177

Design Report for Team Sovereign 2022

Meet Lakhani
Design Head
Meet Lakhani & Bhawani Singh Shekhawat
Analysis & Transmission Head
Bhawani Singh Shekhawat & Smit Patel,Rushang Kulkarni & Rishit Panchal
Team Captain & Suspension, Steering & Brakes Head

Copyright © 2023 BAJA SAEINDIA vehicle while in this approach all departments share their ideas with
each other and give the aggregated and consolidated inputs to
design department.

For an example, traditionally, design department forward the

1. Abstract
This report gives an important information about various steps and
methodologies adopted by Team Sovereign to design, analyze,
simulate and fabricate an Electric All-Terrain Vehicle. General
automotive concepts, past years experiences and failures are used
in order to design the vehicle. Different factors like strength, ride
comfort, reliability, ruggedness, safety, cost, manufacturability,
interchangeability & re- produceability, feasibility and many more
concepts are taken into considerations while designing vehicle.
2. Introduction
The main objective of this design report is to provide brief
information to design and manufacture our vehicle. It also
includes all different concepts and aspects which have been
included while designing and simulating the Baja buggy.
Driver safety, comfort, cost effectiveness and optimized
performance are the four primary pillars of this entire design
process.
3. Design
geometry to analysis department for simulation and analysis
department reverted back to designers with some suggestions and
they imply modifications and the process goes on.
It is a tedious and time-consuming process so in above example a
tool called topology optimization is used. It produces optimized
design by itself and saves a lot of simulation time. By this way
concurrent engineering plays a very important role in entire
designing process.
4.1. Frame:
The main objective behind frame design is to provide firm and
robust support to all components. It also deals with driver safety
and therefore has to be prepared to withstand the impacts created
in any crash and roll over conditions. The 3- D model of the frame is
designed in Solidworks by keeping all rulebook specifications into
considerations. The roll cage consists of circular and square pipes.
Pipes are generally selected based on strength, rigidity, bending
stiffness, composition, availability, and cost. A rigorous and
competitive study was done between AISI 1018 and AISI 4130.
Finally, AISI 4130 is taken and the specifications are given below and
its calculations are shown in the CAE Report of Team Sovereign
2021.

Primary Pipe: 25 mm X 1.57 mm

The eBAJA rulebook 2023 is strictly followed in every aspects of
Secondary Pipe: 25 mm X 0.89 mm
design. The basic dimensions i.e., length, width and height of roll
cage and its members, various clearances and many more are Table 1. Material properties of AISI 4130
decided on the basis of rulebook specifications. Physical Properties
Density 7.47 g/cc
The driver safety and comfort are taken as the most critical criteria Mechanical Properties
in entire designing process. It possesses easy entry and exit for Tensile Strength 722 MPa
driver and also includes safety belt releasing mechanism. Yield Strength 722 MPa
Elongation at Break 20.67%
Roll cage frame and mountings are constructed robust enough to Reduction of Area 58%
sustain any rugged terrain and rough conditions. Weight and cost Modulus of Elasticity 205 GPa
reduction also affect this process. Bulk Modulus 140 GPa
Poisson’s Ratio 0.29
4. Design Process Machinability 70 %
Shear Modulus 80 GPa
Basically, design is an iterative process which includes various
engineering principles and manufacturing processes. This year,
concurrent engineering approach is applied for the design process
over traditional approach.

