BENTLEY RETURNS TO LE MANS 61 YEARS ON

LIGHT FLOWING
FANTASTIC FREELY
Is the new Saxon Computational fluid
hillclimber the lightest dynamics even easier
single seater of all time? with Fluent

July 2001 • Vol 11 No.7 UK £3.95 • USA $7.95

Bentley’s
back Building a car
for the legend’s
a legend’s
Le Mans return

Ackermann part 2
The anti-Ackermann argument and
an affordable super computer

© IPC Media
Ackermann
T
here is a school of thought that argues
that while production cars can benefit
from dynamic-toe-out during cornering
(positive-Ackermann), racecars will
generally corner faster with some dynamic-toe-
in (negative or anti-Ackermann). This argument
is based on the observation that the greater the
load on a tyre, see Figure 1, then the greater the
slip-angle that it must run at in order to develop
its maximum cornering force. Since the outer-
wheel of a cornering car will carry a greater load
than the inner-wheel, it follows that the outer-
wheel must run at a greater slip-angle than the
inner-wheel, if both are to develop their
maximum cornering forces.
For example, consider Figure 4 – together
with the cross-ply tyre curves at the right of
Figure 1 – and the ‘Rear-Slip = 10 deg’ curve of
Figure 3. With 10 degrees of rear-slip and a
corner radius of about 30m the following is the
case;
KSA of Outer-Wheel = -5 degrees
Toe-Out of Inner-Wheel = -0.3 degrees
KSA of Inner-Wheel = -5 + (-0.3) = -5.3 degrees
If the heavily loaded outer-wheel develops its
peak-axial-force at a slip-angle of 10 degrees,
and the more lightly loaded inner-wheel
develops its peak-axial-force at nine degrees
then, for maximum cornering force;
Outer-Wheel Steer-Angle = -5(KSA) + 10(slip-angle)
= +5 degrees
Inner-Wheel Steer-Angle = -5.3(KSA) + 9(slip-angle)
= +3.7 degrees as indicated to the
left of Fig 4.
Put simply there should be about 1.3 degrees
of actual dynamic-toe-in, or anti-Ackermann,
when the front-wheels are steered about five
Figure 1: Tyre ‘Slip-Angles’
38 July 2001 Racecar Engineering
degrees away from straight-ahead.
The upper-right section of Figure 4 gives a
more detailed view of the situation at the inner-
front-wheel. The axial-force (Fy) doesn't point
directly at the Instant Centre but, by the
definition of its nine degree slip-angle, it points
nine degrees behind this radial line. The slip-
angle thus generates a ‘drag’ component of the
axial-force that is rearwards to the direction of
wheelprint travel. This ‘slip-angle-drag’ is an
undesirable force as it requires forward thrust,
and thus engine power and fuel, to overcome it.
One of the main benefits of radial-ply tyres is
that they corner at lower slip-angles, and thus
with less drag, than cross-ply tyres.
If the car in Figure 4 had a steering linkage
that generated dynamic-toe-out, then the inner-
wheel steer-angle would be greater than 3.7
“
One of the main
benefits of radial-ply
tyres is that they corner
at lower slip-angles
degrees, and the inner-wheel slip-angle would
”
be greater than nine degrees. The tyre would
thus be running at a point past its peak-axial-
force. Its ‘centripetal’ component of force would
be reduced and its drag component of force
increased. The car's total cornering force would
thus be reduced and it would require more
engine power to maintain the same speed. This
is the essence of the anti-Ackermann argument.
There are, however, several details that
should be kept in mind when considering this
anti-Ackermann argument. All of these are
detailed over the page. ➔
© IPC MEDIA
 Ackermann

Running adrift
In the second part of our
‘Understanding Ackermann’ series
we look at the ‘Anti-Ackermann’
argument and go back to the
drawing board to explain the theory

