Proceedings of the ASME 2008 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and

Information in Engineering Conference

IDETC/CIE 2008
August 3-6, 2008, Brooklyn, New York, USA

DETC2008-49243

KINEMATIC ANALYSIS AND PARAMETER SENSITIVITY TO HARD POINTS OF FIVE-

LINK REAR SUSPENSION MECHANISM OF PASSENGER CAR

Balike, Krishna Prasad∗ Rakheja, S

Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering

Ion Stiharu
Department of Mechanical & Industrial Engineering
CONCAVE Research Center
Concordia University, Montreal, Canada, H3G 1M8

ABSTRACT:
An existing kinematic model is discussed in this paper
for its suitability for the kinematic analysis and synthesis of
five-link rear suspension mechanism of a passenger car. The
formulations for the trajectory of wheel center and contact
patch along with other basic suspension kinematic parameters,
as a function of wheel jounce and rebound are discussed and
simulated. A model of the suspension is built in Multi-body
Dynamics software ADAMS/view to validate the discussed
model. The simulation results of kinematic model are found to
be influenced by magnitude of the assumed velocity
component of wheel center, however when a small magnitude
of velocity is assumed as the input to the model the results
match with the ADAMS model. A sensitivity analysis method
is discussed in this paper which reveals the influence of
suspension joint locations on the wheel center trajectory and
other kinematic parameters. The information obtained from
the sensitivity analysis can be effectively used for tuning of
the hard points to obtain desired kinematic parameters. Using
the results of sensitivity analysis, two of the hard points of an
existing suspension are relocated and was verified by
kinematic analysis of the modified suspension that the
modification had resulted in an improved camber variation
with a slight compromise on ride height.
1 INTRODUCTION
The position and velocity analysis of any mechanism without
considering the effect of forces acting on it, is usually termed
as kinematic analysis and the kinematics of vehicle suspension
mechanism deals with the articulation of the suspension
mechanism and change in wheel orientation during its vertical
∗
Author for correspondence, Email: pras_bk@yahoo.com
travel [1]. The position and orientation of the vehicle wheel
while it travels from full jounce to full rebound, strongly
influences the road holding and directional dynamics of the
vehicle and this position and orientation of the wheel is
determined by the suspension mechanism [2]. It is evident
from the literature that the handling dynamics of passenger
cars are of primary concern in the vehicle design, as a vast
number of studies had focused on this issue [3-5]. In order to
obtain the required handling, directional stability and tire wear
characteristics from the suspension, due considerations has to
be given to these issues in the suspension design process. The
initial stages of vehicle suspension synthesis involves the
development of kinematic model of the quarter car to
investigate the movement of the wheel carrier to full bump to
rebound, by considering the mechanism elements as rigid
members and at this stage inclusion of compliance members
like tires, springs, bushings or dampers are not important [4].
Optimizing the suspension geometry by tuning of suspension
hard point locations (joint locations are referred to as hard
points in this paper) should be done at this stage to arrive at
the required wheel path, however it is a challenging task.
Knowledge of the influence of each hard point on the wheel
path makes obtaining optimized suspension geometry easier
task.
The position analysis of a few types of independent
suspensions can be carried out by planar analysis but the multi
link suspensions deployed in many of the recent high end
passenger cars form a spatial mechanism and thus the planar
kinematical analysis of such mechanism is complicated [1].
The multi-link suspensions are spatial mechanisms and
numerous researchers have shown interest in the analytical

