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

net/publication/318011082

Structural Analysis of Electric Vehicle Transmission - Mounts and Casing for

Different Materials

Article  in  SAE Technical Papers · June 2017

DOI: 10.4271/2017-28-1961

CITATION READS
1 1,668

6 authors, including:

B. Ashok Saurabh Yadav

VIT University NIIT University
177 PUBLICATIONS   3,965 CITATIONS    4 PUBLICATIONS   7 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Kavitha Chellappan Vemuluri Ramesh Babu

VIT University VIT University
15 PUBLICATIONS   67 CITATIONS    14 PUBLICATIONS   105 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

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

Electric Vehicles View project

Capacity Building in Collaborative Research, Academic Curriculum Development and Outreach towards Additively-Manufactured Electric Scooter for Addressing
Sustainability Challenges in India and UK View project

All content following this page was uploaded by B. Ashok on 30 May 2020.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Structural Analysis of Electric Vehicle Transmission - Mounts
and Casing for Different Materials
Shishir Sirohi, Saurabh Yadav, B. Ashok, and V Ramesh Babu
VIT University
C Kavitha
Kumaraguru College of Technology (KCT),
K Nantha Gopal
VIT University
CITATION: Sirohi, S., Yadav, S., Ashok, B., Babu, V. et al., "Structural Analysis of Electric Vehicle Transmission - Mounts and Casing
for Different Materials," SAE Technical Paper 2017-28-1961, 2017, doi:10.4271/2017-28-1961.
Copyright © 2017 SAE International and Copyright © 2017 SAE INDIA
Abstract
The main objective of the study is to design and analyze casing and
supports of a transmission system for an electric vehicle. The system
comprises of motors as the power source, constant mesh gear box
coupled with limited slip differential as the power transmitting
source. The space occupied by the transmission system is a foremost
constraint in designing the system. The wear and tear in the system is
caused by the gear meshing process and transmission error which
lead to failure of the transmission system. This internal excitation
also produces a dynamic mesh force, which is transmitted to the
casing and mounts through shafts and bearings. In order to overcome
such issues in a transmission system, a gear box casing, differential
mounts and motor mounts have been designed by the use of CAD-
modeling software “SOLIDWORKS”. The designs were imported to
FEA software “ANSYS” for carrying out static structural analysis.
Static analysis is performed to determine the deformation, Von-Mises
stresses, and Factor of Safety of the aforementioned models. The
analysis is carried by applying various boundary conditions of fixed
- fixed motion support and zero displacements for certain parts of the
models. Calculated load values were then applied using ANSYS
static analysis tool. Different materials are used for carrying out the
analysis on the casing, differential mount, and motor mount, for
varying thickness of the models. The materials opted for the study is
Aluminum Alloy (Al 6061-T6) and (Al 7075-T6). The design of the
models focused on weight reduction and appropriate stress
distribution. A comparison study has been carried out for the
materials. The study resulted in determining the thickness of the
models and the material that can withstand the loads and excitations
for maximum weight reduction.
2017-28-1961
Published 07/10/2017
Introduction
Currently, an alarming increase in vehicle population has resulted in
excess pollution and ways to combat it are being explored. The
conventional fossil fuels like petrol, diesel, etc cannot be relied upon
not only because of the high content of pollutants but also because of
the high rate of depletion. Under such a scenario, new ways of fuel
combustion, a hybrid mix of fuels and better equipment are required
to increase efficiency thereby reducing emissions. In such advent,
electric vehicles have been one of the most profound alternatives that
have been adopted [1, 2, 3]. An electric vehicle uses electric-motors
as the power source. The motors are coupled to mechanical drive
train with the help of transmission system. The transmission system
comprises a gear box, a differential and transmission shafts [4-5].
Designing of a gear box casing and other mounts for differential and
motor is one the primary tasks for development of an efficient
transmission system for power transmission. These casing and
mounts support the components and mitigate the vibrations that occur
during the motion. The key factor considered while designing the
components is the weight of the component, as less weight of the
components will be beneficial in improving the performance and
efficiency of the transmission system. A gearbox is a combination of
gears that is used to transmit power to the propeller shaft of the
vehicle. Its primary function is to vary torque and speed as per
requirements of the user and also depends on the terrain on which the
vehicle is driven. The gearbox is often installed with a casing or
housing. Automobile transmissions consist of multiple gears to
increase torque while slowing down the speed also uses a casing for a
gear box. Wang et al. [6] studied the fluctuations occurring in gear
dynamics and Sureyya et al. [7] carried out optimization of tooth
face, meshing stiffness and backlash for transmission components.
The vibration of transmission components causes noises and will lead
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017

to failure. The cause of rattling and clattering noise is the torsional manufacturability [6]. Table 1 contains the properties of Aluminum
vibration of transmission components; this noise is an undesirable 6061-T6 and Table 2 contains the properties of Aluminum 7075-T6,
character [8-9]. two of the materials selected for carrying the study.

