Car No.

83

Union College SAE Baja Vehicle Design Report

Matthew Beenen, Jon Wilson and Ned Lincoln
Union College Dutchmen Racing
Union College, Schenectady NY

ABSTRACT F.O.S.  factor of safety 

FEA  finite element analysis 
ft  feet 
An SAE Baja vehicle is a single-seat, all-terrain vehicle g 
2
acceleration due to gravity, m/s  
powered by a ten horsepower Briggs & Stratton engine. HDPE  high density polyethylene 
Undergraduate students at Union College from multiple ksi  1000 pounds per square inch, ksi 
academic fields collaborated to design and manufacture L  length, m (ft) 
a safe, high-performance, cost-efficient Baja vehicle to lb  pound 
Mpa  mega pascal 
serve as a prototype for mass production. The students
MPH  miles per hour 
utilized and refined both financial procedures and N  newton 
engineering analyses to complete this objective while RPM  rotations per minute 
conforming to the prescribed SAE rules. SAE  society of automotive engineering 
TIG  tungston inert gas [welding] 
INTRODUCTION

The Union College SAE Baja vehicle was designed as a VEHICLE DESIGN
prototype for manufacture by an outdoor recreation firm.
The ideal vehicle is safe, simple and inexpensive: safe FRAME –
for its occupant to be protected during use, simple for a
novice rider to operate and maintain, and inexpensive to Objective - The purpose of the frame is to provide a safe
allow for general production and purchase. Additionally, environment for the occupant while supporting other
the vehicle should be attractive to potential buyers in vehicle systems. Several steps were taken to ensure
both its visual appearance and performance. These this objective was met. Tungsten Inert Gas (TIG) electric
characteristics were considered in design of the arc welding was used to guarantee solid joints and a
following major vehicle systems: frame, drivetrain, rigid foundation to support the main components of the
flotation, suspension, steering, and braking. vehicle. In addition, extensive finite element stress
analysis proved the car would remain intact and protect
LIST OF FIGURES, TABLES AND SYMBOLS the driver under the most strenuous of crashes. The
frame was designed to comfortably accommodate a six-
Figure  Description  Page  foot, three-inch tall driver.
1  2008 Frame Schematic    2 
2  2009 Frame Schematic    2 
Overview of the Design – In order to conform to the SAE
3  Drivetrain Components    4 
4  Foam Model    6 
frame requirements, major redesign was decided upon
5  Front Suspension    7  rather than alteration of the existing frame. For the 2008
6  Trailing Link Cosmos   8  season, several positive modifications were made to the
7  Trailing Link Assembly    8  frame, including a shortened wheelbase, a seven-inch
8  Rear Suspension Analysis    8  front-end rake, and new cockpit layout. The front wheels
9  Tire Selection    10 
were moved six inches back, reducing the carʼs turning
  radius and improving the weight distribution, which had
previously been heavily rear biased. In the 2009 season,
Table  Description  Page 
the team has redesigned the rear section of the frame to
1  Gearbox Specifications    3 
2  Floatation Calculations    5 
accommodate new rear suspension and drivetrain
components.
 

Symbol  Definition 
Figures 1 and 2 display the frame schematics from 2008
A 
2
area m   and 2009, respectively. The changes to the rear half of
%  percent  the frame can be seen. The elimination of the solid 1”x1”
C.G.  center of gravity  steel slugs in the rear greatly reduces frame weight.
CV  constant velocity [axel] 
CVT  continuously variable transmission 
1