W o r d s and illustrations Erik Zapletal

Photos LAT

© IPC MEDIA Racecar Engineering July 2001 39


The finer points
of anti-
Ackermann
Large slip-angles
The above philosophy was developed quite a few
years ago, when racecars had the high slip-angle
tyres used in the above example. The race-tracks
of that period also had fewer tight-radius
corners such as ‘chicanes’. Much of the racing
involved long straights followed by high-speed
large-radius ‘power-limited’ bends. In this
“ With low slip-angle,
evenly loaded wheels,
the need for dynamic-
toe-in is considerably
reduced
”
situation, and for dirt-track cars with very high
rear-slip-angles, some anti-Ackermann, or
dynamic-toe-in from the steering may be
helpful. The maximum amount of dynamic-toe-in
needed is about three degrees for dirt racers
and less than two degrees for road racers.
As explained previously, large slip-angles are
not desirable because they generate drag and
while sideways might look fast, it is not
necessarily the quickest way through a corner.
Likewise, it is not desirable to have widely
different loads on the wheels, as this reduces
the maximum available horizontal wheel forces
via the tyre-load-sensitivity effect.
Figure 3: Kinematic Steer-Angles
Figure 2: Static Toe
It follows that it is desirable to fit a car with
tyres that develop their peak-force at small slip-
angles – for example, low-profile radial-ply
tyres – and to minimise the load variations of
the wheels. With low slip-angle, evenly loaded
wheels, the need for dynamic-toe-in is
considerably reduced.
Which tyre should peak first?
A racecar might not have the ideal steering
geometry that allows its front-wheels to reach
peak-axial-force simultaneously. If the outer-
wheel reaches peak-axial-force before the inner- Transient manoeuvres
wheel, due to excessive toe-in, then any During a fast lane-change, as may be necessary
increase in slip-angles will decrease the outer-
wheel's axial-force and increase the inner-
wheel's axial-force. A consideration of the car-
longitudinal components of these forces would
suggest that such a change will exert an
© IPC MEDIA
Ackermann
oversteering yaw moment on the car, which is
destabilizing. Conversely, if the inner-wheel of
the car reaches peak-force first, due to
insufficient toe-in, then any increase in slip-
angles will result in a stabilizing understeer yaw
moment acting on the car.
These effects may be small but they would
suggest that a racecar with some ‘peak-force-
toe-out’ (in the sense that the inner-wheel
reaches peak-force first) would be more stable
‘at the limit’, than a car with ‘peak-force-toe-in’.
“
A racecar that must
turn sharp corners may
need well over
10 degrees of dynamic-
toe-out
during overtaking or accident avoidance, a
”
driver will typically turn the steering wheel
through a large angle of perhaps half-lock or
more. The purpose of the large steering
movement is to make the front-wheels yaw the
front of the car to one side as quickly as
possible. It is only when the car has a yaw angle
to its direction of travel that its rear-wheels can
develop a lateral force, and thus it will then
push the rear of the car sideways.
A steering geometry that generates large
dynamic-toe-out angles will cause the inner-
wheel of the car to develop a larger steer-angle,
and slip-angle, than the outer-wheel,
whenever a large steering movement is ➔
Racecar Engineering July 2001 41
Ackermann
Figure 4: The ‘Anti-Ackermann’ Argument
made, and the car is still travelling straight-
ahead (see the ‘Static-Toe’ section and Figure 2).
This large rearwards movement of the inner-
wheel's axial-force vector will drag that side of
the car backwards, exerting a large yaw moment
on the car, thus improving transient response
times.
Sharp corners
Many racing textbooks advocate steering
geometries that are anti-Ackermann or, for the
fence-sitters, parallel-steer. They do so largely
because these geometries can be useful on high-
speed large-radius (small steer-angle) corners.
There are many categories of racecars that
are required to turn sharp corners – trials,
autocross/autotest, rallycross, hillclimb, Formula
SAE/Student and so on. If such a racecar has a
steering geometry that gives parallel-steer then
it will have a dynamic-toe curve that is a
horizontal line in Figure 3 (zero toe-change). An
anti-Ackermann steering geometry will produce
an initially horizontal dynamic-toe curve that
then drops below the horizontal axis of Figure 3.
A racecar that must turn sharp corners may
need well over 10 degrees of dynamic-toe-out to
enable its front-wheels to operate at similar slip-
angles. If this racecar has parallel-steer then its
wheels will be ‘effectively’ toed-in at over five
degrees per wheel when turning a sharp corner.
If this racecar has anti-Ackermann steering then
its wheels will be ‘effectively’ toed-in even more.
We will use the term ‘effective-toe’ to refer to
42 July 2001 Racecar Engineering
the discrepancy between the KSAs and the
actual steer-angles. Effective-toe-angles, if
measured at each wheel, are equal to the tyre's
slip-angles. Since we often don't know the
individual front-wheel slip-angles we can refer
to the ‘effective-total-toe-in’ between the two
front-wheels as being equal to the KSA Toe-Out
(for the car's specific instantaneous motion),
minus the total-toe-out of the front-wheels (the
included angle between the two front-wheels).
It might be useful for the reader to conduct a
small experiment to clarify the above situation.
Adjust the static-toe of your car to its maximum
safe extent (leave enough thread in the
adjustments to hold the track-rods together).
Regardless of whether it is toe-in or toe-out, try
to get at least five degrees per wheel – that is,
at least 10 degrees of toe difference between
the two. Now drive slowly along a private road.
Several things should become apparent.
Firstly, the tyres won't like it, and they will
protest loudly. Both tyres will initially be
operating close to their slip-angle-peaks where
there is a lot of real ‘slip’. Secondly, the steering
will be ‘light’. Most of each tyreprint will be
sliding so there will be little self-aligning torque
or steering feel. Thirdly, despite the driver's
steering efforts, the nose of the car will behave
like an overeager puppy trying to sniff every
tree either side of the road. One tyre will
occasionally get a better grip (due to a change in
road surface or wheel loading) and it will push
the other tyre over its slip-angle peak, thus
changing the direction of the car.
This is an inexpensive version of the tyre-
testing machines that produce the curves of
Figure 1. It gives a slow-motion view of the tyres
operating close to their slip-angle peaks.
The experiment also shows what parallel-
steer, or anti-Ackermann, does to the front-
wheels of a car whenever it turns a sharp
corner. The wheels are forced to run at a large
effective-total-toe-in. At least one wheel (which
is typically the outer-wheel) will be close to, or
“
The inner-wheel may,
in fact, be trying to push
the nose of the car out
”
of the corner
beyond its slip-angle peak, and as a result it will
therefore be reluctant to respond to any
steering inputs from the driver. The inner-wheel
may, as a matter of fact, be trying to push the
nose of the car out of the corner.
If the car has stiff front springs, and if it can
corner fast enough, then it may be able to lift
the inner-front-wheel off the ground, and stop it
from fighting the outer-wheel. Speed and noise
will make this fight less obvious but while both
front-wheels are on the ground the anti-
Ackermann car won't like sharp corners. ● RE
 Ackermann