The motor being the power generating devices in case of an electric Table 1. Properties of Al 6061-T6 for the transmission system design
vehicle uses the differential to distribute the power to the drive shafts
which is received from the propeller shaft. In order to assemble and
integrate the motors and differential onto the chassis, mounts are
designed and manufactured. Mounts are the supporting members for
motor and differential which are welded to the chassis or at times
bolted. Mounts have to withstand varying loads, vibrations, shock
loads when the vehicle is in motion. Stresses are induced into the
body and failure might occur due to fatigue induced in the mounts. To
find a solution to these problems, models of varying thickness are
designed for casing, differential and motor mounts. In the case of gear
box casing, three models of thickness-3.5, 4.5, 5.5 mm are designed,
similarly for differential mounts 4 models of thickness-12,14,16,18
mm and 3 models of thickness-12,14,16 for motor mounts are
designed and analyzed. These designs are modeled to optimize the
size to reduce weight by carrying out structural analysis on each of
the models. A comparison study is carried out on these models in
terms of a factor of safety and also to further improve the scope of the
study the material properties of the models are varied to find out the
most suitable material that can withstand the varying loads and
tolerances for manufacturing.
Table 2. Properties of Al 7075-T6 for the transmission system design
Design of the Transmission System
The transmission components comprising of the casing, differential
mount, and motor mount are constructed using CAD software
SOLIDWORKS.The CAD models of the casing, differential and
motor mounts are shown in figure.1. For static structural analysis, the
IGES file of solid models is imported to ANSYS 15.0. The following
sections deals with the design of various components present in the
transmission system of the electric vehicle.

Figure 1. Isometric view of casing, differential and motor mounts in the

electric vehicle tranmission system
Material Selection of Transmission Components
A comparison study of material has been carried out for all the
transmission components. The separate material is selected based on
its suitability for the electric vehicle transmission and
Structural Analysis of the Transmission System
Finite element (FE) structural analysis is carried out using the FE
code ANSYS 15.0. It is used to find the stresses induced and the
Factor of Safety of the models. The boundary conditions opted for the
simulations are fixed - fixed support and zero displacements for
certain parts of the models to constrain the degree of freedom of the
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017

body. Load values are calculated and then applied using ANSYS tool
itself. The result consists of stress concentration, strain, F.O.S as
calculated by FE code ANSYS under the boundary conditions as
applied. The meshing details are given in Table.3 and employed in
the analysis process. The analysis process of the transmission system
is discussed in the following section.

Table 3. Meshing parameters for analysis

Figure 2(a). Gear casing mesh model of thickness 5.5 mm.

Figure 2(b). Gear casing mesh model of thickness 4.5 mm.

a. Calculations
Calculation of static and dynamic loads, for bending moment and
torsion stiffness of the shaft and torque for finalizing the gear ratio are
calculated as done by Andrzej Maciejczyk et.al [2]. The reference is
used as a benchmark to calculate the dimensions of the shaft and
gears used in the gearbox and also the loads that are encountered
during the motion.
Figure 2(c). Gear casing mesh model of thickness 3.5 mm.

b. Boundary Conditions
The complex geometry of transmission components is analyzed using
boundary condition as dependent on the positioning of the
component. The fixed-fixed condition is applied by limiting nodal
displacement. Different Boundary Conditions are applied for analysis
of the models for carrying out structural analysis in ANSYS 15.0.
• Casing - Fixed Support, Displacement Zero, Bearing Load.
• Differential Mount - Displacement Zero, Remote Load.
• Motor Mount - Displacement Zero, Remote Load.
d. Differential Mounts
IGES file of the model is imported to ANSYS, similar boundary
conditions are used for carrying out structural analysis and the nodes
and elements are generated for the respective models as illustrated.
The differential mount mesh model of various thicknees is shown in
figure.3