Figure 1: 2008 frame schematic.
Figure 2: 2009 rear frame schematic
The decision to increase driver safety resulted in several
frame improvements. The side impact members were
widened and located higher from the bottom of the frame
to better protect the driver from side impacts and ensure
that taller drivers remain enclosed by the roll cage at all
times. The new design also includes bracing that was
not present in the previous frame design. This bracing in
the rear eliminates the need for triangulation in the front.
In addition to preventing visual obstruction, it also allows
the driver to egress more quickly should he or she need
to. Supports on the roof of the car and vertical
reinforcements in the cockpit made the new frame safer
in a rollover situation. At the front of the car, a sub-frame
that had supported the pedals, brake master cylinder,
and suspension was eliminated, placing the driverʼs seat
farther forward and improving the use of space in the
car. Lastly, the steering frame was rebuilt to
accommodate a new steering layout and driver position.
The frame is made of 1.25 inch 4130 Chrome
Moly round tubing with 0.065 inch wall thickness which
has a higher strength to weight ratio than the required
material. These characteristics maintain the equivalent
area moment of inertia and provide a reduction in weight.
The rear frame section is made of the same material.
The frame was TIG welded using Certanium 72 as filler
rod.
CosmosWorks, a Finite Element Analysis
package, was used to ensure the frame could withstand
a significant impact. There were three impact scenarios
analyzed each with a 3g impact with a car weight
estimation of 600lb; this provided for a 10,700N force.
The max stress of any member was 18 ksi, while the
yield strength of the steel is 80-90 ksi resulting in a factor
of safety between four and five. The impacts were front,
side, and rear, applied to the front lateral cross member,
the side impact member, and the rear lateral cross
member, respectively. Renderings of these data can be
found in Appendix A, and confirm that the driver
compartment would remain safe in the event of an
accident. A more serious, worst case scenario type
situation was also analyzed with a 10g force of over
20,000N and resulted in a maximum stress of 62 ksi or
323Mpa. This is lower than the yield strength of 435Mpa.
See appendix A for figures.
DRIVETRAIN
Objective – The drivetrain for this yearʼs car has been
radically overhauled to improve overall car performance
and correct vulnerabilities of previous designs. Past
drivetrain designs have been double-reduction, open-
chain designs, based around a CVT, chains, sprockets
and a jackshaft mounted in an open sub-frame. The
system benefited from simplicity and low cost, at the risk
of premature failure due to misalignment and direct
exposure to water and dirt. Adhering to recommended
wrap angles and center distances for chain drives
requires the system to occupy a large volume, thereby
increasing frame weight. Reducing the number of chains
in the transmission was a logical choice to
simultaneously address issues of reliability, performance
and size.
Additionally, the overall drivetrain ratio was re-examined
to optimize top speed and acceleration, and a new chain
tensioning system was designed to reduce
misalignment.
Discussion of Alternatives – Reducing the number of
exposed chains required some form of self-contained,
st
lubricated subsystem to take the place of the 1 stage
open-chain reduction. The car still operates with a final
st
drive chain connecting the 1 stage system to the CV
drive axles. Several alternatives were evaluated against
the following design requirements:
2
1) Increased Reliability Over Open Chains: Protecting
the first reduction stage from water and dirt is critical to
decreasing wear. The new system must isolate the
st
components of the 1 reduction stage from the off-road
environment. Shafts and bearings must be robust
enough to handle the power and torque delivered by the
engine-CVT combination.
2) Decreased Component Volume: Reducing the space
requirements for drivetrain components allows the frame
to be smaller, lighter and more resistant to buckling.
3) Precise Component Alignment: Misalignment in
sprockets, chains and bearings dramatically decreases
component life. Enclosing components in a machined
case reduces the number of components that must be
checked for proper alignment, and reduces the chance
of misalignment.
Alternatives:
1) Sealed, Lubricated Chain Box – Enclosing the existing
first stage reduction components would eliminate the
potential for wear due to exposure to dirt and water.
Chain tensioning would remain an issue, however.
Additionally, the overall size of the drivetrain would not
improve due to required sprocket center distances and
diameters.
2) Enclosed Gears – Gears are capable of higher
operating speeds, load capacity and reliability compared
to chains. The major tradeoffs are increased cost and
manufacturing time, as the gears must be custom
fabricated. Component volume is reduced over chain
drives, but weight may not improve. The gains in
drivetrain durability and efficiency are significant,
however.
Toothed belts were not given serious consideration due
to reported issues with slipping / skipping from other
teams.
A helical gear train was ultimately chosen as the
new 1
st
reduction stage. The potential for car
performance improvement outweighed the increase in
cost. It is also important to keep in mind that gear
manufacturing costs drop rapidly with quantity, so in
terms of mass-production of a Baja vehicle, gear drives
would not be out of the question and in fact, appear to be
the teamʼs best option.
Overview of the Design – A Comet 790 CVT transmits
power from the Briggs & Stratton Intek 305 engine to a
custom helical reduction gearbox. The CVT is capable of
ratios from 3.38:1 (Low) to 0.54:1 (High) between its two
st
pulleys. 1 stage drivetrain components must be able to
