Paper Number 2

FINAL DESIGN REPORT

TEAM STRATOS
Team #8, Car #8

Copyright © 2009 SAE International

ABSTRACT DESIGN OF MAJOR SYSTEMS

The aim of this report is to highlight the final design of
Team Stratos’ mini-Baja vehicle which will compete in
Baja SAEASIA 2010.
The team’s primary objective was to design a safe and
functional vehicle based on a rigid and torsion-free roll
cage and chassis, well mounted powertrain, and
dynamically tested steering and suspension systems.
The secondary objective was to enhance performance
and maneuverability of the vehicle.
The team was divided into core groups responsible for
the design and optimization of major sub-systems which
were later integrated into the final blueprint. Current CAD
modeling and FEA approaches were used.
INTRODUCTION
FRAME DESIGN
Material chosen for the frame is ASTM A106 schedule
40 steel with a radius of 1” and a wall thickness of 3mm.
Some bracing members have 2mm wall thickness. In
accordance with section 31.5 sub-section A of the rule
book, the material chosen has a carbon content of
0.265% which is >0.18%.
Joining method used will be Flux Metal Arc Welding.
This method was compared with Metal Inert Gas
Welding and found to be giving welds of equal strength.
FMAW was chosen since it is more economical.
The earlier frame design is shown below. The forces
used in its analysis were too low in magnitude. New
values of impact and torsional forces were calculated.

We approached our design by considering all possible

alternatives for a system & modeling them in CAD
software like CATIA, AutoCAD etc. to obtain a model
with maximum geometric details.

The models were then subjected to analysis using

ANSYS FEA software. Based on analysis results, the
model was modified and retested and a final design was
frozen.

Dynamics analysis was done in Lotus suspension

analysis software and MSC ADAMS. The aim was to
optimize suspension variables to improve
maneuverability. Theoretical calculations of performance
characteristics were also done.

Extensive weight reduction techniques were followed at

every stage of the design to improve performance fig i
without sacrificing structural integrity.
When the entire powertrain was modeled, the engine
bay area was found to be insufficient. A mockup of the
powertrain was done and the engine bay was resized.

When space between A-pillars was increased to improve

field of vision, the rigidity of the frame was significantly

1
reduced. Also, front structural members were too
complicated to manufacture. Therefore, the front of the
car was redesigned.

The new frame design is shown below. This was

subsequently analyzed in ANSYS for frontal impact,
torsion and rollover tests.

fig ii (a & b) fig iii (a & b)

Frontal Impact Test: Torsion Test:

For a perfectly inelastic collision, energy transferred is For torsion test, a force equivalent to the gross weight of
2
DE = ½ (m1m2/m1+m2)(u2-u1) where m1 and m2 are the vehicle (3500N) was applied at one of the 4 corners
masses of two vehicles and u1 and u2 are of the frame while constraining the other 3.
corresponding velocities. Assuming m1=m2=350kg and
u2=0 (vehicle at rest), Deformation and stresses were as follows. For a stress
2
of 163MPa, the FOS obtained was 2.12.
DE = 1/4 m1u1 & F=DE/t where t=100ms

Then, F= [.25 x 350 x (16.67)^2] / [10x.1] = 24315N

Hence, a frontal impact force of 6000N was applied at 4

points on the frame. The back of the frame was
completely constrained.

The deformation and stresses are shown below. For a

stress of 67MPa, the FOS obtained was 5.15.

2
 SUSPENSION DESIGN & WHEELS

A double wishbone suspension setup was chosen for the

front as well as rear as it is lightweight, independent and
prevents deflection during hard cornering which ensures
that the steering and wheel alignment stay constant.

Other types like McPherson strut and trailing arm were

rejected because of weight considerations.

Wishbones:

Material used for wishbones is same as the frame

material. As seen below, for a 1KN force on the ball joint
and shock absorber mounting, the max stress obtained
is 63Mpa, which gives a FOS of 5.46.
fig iv (a & b)

Rollover Test:

In the rollover test, a force equivalent to the gross weight

of the vehicle (3500N) was applied to one of the top
corners of the frame while constraining the base.

For a stress of 36MPa, the FOS obtained was 9.58.

fig vi

For the rear upper arm, a force of 1KN was applied to

the hinges and the shock absorber mounting. Max
stresses were within limits.

fig vii

Hubs:

Front hubs are OEM and are made of cast iron with a
hardened steel stub axle. Rear hubs are made of mild
steel (hardened). Rear hubs were designed to
incorporate the double wishbone suspension and also to
enable mounting of disc brakes.

fig v (a & b)
3
 Dynamic analysis was done on the front suspension
setup to check the response of the vehicle for bump, in
roll and while steering. Keypoints were obtained from the
CAD model. Variables were tuned to reduce bump steer,
camber angles and wayward movement of roll center.

Bump:

fig viii

Front and rear hubs were both analyzed for 3500N force
applied at the bearings and were found to be within
limits. Front hub shows a stress of 157MPa while the
rear hub shows a stress of 65Mpa. The design is well
within yield limits for the materials used.

fig x (a & b)

Above are the graphs for bump (mm) (x-axis) versus toe,
fig ix camber and castor angles. For a bump and rebound of
100 mm each the camber was restricted within 0.5 deg
Shock Absorbers & Wheels: and toe within 2 deg. This minimizes the forces on the
knuckle ball joints during bumps.
Shock absorbers used are completely adjustable gas
filled dampers (OEM from Maruti Omni) coupled with Roll:
compression springs.