W o r d s and illustrations Erik Zapletal

Photos Tony Petch

Do it yourself
If the reader prefers to use one of the more
expensive boxes of electronic mischief as their
coprocessor, then the method of solution would
be much the same as outlined here. For
example, a computer aided drafting program can
be used in a similar manner to that below.
Ackermann need not require hugely If, however, many different steering
geometries are to be investigated then a
expensive computers, here’s how to dedicated computer program executing this
do it using the barest of essentials same method, might be appropriate. The maths
are straightforward. For the generalised 3-D case
the program must find the correct intersection

T
point of the circular arc traced out by the steer-
here is a children's song called ‘The Since we all come thus equipped, the only arm-end-joint, and the surface of the sphere
Super Computer’ by Don Spencer, the additional ‘coprocessors’ needed to produce the traced out by the track-rod-end-joint – there
lyrics of which are as follows: curves shown in this article are A4 paper (5mm can be zero, one or two intersection points.
graph, if available), a fine-point biro, The first curves to be produced are the
There's a super computer that can do anything. straightedge (ruler), compass and a protractor. If Kinematic Steer-Angle curves, as shown in
It can count, it can smile, it can talk, it can sing. the reader doesn't have any of these, then they Figure 3, for the specific wheelbase and track
It can run, it can jump, it can laugh, it can cry, should be available at the local newsagent for dimensions, and various rear-slip-angles. The
With its own compact and portable power supply. less than US$2 total (the author was able to buy method is as follows:
It doesn't use buttons, has nerves instead. a nice protractor, and an adequate compass, for STEP 1 Draw a rectangle proportional to the car's
There's a super computer inside your head. a measly 50 cents each). wheelbase and track in the lower left corner ➔