handle both the maximum input torque and RPMʼs of the
secondary CVT pulley. Based on the Briggs & Stratton
specifications for their Intek 305 engine, maximum CVT
torque is approximately 47 ft-lb, and maximum CVT
speed is 7000 RPM. These occur at opposite ends of the
CVT engagement range, low and high, respectively.
The CVT secondary drives the integrated pinion-shaft of
the custom helical gearset, designed in-house at Union
th
College. Unfortunately, a 4 Axis indexer was not
available in Unionʼs CNC mill in time for in-house
production of the gearset. Kamar Industries in Buffalo,
New York, was selected for gear cutting. Shaft
machining was done in-house. The basic specifications
of the gearbox are found below, in table 2
Table 1: Shows basic gearbox and drive
specifications
Diametric Pitch        12° 
Pressure Angle  20° 
Helix Angle  15° 
N, Pinion   16 teeth 
N, Gear  64 teeth 
Material  4340 Ht Trtd Stl 
Max Input Torque  50 ft‐lb 
Max Input Speed  7000 RPM 
Minimum Factor of Safety, Bending  2.5 
Minimum Factor of Safety, Wear  1.2 (1000 hrs) 
Inside the gearbox, an integral 16T pinion-shaft engages
a 64T gearwheel, mounted to a 5-bolt hub on the output
shaft. An MITCalc design suite was used to aid gear
design and analysis, The software references ISO 6336
and AGMA standards to calculate gear strength and
wear characteristics. COSMOS FEA was also run on
both pinion and gear to check tooth strength. Based on
the heat treatment performed on the gears, expected
yield strength is at least 150 ksi, giving a F.O.S of 2.5 or
greater.
All gearbox shafts are supported with precision ball
bearings. 40° angular contact bearings handle the thrust
loads generated by helical gears, and sealed radial
bearings support the shafts on the zero thrust-load ends.
The gear housing consists of two symmetrical halves
machined from 6061 aluminum, and features grade 8
fasteners and an integral mounting bolt pattern. Oil
addition is done via a side-mounted plug, and a breather
valve allows for thermal expansion of the air inside the
gearbox. Sealing is assured with a nitrile gasket between
the two case halves and double-lipped shaft seals at the
input and output. High gear speeds and the compact
case make splash lubrication a sufficient mechanism for
getting oil to the meshing teeth and open angular
bearings.
The output shaft was designed to carry a ¾” bore, 3/16”
keyed sprocket. The gearbox output and rear driven
sprockets are connected with 420 RK Gold Racing
chain, rated at 3300lb, giving a factor of safety of 2.5 - 3
during maximum drivetrain torque. Chain load and
3
F.O.S. range slightly depending on rear sprocket
diameter.
The final drive shaft is mounted rearward of the gearbox,
approximately 15.5” center-to-center from the gearbox
output. Driven sprockets from 40 to 54 teeth can be
mounted on the shaft hub, offering a wide range of
ratios. New for this season is the Polaris Outlaw final
drive system. This system integrates the CV shafts with
the drive shaft to produce a single, easily serviceable
and replaceable alternative to a custom setup. The
shafts were lengthened by 3” to accommodate the wider
track of the baja car. Figure 3 shows the assembly fitted
to the frame with a tensioning mechanism very similar to
the factory Polaris design.
This system utilizes two large bearings with the drive
axle built inside of a cast aluminum housing. This
housing, mounted on the bottom with a single pivot axle,
is easily tensioned using the upper mounting points.
Tensioning is accomplished using a large bracket and
bolt between the axle case and the rear of the frame.
This allows up to 1.25” of forward/rearward travel.
Previous designs used outdated Arctic Cat CV axles that
were not only very worn, but were irreplaceable. The
inboard female splines on those units are nearly
obsolete now and needed to be replaced.
Driven sprockets were purchased as blanks from Martin
Sprocket. Bolt patterns and major weight removal
patterns were cut using Unionʼs abrasive waterjet.
COSMOS analysis of the sprockets showed that by
using these patterns, sprocket weight was almost halved
with no significant loss in strength. The sprockets are
mounted to the final drive system using the integrated
bolt pattern and tapped holes. This integrated sprocket
mount on the hub eliminates any trouble with alignment
and any issues with slippage and the previous need for a
custom axle.
Figure 3: All major drivetrain components are present
except for the engine. The chain side gearbox case has
been hidden to show internal detail. A 10T/48T sprocket
combination is shown.
Design Advantages – Starting with a race-proven
drivetrain from last season, this yearʼs improvements
focus mainly on maintainability and integrating more
modern systems. This will not only offer better
performance and efficiency, but will also ensure that if a
part of the system fails replacement parts will be readily
available.
Since only one chain is present in the new drivetrain, the
new rear frame is smaller and more compact than any
previous Union College Baja car. Cantilevered CVT and
sprocket shafts in the gearbox make safety guards
easier to construct, and more effective against the water
intrusion that can cause CVT belt slippage. Chain
tensioning is much more robust than in previous years,
and a wide selection of chain ratios is available. The
drivetrain is easier to work on, adjust and protect
compared to previous years. Higher speed and
acceleration is expected due to higher transmission
efficiency, and the risk of chain failure has been more
than halved by replacing previously used #40 chain with
a 420 racing chain. This system is designed for at least
1000 hours of operation before the gears should be
inspected for wear. Lastly, the drivetrain offers a
continous range of overall ratios from 57.5:1 to 9.2:1.
Such a wide range makes the drivetrain well-suited to
off-road driving; one system can provide both a 30MPH
top speed and over 800 ft-lb of axle torque at takeoff.