In traditional approach various department gives their inputs to

design department only and it solely implies that into the
 Table 2. Chemical Properties of AISI 4130 Table 3. Analysis and Results
Chemical Properties
Von- Mises
Element Content Type of Load Max Deformation
Stresses
Carbon 0.29 Applied(N) (mm) FOS
Analysis (MPa)
Silicon 0.23
Manganese 0.495
Phosphorus 0.015 Front
14,737.7 0.46 364 1.83
Sulphur 0.004 Impact
Chromium 0.910 Rear
6,386.3 2.87 804.95 3.35
Molybdenum 0.160 Impact

Side
6,386.3 0.3504 2486 4.32
Impact
Roll
6,786.8 1.648 4192 2.62
Over

Table 4. Results of FEM Analysis

Sr no. Part Name Force Type FOS
Bump
1 Front Cornering 1.95
Knuckle
Braking
Steering
Bump
2 Rear 1.93
Knuckle Cornering
Braking
Bump
3 Front Hub Cornering 1.97
Braking
Bump
4 Rear Hub Cornering 2.27
Braking
Cornering
5 A – Arm Spring 2.71
Bump
Bump
6. Semi Trailing Arm 1.10
Spring
Bump
7 Hinges 1.73
Corner

Figure 1. Side View and Front View

4.2. Design Optimization

 The weight distribution ratio Front to Rear is optimized to
an optimum value of 40:60.
 The CG height has been reduced from previous year and
brought near to the belly pan which enhances the
parameters of vehicle dynamics.
 Front knuckle has been optimized from previous year to
get the desired rod end angle and free travel of it without
any hindrance with knuckle.
Front Impact and Rear Impact

4.3. Finite Element Analysis

Finite element analysis method is used to simulate all the

components. The most effective method to validate any assembly
is to apply loads on different region in real time conditions in
order to check its durability and strength. The solver for this
particular FEM is ANSYS 19.2. All the general mechanics principles
i.e., force balance, free body diagram and many more are taken
into considerations.
Front Roll Over and Side Impact
Figure 2. FEM Analysis of Roll Cage
 various dynamic analysis on ATS’ IPG CARMAKER and
confirmed our geometry post design.

Static-Structural analysis of Front and Rear Knuckle

Static-Structural analysis Front and Rear Hub

Front (A-Arm) and Rear (Semi-Trailing Arm)

Figure 3. FEM Analysis of Wheel Assembly components and
Wishbones
4.4. Suspension
Objective
The main objective of the suspension department is to allow the Figure 4. Suspension Geometry in Solidworks, Lotus Shark and
car with various other departments and assemblies to work as a Altair HyperWorks
single unit. With this objective, our main focus is to increase
better performance of the ATV without compromising the driver’s
ride comfort and safety of all. We achieved the objective by
Front Suspension
designing an optimized geometry with accurate desired The short-long double A-Arms are used for front as it makes the
characteristics. vehicle dynamically steady during severe impacts and is easy to
install and assemble with respect to various parameters. The front
Various parameters of ride characteristics were maintained as per wishbones are made up with AISI 4130 pipes of outer diameter of
the calculation and verified with Maurice Olley’s Criteria. It was 25.4 mm and thickness 1 mm. We kept static camber and toe angles
achieved as we had a better planning, rigorous brainstorming at 0°, static caster angle is 4° and static kingpin angle is 6.92° for the
sessions and kept standard engineering practices. better vehicle performance in many conditions. During bump
dynamics, camber range is -1.3° to -3.3°, toe ranged from 0° to 2.3°,
Design
kingpin varied from 6.92° to 8.18° and the motion ratio is 0.65. The
The design of Suspension geometries was made keeping lower suspension shocks were designed and hence were customized
change in camber, toe, kingpin angle and catering the parameters according to our requirement.
like anti-dive, roll characteristics, proper clearances, etc. The
design was started on the Lotus Shark vehicle dynamics analysis
and through various parameters for maximum optimization.

