Analysis

FrontSuspension
Ananalysisofthefrontsuspensionsgeometrywas
carriedoutusingWinGeo3srideiteration
calculations.Thedatathatwascollectedoutlines
thesuspensionsdynamicattributesasittravels
throughbumpandrebound.Theiteration
calculatedvaluesforeachvariableevery.01inch
producingadatasetof21valuesfrom1to1inch
respectively.Thefollowinggraphshavebeen
compiledinordertoshowtherelationships
betweensuspensiontravelandattributessuchas
caster,camber,motionratioandderivedwheel
rate.Inthegraphbelowwecancomparethederivedwheelrate[wR]basedonanominalspring
rate[SR]of100.00lbsperinch,usingtheequationwR = HR
2
SR,tothecalculatedmotionratio
[HR]ofthefontsuspensionoveritsdisplacementfrom1inchofbumpto+1inchofrebound.Wefind
thatthewheelrateincreaseswithbumpanddeclineswithreboundproducingarisingratesuspension
witharisingratepercentageof
(1.001-1.001)
1.001
= u%increaseondecreaseinwheelrateover1inchof
bump,orsoitwouldappear.Lookingcloseratthecalculatedmotionratiosforevery.1ofaninchwe
findthattheratioisnotinfactlinearasthegraphbelowillustratesthemotionratioover1inchofbump
isperiodicwithbothariseandfallingrateoccurringduringwheelbump.Thisspikeinthemotionratio
whenunderbumpaffectsthewheelratecausingthemaximumwheelratertooccuratroughly.7ifan
inchofbumpandthenfallofftountil1inchofbumpisreached.Realisticallythereissuchaminute
changeinoverallinthemotionratioandwheelrateastonegatetheeffectsofthechangeentirely.
Thereforethefrontsuspensioncanbethoughtofasbeinganeutralsystemwhichinthelongrunshould
makeiteasiertosetupthecarforanygivesituation.

0.99
0.992
0.994
0.996
0.998
1
1.002
1.004
1.006
1.008
1.01
98
98.5
99
99.5
100
100.5
101
101.5
102
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
WheelRate
MotionRatio
0.4
0.3
0.2
0.1
0
0.1
0.2
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
NetScrub
Steer
ToeIn
Camber

Nextwecanlookattherollcenterparityofthefrontsuspension,whichisthechangeinroll
centerrelativetothecenterofgravityoverbumpandrebound.Theoptimumconditionforrollcenter
parityiszerochangeduringheave,thishoweverwasnotachieved,andinsteadthefrontsuspensionhas
a3.3%changeinrollcenterparityfromfullreboundtobump.Includedalsoonthisgraphisthechange
inrollcenterwithrelativetotheground,thisattributedoesmeetthetargetrollcenteratstaticride
heightofsomewherebetween0and.5onaninch.Lastly,takingalookathowsteering,camber,scrub,
andtoearegeneratedthroughbumpandreboundwefindthatunderfullbumpthecarwillgainroughly
.3degreesofnegativecamberandaccumulateaslightlylessthanhalfofthatnumberinfullrebound.
Lookingatthecalculatedvaluesforsteer(whichshouldalwaysbeasclosetozeroaspossibleinbump)
wefindthatitispracticallynonexistentinbumpwhichmeansthatbumpundersteeroroversteerhas
beeneliminatedinthesuspensiongeometry.Thelackanystyleofbumpsteershouldimprovethe
handlinginwhilecorneringandreducethenaturalinclinationofthefrontsuspensiontocause
understeer,duetotheoffsettrackwidthof43inchesfromtherears40inches.Shiftingfocustoscrub
andtoeinwefindthatthenetscrubisalmostnonexistent,andthatthepropensityforthecarto
producetoeoutunderreboundmeansthatduringstraitlineaccelerationwhentheweighttransferwill
betowardstherearofthecar,liftingthenoseandfrontend,handlingwillsufferduetheincreasedtoe
outversesthetoeinthat
youwouldwantinthis
situationforstability.