FLOTATION AND PROPULSION–
Objective - The goal of the flotation system is to provide
the buoyant force necessary to keep the vehicle and
driver afloat in an aquatic environment. This must hold
true at both a horizontal orientation and up to at least a
30-degree roll situation. While the car is floating, the rear
wheels function as the means of propulsion, with the
treads of the tires acting as paddle wheels. In the past,
it was believed that fenders close to the tires were
necessary for propulsion. We learned last year that thick
mud can easily render these fenders not only useless,
but harmful to the drivetrain. We have therefore decided
against fabricating fenders tight to the tire. This is
covered more carefully in the flotation section.
Design Requirements - The flotation system must first
and foremost support the weight of the car and driver
when in the water. Second, it is important that the
flotation system keep the rear wheels at an optimum
height in the water without sacrificing ground clearance
on land.
Safety was considered the first priority over all
other design requirements. The flotation and body
should not impede a driverʼs ability to exit the cockpit in
fewer than five seconds. There should be easy access to
all the kill switches and there should not be sharp edges.
4
The foam must be durable and protected from debris the
car may encounter during routine use. The flotation
system should be easily removable for repair and
maintenance.
The flotation material on the bottom of the car
should not interfere with the full travel of the suspension,
and the front and rear approach angles should be kept
as high as possible. Finally, the flotation system must
be integrated into the body of the car to produce a
professional look to the vehicle, keeping in mind that the
bottom should be streamlined to reduce drag in the
water.
Discussion of Alternatives – Previous designs employed
a flotation system involving Polystyrene billets. While
this foam was successful in floating the vehicle for a
short period of time, its physical characteristics proved
ineffective over extended testing and abuse. The nature
of the Polystyrene material caused the foam to hold
water and weigh down the car. In addition, its fragile
makeup did not withstand the rocky, unforgiving
conditions of off-road terrain. For these reasons air filled
pontoons were decided against, as a puncture would
render the system useless.
This yearʼs system is comprised of foam side
pods and a block underneath the car, which attaches to
the frame. Rather than using three separate blocks, use
of one solid piece makes installation and removal easy.
A foam piece underneath the drivetrain and behind the
car adds additional support. Durable, water resistant
Polyethylene foam was chosen. Polyethylene is a closed
cell, rigid structure foam product.
In addition, great emphasis was placed on
optimal ground clearance. Previous designs performed
exceptionally in the water, but lacked the necessary ride
height to excel on land. As a result, calculations were
performed to place the car slightly lower in the water, at
a level where it propels efficiently and safely, but does
not sacrifice clearance on land. See Appendix B for
calculations and analysis.
Overview of the Design - The final design was evaluated
with safety being the most important factor followed by
performance and styling.
The car is designed to float in both calm water
and adverse conditions with a driver having a maximum
weight of 220 lbs. The foam planks used for the vehicle
are particularly suitable for flotation. The system is
comprised of Polyethylene foam commonly used in
industrial applications. Two inch planks were heat
treated together to form larger thicknesses. One cubic
foot of foam will provide 60 pounds of buoyant force
before considering the foamʼs own weight. It will not
hold water and will not lose its buoyant characteristics if
punctured. The foam is also resistant to chemicals and
heat.
Table 2: Shows calculations and figures for
flotation design.
Foam 
Bouyancy of foam (lb/sqft)  58 
Center of Gravity (in from firewall)  13 
Surface Area forward of C.G.  7.58 
Surface Area behind C.G.  9.66 
Total Surface Area  17.24 
Distribution    
Front (%)  44 
Back (%)  56 
Volume    
Depth Below Frame (ft)  0.667 
Volume of Foam below waterline (ft^2)  11.499 
Distribution (ft^3)    
Front  5.056 
Back  6.443 
Weight Distribution    
Maximum Driver Weight (lb)  220.00 
Front (lb)  260.00 
Front (%)  40.63 
Back (lb)  380.00 
Back (%)  59.38 
Results 
Foam to be placed behind C.G.  10.24 
Foam to be below waterline (ft^3)  11.499 
Buoyancy foam is located under the driverʼs
compartment, under the engine compartment and rear
suspension components, behind the engine
compartment similar to a rear bumper, and on the sides
of the driverʼs compartment. The foam in the side pods
is the most essential part of the flotation system. The
side pods not only provide a majority of the buoyant
force but also provide transverse stability. The side
pods allow the car to easily recover from a 30 degree
induced tilt from either side. This is accomplished by
keeping the buoyant force as close to vertical with the
center of gravity even in a rolling situation. Submerging
3
the side pods in a roll will help do this. A total of 11.5 ft
of foam is incorporated into the flotation system, which
has been designed with the center of buoyancy directly
under the center of gravity of the car. All figures from
calculations are shown to the left, in table 2. The
metacenter is found directly above both the center of
mass of the car and the center of buoyancy. This is the
point of pivot when the vehicle heels to one side or the
other. During the analysis it was discovered that the tires
also provide a buoyant force. The tireʼs buoyant force
will be considered a factor of safety incorporated into the
design. Figure 4 shows a SolidWorks model of the
undercarriage foam section.
5

