74 views

Uploaded by anmol6237

shocks_brief

- [Automotive]SAE - FSAE Suspension and Frame Design
- The Design of Formula SAE Half Shafts for Optimum Vehicle Acceleration
- Mechanical Engineering - Sae - The Automotive Chassis
- Chassis Stiffness
- Chassis
- Cornell Design Anal Testing Fsae
- Fsae Suspension Design Lawrence
- Formula SAE Inpact Attenuator Testing
- Chassis Torsional Stiffness Analysis of the Influence
- Finite element analysis and improvement of an Ultima GTR Racing car chassis
- Simplification of the Shift-Clutch Operations for Formula SAE Vehicles
- Chassis Frame Torsional Stiffness Analysis
- Carbon Fiber Reinforced Steel Frame
- 2000-01-3538
- Static and dynamic analysis of space frame
- Race Car Design by Derek Seward
- Suspension Paper
- FormulaStudent KA.race.ING
- Vehicle Dynamics 2004
- Optimization of Formula Car Double Wishbone Suspension System

You are on page 1of 11

Torsional Stiffness of a Formula-SAE Chassis

2014-01-0355

Published 04/01/2014

Atishay Jain

CITATION: Jain, A., "Computational Analysis and Optimization of Torsional Stiffness of a Formula-SAE Chassis," SAE

Technical Paper 2014-01-0355, 2014, doi:10.4271/2014-01-0355.

Copyright 2014 SAE International

Abstract

One of the key aspects of designing a race car chassis is

Torsion Stiffness (Roll stiffness). Designers strive to develop a

chassis design with a high value of roll stiffness to counter the

forces applied by the suspension during cornering while keeping

the weight as low as possible. CAD and static analysis

techniques are instrumental for virtual testing and validation in

the initial stages of a project prior to experimental testing. This

paper intends to encapsulate elementary analysis skills and their

application in designing and developing tubular frame structures

for amateur racing vehicles and simultaneously focusing on

reducing the time for the design and development process.

The objective of this paper is to calculate, analyze and optimize

the torsion stiffness of a Formula SAE/ Formula Student

chassis using an analysis model developed and optimized for

quicker design iterations and to compare different design

proposals based on certain key parameters in the nascent

stage of project development.

This paper extensively uses Finite Element Model (FEM)

techniques to execute static structural analysis and modal

analysis, and suggests various approaches that can be

adopted post analysis to help in deriving alterations in space

frame geometry directed towards augmenting torsional

stiffness value for a particular load case and thus, optimize

one's design.

Introduction

Formula Student/ Formula SAE are a series of international

student engineering competitions. Student teams from around

the world from different leading universities design, build, test,

and race a small-scale formula style racing car. All cars are

required to follow the provided rules and guidelines meant for

safety and uniform design evaluation.

aspects of the vehicle while adhering to design governing

constraints such as, center of gravity, engine orientation,

exhaust manifold clearance, intake manifold clearance,

suspension component mounting, drive train, driver safety and

many more.

Taking into consideration these prerequisite constraints, a

chassis designer may come up with quite a number of

iterations of chassis designs. Finally the question arises before

the designer which design is the best? There are a number of

parameters against which a chassis can be evaluated, few

being, weight, manufacturability, torsional stiffness, and

torsional stiffness to weight ratio. Experimental evaluation of

the mentioned parameters can be a costly and a time

consuming scenario, especially for student design team, where

the budget and time constraints are always stringent and

experimental analysis will require life size prototypes,

manufacturing these prototypes will be detrimental to the team

budget. Further, the experimental setup required for such

evaluations is never a standard one.

The challenges mentioned above hints a designer to adopt

FEA techniques to compute approximate values of the

governing parameters and draw a comparison between the

design iterations. Using various analysis results the designer

can identify the scope of improvement in one design and induct

maximum feasible mitigations in the next iteration of design

and development process.

Torsional stiffness and weight are the two very important

measurable aspects to any race car. Thus, the aim of this

paper is to draw a comparison of the given design iterations

and arrive at a design of which the trade-off between high

torsional stiffness and low weight is balanced to achieve high

vehicle performance across the various competition events.

