frame is analyzed using Finite Element Analysis, the frame weight is kept constant
and the maximum stress developed and displacements and shear stress developed is calibrated. A
sensitivity analysis is done and a modified deigns were proposed, a total of three designs were
proposed and then Finite Element Analysis is carried over on them and the results were calibrated
again.

All rights reserved. No part of contents of this paper may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means without the written permission of TTP,
www.ttp.net. (ID: 220.225.106.238-06/08/14,06:36:09)
42 Advanced Research in Design, Manufacturing and Materials

Cross Section of Main Frame are: height (h) = 210 mm, breadth (b’) = 76 mm, thickness (t) = 6
mm

Fig.1 Existing main frame cross section

Design Modification for Weight Reduction

Model No. = 11.10 (Eicher E2)

Side bar of the chassis are made from “C” Channels with 210mm x 76 mm x 6 mm

Front Overhang (a) = 935 mm

Rear Overhang (c) = 1620 mm

Wheel Base (b) = 3800 mm

Material of the chassis is St 52

E = 2.10  105 N / mm2

Poisson Ratio = 0.31

Radius of Gyration R = 210 / 2 =105 mm

Capacity of Truck = 8ton = 8000 kg= 78480 N

Capacity of Truck with 1.25% = 98100 N

Weight of body and engine = 2 ton = 2000 kg = 19620 N

Total load acting on chassis = 98100 +19620 = 117720 N

Chassis has two beams. So load acting on each beam is half of the Total load acting on the
chassis.Load acting on the single frame = 117720 / 2 = 58860 N / Beam

Now we can calculate the maximum shear stress and maximum deflection using the equation given
below.
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 612 43

Deflection of chassis

That is within safe limit according deflection span ratio.

Design Modification for Weight Reduction

For carrying out the FE Analysis of chassis as per standard procedure first it requires to create
merge part for assembly to achieve the connectivity and loading and constraining is required to be
applied also idealization of parts is done on structure this will lead to faster analysis since the
connected structure will not be physical but it will be a sketch with mechanical properties of
mechanical structure. Procedure is followed in this section. The truck chassis model is loaded by
static forces from the truck body and load. For this model, the maximum loaded weight of truck
plus body is 10.000 kg. The load is assumed as a uniform distributedobtained from the maximum
loaded weight divided by the total length of chassis frame. Detail loading of model is shown in
Figure. The magnitude of force on the upper side of chassis is 117720 N. Earth gravity is also
considered for the chassis frame as a part of loading.[4]

There are 4 boundary conditions of model; the first two boundary conditions are applied in front
of the chassis, the second and the third boundary conditions are applied in rear of chassis, there are
shown in Figure.

Fig.2 Structural load and boundary condition for chassis frame

Results

The location of maximum Von Misses stress and maximum shear stress are at corner of side bar
which in Figure. The Von Misses stress magnitude of critical point is 190.38 MPa and the
maximum shear stress magnitude is 106.08 MPa.

Fig.3 Equivalent stress in chassis frame Fig.4Maximum shear stress in chassis frame
44 Advanced Research in Design, Manufacturing and Materials

Displacement

The displacement of chassis and location ofmaximum displacement is shown in Figure. The
magnitude of maximum displacement is 3.0294 mm.

Fig.5Displacement in chassis frame

Design Modification

To analyze the sensitivity of frame web height to the change in thickness and vice-versa for the
approximately same section modulus and flange width.

Section modulus

But, t<< b’ and t << h so taking b’ - t =b’ and h - 2t = h)

Section modulus and flange width being constant K is constant parameter. Taking h as dependent
parameter and t as independent parameter. Differentiate equation the above equation we get,.