c. Gear-Box Casing
IGES file of the models is imported to ANSYS and the variation in
each file being the thickness and material. The material property is
defined in the library data and meshing done is of tetrahedral nature.
The numbers of nodes for models are generated. The thickness of the
casing is designed by considering the space constraints and
Figure 3(a). Differential mount mesh model of thickness 18 mm.
manufacturability. The mesh model of gear casing with different
thickness is shown in Figure 2.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Figure 3(b). Differential mount mesh model of thickness 16 mm.
Figure 3(c). Differential mount mesh model of thickness 14 mm.
Figure 3(d). Differential mount mesh model of thickness 12 mm.
e. Motor Mounts
A similar methodology is adopted in the case of motor mounts as
aforementioned for casing and differential mounts. IGES models are
imported to ANSYS and nodes and elements are generated to carry
out the analysis. The motor mount mesh model with various
thicknesses is shown in figure.4.
Figure 4(a). Motor mount mesh model of thickness 16 mm.
Figure 4(b). Motor mount mesh model of thickness 14 mm.
Figure 4(c). Motor mount mesh model of thickness 12 mm.
Results and Discussion
FE code-ANSYS 15.0 is used to carry out structural analysis. The
result consists of stresses, strain, Factor of Safety as provided by
ANSYS[5]. The analysis is carried out for two materials and graphs
have been plotted to show the deviations in the models for Total
Deformation, VON-MISES Stress, and Factor of Safety.
a. Gear-Box Casing
Figure 5 and 6 depicts the simulations carried out on the gear-box
casing of various thicknesses for material Al-6061 and Al-7075. The
result shows the maximum deflection and the stresses induced in the
model depending on the thickness of the model. Figure.5 shows the
maximum deflection and maximum stress occurring in the model. It
is observed that the maxima’s are noticed at the inner circle in the
model. This is due to disruption of continuity in the model which
creates a stress concentrated zone. Figure 5 also depicts the factor of
safety of the model under the applied boundary conditions for the
material Al 6061-T6.
Figure.5. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for gear box
casing (Al-6061) at different thickness (T-5.5, T-4.5, T-3.5)
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Figure.6. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for gear box
casing (Al-7075) at different thickness (T-5.5, T-4.5, T-3.5)
Figure 6 shows the maximum deflection and Von-Mises stress, factor
of safety of the model for the material Al 7075-T6. A similar stress
concentration pattern is observed when the boundary conditions were
applied as it was observed in Figure.5. The only advantage being that
the deformation and the stress values are comparatively low for the
model as shown in Figure.6.
Figure.7. Graphical representation-factor of safety for gear box casing.
A graphical comparison is carried out between the analysis results of
two models with different materials. As three models of varying
thickness are modeled, thicknesses ranging from 3.5 to 5.5. Figure 7
displays the variation in factor of safety of the models. The maximum
value is being 15 for thickness of 5.5 with material Al 7075- T6. The
minimum is being 7.3 for thickness of 3.5 with material Al 6061-T6.
Figure.8. Graphical representation of maximum deformation for gear box casing.
Similarly, Figure 8 compares the maximum deformation that occurred
when the models are simulated for static structural analysis. It is
observed that model of material Al 7075 -T6 showed comparatively
lesser values of deformation that the Al 6061-T6 model. The
maximum deformation is noted 0.068 mm for Al 7075 - T6 and
minimum of 0.0266 for Al 7075-T6. A deviation is observed that the
maximum deformation occurred in the Al 7075-T6 model for the
thickness 3.5 mm. Correspondingly, Al 6061-T6 thickness 3.5 mm
model shows lesser value of deformation.
Figure.9. Graphical representation- Von Mises Stress for gear box casing
In Figure.9, the induced stress in the gear box casing have been
depicted and it is noted that Al 7075-T6 with thickness 3.5 mm model
showed a higher induced stress value than the Al 6061-T6 model of
same thickness. The maximum stress value is also encountered in Al
7075-T6 model as shown in Figure 6 and Figure 9. This is one of the
consideration factors that are kept into account when the final model
assembly is carried out.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017

b. Differential Mount

Figure.10. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for differential

mounts (Al-6061) at different thickness (T-18, T-16, T-14, T-12)

Figure 10 and Figure 11 depicts the simulations which are carried out
Figure.11. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for differential
on the differential mounts of various thicknesses for material Al-6061 mounts (Al-7075) at different thickness (T-18, T-16, T-14, T-12)
and Al-7075. The boundary conditions are applied to the specific
models and results are generated using ANSYS FEA solver. Figure
10 shows various mounts of thickness varying from 12 to 18 mm and
the material for all the mounts is Al 6061-T6. The differential mounts
have been modeled specifically to fit the chassis with ease by the use
of bolting mechanism. It is noted that the differential mount subjected
to high stress due to continuous variation in shape of the differential.
Maximum Deformation, Von-Mises Stress and factor of Safety of the
model have been displayed in Figure 10 and it has been noted that
differential with circular cross-section shows maximum deformation
under loads and also has the highest stress-concentration factor.