Then, the design was initially confirmed on MSC ADAMS where we

also performed some analysis like Kinematic & Compliance (K & C)
Analysis, bump and roll analysis, full vehicle analysis through
which obtained different graphs through which our design was
confirmed. Therein, we designed our complete suspension and its
geometry was made on Dassault System’s Solidworks. Later, we
performed
 Table 5. Properties of Suspension

Front Rear
Figure 5. Camber, Caster and Toe Angle vs Wheel Trave
H - Arm
SuspensionType Double A-arms

Mass Distribution 92 kg 138 kg

Rear Suspension Sprung Mass 170 kg
The rear suspension system consists of trailing arms with the two Un-sprung Mass 60 kg
toe-links. It is also known as semi-trailing arms. The main purpose Camber Angle 0° 0°
to change it with the H-arms from previous year was to avoid Caster Angle 8° 0°
fowling error, to make a stable system, ease of installation and to KPI 5.54° 0°
reduce the degree of freedom for the rear wheels. The motion Scrub Radius 12 mm -
ratio is fixed to 0.6 which also follows the various Maurice Olley’s Motion Ratio 0.6 0.65
criteria. The static camber and toe angles are at 0° and the range of Roll Centre Height 294.38 113.4
dynamic camber and toe angles is from -4.32° to 0.12° and -1.44° (mm)
Shocks Fox Float Evol 3R series
to 0.02°. The rear geometry is relatively simpler as compared to the
RollRate(Nm/deg) 2.87 7.51
front geometry due to these reasons. The wobbling of tires is
restricted by using of two toe links mounted at last most part of SuspensionTravel Jounce = 6”; Rebound = 3”
the Roll Cage. The rear wishbones are made of same material as
that of the front wishbones. Spring Rate 21366.47 N/m 25776.47 N/m
CG Height 584.2 mm
Desired Natural 1.17 Hz 1.78 Hz
Frequency
Damping Ratio 0.7 0.7

Damping Value@ 0.3m/s

40.28 61.89

Shock Absorbers

The spring damping shock system was designed by considering the

dynamic factor of 2 on the suspensions. Coiled spring system was
used due to its various benefits like less weight, better
sustainability, low cost, easily replaceable, fulfilling the
requirements over other types of shock- absorbers. The material
used in springs is Chrome Vanadium. The mean diameter of the
spring is 49 mm for both front and rear suspensions. There are total
number of 11 coils out of which 9 are active and 2 are inactive.

4.5. Steering
Figure 6. Camber and Toe Angle vs Wheel Travel
Objective
The main objective of the steering sub-assembly and department is
to reduce the turning radius by even improving the maneuverability
and not compromising any other factors. The sub-system is
designed so as to get proper feedback of aligning torque.
Additionally, the steering effort applied by driver should be less for
better control.

Figure 7. Steering Geometry in LOTUS Shark

Design
It consists of steering geometry and its wheel, Rack and Pinion,
Steering link, Tie-rod. To begin the design of steering assembly and
sub-assemblies, many hours were invested on
brain-storming wherein various parameters were decided for better
steering performance for the vehicle and also to the driver. This force then gets multiplied with the pedal ratio and transmits
between the dual master cylinder system wherein individual
master cylinder absorbs force according to the bias ratio kept. It is
After these sessions, we made our geometry on Lotus Shark and
decided from the dynamic weight transfer while applying brakes.
made its dynamic analysis in IPG CARMAKER. We have used a rack
Here, it is believed that there is no loss in force. This force is
and pinion of 14” length with a total rack travel of 80 mm.
converted into pressure with the help of bore whose diameter is
19.05 mm present in the cylinder.
The steering ratio is 61.53 mm/ rev. Our geometry is an Oversteer
geometry with 123% Ackermann quality. Due to these parameters,
the turning radius turned out to be 1.3 m.

Figure 10. Front-Rear Brake Split System

Figure 8. Ackermann Percentage vs Steer Travel
The pressure generated in each cylinder is then transferred
through steel rigid Bundy tubes into front and rear respectively
through the Front-Rear Split System. For transfer of this pressure,
DOT 3 hydraulic oil is used as it meets the maximumnecessities. The
pressure pass through fluid with the help of Pascal’ Law.