This concludes that with increase in web height, thickness of frame can be reduced with this
relation an approximate value can be obtained. With increase in web height and decrease in
thickness. By using equation
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 612 45

Three cases of different cross section are produced.[4]

Case 1

h=227.5 mm t=5.5mm b ‘= 76 mm

Case 2

h= 236.25mm t=5.25mm b’ = 76 mm

Case 3

h = 245mm t=5 mm b ‘= 76 mm

Similarly FEA is carried out for the above three cases and the following Result is tabulated

Table 1 Comparison of Results obtained after Finite Element Analysis

Maximum
Chassis Shear Maximum
Equivalent
Sr. No. Section Weight Stress Displacement
Stress
[Kg.] [MPa] [mm]
[MPa]

Existing
1 326.36 106.08 3.0294 190.38
Section

2 Case 1 318 113.71 2.6962 195.5

3 Case 2 311.45 111.89 2.7457 204.97

4 Case 3 304.57 93.203 2.6901 174.22

From the above result it is clear that the weight is reduced by 6.68 % of the chassis frame. The
maximum shear stress, maximum equivalent stress and displacement are also reduced respectively
12.14 %, 8.55 % and 11.20 %. It is clear that design is safe.

Rolling Over & Toppling Effect

Vehicle rollover is a serious problem in the area of ground transportation and a report published
by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has found that, even though
rollover constitutes only a small percentage of all accidents, it does, however constitute a
disproportionately large portion of severe and fatal injuries. Almost 11 million passenger cars,
SUVs, pickups, and vans crashed in 2002, yet only 2.6% of these involved a rollover. However, the
percentage of fatal crashes that involved the occurrence of rollover was about 21.1%, which is
significantly higher than the corresponding percentages for other types of crashes (NHTSA, 2003).
In order to help consumers understand a vehicle’s likelihood of rollover, the rollover resistance
rating program was proposed by NHTSA which uses the static stability factor (SSF), which is the
ratio of half the track width to the height of the center of gravity (CG), to determine the rollover
resistance rating. The SSF has been questioned by the automotive industry as it does not consider
the effects of suspension deflection, tire traction aspects, or the dynamics of the vehicle control
46 Advanced Research in Design, Manufacturing and Materials

system. Accordingly, in 2002, NHTSA published another announcement with regard to a tentative
dynamical rollover test procedure (NHTSA, 2001).[6]

If a body is resting on a rough slope, it will be on the verge of toppling over when the weight of
the body acts through the edge of the part of the body which is in contact with the slope.

Toppling will not occur Object on verge of toppling Here the object will topple

Fig.6 Toppling Effect

This is because, about the edge of the object, there is a net anti-clockwise moment (turning
effect). Remember, the weight acts through the centre of gravity of the object.

Vehicle rollovers are divided into two categories: tripped and untripped. Tripped rollovers are
caused by forces from an external object, such as a curb or a collision with another vehicle.
Untripped crashes are the result of steering input, speed, and friction with the ground.

Fig.7. Because of a higher center of gravity, Suvs are more prone to rollover

All vehicles are susceptible to rollovers to various extents. Generally, the higher the center of
mass, the narrower the axle track, the more sensitive the steering, and the higher the speed, the more
likely a vehicle is to roll over.

Untripped rollovers occur when cornering forces destabilize the vehicle. As a vehicle rounds a
corner, three forces act on it: tire forces (the centripetal force), inertial effects (the centrifugal
force), and gravity. The cornering forces from the tire push the vehicle towards the center of the
curve. This force acts at ground level, below the center of mass. The force of inertia acts
horizontally through the vehicle's center of mass away from the center of the turn. These two forces
make the vehicle roll towards the outside of the curve. The force of the vehicle's weight acts
downward through the center of mass in the opposite direction. When the tire and inertial forces are
enough to overcome the force of gravity, the vehicle starts to turn over.
The most common type of tripped rollovers occur when a vehicle is sliding sideways, and the
tires strike a curb, dig into soft ground, or a similar event occurs that results in a sudden increase
lateral force. The physics are similar to cornering rollovers. In a 2003 report, this was the most
common mechanism, accounting for 71% of single-vehicle rollovers.
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 612 47