Figure 4: Foam underbody model
To ensure that the system is durable, it has
been fitted with an HDPE (high density polyethylene)
shell. Not only is this shell extremely durable, but being
smooth as it is, it will greatly reduce drag caused by the
un-sealed foam cells on the surface of a cut. An
aluminum angle sub-frame that bolts directly to the main
frame supports the entire system. With this flotation
system bolted to the car securely, an individual is able to
stand on the flotation pods with no risk of harm to the
vehicle. This frame makes the system both structurally
sound and easy to remove should repairs or
modifications need to be made.
Propulsion is a key part of this vehicles design.
With the tread of the tires providing the thrust, the car is
able to move and steer in the water. Using fenders
mounted above the rear wheels, the car is able to
convert the energy created by the water being kicked up
by the tires into a useable amount of thrust. These
fenders are constructed of HDPE, a durable, lightweight
alternative to aluminum of fiberglass. In addition to
helping with propulsion, the fenders help guard the
engine from the inevitable splashing that the tires create.
Steering is done using the steering wheel. While
other methods can be used, the added complexity and
opportunity for failure far outweigh the benefits. The
shifting of the driverʼs weight can also be used to aid in
cornering. With more of the outside rear tire/wheel in the
water, the turn is completed more quickly. Sometimes
overlooked by previous teams, flotation and water
maneuverability are very important to performing well not
only in a competition setting, but in a recreational setting
as well.
SUSPENSION –
Objective – The objective of the suspension system is to
provide the vehicle with the means to keep all four
wheels planted on the ground with the maximum tire
contact patch in any driving situation. The front and rear
suspension must work as a unit to keep the tires on the
ground as well as possible so that the drivetrain can
continue moving the car with maximum efficiency and
the driver can comfortably control the car.
Discussion of alternatives – The main options
considered for the front suspension were a few
variations on the double a-arm suspension setup. These
included parallel a-arms, un-parallel a-arms, equal
length and unequal length. These offer various pros and
cons. The main goal is to keep the tires planted firmly on
the ground in all driving conditions. To do this, the tire
and wheel need to gain negative camber in a rolling
situation, keeping the tire flat on the ground. This leaves
only a limited number of options, the best being
unparallel double a-arms.
For the rear suspension several alternatives
were considered. These included independent unequal
A-arms, trailing link with locators, and swing arm
designs. A rear swing arm consists of a solid axle which
is connected to the wheel at either end. This design is
strong and simple but yields a combination of poor
ground clearance, unruly camber change and high
unsprung mass, all of which make it less than ideal.
Independent unequal length A-arms are widely accepted
as one of the best alternatives for off-road suspension
due to the fact that camber change can be nearly
eliminated. A-arms can provide large amounts of travel
and usually match the front suspension set up which is
almost always an A-arm type. A-arm systems can add
unwanted unsprung mass to the suspension and are
prone to failure due to the number of parts involved. The
suspension type chosen for this vehicle is a trailing link
with locating links. This simple design is comprised of a
pair of arms (trailing links) which are connected to the
chassis just behind the driver on the lower part of the
rear roll hoop. These extend outward and back to the
position of the output shaft where it connects to the drive
axle. Additionally, there are two locating links attached to
the hub end of each trailing links. These links can be
adjusted so that the system acts similarly to a double a-
arm system, geometrically. A 2006 Polaris Outlaw 500
hub and bearing carrier is integrated into the end of the
trailing link. This accommodates the use of the Outlaw
final drive as well as more standard wheel sizes. The
dampers are connected to the arm and mounted to the
roll cage above. This system is ideal because it provides
a combination of significant ground clearance, relatively
low unsprung mass, simplicity, and better access to
drivetrain area.
Overview of the design – The vehicle features front
unequal length A-arms that attach to the frame with a
rake of 15 degrees from the horizontal. This provides
better transmission of shock forces when the vehicle