The final pressure at the end of lines is provided to the caliper

which force stops the vehicle by clamping its pads over the brake
disc fixed on the knuckle and attached with the hub.

Figure 9. Static Structural Analysis of Tie Rod

Table 6 Specifications of Steering

Steering System Oversteer

Steering Geometry Ackermann: 82 %
Inner/ Outer Wheel Angle 44.66°/27.27° Figure 11. Thermal and Stress Analysis of Disc Rotor
Turning Radius 1.2 m
Steering Gear Rack and Pinion
End to End Travel 60 mm Important Points
Turns Lock to Lock 1.5 turns Reduced the pedal length according to the change in pedal
Steering Ratio 40 mm/ revolution ratio from 7:1 to 6:1 this year.
Column Type Single Column
A mechanical spring is attached to the pedal to avoid spongy
Drive Type CHD
behavior and to have a proper rebound of the pedal.
IBJ/OBJ Centre Distance 529.05 mm/ 175 mm
Metallic lines are used to transfer pressure as they are able
Tie Rod Length 15.30”
to sustain high pressure and to make the assembly
Rack Length 13.77”
Steering Wheel Diameter 250mm
commercially and scientifically correct.
Steering Wheel Torque 6.0-7.0 Nm Brake disc is customized with effective radius of 75 mm.
Thermal and Stress analysis is done on the disc through ANSYS
19.2 software and discovered the maximum temperature to
4.6. Brakes be 161.07° and stress deformation of 114.97mm.
Avoid extra bending in the lines to reduce the pressure loss
Objective based on the errors of previous year.

According to the RULEBOOK of BAJA SAEINDIA 2022 for electric

vehicle, our aim is to stop the ATV within the distance of 8 meters
or 26 ft such that with panic braking, all four wheels should get
locked at the same time and also, they should not even make any
rotation.

Design
We chose to employ the hydraulic brakes type in accordance with
the demand and brainstorming session held inside and across the Figure 12. Velocity vs Stopping Distance & Velocity vs
many departments. In order to achieve our goal, we favoured the Stopping Time
out board braking by using disc brake. In order to use the brakes
fully, the driver must press down on just 1 pedal, which reqires a
force of 400N from a person of avg weight(60.75kg).
 Table 7. Properties of Brakes stage gear reduction system. It possesses the constant gear ratio
of 8:1. In this gearbox two gears and two pinions are continuously
Brake Type Disc meshed with each other. Furthermore, this subsection is divided
Pedal Force 400N into four parts.
Master Cylinder (Bore diameter &Stroke 19.05 mm X 25mm 1. Gear ratio calculations
length) 2. Calculations of max. velocity, max. acceleration and
Brake Hose Flexible gradeability
Brake Caliper Bybre 3. Gear box calculations & specifications
Caliper Piston Area 1372.81 mm2 4. CAE of gears and drivetrain Gear ratio calculations
Mass of the Vehicle including driver 230 kg
Pedal Ratio 6:1
Bias Ratio 60:40 Gear ratio calculations
Brake Fluid DOT 3
Effective Radius 0.075 m Basically, three types of forces are taken into considerations
Disc Material SS 304 while calculating total tractive force. These forces are drag
Front Torque Required (Single tire) 205.0108 Nm force, gradient force and rolling force.
Rear Torque Required (Single tire) 124.521 Nm
Front Torque Generated (Singletire) 420.56 Nm
Drag force