Racecar Engineering July 2001 45

© IPC MEDIA
Ackermann

of the page. The example in Figure 3 was drawn

at a scale of 1:50, that is 52mm x 32mm. The top-
left-corner of this rectangle therefore
Figure 10: Worked Example
corresponds to the front-left-wheel.

STEP 2 Use the protractor to mark out a line from

the centre of the rear-axle, towards the right
and up, at the required rear-slip-angle – a
horizontal line for zero degrees rear-slip.

STEP 3 Mark out lines from the front-left-wheel at

angles of 10, 20, 30, and 40 degrees, towards the
right and down, until these lines intersect the
rear-slip line. These intersections are the
Instant Centres (ICs) of the turn. These lines
correspond to changes of angle of the front-
left-wheel's axle, and also to this wheel's steer-
angle from straight-ahead. If there is a lot of
rear-slip then lines at -10 degrees, and so on,
will be required. If a bigger sheet of paper is
available, then some lines at plus or minus five
degrees can be added, although at these angles end-joint at 25%, 50%, 75% and 100% full-lock, to table while his children are doing their
the wheels are almost parallel. the left and right of the already drawn ‘centred’ homework. For a quick feeling of the shape of
position. Alternatively mark positions at the dynamic-toe curve, only the half and full-
STEP 4 Use the straightedge to draw lines from regular, say 20mm, positions to the left and the lock angles have to be plotted. If these look
the front-right-wheel to the ICs. Use the right of the rack-end-joint. If the steering is via good then more points can be plotted for a
protractor to measure the angles of these lines. a rotating idler instead of a rack, then mark off more accurate curve.
symmetric positions to the left and the right of If an ‘A0’ size drawing board with built-in
STEP 5 Draw up a table of corresponding front- the centred idler position. protractor is available, very quick and accurate
left and front-right-wheel angles, and also the curves can be expected. In this case, if full-scale
difference of the angles – that is, right (inner- STEP 3 Use the compass to measure the track-rod or larger drawings are used, then the accuracy
wheel) angle minus left (outer-wheel) angle. length. With the compass point on each of the will probably exceed that on the real car, given
abovemarked rack positions, draw an arc that the manufacturing tolerances and compliance of
STEP 6 Transfer the above values to a graph, with intersects the steer-arm arc. Draw lines from
the outer-wheel angles along the horizontal each of these intersections to the kingpin. Align

axis, and ‘Kinematic Toe-Out’ values (inner
minus outer-wheel angles) along the vertical
axis. Join the points with straight lines, or with of the newly drawn steer-arm-angle lines.
a ‘French-curve’ or a ‘spline’ if available.
Dynamic Steps
Figure 10 shows how to produce the Dynamic-
“
the ‘zero’ of the protractor to the original steer-
arm centreline, then measure the angles to each It should be possible
to draw the dynamic-toe
STEP 4 Draw up a table of corresponding steer-
curve in about 15
arm-angles to the left, and to the right, of the
original steer-arm line. If drawn as in Figure 10,
the leftward angles represent the inner-wheel
steer-angles, and the rightward angles
minutes

the linkage and suspension under load.