1 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 approach to the kinematic analysis of the multi link suspension
[6-11]. Suh [6] used displacement matrices method to solve
the position, velocity and acceleration of joints. Lee et al [7]
used velocity vector method for the position analysis of the
wheel center and the joint centers. Knapczyk et al [8]
proposed the displacement analysis of multi link suspension
by vector algebraic method, considering suspension as a
modified mechanism with upper two links disassembled. The
analysis was carried out by solving an optimization routine
describing a condition that the distances between the
homologous released joints remain equal to the lengths of the
disconnected members. Roca et al. [9] repeated the kinematic
analysis with the same method and compared the results with
the results of model developed using ADAMS/view software.
Knapczyk et al. [10] experimentally verified the method in
[8]. The formulations were derived using screw calculus and
are very complicated. The studies in references [8-10] were
focused on the elasto-kinematic analysis and they did not
address the influence of change in the hard point locations on
the wheel center path. Simionescue et al. [11] considered
suspension as a rigid body guiding mechanism released from
its joints and to be moved in successive positions along an
idealized vertical trajectory. In order to find the joint
disposition for which the distances between the homologous
released joints vary as little as possible an objective function
was defined. The objective function which on minimization
yielded an improved suspension performance but the objective
function was defined with an assumption that the wheel
orientation should be vertical during wheel vertical travel
which has a few disadvantages as will be explained later.
Further none of the above studies had addressed motion ratios
in their studies which are important from the perspective of
ride dynamics of vehicle.
The present study is aimed at exploring a simple kinematic
model to simulate the kinematic parameters and to carry out
sensitivity of kinematics of the multi link suspension
mechanism to the hard point location variation. The kinematic
model based on a system of velocity equations proposed by
Lee [7] for the multi link suspension is considered for this
study. However, in reference [7] none of the simulation results
were illustrated. We are unaware of the model validation
published else where. Validation of the model by comparing
the simulation results with other models is one of the main
objectives of this study. Subsequently, to explore the
usefulness of this method to compute motion ratio and to carry
out the study of kinematic parameter sensitivity to hard point
location to enable tuning of suspension hard points are the
other objectives of this work.
The paper is organized as follows: The geometry of five link
suspension is briefly described in Section 2. Based on the
methodology suggested by Lee in reference [7], velocity
equations for the joints of five link suspension mechanism are
derived from the fundamentals in Section 3. Section 4
describes the derivations for suspension kinematic parameters,
with the explanation on importance of each on the vehicle
performance and Section 5 describes the model of the
suspension developed in ADAMS/view. Numerical results
corresponding to the validation are discussed in Section 6. The
proposed sensitivity analysis method together with the
2 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
numerical results is discussed in Section 7 and Section 8 gives
the concluding remarks.
2 GEOMETRY OF FIVE-LINK SUSPENSION
Figure 1 illustrates schematics of a five link independent
suspension in its basic form. It is a modified form of double
wishbone suspensions where the wheel career is attached to
the vehicle chassis through five distinct links with spherical
joints in both wheel career and chassis. The five spherical-
spherical joints of the suspension form a spatial mechanism
with one active degree of freedom i.e. vertical motion of the
wheel. Each link has one isolated passive degree of freedom
due to its mobility around its longitudinal axis; however this
degree of freedom does not alter the kinematics of the
mechanism [8]. In the Fig.1 the points A1, A2,…A6 are the link
joints at the chassis and the points B1,B2,…B5 are the link joints
at the wheel carrier. The point B0 is the wheel center, N is a
point, wheel plane makes contact with the ground and C is the
spring attachment point in the link. The load on the wheel is
carried by the spring and shock absorbers mounted between
one of the links and the car body. If the position of joints in a
global three dimensional coordinate system is considered as
variable parameters, there are 30 parameters that can be varied
to get a better ride and handling performance of the vehicle
[8].
Figure 1: Schematics of a multi link suspension system
3 VEHICLE SUSPENSION KINEMATICS
Suspension kinematics are derived based on vector relation of
velocity of any point in a rigid body with respect to velocity of
point in the same body. The instantaneous velocity of any
point Q in a rigid body A as shown in the Fig. 2, relative to a
fixed inertial frame OXYZ can be described by the relation
[12]:
vq = v p + ω × r (1)
where, vp and vq are the instantaneous velocities of P and Q, r
is the position vector from P to Q and is the angular velocity
of A The cross product of two vectors can be represented in
their components form in x, y and z directions as:
x y z
ω × r = ωx ω y ωz (2)
rx ry rz