Figure 11 shows the maximum deflection and Von-Mises stress,

factor of safety of the differential model for the material Al 7075-T6.
Figure.12. Graphical representation-factor of safety for differential mounts.
A similar stress concentration pattern around the circular cross-
section is observed when the boundary conditions are applied as it is
observed in Figure 10. The only advantage is being that the Al
7075-T6 model shows higher values of factor of safety due its
ultimate tensile strength and yield strength.

A graphical comparison is carried out between the analysis results of

two differential models with different materials. Four models of
varying thickness are modeled, thicknesses ranging from 12 to 18
mm. Figure 13 displays the variation in factor of safety of the models.
The maximum value is 2.4442 for the material Al 7075-T6 model.
The minimum value is less than unity 0.82597 at thickness of 3.5 mm
with material Al 6061-T6.
Figure.13. Graphical representation of Von Mises Stresses for differential mounts
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017

Figure.13 shows a comparison of stresses induced in the models with when the boundary conditions are applied as it is observed. The only
varying thicknesses. It is observed that for thickness 12 mm the advantage is that the Al 7075- T6 model shows higher values of
material Al 7075-T6 model has higher induced stress values than Al factor of safety due its ultimate tensile strength and yield strength.
6061-T6. The maximum stress value is also encountered in material
Al 7075-T6 model as shown in Figure 10 and Figure 13. This is one
of the major factors that are considered for the final model assembly.
Figure 14 shows a comparison of maximum deformation that
occurred when the models are simulated for static structural analysis.
It is observed that the material Al 7075 -T6 model shows
comparatively lesser values of deformation than that of the Al
6061-T6 model. The maximum deformation is observed as 2.3391
mm for Al 7075 -T6 and minimum of 0.94607 mm for Al 7075-T6. A
deviation is observed in terms of maximum deformation occurred in
the Al 7075-T6 model for the thickness 12 mm. Correspondingly, Al
6061-T6 with thickness 12 mm model shows lesser value of
deformation. The maximum deformation is quite noticeable at the
circular cross-section and hence a fillet is added to the model design
to ensure distribution of stress and hence decrease the chance of
failure of the component.

Figure.15. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for motor

mounts (Al-6061) at different thickness (T-16, T-14, T-12)

Figure.14. Graphical representation of maximum deformation for

differential mounts

c. Motor Mounts
Figure15 and 16 depicts the simulations carried out on the differential
mounts of various thicknesses for material Al-6061 T6 and Al-7075
T6. The boundary conditions are applied to the specific models and
results were generated using FEA solver- ANSYS.

Figure 15 shows various mounts of thicknesses varying from 12 to 16

mm and the material for all the mounts is Al 6061-T6. The motor
mounts have been designed specifically to fit the chassis with ease by
the use of bolting mechanism and hold the motor to counter the
vibrations that are induced in the mounts due to continuous motion of
the motors under loading conditions. It is also noted that the motor
mount will be subjected to with high stress due to continuous variable
caused by the sudden acceleration and braking caused by the input of
the driver.