lands after jumps and when approaching steep inclines.
6
The front shock absorption is supplied through two
independent Fox Air Sox 2.0 shocks that have 8.5
inches of travel. Opting for a non-coil-over setup
provides significant weight reduction compared to a
more conventional coil spring design and increased
travel. The front spindles come from a Polaris Predator
ATV. They were chosen for their high strength-to-weight
ratio based on their cast aluminum design: using a
prefabricated spindle allows for easy brake and steering
integration.
The A-arms are fabricated with 1 inch 4130
Chrome Moly tubing, which is a strong, lightweight, and
workable material. This adds durability to the
suspension, thus improving the reliability and safety of
the vehicle. A finite element analysis was run in
CosmosWorks with the same force as the rear and the 1
inch tubing proved to be more than adequate with a
factor of safety of well over 1 for both the front and the
rear. The ball and helm joints are attached to the tubing
using tube ends of their respective diameters and thread
sizes. These A-arms can be seen in Figure 5.
Figure 5: View of front suspension
The front suspension setup was designed and
modified from starting parameters based on the carʼs
ride height and track width. Such a methodology makes
certain the car is as stable and efficient as possible. The
lower A-arms are designed with force transmission as
their main priority. Thus they are the main structural
members of the front suspension. The lower a-arms are
th
further reinforced using a 1/8 inch plate to not only
strengthen the part, but to also provide a flat, solid
mounting point for the front shocks. Their connection
with the frame is made through two unidirectional
bushings for rigidity. The ball joint that is used to
connect the lower A-arm to the spindle has a limited
amount of travel. To maximize the carʼs suspension
capabilities and travel, a bend of 20 degrees was placed
in the A-arm to allow for a more horizontal relationship
with the spindle mounting point. This ensures that the
travel of the front suspension is not hindered by the
limited travel of the ball joints. A similar approach was
taken when designing the upper A-arms; however
adjustability was considered more important than
strength because it is not required to transmit forces to
the shock. This led to mounting the upper A-arms 5
inches above the lower A-arms using heim joints instead
of bushings. This allows for easy camber adjustment.
Like the lower A-arms, the uppers also are bent to
provide a more level mounting angle with the spindle.
The ball joints are mounted on the spindle 1 inch further
apart than the mounting points on the frame to reduce
the overall camber change throughout the working arc of
the suspension.
The shocks are connected as close to the
spindle as possible to help decrease body roll and stress
on the arms. The Fox Air Shox 2.0 provides gas
pressure specialization that is not available in a standard
coil spring. They permit specific pressure adjustment
based on the weight distribution of the car and the
desired spring rate. This allows the suspension to
compensate for the additional weight of the driver while
still providing the user a comfortable ride over rough
terrain. The shocks have been re-valved to
accommodate the approximate 128 pounds per wheel
sprung weight estimate. The vehicle obtains a maximum
unloaded ground clearance of 14 inches without flotation
and 10 inches when the flotation is attached.
The rear suspension uses a trailing link design
and has many positive characteristics, one of which is
the significant weight savings over the alternatives. The
links are constructed from the same 1-inch diameter,
0.065-inch wall thickness Chrome Moly tubing that the
front a-arms are made of. This provides more than
adequate strength and durability without the added
volume and bulk of similar aluminum trailing links. A
simple and effective system was designed and built with
minimizing unsprung weight in mind. Two symmetrical
parts were TIG welded together to form the arm portion
of the link. Additional tabs and mounting brackets are
found at the hub end of the arm.
The members were modeled using SolidWorks
3-D solid modeling software. FEA analysis was then
conducted using CosmosWorks modeling software. The
members were subjected to shock loading of 90,000n
assuming a bottomed out shock and very high impact on
a single trailing link. The member was also subjected to
a simulated 4 G rear impact, which could occur if another
car hit the vehicle at full speed. Both of these modes of
loading produced a factor of safety in excess of 3. The
stress plot of the shock loading analysis can be seen in
Figure 6:
7