Figure 2: Instantaneous velocity of any point in a rigid
body.
Using the above vector relations, velocities of various joint
locations can be specified for a suspension mechanism,
based on the following assumptions [4, 7],
1) the vehicle chassis is rigid and fixed
2) the links of the suspension are rigid
3) wheel carrier or knuckle is rigid
4) elasto-kinematic effects in the joints are neglected
5) wheel is rigid, locked and rigidly fixed to the wheel
carrier so that it forms a part of it.
Since by assumption, wheel carrier is a rigid body, when it
moves through a path in 3-D space in relation to a fixed
reference frame; it will appear to rotate about an instantaneous
axis at an instantaneous angular velocity . The velocities of
each point on the knuckle can be determined by the relation
vBi = vB0 + ω × rB0 Bi for i = 1...5
where, VBi is the instantaneous velocity vector of points Bi, is
the instantaneous angular velocity vector, rB0Bi is the position
vector from point B0 to point Bi, the subscript i represents the
number of links, and ω × r ≡ cross product of and r. The
instantaneous angular velocities of each point in a rigid body
remain same [12]. Since the chassis is assumed to be fixed, so
are the points Ai, the velocities of points Bi are constrained to
be at 900 from AiBi. The condition, that the dot product of
vector from B to A and the instantaneous velocity vector for
each link is being 0, leads to a second set of equation:
eAi Bi .vBi = 0
where, eAiBi are the vectors representing the links from points
Ai to Bi. The Eq. (3) can be rewritten in terms of its
components along the x, y and z axes as:
v Bi x = v B0 x + ω y ( rB0 Bi z ) − ω z ( rB0 Bi y ) (5)
v Bi y = v B0 y − ω x (rB0 Bi z ) + ω z (rB0 Bi x )
v Bi z = vB0 z + ω x (rB0 Bi y ) − ω y (rB0 Bi x )
where, the subscripts x, y and z represent the components of
the vectors in the respective directions. Similarly Eq. (4) can
be rewritten, decomposing it in to component form as,
e Ai Bi .v Bi = v Bi x e Ai Bi x + vBi y e Ai Bi y + v Bi z e Ai Bi z
From the Eqs. (5-8) four equations can be written for each of
the five links and their corresponding joints, thus together
there are 20 equations, and 21 unknowns. The unknowns are
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
in the form of three components of velocities of six points that
include five joints and wheel center point and three
components of angular velocities of the wheel carrier. This
indeterminate system of equations can be solved if one of the
unknown can be suitably assumed. Since the natural path of
the wheel is vertical, it can be assumed suitably. Now, other
20 unknowns can be calculated by solving 20 equations.
Rearranging the Eqs. (5-8) for each of the link;
vBi x eAi Bi x + vBi y eAi Bi y + vBi z eAi Bi z = 0
v Bi x − v B 0 x − ( rB 0 Bi z )ω y + ( rB0 Bi y )ω z = 0
vBi y − vB0 y + (rB0 Bi z )ω x − (rB0 Bi x )ω z = 0
vBi z − ω x (rB0 Bi y ) + ω y (rB0 Bi x ) = vB0 z
can be written in the matrix form as [4],
[ A]{q} = { f } (9)
where, [A] is a matrix basically formed by the vectors between
the joints, {q} is a vector of unknown velocities and {f} is the
assumed vertical velocity input. When a value is chosen for
the wheel center vertical velocity component the set of
equations can be solved, each point in the knuckle is moved
by a small distance related by the equations and gives rise to
new set of coordinates. For a parametric time of t, the
distance traveled by any point in the wheel can be estimated as
product of the velocity and time.
δxi = vi .δt (10)
where, xi is the displacement of any joint center in the wheel
assembly. A new position of any point is the sum of old
position and the displacement. And if we assume that the
(3) parametric time t is unity, then we can write,
δxi = vi . (11)
The positions of the joints for successive movement of the
wheel center can be simulated by solving the matrices each
time the wheel center is moved by an assigned value in
vertical direction.
4 SUSPENSION KINEMATIC PARAMETERS
ANALYSIS
The handling and ride performance of the vehicle are
influenced by a few of the suspension kinematic parameters
such as camber, toe angle, roll center height and motion ratio
(4) variation with wheel vertical travel [13]. These parameters are
related to wheel center path. In the present study only front
view kinematic parameters are considered. Wheel center path,
wheel contact patch path or half track variation, camber angle,
roll center height and motion ratios are formulated in this
section by extending the velocity relations. The coordinates
(6) used for these derivation are SAE vehicle coordinate system
i.e. x is along longitudinal, y is along lateral and z is along
(7) vertical direction of the vehicle and the origin is located in a
plane normal to ground and passing through the axle [14].
4.1 Wheel Center and Contact Patch Trajectory
The path followed by the wheel center and wheel-ground
(8) contact point both in x and y (longitudinal and lateral)
direction during jounce and rebound motion of the suspension,
is one of the primary concern in the kinematic analysis of any
suspension [1, 8]. The phenomenon known by ‘track change’