Wheels used are tubeless bias type having R10 175 in

front and R10 250 in the rear. Rims used are
magnesium alloy.

Dynamic Analysis:

During wishbone design it was found that size of the

engine bay and track width limitations were resulting in
extremely short rear wishbone lengths. This would in
turn limit travel of the shock absorbers and result in an
extremely harsh ride and possible damage to the engine
mounts. The back of the frame was then extended as a
narrow portion to make longer wishbone lengths
possible.

4

fig xi (a & b)
Values of toe angle, camber angle and roll center height
versus roll angle (deg) (x-axis) indicate that driver will
experience good control over the vehicle while
cornering.
Steer:
fig xii (a & b)
Steering angle (deg) (x-axis) vs. camber angle, toe angle
and roll center indicates minimum deviations of all three.
The Ackermann error is only 6%, which indicates an
accurate and responsive steering.
5
ENGINE & DRIVETRAIN
A Mahindra Alfa transmission (4 forward 1 reverse) will
be used and will be directly coupled to the wheels. Gear
ratios will not be modified. Engine will be mounted on
rubber bushings to reduce NVH characteristics.
Using a directly coupled final drive also enables the
engine to be mounted as low as possible, thus lowering
the C.o.G of the vehicle.
STEERING & BRAKES
Steering is a rack and pinion system having a lock-to-
lock of 2.5 turns. Steering ratio is 15:1 with Ackermann
angles of 24deg and 36deg. The turning radius of the
vehicle is 3.46m. The rack is placed ahead of the front
wheels’ center axis to improve handling.
fig xiii
Brakes are disc type in front and rear, with 180mm discs
in front and 130mm in rear. Brake force is distributed via
2 master cylinders so that system is independent.
SAFETY & ERGONOMICS
fig xiv
Shown above is the Impact Energy Diffuser (IED) used
in the front of the vehicle to absorb energy from impacts
and prevent damage to the wishbones and tie rods. It
will incorporate springs and dampers to absorb forces
and keep vehicle functioning after a crash.
 Then, pressure delivered by the cylinder P=F/A =
1254.5/314.15e-4 = 39,933N/m^2

Assuming front:rear brake bias as 68:32 gives

P(f)=27154.4N and P(r)=12788.6N.

Hence, force applied by the rear cylinder F(r) = P(r)*A =

490.9e-4*12788.6 = 627.70N and similarly, F(f) =
1333.1N.

Also Force applied on the discs by the cylinder F(R) =

2*F(r)* = 2*627.70*0.3 = 376.62N and F(F)=798.7N.

Which implies torque on each disc in the rear= T(R)=

F(R)*Radius = 376.62*0.06 = 22.6N and that on the front
fig xv
(with radius of the disc=0.08 m) T(F)=63.9N
The driver cabin is ergonomically designed keeping
Finally force per wheel in the rear becomes F(Rw) =
anthropometry in mind. The seating is adjustable. Shown
T(R)/Radius of the wheel (R(w)) = 22.6/0.292 = 77.36N
above is the tilt steering assembly used to provide
and also F(Rr) = 218.72N.
different steering settings depending on the user’s
preferences. It utilizes a spring loaded locking
Thus, net deceleration Acc=[2*F(Rw)+2*F(Rr)]/Weight of
mechanism to hold the steering column in preset
the vehicle(W) = 2(77.36+218.72)/3500 = 16.9m/s^2.
positions. It can also be moved completely out of the
way to enhance ease of ingress/egress.
And, Stopping distance D(s) = V^2/2*a = (14*14)/2*16.9
= 2.89m.
EXPECTED PERFORMANCE
CHARACTERISTICS C.o.G & WEIGHT DISTRIBUTION:
POWER & TORQUE: C.o.G calculations were done by considering the origin
at the front end for X, at the chassis for Z and at the
Power to Weight ratio is (10.72/275)*1000 = 39 bhp/ton. wheels for Y. The final value for Z was arrived at after
Torque is calculated as follows. adding the ground clearance.

BRAKING DISTANCE:

Using OEM master cylinders & assuming force applied

by driver on pedal to be 85lbs = 386N, force on master
cylinder = 386 x 0.26 (dist in m from pedal to cylinder) =
100.36N

Now, this is equal to F x ram length, i.e. 100.36=Fx.08

so F=1254.5N

6
 fig xvi

Static Stability Factor (SSF) = T/2H where T= track width

and H= height of centre of gravity.

SSF=1324/(2x553)= 1.19

Using the graph, this gives our vehicle a four star rating.

FULL VEHICLE 3D VIEWS

fig xvii

Stability Analysis:

According to the National Highway & Traffic Safety

Administration, most vehicle rollovers occur by tripping
over low obstacles. For a Baja vehicle, this would also
be the case. Then stability is obtained from the following
graph. fig xviii

7
 CONCLUSION

This being Team Stratos’ first attempt at Baja SAE , our

team’s objective was to design and build a vehicle that
can complete all competition events without failure. All
designs and calculations were done to realize this aim.

Reliability and safety were considered paramount,

keeping the nature of the end-user in mind. Finally, a
high level of manufacturability was incorporated to
ensure feasibility for mass-production.

REFERENCES
fig xix
1. Chassis Engineering by Herb Adams
2. Automotive Mechanics by Crouse Anglin
3. Race Car Vehicle Dynamics by Millikens & Millikens
VEHICLE TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
CONTACT

Manish O. – Team Captain – 91-9844421914

Mokshith S.N – Design Head – 91-9611666646

Karthik N – Marketing Head – 91-9036227798