Contents:
Internal Combustion Engine:
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
Engine capacity:
Piston Design:
Crankshaft:
Combustion Process:
Electric Vehicle:
1.5 Energy source:
1.6 Electric Power Converter:
Comparison:
I.
II.
MacPherson Strut
Wish Bone Type:
Optimum Solution:
I.
It
It
It
It
It
It
It
Piston Design
2.3 Crankshaft:
The purpose of the crankshaft is to convert the rectilinear reciprocating movement
of a piston into the rotating movement necessary for the car. This is obtained by
linking the pistons to the crank throws, which are offset from the central axis of the
crankshaft to create a revolution about that axis.
Crank Shaft
2-3, Compression Stroke The valves are closed during the compression stroke.
The piston then moves upwards and compresses the mixture.
3-4, Working Stroke An electric spark is produced by the spark plug that ignites
the compressed mixture and forces the piston down.
4-1, Exhaust Stroke the exhaust valves open up during the exhaust stroke. From
the cylinder, the piston rises, expels the exhaust gases.
3 Electric Vehicle:
3.1 Energy source:
The feasible vitality sources being proposed for EVs incorporate batteries, power
devices, capacitors and flywheels. Among them, the batteries, capacitors and
flywheels are vitality stockpiling frameworks in which electrical vitality is put away
amid charging, though the power modules are vitality era frameworks in which
power is produced by synthetic response.
3.3 Comparison:
MacPherson Strut
Wish Bone Type
MacPherson Strut
The shocks and struts in your auto are a piece of the suspension, and they secure
your motor and whatever is left of your vehicle from the different hindrances. In
spite of the fact that you can have singular struts replaces, commonly you will find
that both struts are supplanted in the meantime. To supplant an individual strut, you
have to pay anywhere in the range of $133 and $439. To supplant both the expense
will as a rule be amongst $239 and $818. The performance is generally good, it is
light weight maintenance cost is less but is not suitable for heavy motor vehicles.
As we may see it is also called double wish bone type and the price range is as such
following that $400-800 per set. The Ride Quality Increases when using it, the
4 Optimum Solution:
Our assignment was to examine two alternatives for the suspension frameworks
while keeping in perspective some key components, for example, expense and
execution. To begin with impressive choice for this issue is to plan the dynamic
suspension framework. The AS burden causes an expansion in FC and emanations
of both routine vehicle and HEV. Nonetheless, in the traditional vehicle, the AS
burden is deciphered as an extra high recurrence torque load on the ignition motor.
In this way, in ordinary vehicle, because of moderate reaction elements of burning
motor, the AS force deficiency too motor delay and surge will probably happen. The
framework is extremely unsurprising. After some time, you will build up a nature
with your auto's suspension. You will comprehend its abilities and its constraints. On
the drawback, once the framework has achieved these breaking points, it has no
chance to get of making up for circumstances past its outline parameters. Hence
safeguards scrape the bottom, struts overextend, and springs react slowly, torsion
wellbeing.
Then again, Adaptive or semi-dynamic frameworks can just change the thick
damping coefficient of the safeguard, and don't add vitality to the suspension
framework. In spite of the fact that restricted in their intercession (for instance, the
control power can never have distinctive heading than the present vector of speed
of the suspension), semi-dynamic suspensions are less costly to outline and devour
far less vitality. The expense of dynamic suspension framework might be somewhat
higher yet from the execution perspective, this is the best alternative for the electric
vehicle.
So I would say that I would go with MacPherson strut suspension system as we are
making a simple system or a simple car.
suspension 5
to
assume
chassis is fixed
BArBA
the
Kinematic Analysis:
6
7
8
9
10Kinematic Analysis Results
Note that all of these images were taken from Smith,2002 for the ease of calculations.
11
12
13
14
15Detailed CAD and Models:
16
17Conclusion:
The conclusion is as following that Adaptive or semi-dynamic frameworks can just
change the thick damping coefficient of the safeguard, and don't add vitality to the
suspension framework. A dynamic suspension framework, then again, has the
capacity to modify itself ceaselessly to changing street conditions. The AS burden
causes an expansion in FC and emanations of both routine vehicle and HEV.
Nonetheless, in the traditional vehicle, the AS burden is deciphered as an extra high
recurrence torque load on the ignition motor. In this way, in ordinary vehicle,