3 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
 is the foot print of a tire in lateral direction when viewed in a
direction normal to road surface [1]. Track change can occur
due to wheel vertical travel as in the case of a bump. As it
involves a motion in lateral direction, there will be some
relative motion between the wheel and the road surface. This
lateral motion causes the tire to develop a lateral force which
in tern will develop tire slip causing change in wheel direction.
Vehicle driver has to give a corrective steering to get back the
direction. Track change has to be minimized to have good
directional behavior of the vehicle [2]. This makes the study of
wheel track variation a critical issue.
The solution of Eq. (9) yields the wheel center position
for successive steps of vertical velocity components assigned.
With the assumptions that the wheel is rigid and is fixed to the
wheel carrier which represents the condition that wheel being Figure 3: A schematic diagram of wheel camber
locked fully and the wheel center successive positions known, 4.3 Roll Center Height
the position analysis of contact patch point N, can be made The term roll center is associated with the point in the
using the following relation. transverse vertical plane at which lateral forces if applied does
v N = vB0 + ω × rB0 N (12) not produce any angular displacement of the sprung mass. The
roll center height is the distance at which the roll center is
where, vN is the velocity of the wheel contact patch point as
located above the ground in static position. The roll center
shown by point N in the Fig. 2. The decomposition of the
height is sometimes specified taking vehicle body as the
above equation in x and y directions gives the contact patch
reference. Recent researches have distinguished the force roll
lateral and longitudinal positions. The successive positions
center defined above, from the kinematic roll center which is
when estimated fetches the contact patch path with the wheel
obtained by joining the contact patch with the instantaneous
jounce-rebound.
center [15]. The kinematic roll center is based on the
4.2 Camber Change symmetry assumption between spring rates of the left and
The static camber angle is the inclination of the wheel plane right of vehicle. As the vehicle rolls the symmetry is disturbed
from a plane perpendicular to the road surface when viewed the roll center obtained based on quarter car suspension looses
from the front and positive camber occurs when the top of the its meaning as far as its effect on vehicle roll is concerned.
wheel tilts outwards and negative camber occurs when the top However the kinematic roll center height and its variation with
of the wheel tilts inwards. A small static camber is provided wheel jounce-rebound is widely used as qualitative suspension
intentionally in a vehicle to achieve an axial bearing pressure data and for the analysis of ride height changes. Furthermore,
and to decrease the kingpin offset, but a large camber of the the roll center height determines the tire scrub characteristics
wheel causes a lateral force developed at contact patch which during the vehicle roll [15]. Figure 4 shows the schematic
usually makes the vehicle understeer and also leads to tire diagram representing roll center height of a suspension [13].
scrub and accelerated wear [14].
All the independent suspension can be assumed to be rotating
about an imaginary instantaneous center, in y-z plane, during
jounce and rebound of the vehicle causing the wheel to have
camber with respect to ground [13]. Similarly, during
cornering of the vehicle, the roll of the vehicle induces
modification of the wheel camber and this camber is termed as
roll camber. Wheel camber causes lateral forces developed at
tire and the total wheel camber variation has to be zero in an
idealized suspension mechanism [2]. In this study the analysis
is restricted to the camber variation during the wheel bounce
and rebound only. Figure 4: Schematic diagram showing the roll
Since the wheel is assumed to be rigidly fixed to wheel carrier center
the camber angle can be related to the y coordinates of the
wheel center and contact patch. Referring to Fig. 3 the wheel The formulations for the roll center height described here is
camber angle can be described as, exactly same as that proposed by Lee [7]. With an assumption
 N y − B0 y  (13) of equal spring rates of the suspension of both left and right
camber = sin −1   sides, the roll center will be located along the center line of the
 Wheelradius 
vehicle. Referring to the Fig. 4, it can be noted that the dot
where, Ny and B0y are the y coordinates of contact patch and in product of the instantaneous velocity of point N and the
the wheel center respectively. The wheel camber when position vector from the point N to roll center is zero.
estimated for successive positions of wheel in its vertical
travel yields the camber change with wheel jounce-rebound. vN .rNRc = 0 (14)
where, VN is the instantaneous velocity of wheel contact patch
N and rNRc is the unit vector from the point N to roll center Rc.