Rear Torque Generated (Single tire) 255.44 Nm

Maximum speed while braking(Rulebook) 40 kmph
Where,
6.867 m/s2
𝑘𝑔
Deceleration (µ X g) 𝜌 = 𝐷𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝐴𝑖𝑟 = 1.12 ⁄
Stopping Distance 8.99 m 𝑚3
Co-efficient of Friction betweenRoad & Tire
𝐴 = 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑗𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑟𝑒𝑎 = 1 𝑚2
0.7 𝐶𝑑 = 𝐷𝑟𝑎𝑔 𝑐𝑜 − 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 1.38
𝑉 = 𝑅𝑒𝑙𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑣𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 = 40 𝐾𝑚𝑝ℎ
Co-efficient of Friction betweenCaliper Pad 0.45 1
& Brake Disc 𝐹𝑑 = × 1.12 × 1 × 1.38 × 11.112 = 95.5 𝑁
Dynamic Load Transfer 659.123 N 2
Static Roll Radius (Tire Radius) 11.5 “(292.1 mm)
Pedal material Aluminum 7075-T6
Gradient force

𝐹𝑔 = 𝑊 × sin ∅
4.7. Transmission 𝑊 = 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 = 𝑚 × 𝑔 = 230 × 9.81
= 2256.3 𝑁
Objective: ∅ = 𝐴𝑛𝑔𝑙𝑒 𝑎𝑡 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑖𝑠 𝑒𝑥𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑡𝑜 𝑐𝑙𝑖𝑚𝑏 = 30°
𝐹𝑔 = 2256.3× sin 30° = 1128.15 ≅ 1130 𝑁
The main objective of transmission department is to provide
sufficient amount of torque to the wheels and also achieve Rolling Force
maximum of speed of 41 Kmph. To achieve this, we have used
constant velocity drive with a constant gear ratio of 8:1. 𝐹𝑅 = 𝐶 × 𝑊
𝐶 = 𝑅𝑜𝑙𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑔 𝑐𝑜𝑓𝑓𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑒𝑛𝑡 = 0.04
𝑊 = 𝑊𝑒𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑜𝑓 𝑣𝑒ℎ𝑖𝑐𝑙𝑒 𝑤𝑖𝑡ℎ 𝑑𝑟𝑖𝑣𝑒𝑟 = 𝑚 × 𝑔 = 230 × 9.81
Motor = 2256.3 𝑁
𝐹𝑅 = 0.04 × 2256.3 = 90.252 𝑁 ≅ 91 𝑁
We have a Brushless DC Motor (BLDC motor). It has an operating
voltage of 48V and its rated power is 6 KW. It gives out a constant Total Tractive force
torque of 19 N-m at 94A and has peak torque of 57 N-m at. The
rated rpm of the motor is 3000rpm. We have directly coupled with 𝐹𝑇 = 𝐹𝑑 + 𝐹𝑔 + 𝐹𝑅 = 95.5 + 1310 + 91 = 1316.5 𝑁
the customized gearbox via shaft with external splines on it.
Total Tractive Effort
Battery 𝑇𝑡 = 𝑇𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑐𝑒 ∗ 𝑇𝑦𝑟𝑒 𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑖𝑢𝑠
= 1316.5 ∗ 0.2921 = 384.5 ≅ 385 𝑁𝑚
We have a NMC Lithium-Ion battery of 48V/110Ah capacity. It has a
nominal voltage of 48V, with nominal current of 60A and maximum Gear ratio
discharge current of 150A. It has charge voltage of
54.6V and weighs around 32.023Kg. This battery supplies the 𝑇𝑜𝑡𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑒𝑓𝑓𝑜𝑟𝑡 385
current to the motor controller that in turn is connected to the 𝐺𝑅 = = = 6.75 ≅ 8
𝑀𝑎𝑥𝑖𝑚𝑢𝑚 𝑡𝑜𝑟𝑞𝑢𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑒𝑑 57
motor.

Calculations of max. velocity, max.