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

In order to ensure that the chassis performs satisfactorily for an

FSAE race car, it must be designed after an extensive analysis

has been performed. Thus, it becomes imperative to know

about loads that the chassis must withstand during the

operation of the race car. In the design and analysis of the

chassis for FSAE application, there are generally four types of

static load cases. These load cases are:

Vertical Bending

This load case arises from supporting the weight of all

components of the race car. Among them, more dominant ones

are driver, engine and differential system. The frame is

assumed to act as a beam simply supported on four wheels

(Figure 3), which tend to produce reactions vertically upward at

the axles. Under dynamic conditions, the magnitudes of these

weights can be several times higher than those at static

conditions, due to acceleration/deceleration.

Lateral Bending

This load case (Figure 1) is developed when the race car

navigates a corner at high speeds. Lateral bending deformation

occurs mainly due to the centrifugal forces caused during

cornering and wind forces to some extent. Magnitudes of these

forces depend on the speed of the race car, the radius of the

corner and the degree of the road banking. Lateral forces act

along the length of chassis and is resisted by axles, tires and

frame members directly connected to the suspension. Stresses

in these members can be several time higher than those in

members of other areas of the chassis.

Longitudinal Torsion

Thought of as a torsion spring connecting the two ends where

suspension loads act. The resistance to torsional deformation

is called as torsional stiffness, expressed in Nm/degree (in SI

units). Torsional rigidity is the primary parameter for

determination of frame performance of cars.

Horizontal Lozenging

When there is non-uniformity in traction, horizontal lozenging

load case is encountered (Figure 2). This deformation is

caused by forward and backward forces applied at diagonally

opposite wheels. Instances of such conditions may be forces

applied due to vertical variations in the pavement or the

reaction from the road driving the car forward. These forces

tend to distort the frame into a parallelogram shape. The

magnitude of these loads changes with the operating mode of

the car. Similar as the load case of lateral bending, this load

case is vital for areas of the chassis which are directly

connected to the suspension.

Torsional Stiffness

Structural stiffness has a huge impact on the performance and

safety of the race car. Since the chassis functions as a structure

that houses various vehicle systems, it ensures the stability of

the chassis for these systems to perform consistently. From the

safety point of view, it ensures that the chassis is sufficiently

stiff to provide the survival space needed for the driver when

accidents occur. Statistically, a chassis that has high structural

stiffness almost always has high structural strength. There are

two main classes of stiffness, namely structural torsional

stiffness and structural bending stiffness. The structural

torsional stiffness of the chassis is highly significant because it

affects the ability of the suspension to tune the race car's

handling characteristic for high performance.

It is generally thought that if torsional and vertical bending

stiffness is satisfactory, then the chassis structure is expected

to perform well. But torsional stiffness is awarded more

weightage as the total cornering traction is the function of

lateral weight transfers.

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

defined by how much it distorts when it is loaded in pure

torsion and is usually expressed in Nm/degree of rotation.

The formula for a shaft constrained at one end and an applied

torque T at the other, with denoting the resultant twist of the

shaft is expressed as:

(1)

torque, where

Torque Calculations

The chassis was assumed to be rotating about the symmetrical

longitudinal axis. Figure 6 below shows a simplified

representation of the connection between point C and D

which represent the points on which the two known loads (of

equal magnitude but opposite in direction) are applied. The

torque on the chassis or around the axis of rotation is defined

by equation below:

G= shear modulus of the material, and

l= length of the shaft.

This equation can then be rearranged to express torsional

stiffness i.e. T/

(3)

(2)

to both the polar moment inertia and material shear modulus,

whilst being inversely proportional to the length.

Though the steps for maximizing torsional stiffness of a chassis

seem simple enough, a car designer encounters conflicting

results when she tries to pursue them. While length

specifications are governed by rules, increasingly strong

materials bring with them other undesirable properties such as

brittleness and low machinability. An increase in the third

attribute, the polar moment of inertia, demands additional

material that increases the weight, which must otherwise be

minimized for better performance. Hence a chassis design is at

best, a tradeoff between many factors. This finally becomes a

problem of optimization rather than maximization which can be

solved iteratively, through computer simulation till a satisfactory

result is obtained.

The method for measuring the chassis twist angle due to the

subjected force was done by measuring the deflections at

inboard wishbone mounting points. The reason for this is that

at these points the twist angle is the very deformation that is

being designed against. Due to the inherent symmetry of the

chassis, the vertical displacement of the corner nodes was use

to derive the suspension point relative twist angle, the figure 5

illustrates how these displacements were used to calculate

angle of twist .