4 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 Since the roll center is located in the transverse vehicle plane,
the equation can be expanded in terms of the components in y
and z axes as
vN y (rNRcy ) + vN z (rNRcz ) = 0 (15)
where, the subscripts y and z represents the components in the
respective direction. But, from the geometry as shown in Fig.
4,
rNRcy = Rc y − N y (16)
where, RCy and Ny are the y coordinates of the roll center and
contact patch respectively. Similarly,
rNRcz = Rch = Rc z − N z (17)
where, Rch, is the roll center height, Rcz, and Nz are the z
coordinates of the roll center and the contact point N
respectively. Substitution of the equations (16) and (17) in to
equation (15) gives,
v N y ( Rc y − N y ) + v N z Rch = 0
− v N y ( Rc y − N y )
or, R ch = (18)
vNz
The instantaneous roll center height can be estimated for each
step of wheel vertical travel and the roll center change can be
simulated.
4.4 Motion Ratio or Installation Ratio
The motion ratio or the installation ratio is the ratio between
the changes in length of force producing elements like spring
or damper, to the change in vertical movement of wheel center
or it is also the velocity ratio of the spring to the wheel [13].
The wheel load acts at the wheel ground contact point and the
spring force acts at a distance from the pivot. Since the points
of application of two forces are different, the rate of the spring
required to support the vehicle is more than that of a spring
that acts at the point of wheel load. The motion ratio can be
given by the relation [13]:
Spring _ displacement
Motion Ratio =
Wheel _ vertical _ displacement
As the wheel travels vertically the position of the spring
attachment point changes and so is the motion ratio.
Determination of the motion ratio change with wheel vertical
travel is important to a suspension designer because in order to
maintain a constant ride natural frequency springing has to be
designed to compensate for the motion ratio [13]. Assuming
the spring attachment point C to be a point in the rigid link
A1B1 of Fig. 1, the velocities of points C and B1 are related by
the ratio of the distance from pivoted point A1. The velocity of
point of B1 in the wheel knuckle is estimated by solving Eq.
(9). The instantaneous velocity of point C can be formulated
as:
eB1 A1 .v B1
vc = (19)
e A1C
where, vc is the velocity of point C, eA1C is the unit vector
representing the distance of point C from chassis attachment
point. Decomposition of the above equation gives the
velocities in all three directions. If the spring is assumed to be
positioned vertically, only vertical velocity component needs
to be considered. When the spring is positioned at an angle to
the vertical, the component of the resultant instantaneous
5 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
velocity of point C in the direction of the spring will yield
more accurate result.
5 SUSPENSION MODELING IN ADAMS/VIEW.
ADAMS (Automated Dynamics Analysis of Multi-body
System) is a software package that permits static, kinematic
and dynamic analysis of multi-body system such as
suspension system. In ADAMS environment a system is
assembled by a set equation of motion using Lagrange method
and a set of constraint equations to represent the relative
motion between any two parts. The program solves the
equation of motion algebraically for displacements, velocities,
accelerations and forces.
A five link suspension mechanism was modeled in ADAMS
software in order to compare the simulation results of the
analytical model. The ADAMS/view software package was
used for modeling of the quarter car suspension due to its
effectiveness in determining the kinematic responses that were
studied in the analytical model. The links were modeled as
rigid bodies connecting between wheel carrier and ground
through non flexible spherical joints. The ground represented
the fixed chassis. The wheel center is given a point motion in
vertical direction and the motion was defined as a sinusoidal
function of time which makes the wheel carrier to simulate a
cycle of bounce- rebound and back to the equilibrium position.
Figure 5 demonstrates the ADAMS model of the suspension.
Figure 5: ADAMS model of the suspension
6 NUMERICAL SOLUTIONS AND DISCUSSIONS
Numerical analysis of the five link rear wheel independent
suspension was carried out using the velocity vector method.
The geometrical data of Mercedes 190 five link suspension
components given in reference [8], which represents the
equilibrium position of joint coordinates from a reference
frame fixed at ground level below chassis are used for the
analysis. The same geometric data were used in the kinematic
analysis in references [8-11]. The velocity equations were
written in the matrix form as in Equation (9) and MATLAB
codes were written to solve the matrix equation. The
MATLAB codes, in addition to solving the equations update
the joint locations and plot the consecutive joint locations in
each of the x, y and z direction. The vertical component of the
wheel centre velocity, vB0z was assigned as 1 mm/s initially.
The simulations were carried out for one cycle of 100 mm
jounce-rebound and then returning back to the equilibrium
position.
 The joint locations, wheel center and contact patch paths were
simulated for the wheel jounce-rebound. The ADAMS model
is simulated under similar conditions and the readings from
the result file were exported as spread sheets. Both the results
were compared. Camber angle, roll center height and motion
ratio variation with wheel jounce-rebound are estimated. The
values for 100 mm jounce to 100 mm rebound are plotted in
all the cases and the first and the last quarter cycle readings
were neglected. The simulation results from both the models
are compared.
Figure 6 illustrates the comparison of the wheel center path
with wheel jounce-rebound obtained by simulating the
analytical model as well as the ADAMS model. The analytical
model trajectory deviates from the ADAMS trajectory and the Fig. 7: Contact patch path vs. wheel bump
deviation increases continuously when the wheel travels from
full jounce to rebound. Figure 7 shows the contact patch path
with the wheel jounce-rebound, the deviation of the analytical
model curve from the ADAMS model curve is continuous as
in the case of wheel center trajectory but the deviation is less
as compared to the wheel center curve. The similar results
were obtained in references [8] and [11].