Drivetrain: accelerationand gradeability
The mechanical drivetrain consists of motor, gearbox, Maximum velocity:
constant velocity joints and axle. As we opt constant velocity
drive system so motor is directly coupled with the gearbox at 2 × 𝜋 × 𝑅 × 𝑁𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 2 × 𝜋 × 0.2921 × 3000
input shaft. Constant velocity joints are connected with 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 𝐺𝑅 × 60 ≅ 11.46
8 × 60
gearbox at output shaft and the other side they are connected
with wheel assembly via axle.
Maximum acceleration:
Gearbox:
This year we have used compound gearbox which have two
 𝐹𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒 − 𝐹𝑑 − 𝐹𝑅 Step 4: Calculation of module
𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥 =
𝑀
1⁄
3
𝐹 = 𝑇𝑚𝑎𝑥 × 𝐺𝑅 = 57 × 8 = 1561.10N 60 × 106 (𝐾𝑊) × 𝐶𝑠 × 𝑓𝑠
𝑚= { ]}
𝑎𝑣𝑎𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑏𝑙𝑒
𝑅 0.2921 [𝑧 × 𝑛 × 𝐶 × 𝑏 × 𝑆𝑢𝑡
𝜋 𝑣 𝑚 3 × 𝑌
1 Where,
𝐹𝑑 = × 𝜌 × 𝐴 × 𝐶𝑑 × 𝑉2 ( 𝑡𝑎𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔 = 45 𝑘𝑚𝑝ℎ)
𝐾𝑊 = 𝑝𝑜𝑤𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 4.5 𝐾𝑊
2 𝑉𝑚𝑎𝑥
1
= × 1.12 × 1 × 1.38 × 12.52 = 120.75 ≅ 121 𝑁 𝐶𝑠 = 𝑆𝑒𝑟𝑣𝑖𝑐𝑒 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟
2 = 1.5 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑙𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑠ℎ𝑜𝑐𝑘 𝑖. 𝑒 𝑒𝑙𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑟𝑖𝑐 𝑚𝑜𝑡𝑜𝑟 )
𝑓𝑠 = 𝐹𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑠𝑎𝑓𝑒𝑡𝑦 = 2 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑐𝑟𝑖𝑡𝑖𝑐𝑎𝑙 𝑐𝑜𝑚𝑝𝑜𝑛𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑡)
𝐹𝑅 = 0.04 × 2256.3 = 90.252 𝑁 ≅ 91 𝑁 𝑧 = 𝑁𝑢𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝑜𝑓 𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑡ℎ
1561.10 − 121 − 91 𝑛 = 𝑅𝑝𝑚 𝑜𝑓 𝑠ℎ𝑎𝑓𝑡
𝑚
𝑎𝑚𝑎𝑥 = 6 = 6 = 6
= 5.86 ⁄𝑠2 𝐶𝑣 = 𝑉𝑒𝑙𝑜𝑐𝑖𝑡𝑦 𝑓𝑎𝑐𝑡𝑜𝑟 = 6 + 12.5 18.5
230 6+𝑣
( 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑎𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑙𝑦 ℎ𝑜𝑏𝑏𝑒𝑑 𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑔𝑒𝑛𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑒𝑑 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟𝑠 𝑣 < 20 𝑚⁄𝑠 )
Gradeability 𝑏 = 10𝑚 (𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑠𝑡𝑢𝑏 𝑖𝑛𝑣𝑜𝑙𝑢𝑡𝑒 𝑝𝑟𝑜𝑓𝑖𝑙𝑒)
𝑆𝑢𝑡 = 700 𝑁⁄𝑚𝑚2 ( 𝑃𝑙𝑎𝑛𝑒 𝑐𝑎𝑟𝑏𝑜𝑛 𝑠𝑡𝑒𝑒𝑙 45𝐶8)
Gradeability = tan 30° = 0.577 ≅ 58 %
𝑌 = 0.308 ( 𝑓𝑜𝑟 𝑧 = 18 𝑖𝑛 𝑏𝑜𝑡ℎ 𝑐𝑎𝑠𝑒𝑠)