Another type of tripped rollover occurs due to a collision with another vehicle or object. These
occur when the collision causes the vehicle to become unstable, such as when a narrow object
causes one side of the vehicle to accelerate upwards, but not the other. Turned down guard rail end
sections have been shown to do this. A side impact can accelerate a vehicle sideways. The tires
resist the change, and the coupled forces rotate the vehicle. In 1983, crash tests showed that light
trucks were prone to rolling over after colliding with certain early designs of guide rail.
A rollover can also occur as a vehicle crosses a ditch or slope. Slopes steeper than 33% (one
vertical unit rise or fall per three horizontal units) are called "critical slopes" because they can cause
most vehicles to overturn.
A vehicle may roll over for other reasons, such as when hitting a large obstacle with one of its
wheels or when maneuvering over uneven terrain.
Existing Rollover Prevention Technologies

Most existing rollover prevention technologies can be classified into two types, namely, (1) the
type which directly controls the vehicle roll motion through an active suspension, an active anti-roll
bar, or an active stabilizer (Chen & Hsu, 2008) which can prevent rollover by raising the rollover
threshold; and (2) the type which indirectly influences roll motions by controlling the yaw motions
through differential braking and active front steering (Wielenga&Chace, 2000).(3) The unified
chassis control (UCC) algorithm has been designed to prevent vehicle rollover while, at the same
time, ensuring good maneuverability and lateral stability by integrating individual chassis control
modules, such as ESC and active front steering (AFS).[3]

Active Bogies with Multiple Axle Drive

Multiple axle drives with active bogies are used for the purpose of chassis leveling and smooth
running of a vehicle operating in rough terrain. Suppose a heavy motor vehicle has to be driven on a
slope above 30% on a rough terrain, it is difficult to do so, because of the problem of rolling over.
Therefore, vehicles incorporating tilting chassis are ideal for working on steep slopes as it allows
considerably increased stability.

Fig.8. Multiple Axle Drives with Active Bogies Fig.9.Chassis Leveling

Another alternative to improve traction and adaptation to uneven terrain is locomotion by legs,
but these vehicles have two major inherent drawbacks. The first is the complexity of construction
and control, given the coordinated simultaneous leg movement for the advancement of the vehicle.
The second is the very high energy consumption compared to a wheeled vehicle. The company
Timberjack developed an interesting harvester model with 6-leg loco- motion. Due to its high
complexity and cost it has not come to market yet.[1]

Acttive in itself means moving or capable of moving. Vehicle with the moving compartment or
the bogies to certain angle or to say a tilting compartment are said to be active bogies. The active
bogies may also actuate so as to produce a variation of normal force distribution between the two
wheel axles of the bogie, so decreasing the load of a particular wheel facing an obstacle.
48 Advanced Research in Design, Manufacturing and Materials

Future Scope – Proposed Design to Prevent Rollover Accidents

In part 1 of the report, we reduced the weight of the vehicle by 6.68%. we can use other methods
as well to reduce the weight of the vehicle. But, what is important is the 6.68%. Now, what we are
doing is that we are designing a new method to prevent rolling over implementing add on weights
so that the entire weight of the vehicle does not exceed the total weight of the existing model, i.e.,
even after adding on weight to the chassis the total weight is not exceeding the existing model.

In part 2 of the report, we studied the topping effect, the rolling over effect, NHTFA calculation
of rolling over index, active bogies and multiple axle, chassis leveling and the causes of rolling
over. We will overcome these causes using the new design.

Proposed Design

The new design consists of active weights put on the axle of the vehicle. The active weights
should not exceed a total amount of 6.68% of the actual weight of the existing vehicle in order to
maintain the same weight.