Figure 8: Spring attachment point vs. wheel bump

Figure 6: Wheel center path vs. wheel bump

Figure 8 compares the trajectory of spring attachment point C,

obtained by simulating analytical model with the path of
ADAMS model. Both the plots coincide except for the slight
deviation that can be observed below 60 mm of rebound. In all
of the above results the difference between the analytical and
ADAMS model results increases continuously as the wheel
goes through jounce to rebound. This is due to the fact that in
each iteration joints positions are estimated based on their
previous position. Any error in the previous step of iteration Figure 9: Wheel center and contact patch path vs. wheel
would add up to the current iteration and the numerical error bump
becomes cumulative.
The amount of numerical error in this analysis is estimated by
Figure 9 illustrates the wheel center and the contact patch the variation of the length of the links at successive steps. The
trajectory in one graph. It can be observed that wheel contact distance between the joints of two ends of the link is its length
patch is farther in y direction during wheel compression. and supposed to remain a constant value. The length of link
estimated after each iteration should remain same if the
positions estimated by the numerical calculation is the true
position. Figure 10 illustrates the propagation of error with
successive iterations, being represented by the increase in
length of link 1 with the successive iteration. The link lengths

6 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 are computed for different magnitudes of vertical velocity The load shift from inner wheel to outer wheel causes the
components. It can be observed that when the assigned inner wheel to develop less lateral force as compared to the
vertical velocity is 0.1 mm/s the length variation got reduced outer wheel but is desirable to eliminate the rebound camber.
to 10% of that of 1 mm/s velocity. From Fig. 10 it is evident
that the accuracy of the results can be increased by reducing
the magnitude of vertical velocity input to the system of
equations.

Figure 12: Camber change vs. wheel bump

Figure 10: Variation of simulated link length with wheel
bump for different velocity inputs
Figure 11 illustrates that the deviation of the wheel center and
contact patch trajectories of analytical model from and the
ADAMS model can be reduced considerably when a small
vertical velocity was considered. Both the curves coincide, the
difference being negligible.
Figure 13 illustrates the roll center height variation with the
wheel vertical travel taking ground level as the reference.
Figure 14 shows the motion ratio variation with the bump
movement of the wheel. The motion ratio decreases with the
increase in jounce, the suspension under consideration
requires a progressive rate spring to maintain a constant wheel
rate.

Figure13: Roll center variation with the wheel jounce-

rebound.

Figure 11: Wheel center and contact patch path with

vertical velocity of 0.1 mm/s.

The camber angle increases continuously to negative side

during compression as shown in the Fig. 12. An initial camber
of 0.9° is assumed during the analysis in order to compare the
results with the published results [8, 11]. From Eq. (13) and
Fig.9 it is clear that the wheel plane is tilted inwards during
jounce and the inner tilt of the wheel is considered as negative
camber. The suspension designer prefers to have a negative
jounce camber which will cancel the positive roll camber
during cornering [1]. The suspension under consideration has
positive rebound camber which is not good for the handling Figure 14: Motion ratio vs. wheel bump
performance [2], although the rebound camber is less
significant as compared to the jounce camber in cornering.