Gear box calculations &specifications For pinion 1

1⁄
3
The two-stage reduction gearbox is opted in order to avoid 60 × 106 (𝐾𝑊) × 𝐶𝑠 × 𝑓𝑠
unwanted noises and vibrations. If we went for single stage 𝑚𝑝1 = { [ 𝑏 ]}
𝜋 𝑧 × 𝑛 × 𝐶 × × 𝑆𝑢𝑡 × 𝑌
reduction, dimensions of gearbox became too large and it is 1 𝐴 𝑣 𝑚 3
not practically feasible to design such a huge gearbox. Due to 1⁄
3
ease of manufacturing and cost effectiveness, the pair of spur 60 × 106 (6) × 1.5 × 2 ]}
gear is designed. The 20-degree stub involute system is = { [ 6 700
𝜋
considered to avoid interference between two meshed gears. 18 × 3000 × 18.5 × 10 × 3 × 0.308
The calculations of various dimensions are given below. = 3.01 ≅ 3.5 𝑚𝑚
Step 1: Finding the individual transmission ratio
For pinion 2
1⁄
𝐼𝑛𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 3
60 × 106 (𝐾𝑊) × 𝐶𝑠 × 𝑓𝑠
= √𝑂𝑣𝑒𝑟𝑎𝑙𝑙 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 = √ 8 ≅ 2.82 𝑚𝑝2 = { [ 𝑏 ]}
𝜋 𝑧 × 𝑛 × 𝐶 × × 𝑆𝑢𝑡 × 𝑌
3 𝐵 𝑣 𝑚 3
1⁄
Step 2: Calculating teeth on each pinion and gear 3
For 20-degree stub involute system the minimum number for 60 × 106 (6) × 1.5 × 2
= { [ ]}
teeth to avoid interreference is 18. 𝜋 6 700
18 × 1058 × 18.5 × 10 × 3 × 0.308
𝑇𝑒𝑒𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 = 𝑍𝑝 = 18 = 4.26 ≅ 4.5 𝑚𝑚
𝑇𝑒𝑒𝑡ℎ 𝑜𝑛 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 = 𝑍𝑔 = 𝐼𝑛𝑖𝑣𝑖𝑑𝑢𝑎𝑙 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑛𝑠𝑚𝑖𝑠𝑠𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑟𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜 ∗ 𝑍𝑝 =
2.82 × 18 ≅ 51 Diametral pitch

𝐷𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 1 = 𝑚𝑝1 × 𝑍1 = 3.5 × 18 = 63 𝑚𝑚

𝐷𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 1 = 𝑚𝑔1 × 𝑍2 = 3.5 × 60 = 178.5 𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑝𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑜𝑛 2 = 𝑚𝑝3 × 𝑍3 = 4.5 × 18 = 81 𝑚𝑚
𝐷𝑖𝑎𝑚𝑒𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑙 𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑐ℎ 𝑜𝑓 𝑔𝑒𝑎𝑟 2 = 𝑚𝑔2 × 𝑍4 = 4.5 × 60 = 229.5 𝑚𝑚