Figure 6: Cosmos Stress plot with 90000N shock loading
and deformation scale of 22. Max Stress = 20KSI
The locator links were constructed using the same
tubing mentioned above, with ultra high-strength heim
joints at each end. These allow for smooth, easy travel
and up to 2.5 inches of length adjustability. This allows
the team to carefully tune camber change and track
width using only a single crescent wrench.
This member, in addition to the wheel, hub and locator
links, constitutes the entire unsprung weight of the rear
suspension. The links are shown installed on the chassis
in figure 7:
Figure 7: rear trailing link members on chassis.
Most standard trailing link suspension designs
have one major drawback. The angle of the tire relative
to the trailing link never changes. This means that
excessive body roll will effectively induce unwanted
camber change at both wheels. The suspension
designed and built for the 2008 season eliminates this
issue by using two locator links on each side. Instead of
using a bushing and hinge type attachment to the frame
for the trailing link, an ultra high-strength heim joint has
been used. As stated earlier, this allows adjustment of
static and dynamic camber change. A demonstration of
camber change (gaining negative camber) is shown in
figure 8. Appendix B contains a figure showing the car in
a hard left turn, demonstrating how the rear suspension
reacts and keeps maximum tire contact with the ground.
Not only does this increase the stability, it increases the
tire patch on the ground, increasing cornering ability.
Figure 8: Rear suspension shown at full droop and full
bump
To compensate for excessive body roll, the dampers
used are highly adjustable Fox 2.0 Airshox. These
dampers use internal nitrogen gas pressure to determine
spring rate as opposed to conventional steel springs.
The stock nitrogen pressure in these shocks is 200 psi.
The necessary pressure to achieve 8 inches of ride
height with all flotation components has been estimated
180 psi. This is based on gross vehicle and driver weight
as well as expected fore/aft weight distribution in the
chassis. This adjustable damper set up is absolutely
necessary with the trailing link suspension and allows
the user to adjust ride characteristics at will. Another
benefit of the trailing link system is the ground clearance
that can be achieved. As shown in Figure 1 the closest
component to the ground at full droop is the end of the
trailing link. This is an improvement over double a-arms
where a drop angle can occupy otherwise free ground
clearance.
STEERING –
Objective - The main objectives of the steering system
are to provide the driver with an accurate, predictable,
and reliable method for navigating a Baja vehicle over
rough terrain. A small turning radius provides the driver
with a responsive and controllable ride. The rack and
pinion system is a proven method of steering that is
direct and reliable. The tie rods must be protected from
impacts and move with the two A-arms while the wheel
stops limit the steering radius and reduce wear on the
system. In addition, the steering system does not
interfere with the suspension, allowing for optimal
negotiation of off-road conditions.
Discussion of Alternatives - The steering linkage system
had two options. The first option was to place the tie rod
attachment point in front of the spindle, and the second
8
option was to place it on the back side of the spindle.
The tie rods are attached to the rear of the spindle to
provide more protection from impact and easy
integration into the Polaris knuckle.
Overview of the Design - A 14 inch rack and pinion
system was selected for the steering of the vehicle. This
industry-proven steering method is reliable and was
chosen to ensure the safety of the driver. The position
of the steering rack was carefully positioned for minimal
movement over the suspensionʼs entire arc. This was
accomplished by modeling all the components in
SolidWorks. This gave a base for optimizing under both
bump and droop conditions. The wheels were aligned
forward and the displacement of the rack was measured
at both extremes. This procedure was repeated
iteratively for a matrix of potential steering rack positions.
By following this procedure the position of minimum
bump steer was determined.
The three-dimensional modeling programs
SolidWorks and COSMOSWorks, and a two-dimensional
modeling program, Working Model, were used to
perform a stress analysis of the tie rods. This test
determined that the rods will endure expected
conditions. An axial compression force of 1200 lbs. was
applied, giving a factor of safety of 3. Analysis of the
buckling force also showed that with this design, neither
buckling nor axial failure will be an issue.
Design Characteristics - In order to properly achieve the
main objectives, numerous technical aspects were
considered. Camber and toe setting were other
important issues addressed. The camber is adjusted to
a slight inward, or negative, tilt of two degrees from static
ride height. This setting optimizes the tireʼs contact with
the road surface, maximizing steering feel, response,
tracking, and tire life. Through threaded rod ends and
heim joints, the system is adjustable to optimize steering
geometry and performance. To enhance the turning
radius, the wheel base was minimized. With a shorter
wheel base and wide track the car is both stable and
steers as directly as possible.
BRAKING–
Objective - The brakes are one of the most important
safety systems on the vehicle. The car uses three disc
brakes, one on each front wheel and one on the rear
axle, to bring the vehicle to a quick and safe stop
regardless of weather conditions or topography.
Discussion of Alternatives - A braking system that acts
on all four wheels was chosen for optimum safety and
performance. Two methods for accomplishing this
objective were considered. Both options made use of
dual front disc brakes, but the rear setup could vary.
The first option with regard to the rear system wasthe
use of a single disc brake located inboard of the wheels.
It would act to stop the rear tires by braking the final
drive axle. The second alternative was locating the disc
brakes at each rear wheel. The first option was chosen
because it simplifies the rear trailing link design and fully
utilizes the capabilities of the Outlaw 500 final drive
system. Additionally, it converts the rear brakes from
previously unsprung weight to now sprung weight. With
newer, pre-fabricated CV axles and hub, a single rear
disc brake can be used without worrying about the ability