The chassis, as with any structure, has an infinite number of

resonant frequencies. A resonant frequency, also known as

natural frequency, is a preferred frequency of vibration, and

results when the inertial and stiffness forces cancel. The lone

factor controlling the amplitude of vibration in resonance is

damping. For each of the infinite natural frequencies of vibration

which exist, a different shape that the chassis will deform to

during vibration also exists. The deformed shapes that chassis

will vibrate are also known as modes of vibration. Of the infinite

modes of vibration that exist on the frame structure, only the

lowest frequencies are of interest. The low modes of vibration

maximize the kinetic energy and minimize the strain energy

while the high modes act in an opposite manner. This means

that the soft and stiff parts of the chassis will be apparent in the

low and high modes of vibrations respectively.

Chassis Design

The chassis models used for this paper are designed in

accordance with Formula Student/FSAE guidelines 2012. The

vehicle frame is required to meet certain criteria for driver

safety and hazard prevention measures in the event of critical

circumstances during the use of vehicle. Further, a chassis has

to take in to account several other factors in addition to the

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

shortest driver, sufficient clearance for routing exhaust

manifold. Some of these criterions are discussed as follows:

When seated normally and restrained by the Driver's Restraint

System, the helmet of a 95th percentile male (anthropometrical

data) and all of the team's drivers must:

hoop if the main hoop bracing extends forwards. (Figure10).

[1]

Figure 10. Template clearance forward main hoop bracings used

drawn from the top of the main hoop to the top of the front

hoop. (Figure 8)

All parts of the engine air and fuel control systems (including

the throttle or carburetor, and the complete air intake system,

including the air cleaner and any air boxes) must lie within the

surface defined by the top of the roll bar and the outside edge

of the four tires. The design of main roll hoop of the chassis

plays a crucial role in determining this envelope. [1]

drawn from the top of the main hoop to the lower end of the

main hoop bracing if the bracing extends rearwards. (Figure 9)

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

Cockpit Size

In order to ensure that the opening giving access to the cockpit

is of adequate size, a template shown in Figure 12 will be

inserted into the cockpit opening. It will be held horizontally and

inserted vertically until it has passed below the top bar of the

Side Impact Structure. [1]

(finite) number of points and then interpolate the results for

entire domain. Any continuous object has infinite degrees of

freedom and it is not possible to solve the problem in this

format. Finite element model reduces the degrees of freedom

from infinite to finite with the help of discretization i.e. meshing

(nodes and elements). All calculations are made at limited

number of points known as nodes. Entities joining nodes and

forming a specific shape such as quadrilateral or triangular, etc.

are known as elements. To get value to variable (say

displacement) anywhere between the calculation points,

interpolation function is used. [2]

While the process of solving Finite Element problems is a

science, creating the models is quite an art. There are many

types of elements possible for representing a structure and

every choice the analyst makes can affect the results. The

number, orientation and size of elements as well as loads and

boundary conditions are all critical to obtaining meaningful

values of chassis stiffness. [3]

Exhaust Clearance

It is ideal to plan for the requisite allowances between frame

members and heating exhaust elements, which is required to

route the exhaust manifold to avoid any damage during

operation and achieve an optimal design.

For ensuring safety constraints in frame design SAE has the

following minimum material requirements [1]:

Table 1. Specifications for chassis members

consideration as a wireframe in ANSYS Mechanical APDL

(ANSYS Release 14), in the form of axial lines, arcs and

key-points. First step was to plot the key points, following which

a wireframe was formed by creating line using them to

complete the geometric analogy of the frame. As mentioned

earlier the choice of elements, and type of meshing can

affected the results of the analysis. Thus, one must be

extremely cautious and careful while creating the FEA model of

a geometry as complex as a racing vehicle frame.

After thorough analysis and study we were able to conclude

that 2-D shell elements were most ideal in terms of the level of

accuracy that could be achieved in the analysis. Due to the

complex geometry of the frame, time involved in creating a

FEA model per iteration and number of the iterations required

to be performed in a project for refining a chassis design, it was

practical to use 1-D beam element for modeling the frame.