7 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 influence the wheel center movement in y-z plane during
7 SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS wheel vertical travel. Subsequently, lateral movement of
The sensitivity of a system to changes in its parameter values wheel center determines the camber change with wheel bump.
is one of the basic process in the analysis of a system and
knowledge of sensitivity is very valuable in optimizing the Table 1: Sensitivity of wheel center path to hard point location
design. In the case of suspension kinematic studies it would be displacement
appropriate to consider the suspension hard points location in
the space as system parameters. The sensitivity of the Joints x y z
McPherson suspension kinematic parameters (camber, caster, B1 0.0002 -0.0001 -0.0008
toe, wheel base, and kingpin changes with wheel jounce-
rebound) to the hard point location was studied by Bae et al B2 0.0000 -0.0000 -0.0000
[16] using axiomatic design approach. The main objective of B3 0.0001 -0.0000 -0.0004
our study is to find the influence of the changes in hard points B4 0.0000 0.0000 -0.0000
on the kinematic parameters. Modification of the model
B5 0.0001 0.0000 -0.0011
discussed in Section 3 to enable to study the sensitivity of
suspension kinematic parameters to the changes in the hard A1 0.0002 0.0001 0.0010
points of the five link suspension is proposed in this section.
A2 0.0000 0.0000 0.0001
The Equation (9) can be modified to write in terms of the
unknown velocity vector {q} as, A3 0.0001 0.0000 0.0005
{q} = [ A]−1{ f } (20) A4 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
The matrix [A] is formed by the distances between the joint A5 0.0001 0.0000 0.0013
locations and is function of joint locations. Considering any
change in joint location in x, y and z directions as changing
parameters, the parameter vector can be formed as, The sensitivity index values as shown in the Table 1 are
S= [Aik…Bik…], Aik are the movement of the chassis-link joint validated by displacing the hard point locations and carrying
of ith link in x, y and z directions and Bik are the change in out the kinematic analysis. Figure 15 illustrates the wheel
location of link-knuckle joint of ith link in x, y and z directions center trajectories obtained by displacing the two of the most
respectively. The components of the matrix [A]-1 depend on influential joints A5 and B5 and one of the least influential
the parameter vector S. Assuming that the matrix [A]-1 is a joints A2 by 5 mm in positive z direction. Movement of the
continuous function of S, its expansion about a nominal joint A5 makes the trajectory outwards in jounce and inwards
parameter vector yields a sensitivity matrix [W] in the form of in rebound. An opposite trend is shown by moving B5 since it
[17]; has negative sensitivity index value. And the movement of
∂[A]
−1
(21) joint A2 shows negligible effect on the wheel center trajectory.
[W ] =
∂sik
The partial derivative of the matrix with respect to the
parameters gives the sensitivity of the system to parameter
changes [17]. The partial differentiation of the matrix [A]-1
with respect to the parameters Sik yields;
∂ [A ] −1 ∂ [A ] (22)
−1
[W ] = = − [A ] [A ]−1
∂ s ik ∂ s ik
In the case of five link suspension the parameter vector
contains 30 elements. This analysis yields the sensitivity of
each unknown in the wheel carrier to the hard point location
changes from the existing locations, when the wheel center is
moved up vertically by a unit distance. Furthermore, this
analysis method yields the influence of each hard point on the
kinematic responses of the mechanism.
The Table 1 demonstrates the sensitivity index values for
lateral position of wheel center, obtained by the sensitivity
analysis method discussed above. The results can be
interpreted in the following way: relocation of any of the Figure 15: Effect of joint location displacement on
joints by moving from the original set up will move the wheel wheel center trajectory
center inwards or outwards when the wheel carrier moves up
vertically, depending upon whether the sensitivity index is It can be noted from Eq. (13) that as the value of y coordinate
negative or positive. For example, if the joint B5 is moved in of the wheel center reduces, the camber angle gets negative.
positive z direction, the wheel center trajectory will move An inward wheel center trajectory would result in inward
inwards during jounce and outwards during rebound. From the camber angle too. Figure 16 illustrates the camber angle
table it can be comprehended that the joints A1, A5, B1 and B5 variation when joints A1, A2, and B5 are moved up by 5 mm.
or the front upper control arm and the rear lower control arm The joint A1 has a positive sensitivity index value and its