”
Toe curves for a specific R&P steering geometry. represent the outer-wheel steer-angles. If a finished curve has a ‘kink’ in it, then it is
The method is as follows: Provided that the ‘rack marks’ are symmetric probable that a mistake was made. This could
about the rack ‘centremark’, then each inner- be due to wrong compass point positioning, flex
STEP 1 As with Figure 10, draw the basic steering wheel steer-angle will have a corresponding of a cheap compass, poorly drawn steer-arm-
geometry across the bottom of the page. Only outer-wheel steer-angle, for that particular angle lines, or misreading of the protractor. If
draw one half of the steering system. Use a displacement of the rack. It is also worth the arc of the track-rod is almost parallel with
scale that is as large as possible – 30% to 50% for noting, on the table, the differences of inner the arc of the steer-arm, making the
A4 paper. Position the kingpin first. Draw an arc minus outer-wheel steer-angle. intersection point difficult to determine, then
of radius equal to the steer-arm length. Draw in you will find that the real linkage will also be
the centreline of the steer-arm. Draw the rack STEP 5 On a similar graph to the KSA, draw a ‘compliant’ at this point in its travel.
centreline and the rack end-joint (with the rack curve of outer-wheel steer-angles versus The caveats at the beginning of the main
‘centred’) in the correct position relative to the dynamic-toe change of the inner-wheel. article, regarding the simplified 2-D analysis,
kingpin. Draw the track-rod from the rack-end- should be kept in mind when interpreting the
joint to the steer-arm-end-joint. Using the above method it should be possible to curves produced by this method. However,
draw the dynamic-toe curve for a specific you’ll find that a 90% accurate answer today,
STEP 2 Mark off positions along the rack steering layout in about 15 minutes – less, if the may well be better than a 99.9999% accurate
centreline corresponding to the position of the reader is not drawing his curves at the kitchen answer ‘sometime tomorrow’. ● RE

46 July 2001 Racecar Engineering © IPC MEDIA

 SUBSCRIBE TODAY
and get your first 3 issues absolutely FREE!
Take up our free trial for 3 months, and
have your favourite magazine delivered
direct to your door every month.
Continue your subscription and
save a further 15% off the full rate,
paying only £4.60 £3.91 an issue!

The world’s leading motorsport technology

For a rapid order call our hotline
publication brings insight into the ever-
changing world of motorsport engineering
Tel: +44 (0)845 676 7778
Please quote 29E. Lines open 7 days a week, 9.00am–9.00pm (UK time)
in all its forms, keeping you informed about OR SUBSCRIBE ONLINE AT WWW.RACECAR-ENGINEERING.COM
the latest technologies, expanding your Please note: offers vary online
knowledge of racecar design and operation
Click here to download a free sample
of the digital edition now or go to
™

www.racecar-engineering.com/digital
for more details
SUBSCRIPTION ORDER FORM
✔ Yes, I would like to subscribe to Racecar Engineering
and save a further 15% after 3 FREE issues
12 issues Offer price
■ UK (6-monthly Direct Debit) £23.46 SAVE 15%
■ UK (annual) £46.92 SAVE 15%
■ USA $106.87 SAVE 15%
■ Europe €80.37 SAVE 15%
■ Rest of World £66.90 SAVE 15%
N.B. All prices are discounted against our standard subscription rates.
Complete this coupon and send with your payment to:
UK: Racecar Engineering Subscriptions,
FREEPOST CY1061, Haywards Heath,
West Sussex RH16 3BR, UK (NO STAMP REQUIRED)
Overseas: Racecar Engineering Subscriptions,
PO Box 272, Haywards Heath,
West Sussex RH16 3FS, UK (PLEASE AFFIX CORRECT POSTAGE)
Offer Closing Date: 31 December 2006 (29E)

YOUR DETAILS
Title: ....... Initial: ............ Surname: ..............................................................
Address: .......................................................................................................
.....................................................................................................................
Post/Zipcode: ........................... Country: .....................................................
Evening Tel: ..................................................................................................
If you would like to receive emails from Racecar Engineering and IPC
containing news, special offers, product and service information and online
research quesionnaires, please include your email address below:

Email: ...........................................................................................................
Data protection: Racecar Engineering, published by IPC Media Ltd (IPC), will collect your personal information
to process your order. Racecar Engineering and IPC would like to contact you by post or telephone to promote and ask
your opinion on our magazines and services. Please tick here if you prefer not to hear from us ■. IPC may occasionally pass
your details to carefully selected organisations so they can contact you by telephone or post with regards to promoting and
researching their products and services. Please tick here if you prefer not to be contacted ■.