In ANSYS Release 14 we had a choice of elements BEAM189

(3 node) or BEAM188 (2 node). After researching and studying

the reports and blogs of experienced ANSYS users, we

selected BEAM189 over BEAM188 because it was noted that,

in general the former always gives better results. BEAM 188 is

preferred when you want to model stiffeners along with shell

elements (181, 43 ), the 188 provides the required

compatibility, but in our case it was redundant.

FEA Model

To determine the torsional stiffness of a vehicle frame under

scrutiny before fabrication a FEA model can be constructed to

calculate the stiffness and strength. In FEA method the object

to be analyzed is broken into a large number of basic

elements, and creating a stiffness matrix models how these

elements interact with each other.

welded tubes have stiffness in bending and torsion. If a truss or

link element were used, the assumption being made would be

the connections do not offer substantial resistance to bending

or torsion. By examining various FSAE frames, we can see that

while they are usually reasonably well triangulated, if some

bending was not being resisted, some parts of many frames

would become mechanisms and deflect substantially. [3]

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

replicate a real roll scenario to determine roll/torsional stiffness,

i.e. model all the suspension components and apply loads at

tire contact patches or at hub center. Initially being the first

thought it turned out to be an extremely tedious task, as the

time involved in just creating such a complex model would take

no less than 200-300 hours, i.e. by the hands of a professional

CAE Engineer. Moreover, the validation of the FEA model and

results of this complex simulation would be another herculean

task (especially for students at undergraduate level) and still

may come out to be inaccurate and rife with uncertainties and

imperfections.

In order to make the analysis relatively simpler and practically

manageable (considering that many FSAE teams have a

majority of undergraduate student members), it was decided to

use only the chassis model for determining the torsional

stiffness, as it would be critical in reducing design iteration time

and make the analysis model more convenient and adaptable

for undergraduate students.

Beam Section

In order to have a fine mesh on critical surfaces of the beam/

pipe for higher accuracy in using FE methodology the number

of circumferential divisions was taken 12 in the beam section

attributes. The space frame is constructed of pipes of different

thickness as per requirements of strengths and safety;

similarly, meshing attributes for these pipes of different

thickness consist of separate section profiles which are applied

in accordance with their thickness.

all rear in-board wishbone mounting points have been

restricted and equal and opposite loads have been applied at

the front in board points (refer figure 14).

the problem of representing the engine and stressed skins. For

the engine, the first step is to locate a node at each position

where the engine is mounted to the chassis. Since the engine

can be considered to be a member of very high stiffness, to

model the physical load effects of the engine, in this analysis,

the degrees of freedom of the engine mounts have been

coupled (figure 15). Coupling the degrees of freedom of the

engine mounts could be interpreted as points on an object of

very high stiffness. Alternative techniques such as replacing

the engine with a solid Aluminum block may or may not create

the same effect depending on the interaction of the aluminum

block with the engine mounts.

Boundary Conditions

Boundary conditions though take least time but are the most

important step in FEA. Application of boundary conditions is a

tricky subject and is based on pure engineering judgment and

common sense.

engine mounting points

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

Analysis Model

Structural Analysis

The analysis environment is static structural linear elastic in

ANSYS Mechanical APDL. Since the calculated value of

torsional stiffness obtained using FE methodology will vary

depending on the boundary conditions and loads applied. For

the purpose of comparison of successive design iterations we

have kept identical boundary conditions throughout the

analysis. Without common boundary conditions and load cases

torsional stiffness values would vary and a comparison would

be absurd and meaningless.

Description

This nascent design (figure 16) was prepared by incorporating

suggestions from judges on the evaluation of our last event's

car. The car was made more driver friendly by focusing on

driver seating angles, head restraint, pedal position and

steering comfort. Centre of gravity was lowered by orienting the

engine at the lowest possible position, while considering

appropriate clearances for exhaust routing and fuel tank. The

triangulation of inboard suspension points was improved.

Superficially, the chassis dimensions and suspension geometry

was retained from the earlier design.

Weight: 34.93 Kg

Length: 2297 mm

Material: AISI 1020

Load: 50.325 Nm

Torsional Stiffness: 1578.654 Nm/degree

After carefully studying the Von-Mises stress plot (figure 17)

and Deformed Shape animation, target areas can be identified

and counter measures can be taken to lower stress

concentrations and deflection values. In this analysis, high

stress concentrations were noticed at engine middle mounts

and members of the middle chassis above side impact

structure. Further, it was construed that there was an untapped

potential in the rear chassis to make it possibly more compact.