8 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

 displacement makes an outward camber angle trajectory in
jounce. The influence of joint A2 on camber variation is
negligible.
Figure 16: Effect of joint location displacement on
camber change
These observations help in tuning the suspension joint
locations for a desired kinematic parameter. The suspension
under consideration has a large negative jounce camber and
positive rebound camber.
Figure 17: Reduced camber variation by changing the
joint locations of upper front control arm
This camber variation can be reduced considerably by
changing the upper front control arm joint locations only. Fig.
17 shows the reduced camber variation by relocating the joints
A5 and B5, by 5 mm in positive and negative z directions
respectively. The effect of modifying the suspension geometry
for improved camber angle on roll center height is
investigated. Fig. 18 compares the roll center height migration
between the original set up and modified suspension geometry
as a function of wheel jounce-rebound. With the hard points
optimized for the minimal camber variation, the roll center
height is observed to be lower than that the roll center height
with the original set up. The lowered roll center height in the
static condition reduces the roll angle of the vehicle which in
turn reduces the roll camber. From the perspective of ride
height the vehicle is more stable during the cornering of the
9 Copyright © 2008 by ASME
Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use
vehicle due to lowered ride height but a compromise is
required in the ride height during straight line motion. This
example is for illustration purpose only and during suspension
design the effects of this change on the other parameters have
to be considered. A second level sensitivity analysis which can
determine the sensitivity of all the kinematic parameters to
changes in the hard point location would yield more optimized
suspension geometry.
Figure 18: Effect of geometry modification on the roll
center height.
8 CONCLUSION
In this paper an analytical model for the initial kinematic
analysis of suspension mechanism has been discussed. The
wheel center and contact patch trajectories for the wheel
jounce-rebound are simulated using the developed method and
the results are compared with the ADAMS model trajectory. A
few of the suspension kinematic parameters were formulated,
their relevance in suspension design are discussed and are
simulated. A method of sensitivity analysis, to determine the
influence of changes in the hard point location on the wheel
center trajectory and the kinematic parameters are discussed.
Numerical error plays an important role in the accuracy of the
results, because the position of any joint is determined based
on the position in the previous iteration. However assigning a
very small vertical velocity component for the wheel center,
the error can be minimized. The motion ratio can be
effectively estimated using the velocity vector method. The
sensitivity analysis method discussed in this paper can be
effectively used to find the most influential link and joints that
affect the kinematic parameters. In the discussed example, the
upper front and lower rear control arms are found influencing
the wheel center trajectory the most. This analysis helps in
tuning of the suspension mechanism for the desired
performance and it was illustrated through an example for
improved bump camber change.
The constraint equations in the model are true for any rigid
body mechanisms, so the method can be applied to other multi
link suspension mechanisms effectively. Velocity vector
method discussed in this paper does not replace the need for
advanced commercial software for the suspension design and
analysis but the sensitivity analysis information can
supplement the design process.
 an Automotive Suspension System with the McPherson
REFERENCES Strut Type”, Int. J. of Vehicle Design, Vol. 31(1), pp 58-
71.
[1] Reimpell, J. and Stoll, H., 1996, The Automotive
Chassis: Engineering Principles, SAE Inc., Warrendale, [17] Nalecz, A. G., 1989, “Application of Sensitivity Methods
PA, USA. to Analysis and Synthesis of Vehicle Dynamics
Systems”, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 18, pp 1-44.
[2] Raghavan, M., 1991, “Suspension Kinematic Structure
for Passive Control of Vehicle Attitude”, Int. J. of
Vehicle Design, Vol. 12(5/6), pp 525-547.
[3] Blundell, M. V., 1999, “The Modeling and Simulation of
Vehicle Handling Part 1: Analysis Methods”, IMechE
Part K, Journal of Multibody Systems Dynamics, Vol.
213, pp 103-118.
[4] Blundell, M. V., 1999, “The Modeling and Simulation of
Vehicle Handling Part 2: Vehicle Modeling”, IMechE
Part K, Journal of Multibody Systems Dynamics, Vol.
213, pp 119-134.
[5] Hegazy, S., Rahnejat, H. and Hussain, K., 2000, “Multi-
body Dynamics in Full-Vehicle Handling Analysis under
Transient Maneuver”, Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol.
34, pp 1-24.
[6] Suh, C. H., 1989, “Synthesis and Analysis of Suspension
Mechanisms with Use of Displacement Matrices”, SAE
paper 890098.
[7] Lee, D. M. A., Pasocoe, D. M., and ElMaraghy, W. H.,
1993, “An Analysis of the Multi Link Independent
Suspension System”, Int. J. of Vehicle design, Vol.
14(1), pp 44-58
[8] Knapczyk, J, and Dzierzek, S, 1995, “Displacement and
Force Analysis of Five- Rod Suspension with Flexible
Joints”, Journal of Mechanical Design, Vol. 117, pp
532-538.
[9] Rocca, E., and Russo, R., 2002, “A Feasibility Study on
Elastokinematic Parameter Identification for a Multilink
Suspension”, IMechE Part D, Journal of Automobile
Engineering, Vol. 216, pp 153-160.
[10] Knapczyk, J., and Maniowski, M., 2006,
“Elastokinematic Modeling and Study of Five-Rod
Suspension with Subframe”, Mechanism and Mach.
Theory, Vol. 41, pp 1031-1047.
[11] Simionnescu, P.A., and Beale, D., 2002, “Synthesis and
Analysis of the Five Link Rear Suspension System used
in Automobiles”, Mechanism and Machine Theory, Vol.
37, pp. 815-832.
[12] Shabana, A.A., 2006, Computational Dynamics, John
Willey & Sons, Inc., New York, USA.
[13] Milliken, F. W., Milliken, D. L., 1995, Racecar
Dynamics, SAE Inc., Warrendale, PA, USA.
[14] Wong, J.Y., 2001, Theory of Ground Vehicles, John
Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, USA.
[15] Gerrard, M. B., 1999, “Roll Centers and Jacking Forces
in Independent Suspensions- A First Principles
Explanation and a Designer’s Toolkit”, SAE Paper 1999-
01-0046.
[16] Bae, S., Lee, J.M., Choi, W. J, Yun, J. R., and Tak, T.O.,
2003, “Axiomatic Approach to the Kinematic Design of

10 Copyright © 2008 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 06/06/2018 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use