Fig.10.Proposed Design to Prevent Rolling Over

The weights are movable, as already said the are active weights. We now design an ECU
(Electronic Control Unit). What this ECU does is it senses the shifting of centre of gravity (CG) of
the vehicle. After sensing the gravity shift it manages the movable weights on the axle to maintain
the centre of gravity(CG). Now when does it work?. The ECU is so designed that it gets activated
only after a certain speed, probably depending on the country roads and speed limits and offcourse
the warning signs. When the risk of rolling over is maximum from one side, i.e., the centre of
gravity has shifted to that side, the ECU manages the weights the shift to the other side and
maintain the centre of gravity. Thus, if a particular vehicle rolled over on a road at a speed of v
kmph, it might sustain the speed and now roll over at a speed say 1.2v kmph. Thus if speed limit is
increased by 20% for a rollover, most likely the rolling over may reduce by the same percentage,
may be less may be more. However, the actual figures may only be determined after certain tests
performed. Probably at right place and with the right resources available.

In addition to this, the ECU has some more features, may be an active cruise control, collision
warning, collision avoidance, parking sensors, etc.

Requirements for Testing the Design

A full scale driving simulator on a virtual test track is required with the involvement of the
human. More easily explained as what we use or see in video games these days, a car driven by a
human him self, the inputs given by him as according to the road, the acceleration, deacceleration,
braking, cuts and turns. A test can be performed with the same simulator but say 15 to 20 number of
humans driving the same vehicle, as the driving skills differ from driver to driver and the
observations made and analyzed in detail and then accordingly the design can be modified to our
best requirements.
 Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 612 49

Fig.11.Hardware configuration of the driving simulator with a human in-the-loop.

Conclusion

The Static Stability Factor (SSF) described by the NHTSA as ratio of half the base width to the
height of Centre of Gravity, is surely increased as the height of Centre of Gravity is brought down.
Hence SSF is increased, but final results can only be achieved by practical implementations, but if it
works, it surely overcomes the two designs studied in the literature survey. The first being the
method in which if the ECU senses a chance of rolling over, it reduces the lateral acceleration, this
is in the direction opposite to that of the driver inputs. The second one being the ECU design in
which if the ECU senses the rolling over chances, it calculates the required braking torque and the
brakes are applied automatically. In the design shared above, neither the brakes act, so the speed is
maintained nor a lateral de-acceleration, therefore the handling is smooth.

References

[1] “ ctive bogies and chassis levelling for a vehicle o erating in ro gh terrain” i an,
Comellas, og e s, oca, ota o rnal of erramechanics (2012) 161-171;
received 28 June 2011; received in revised form 22 December 2011; accepted 8 March 2012
Available online 3 April 2012.
[2] “Str ct ral d rability design recommendations for forged a tomotive al mini m chassis
components submitted to spectrum and environmental loadings by the example of a tension
str t” Hägele,C Sonsino International o rnal of Fatig e received 3 febr ary 2012
received in revised form 20 March 2012; accepted 22 March 2012.
[3] Design and evaluation of a unified chassis control system for rollover prevention and vehicle
stability improvement on a virtual test track; JangyeolYoon, WankiCho, JuyongKang,
Bongyeong Koo, Kyongsu Yi; Control Engineering Practics 18 (2010) 585-597; received 6
May 2009; accepted 23 February 2010.
[4] Structural Analysis of Automotive Chassis Frame and Design Modification for Weight
Reduction; Patel Vijaykumar V,Prof. R. I. Patel; International Journal of Engineering Research
& Technology (IJERT);ISSN: 2278-0181;Vol. 1 Issue 3, May – 2012
[5] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), F. (2003). Motor vehicle traffic
crash injury and fatality estimates, 2002 early assessment. NCSA (National Center for Statistics
and Analysis) Advanced Research and Analysis.
[6] National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), F. (2001). DOT Announces
Proposal to Add Rollover Ratings to Auto Safety Consumer Information Program. NHTSA
Now, 6(7)
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rollover cited on 25th September, 2013.

View publication stats