Shortening the chassis would increase the torsional stiffness

and may also lead to reduction in weight.

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

Weight: 32.18 Kg

Length: 2057 mm

Material: AISI 1020

Loads: 50.325 Nm

Torsional Stiffness: 1811.57 Nm/degree

The effort in remodeling of the rear and decreasing the length

paid off, weight was considerably reduced and vital increase in

torsional stiffness was noted (figure 19). The success deemed

was partial, as it was difficult to accommodate the mounting of

the components for the desired suspension geometry. Further,

the manufacturing of the chassis also posed difficulty due to

the complex design of the rear, particularly modified to reduce

the length. Indications were clear on the need for a much more

simplified space-frame design.

Description

Front and middle chassis design was retained and inboard

suspension mounting points remodeled to minimize the length

of rear chassis. Better triangulation and considerable

reductions in weight achieved (figure 18).

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

The decision to simplify the space frame design and add new

members proved to be gratifying and spot on towards

aggrandizing torsional stiffness and easing manufacturability.

Moreover, reduction in weight was also noted. It was observed

from stress plots that the concentration of stress was reduced

and more uniformly distributed.

Description

Modifications were again made in the rear and the design was

simplified, this time coherent with the manufacturability of the

structure as well. In addition, in the front part of the chassis, a

new member was added to connect the inboard suspension

mounting points (figure 20). The decision to add the new

member was taken by thorough study of the deformed shape

animation. The modifications though eased the

manufacturability but added two new members and marginally

increased he length of the chassis too.

Weight: 31.53 Kg

Length: 2130 mm

recorded variables of the chassis design models (Table 2,

Figure 23, 24, 25), such as twisting angle (angle of deflection),

chassis weight, it can be clearly noted that chassis design

CHS_3 is a superior one.

Loads: 50.325 Nm

Torsional Stiffness: 1857.24 Nm/degree

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

Table 2. Structural Analysis Result Summary

Modal Analysis

A beam mesh of the chassis model was used for analysis of:

mode shape and corresponding natural frequency, or modal

analysis. Following meshing and defining on the order of eight

to ten deformation plots, the study was created and run for

interpretation of results. It may be anticipated that torsion

would be listed in the first couple modes of vibration; however,

it was seen the seventh. No loads or restraints were applied;

therefore the first six modes are translation and rotation or rigid

body modes. The structure has 6 degrees of freedom,

describing 3 translational and 3 rotational rigid body modes,

with are assigned values of 0Hz. Of interest for analysis, are

the seventh, eighth and ninth modes of vibration or first,

second, and third elastic modes of vibration. Further, since for

a rigid body has first 6 natural frequencies as 0 Hz, it can be

used as a test to check if an FEA model is constructed

correctly rigid body. If the first 6 natural frequencies are 0 Hz,

then it can be correctly assumed that the FEA model has been

constructed properly as a rigid body.

Figure 23. Weight comparison

frequencies. This means the first elastic mode of vibration

demonstrates the shape that the chassis is most susceptible to

deform because it has a lower natural frequency and hence,

lower stiffness. Therefore it is desired to have a chassis with a

relatively high natural frequency in the first elastic mode of

vibration. It is worth considering not only first elastic mode of

vibration, but several others because of cancellation effects

from damping that could occur from the suspension dampers

and soft engine mount damping materials.

In the conducted modal analysis of the three chassis models

CHS_1, CHS_2 and CHS_3, the results (Table 3) are coherent

with that of the Structural analysis results (Table 2), and it can

be again said that CHS_3 is a better design.

Figure 24. Torsional Stiffness comparison

Downloaded from SAE International by Vellore Inst of Technology, Sunday, November 02, 2014

Table 3. Natural Frequencies of Vibration

with other design governing parameters, namely,

manufacturability and weight.

In modal analyses, concepts of natural frequencies of vibration

and natural frequencies of a rigid body were discussed. Further

discussion was made on the use of modal analyses for testing

the correctness of an FEA model of a rigid body and study of

elastic modes of vibration to identify areas susceptible to

deformation. It was concluded that a high frequency value of

first elastic mode of vibration is desirable as it is directly

proportional to torsional stiffness.