1
0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
10.95
11
11.05
11.1
11.15
11.2
11.25
11.3
11.35
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
toC.G.
RollCent
1.03
1.04
1.05
1.06
1.07
1.08
1.09
1.1
1.11
1.12
1.13
1.14
105
110
115
120
125
130
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
WheelRate
MotionRatio
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
12.55
12.6
12.65
12.7
12.75
12.8
12.85
12.9
12.95
13
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
toC.G.
toground
Rear
Suspension
Asimilaranalysisof
thesuspension
geometrywas
carriedoutusing
WinGeo3sride
iterationcalculations
ontherear
suspensionofthe
2012conceptcar.In
thegraphbelowwe
cancomparethe
rearsuspensions
derivedwheel
rate[wR]basedona
nominalspringrate[SR]of100.00lbsperinch,usingtheequationwR = HR
2
SR,tothecalculated
motionratio[HR]ofthefontsuspensionoveritsdisplacementfrom1inchofbumpto+1inchof
rebound.Wefindthatthewheelrateincreaseswithbumpanddeclineswithreboundproducingarising
ratesuspensionwitharisingratepercentageof
(1.119-1.115)
1.119
.uuSS7 or .S6 %increaseinthemotion
ratioover1inchofbump.However,afteracloserinspectionofthegraphedresultsweseethatjustlike
thefrontsuspensionthereisaspikeinboththemotionratioandwheelrate.7inchesofbump.This
timethoughtthespikeinthemotionratioismoresevereduetothealreadypresentrisingrateofthe
suspensiongeometry,thereforeinordertoreducethestifferwheelrateintherearofthecar,onecould
opttousesoftercoiloversprings,oruseprogressivespringsinthefrontsuspensiontocreateamore
neutralcaroverall.

Analyzingrollcenter
parityoftherear
suspensionwefind
thatunlikethe3.3%
changeinrollcenter
parityfromfull
reboundtobumpof
thefrontsuspension,
therearfairsslightly
betterachievinga
changeof2.8%.
Againforcomparison
thechangeinroll
centerrelativetothe
groundisincluded
onthisgraphwiththetargetthistimebeingfortherollcentertostaybetween1and2inchesunderfull
bump,whichitachieves.Finally,takingalookathowsteering,camber,scrub,andtoearegenerated
throughbumpandreboundintherearsuspensionwefindthatunderfullbumpthecarwillgainjust
above.6degreesofnegativecamberwhichisshyof1degreeofcamberwithbumpwhichwasthe
initialtarget.Movingontobumpsteerwefindthatitissubstantiallygreaterintherearthatthefrontof
thecarinbothreboundandbumpatroughly.2ofadegree,thisshouldcausebumpundersteer,
whichmaynotbeabadthingwhenconsideringtheinherentpropensityofthereartowantto
oversteer,duetoweightfromtherearmountedengineandthesmallertracksizeof40inchesin
comparisontothefronttracks43inches.Withthefrontsuspensionofthecarwantingtoundersteer
andtherearoversteerhavingthissmallamountofbumpoversteerintherearshouldcreateamore
neutralcar.Shiftingfocustoscrubandtoeinwefindthatthenetscrubisalittleontheheavysideand
thatthepropensityforthecartoproducetowinunderreboundmeansthatduringbrakingstabilitywill
beimproved.

Conclusion

Boththefrontandrearsuspensionhaveanearto1/1motionratio,yetsufferfromperiodicspikesin
therewheelrates.Toeitherreduceorremovethespikesinbothsuspensiongeometriesfurtheranalysis
onthelocationsoftherockersordampersthemselvesinfluenceonthecurrentwishbonegeometryis
needed.Toimmediatelyreducetheeffectsofthesuddenspikesandthendropsinwheelratesfor
eitherthefrontorbacksuspension,bumpstopsplacedontherockersordamperswoulddothetrick,in
theshortterm.However,thebetterwaytocontroltheunwantedchangesinwheelratesandmotion
ratiowouldbetouseprogressivecoilspringsetforthefrontsuspensionsetup,creatingastifferfront
chassisrelativetothesmallrisingrateofrearsuspension.Oneoverlookedpossibilityisthatthespikesin
thedisplacementiterationsarecausedbyabuildupinerrorofonlyusingtwodecimalplacesformost
variables.
0.8
0.6
0.4
0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
1.5 1 0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5
NetScrub
Steer
ToeIn
Camber