Figure 14. CAD Geometry of Gearbox

Figure 13. Schematic Diagram of Geartrain CAE of gears and drivetrain

Both static structural and transient stress analysis of entire gear
From above fig we will have
train is carried out. During these analyses the interlocking of
𝑍1 = 𝑍3 = 18 , 𝑍2 = 𝑍4 = 51 geartrain is taken as the major failure condition. This might occur
due to the jamming of the bearing so in Ansys the input shaft
Step 3: Calculating speed of each shaft (coupled with motor) is given torque of 57 Nm and the rotational
speed as 3000 rpm and the intermediate shaft is taken as
𝑁𝐴 = 4500 𝑟𝑝𝑚 stationary. The case of braking is also considered
𝑍1 18 where the exact reverse situation happens where motor shaft
𝑁𝐵 = 𝑁𝐴 × = 3000 × = 1058 𝑟𝑝𝑚 is stationery and wheel side rotate with 6 KW of power.
𝑍 51
𝑍32 18
𝑁𝑐 = 𝑁𝑏 × = 1058 × = 373.7 𝑟𝑝𝑚
𝑍4 51
 6. References
Figure 15. FEA
Analysis of Geartrain
4.8. Electrical Systems
The electrical system of the car consists of a BLDC motor, 48 V
Li-ion battery, Motor controller, brake light, reverse light,
reverse alarm and tractive system active light (TSAL). Apart from
that, it consists of sensors for the measurement of battery’s
current, voltage as well as the state of charge. Also, adisplay will
be mounted in the cockpit for the driver toknow the condition of
battery as well as the distance travelled by the vehicle and the
percentage of battery capacity.
Books:
1. Thomas D. Gillespie, “Fundamentals of Vehicle
Dynamics”,Society of Automotive Engineers, July 976.
2. Dr. Kirplal Singh, “Automobiles Engineering Vol-1”,
StandardPublishers, Seventh Edition, 1997, New Delhi.
3. V. B. Bhandari, “Design of Machine Elements”, McGraw
HillEducation, Third Edition, 2010, New Delhi, ISBN-0- 07-
068179-1
4. Fred Puhn, “Brake Handbook”. HP Books, ISBN-0- 89586-
232-8
5. David Hutton, “Fundamentals of Finite Element Analysis”,
Tata McGraw Hill Education Private Limited, 2005, ISBN-0-
07-239536-2
6. Race car vehicle dynamics by William F. Milliken and
Douglas L. Milliken
7. BRAKE HANDBOOK by FRED PUHN. ISBN 0-89586-232-8

The connections of the motor controller with the battery and Websites:
themotor as provided by BAJA SAEINDIA have been taken into
consideration. 1. www.bajasaeindia.org
2. www.bajasaeindiaforum.com
Circuits have been developed for the easy mounting and 3. www.nptel.ac.in
connection of the auxiliaries like brake light and the reverselight. 4. www.allelectricals.com
The rule for starting the motor while pressing the brake pedal 5. www.bajatutor.net
and keying has been implemented. The circuit for the same has
been developed. Further connections have been provided for 7. Contact Information
auxiliaries other than the aforementioned. Meet Lakhani
5th Semester, Mechanical Engineering,
The ATV as a whole has been properly insulated to ensure Pandit Deendayal Energy University
thesafety of the driver as well as the vehicle itself. The
Contact No.: +91 6355456526
insulation provided is strictly in accordance with the standards
Email ID.: meet.lmc20@sot.pdpu.ac.in
specified by the rule book.

Smit Patel
5th Semester, Mechanical Engineering,
Pandit Deendayal Energy University
Contact No.: +91 6353926682
Email ID.: smit.mc20@sot.pdpu.ac.in

Bhawani Singh Sekhawat

5th Semester, Mechanical Engineering,
Pandit Deendayal Energy University
Contact No.: +91 9016530426
Email ID.: bhawani.smc20@sot.pdpu.ac.in

8. Acknowledgments
We would like to acknowledge all the team members to givetheir
knowledgeable inputs for each department that allowedto design
and analyze the vehicle giving top notch performance.
Faculty Advisors: Mr. Rahul Deharkar, Dr. Alok Jain
a. Design and Analysis Department:
Meet Lakhani, Devam Purohit, Abhishek Pathak
b. Mechanical Power Train Department:
Bhawani Singh Sekhawat
c. Brakes Department:
Dhrumit Bhatt, Anand Joshi
d. Vehicle Dynamics Department:
Figure 16. Electrical Subsystem Positioning
Smit Patel, Raghav Parmar, Krishna Vaishnav, Rushang
Kulkarni, Rishit Panchal
e. Electrical and Electronics Department:
5. Conclusion Harshil Solanki, Vrinda Dhadeech, Sahaj Vithlani, Maulin
We designed and assessed the Electric All-Terrain Vehicle in Mehta
accordance with the necessary regulations and standards
announced by the BAJA committee, and we made
improvements in the following
required to perform at a high level.