Maximum Deformation, Von-Mises Stress and factor of Safety of the

model have been presented in Figure 15 and it has been noted that
circular cross-section exhibits the maximum deformation under loads
Figure.16. Deformation, Von-mises stress and factor of safety for motor
and also has the highest stress-concentration factor. Figure 16 shows
mounts (Al-7075) at different thickness (T-16, T-14, T-12)
the maximum deflection and Von-Mises stress, factor of safety of the
differential model for the material Al 7075-T6. A similar stress
concentration pattern around the circular cross-section is observed
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017
Figure.17. Graphical representation-factor of safety for motor mounts.
A graphical comparison is carried out between the analysis results of
two models with different materials. As three models of varying
thicknesses such as from 12 to 16 mm. Figure 17 displays the variation
in factor of safety of the models. The maximum value is 3.271 for the
thickness of 16 mm with material Al 7075- T6 and the minimum is
1.0859 for thickness of 12 mm with material Al 6061-T6.
Figure.18. Graphical representation of maximum deformation for motor mounts
Figure 18 shows a comparison of maximum deformation that
occurred when the models were simulated. It is observed that the
material model Al 7075 -T6 shows comparatively lesser values of
deformation than that of the material model Al 6061-T6. The
maximum deformation noted is 6.939 mm for Al 6061 -T6 and
minimum of 3.465 mm for Al 6061-T6. The maximum deformation is
quite noticeable at the circular cross-section and hence a fillet and
extra mounting points for support are provided to the model for
countering the deformations induced due to excessive vibrations of
the motor. It also ensures distribution of stress and hence decreases
the chance of failure of the component. Figure 19 displays the stress
value comparisons and it is noted that stress induced in the Al
7075-T6 at thickness 12 mm is comparatively lower than that of Al
6061-T6 model of similar thickness. It is also observed that high
stresses are induced at the bolting points due to high force moments
and dynamic loading of the motor.
Figure.19. Graphical representation- Von Mises Stress for differential mounts
Conclusion
As the study shows that models are simulated for static structural
analysis and FEA modeler ANSYS results of maximum deformation,
Von-Mises stress, and factor of safety [5] are listed out and compared.
The factor of Safety is opted as a deciding factor for analyzing the
result and selecting the material for the transmission components.
Thickness is selected by studying the maximum deformation and
induced stress values. The material chosen for manufacturing the
transmission components is Aluminum 6061-T6. Al (6061-T6)
material is suitable enough to provide effective strength to weight
ratio. The selection of the models for thickness is done and the cost of
machining is also taken into consideration to finally select the
models. The selected models for manufacturing as suggested after
carrying out the study are:
a. The thickness of Gear-Box Casing was chosen to be - 4.5mm.
b. The thickness of Differential Mount was chosen to be - 14mm.
c. The thickness of Motor Mount was chosen to be -12mm.
The analysis result shows the significance of boundary conditions for
all the designs and force application as carried out by ANSYS. The
use of FE Software ANSYS and its components allow faster and
efficient model generation. Almost all structurally important
components could be modeled using ANSYS Preprocessor. The
application of various types of loads and boundary conditions are also
simple. SolidWorks 14.0 is a useful tool in carrying out the design of
the models used for analysis. A comparison study is useful to select
the material and helped in understanding material behavior on the
application of load. Al (6061 -T6) is found out to be more suitable for
the application in automobile industry.
References
1. Ashok, B., Ashok, S.D. and Kumar, C.R., 2015. LPG diesel dual
fuel engine-A critical review. Alexandria Engineering Journal,
54(2), pp.105-126.
2. Nanthagopal, K., Ashok, B. and Raj, R.T.K., 2016. Influence
of fuel injection pressures on Calophyllum inophyllum methyl
ester fuelled direct injection diesel engine. Energy Conversion
and Management, 116, pp.165-173.
 Downloaded from SAE International by Ashok B, Wednesday, June 28, 2017

3. Ashok, B., Raj, R.T.K., Nanthagopal, K., Krishnan, R. and 8. Rakesh N. Lenin, Palanisamy V. and Jeevabharathi S., 2003.
Subbarao, R., 2017. Lemon peel oil-A novel renewable Stress Analysis of a Shaft Using Ansys, Middle-East Journal of
alternative energy source for diesel engine. Energy Conversion Scientific Research 12, pp 1726-1728,
and Management, 139, pp.110-121. 9. Sameer Chakravarthy and Subbaratnam B.2014. Finite Element
4. Dahiya, S., Sharma, A., Srinivasan, R., Tekriwal, R. et al., Analysis And Fatigue Analysis Of Spur Gear Under Random
"Electro-Pneumatic Shifting System and Gear Control Unit for Loading, International Journal of Mechanical Engineering and
a Sequential Gearbox," SAE Technical Paper 2016-28-0175, Robotics Research.
2016, doi:10.4271/2016-28-0175.
5. Vemparala, M.R., Somasundaram, S.R., Anandkrishnan, S.M., Contact Information
Ashok, B. and Kavitha, C., 2016, February. Implementation of real
Prof.B.Ashok
time low voltage system for enhancement of safety in an electric
Department of Automotive Engineering
vehicle. 2016 IEEE International Conference on Information
School of Mechanical engineering
Communication and Embedded Systems (ICICES), (pp. 1-6).
VIT University, Vellore-632 014, Tamilnadu, India
6. Ji Wang, Jianhua Zheng, Aibo Yang. 2012. An Analytical Study ashok.b@vit.ac.in
of Bifurcation and Chaos in a Spur Gear Pair with Sliding ashokmts@gmail.com
Friction. Procedia Engineering vol. 31, pp. 563 - 570.
7. Sureyya Nejat., 1999. Loose part vibration in vehicle
transmissions Gear rattles. Tr. J. of Engineering and
Environmental Science vol. 23, pp.439-454.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2017-28-1961

View publication stats