of the axles to withstand the added torque, similar to the
Polaris Outlaw 500 ATV.
Overview of the Design - The braking system uses two
CNC master cylinders of the same bore size to supply
hydraulic pressure to the brake calipers. All three
calipers are driven by a 5/8 inch bore. The front two
share one cylinder while the rear has its own A
balancing bar at the pedal allows for the allocation of
front and rear braking pressures. The dual cylinders and
reservoirs are easy to access, providing ease of
monitoring and maintaining brake fluid levels. The brake
calipers are connected to the master cylinders by a
combination of both hard line and flexible braided brake
line. The steel braided lines are used for their flexibility
and resistance to wear. Thus, they are located in
sections where suspension travel occurs. Both the hard
lines and braided lines are protected from possible
damage because they are placed inside the roll
envelope.
The independent front and rear brakes systems
ensure that there should always be at least one mode of
braking in the case of a line or caliper failure.
Additionally, the system is properly sealed such that it
will remain fully functional in the event of a collision or
roll.
The disk brakes, calipers, and caliper mounts
are made by Polaris. The rear calipers are designed for
an Outlaw 500; a vehicle of similar size and weight while
the front calipers can be found on a 2006 Polaris
Predator. The spindles are also from the Predator and
were chosen for their availability and proven design
strengths. Utilizing parts already in production reduces
cost and lessens the cost of repair for the end user,
should something break. The tie rod mounts, and caliper
mounts were designed and manufactured in-house.
These parts are composed of 4130 steel for strength.
Design Characteristics - It was deemed critical that the
front and rear brakes lock up at the same rates. This
would maximize deceleration, prevent front-end dive,
and offer the best vehicle control. All brake calipers and
discs are mounted to factory mounts on a Predator ATV
and an Outlaw ATV. This is for a couple of reasons. The
first is that it ensures that the pieces are designed to
withstand a very significant force. The second is that it
9
makes replacement and maintenance much easier
should a part need to be replaced. A brake fluid analysis
of the different bore sizes of master cylinders was
completed. From this analysis, the best combination of
braking forces for the front and rear brakes was
selected.
TIRE SELECTION–
The rear tires are a 25” outer diameter by 10”
wide ITP Mud Lite model mounted on aluminum rims.
They are the lightest six-ply rated tires available which
give the durability needed to withstand rugged terrain.
The large outer diameter of the tire provides an increase
in ground clearance which is vital in traversing off-road
conditions. The treads provide ample water propulsion
when mounted correctly, which means the tires are used
in their proper orientation for optimum traction on rough
terrain. These tires were also chosen for their ability to
perform in mud, a clear requirement when off-road in
anything but a very dry terrain. The front tires are Maxxis
Razr tires mounted on 10” aluminum rims. Aluminum
wheels were chosen for their durability with minimal
weight. Minimizing the amount of unsprung weight on the
car is a major goal when designing suspension
components and saving weight anywhere possible
allows for added strength elsewhere. The Razr features
a wide tread pattern to reduce tread squirm and the
sipes tighten up under acceleration and braking forces.
These sipes are small cracks in the tread, designed to
move water away from under the tire quickly. Under a
sliding force, they lock together and prevent the treads
from shifting. These front tires have a less aggressive
tread pattern than the rear tires. A 10-inch wide rear tire
was chosen for its capabilities in mud and water. This
size was chosen over the available 12-inch model to
reduce the amount of friction the car must overcome in
cornering. Without a rear differential, the outside tire
must drag across the ground, or break loose in
aggressive cornering. The ITP mudlite offers an
excellent middle ground, as proven in the mud pit of the
2007 competition. The chosen tires, both front and rear,
are shown in Figure 9.
Figure 9: Rear Mud Lite tire & Maxxis Razr
CONCLUSION -
The Union College Mini Baja vehicle has been designed
to appeal to customers and manufacturers by effectively
meeting the initial objectives and offering a safe,
affordable recreational vehicle to fill an otherwise empty
market segment. The current frame yields high factors of
safety and drive comfort. The drivetrain was improved
upon to further optimize the vehicleʼs performance and
enhance reliability and ease of maintenance. The
flotation system has been revised and lightened to
effectively traverse water without sacrificing land
maneuverability. The steering systemʼs design yields a
responsive and controllable car with no noticeable bump
steer. The braking system affords maximum overall
braking force on the front and rear wheels. The
suspension has been designed to provide ten inches of
ground clearance with the flotation, ample for nearly any
off-road terrain. The tires were selected to run on nearly
any terrain. The resulting vehicle is safe, attractive,
reliable, economical and fun to drive.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Brad Bruno - Union College Mechanical Engineering
Faculty
Paul Tompkins – Union College Machine Shop
Technician
James Howard - Union College Machine Shop
Technician
Roland Pierson - Union College Machine Shop
Technician
Quality Drive System – Alhambra CA, Parts Distributor
REFERENCES
1. http://students.sae.org/competitions/bajasae/
(3/05/09)
2. http://parts.polarisind.com/Browse/Browse.asp
(3/05/09)
3. http://www.hoffcocomet.com/
(3/05/09)
4. http://www.martinsprocket.com
(3/05/09)
5. Callister, William. Material Science and Engineering
th
an Introduction. 7 edition, 2006
CONTACTS
Matt Beenen – beenenm@union.edu
Jon Wilson – wilsonj@union.edu
10
Appendix A:

10G Frontal Impact (29430N) – Max Stress = 62 KSI

4G Side Impact – 10700 N. Maximum Compressive Axial Stress = 16,140 PSI

Maximum Tensile Stress = 7,133 PSI

11
 Rear Impact, 4G  10700 N
Max Stress (compression) = 18,330 PSI

Rear Impact  125000 N

Max Deformation (buckling) = .0006m
Deformation scale = 181.694

12
 Static Load  90,000 N
Max Deformation (deformation scale 22.6)= .0021m

Static Load  90,000 N

Max Stress = 20.5 KSI

13
Appendix B: Suspension Roll Analysis

14