The final recalibrated chassis design, CHS_3 had maximum

value of torsional stiffness, lowest weight and highest torsional

stiffness - weight ratio. This design iteration can be used to

manufacture a prototype and validate FEA results through

experimental testing. The FEA analyses formulated in this

paper are instrumental for an FSAE team to reduce

experimental costs and project development time. Both of

which are valuable resources for any research oriented project.

References

1. FSAE rule book 2013.

2. Gokhale Nitin S, Practical finite elemental analysis book,

Finite To Infinite India, ISBN: 978-81-906195-0-9.

In the structural analysis of chassis design iterations, torsional

stiffness and natural frequencies were predicted using FEA

techniques and optimized in three design iterations. Results

from modal analysis and, structural analysis and study of

deformed shape animation were used to identify areas of

potential improvements. Design improvements, coherent with

analyses interpretations were made in Chassis design iteration

models, and were successful in culminating a high value of

torsional stiffness and also reduced appreciable amount of

weight (3.4 Kg).

The relevance of torsional stiffness in chassis design and

vehicle performance was discussed. In addition, the various

constraints and challenges in design of an FSAE chassis were

identified. For the calculation of torsional stiffness we

formulated and discussed an FEA model and a unique set of

boundary conditions. Study was done on the various analysis

parameters that affect torsional stiffness such as length of the

chassis, stress distribution and, natural frequencies of

Formula SAE Car Chassis, SAE Technical Paper 2002-013300, 2002, doi:10.4271/2002-01-3300.

Contact information

Mr. Atishay Jain

Mobile No: +91-9673759590

JAIN.ATISHAY@mahindra.com

mail.atishay@yahoo.com

Definitions/Abbreviations

CAD - Computer Aided Design

FEM - Finite Element Method

CAE - Computer aided engineering

Von Mises stress - It is a stress widely used by designers to

check whether their design will withstand given load condition

Stiffness matrix - In the finite element method for the

numerical solution of elliptic partial differential equations, the

stiffness matrix represents the system of linear equations that

must be solved in order to ascertain an approximate solution to

the differential equation.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAEs peer review process under the supervision of the session

organizer. The process requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical,

photocopying, recording, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the

paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2014-01-0355

- [Automotive]SAE - FSAE Suspension and Frame DesignUploaded bymarshall, of course
- The Design of Formula SAE Half Shafts for Optimum Vehicle AccelerationUploaded byRitwik Das
- Mechanical Engineering - Sae - The Automotive ChassisUploaded byboss199410
- Chassis StiffnessUploaded byArun Kumaar
- ChassisUploaded byNimish Pande
- Cornell Design Anal Testing FsaeUploaded bySalil Apte
- Fsae Suspension Design LawrenceUploaded byAbhishek Dixit
- Formula SAE Inpact Attenuator TestingUploaded bykstv04
- Chassis Torsional Stiffness Analysis of the InfluenceUploaded byShashi Chaurasia
- Finite element analysis and improvement of an Ultima GTR Racing car chassisUploaded byjosbaema
- Simplification of the Shift-Clutch Operations for Formula SAE VehiclesUploaded byNishant Nagle
- Chassis Frame Torsional Stiffness AnalysisUploaded byInternational Journal for Scientific Research and Development - IJSRD
- Carbon Fiber Reinforced Steel FrameUploaded byrocketseal36470
- 2000-01-3538Uploaded bykadir_Ünal
- Static and dynamic analysis of space frameUploaded byanand007krishnan
- Race Car Design by Derek SewardUploaded byJunk Dakine
- Suspension PaperUploaded bytadi2k4
- FormulaStudent KA.race.INGUploaded byApurv Goyal
- Vehicle Dynamics 2004Uploaded byzhouhongliang
- Optimization of Formula Car Double Wishbone Suspension SystemUploaded byDebraj Roy
- Race Car ChassisUploaded byRamona
- Formula StudentUploaded byAkshay Dolas
- Analysis of Double Wishbone Suspension System ComponentsUploaded byauhut
- FSAE Suspension OptimizationUploaded byisaiahfreerksen
- kinematic and dynamic analysis of independent suspension systemUploaded bysiddhartha180987
- Analysis of Racecar ChassisUploaded byMichelle Morrison
- Vehicle Structures - Development of the Sports Car Chassis and Stiffness Analysis of the Westfield Sports CarUploaded byWaynePrangnell
- Beckman - The Physics of RacingUploaded byKFourMetrics
- Books List for Racecar Design or FSAEUploaded byRohit Tokas
- Racing Sports Car Chassis Design - 0837602963Uploaded bydineshtej7768

- Body BirdUploaded byanmol6237
- Clients ListUploaded byanmol6237
- HW Starter Manual March HresolutionUploaded byCharan Kumar
- PTC Creo Parametric - Advanced PrimerUploaded bytommy_84_mail5328
- Industrial EnclosuresUploaded byanmol6237
- Body Birp9888Uploaded byanmol6237
- Press Tool Cutting ForceUploaded byanmol6237
- Nissan Walkin Chennai 1Uploaded byanmol6237
- Design and Fabrication of Automated Manual Gear Transmission in Motor BikesUploaded byanmol6237
- RGB Color TableUploaded byanmol6237
- Nissan Walkin ChennaiUploaded byanmol6237
- Nissan Walkin ChennaiUploaded byanmol6237
- Nissan Walkin ChennaiUploaded byanmol6237
- Kaz Tech Damping Calculation SeminarUploaded byManu Pant
- introduction to HM.pdfUploaded byanmol6237
- qp2k12Uploaded byNESEGA
- Intro to Cfd ProblemUploaded bylino
- E2SEM1MT2TD06102012Uploaded byanmol6237
- Train ScheduleUploaded byanmol6237
- Train ScheduleUploaded byanmol6237
- Gate Syllabus for Mech EnggUploaded byanmol6237
- Parametric Modeling With Creo ParametricUploaded byfrancesca050168
- SHEARINGUploaded byanmol6237
- ansysUploaded byTuyen Tran
- Press Tool (1)Uploaded byanmol6237
- Tool Design TerminologyUploaded byanmol6237
- GDUploaded byanmol6237
- m Tech Project List 2015 NewUploaded byanmol6237
- 10_sample_paper_term1_englishAUploaded byPrashant Tolani
- GD AdvantagesUploaded byanmol6237

- Control System Objective Type QuestionsUploaded byavinash15may
- Math VI Test With TOSUploaded bycalindagan
- Demand ForecastingUploaded byTanya Saraswat
- Problem2.4.30Uploaded byAnilkumarsanctum
- Lab Report 7Uploaded byEsther Chiew
- BPSK ModulatorUploaded byTayran Prashad
- Kolaczyk CNUploaded byMustafa
- Bridge Integrity AssessmentUploaded byevan_arendse
- Basic ConceptsUploaded bysurajitacharya2001
- Determination of appropriate configuration of submerged vanes using fuzzy topsis optimization.pdfUploaded byHimanshu Sharma
- Chapter 2Uploaded byRikil Shah
- Flow Routing TechniquesUploaded byFaye Gacosta
- Placement Questions 2013-2014Uploaded byPrashant Kumar
- Harvard Spring 2010 Macro IIUploaded byDennis Plott
- The Dubinin-Radushkevich Equation and the UnderlyiUploaded byApriyanti Tindage
- Musical AnalogiesUploaded byNancy Al-Assaf
- Transmission of HeatUploaded byNaveenKumar
- Exam Preparation WIKIBOOKUploaded bycarlosazucena1
- Claremont COURIER 10-9-15Uploaded byClaremont Courier
- 1328 754 507 PtBr Iveco.pdf FallosUploaded byjoel_ayala_22
- KTET Syllabus for Category IUploaded byaglasem
- 9789387994324.pdfUploaded bykumarpraduman
- 12-Physics-Revision-Notes-Chapter-1-2.pdfUploaded byGeeteshGupta
- Hypermesh Basics Tutorials-1Uploaded byapi-3717939
- Optics27-Ultrafast-Optics.pptUploaded byTria
- assignment two template 2016Uploaded byapi-356862575
- The Advanced Supply and Demand Zones Trading Guide_ Untold Truths _ COLIBRI TRADERUploaded byGodwin Ariwodo
- 78398676-7SD522-Calculation-2Uploaded byBalaji
- Secondary System Mechanica Resonance in New Tall-shell SDI-Butler Arc FurnacesUploaded byLeonardo Chin
- GME ProspectusUploaded byRITIK SHARMA