Dissertation PDF

Investigation into the Suspension Characteristics of the Nissan 200SX
By
Nathan Mawhinney
B00184019
This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment for the

B.Eng. in Motorsport Design Engineering
Under the auspices of the University of The West of Scotland
May 2013
DECLARATION
I Nathan Mawhinney B00184019 hereby declare the dissertation entitled

Investigation into the change in suspension characteristics when lowering the Nissan 200sx
submitted by me in partial fulfilment for the B.Eng. in Motorsport Design Engineering is my

own work and I have not contravened University regulations in submitting this project. In
particular, I am aware of the University regulations on plagiarism, cheating and collusion, and
am aware of the potential consequences of any breach of regulations in this regard.
Dated:
Suspension Optimization
Nathan Mawhinney
Abstract
Desirable suspension attributes in order to optimize the vehicle for drifting were researched.
A literature review was conducted into aspects discussed within this project.
The main body of this dissertation features a breakdown of obtaining measurements, validation
of these measurements and vehicle attributes which were required to create the vehicle model
in WinGeo 3.
The vehicle was successfully modelled in 3D kinematic suspension software allowing

optimization of the current geometry setup; this was to determine the effects that drift
maneuvers would have on the vehicle. This data was then compared to expected results and
served as a method of validating suggested geometry changes.
The conclusions drawn from simulation results allowed a number of suggested setting changes
to be stated, typically by changing how the tyre functioned predominantly at the front of the
vehicle. A comparison was drawn between the standard and optimized setups in a simulated
drift maneuver.
A project discussion was completed including details of limitations, conclusions and future
work. A project timeline and approximate costing were included within this discussion.
ii
Nathan Mawhinney
Acknowledgements
Special Thanks to
Kenny Cameron - (Supervisor at UWS.)
Dave Kennedy - (Supervisor at UWS.)
SXOC.com - (Dedicated Nissan owners website.)
Dr Stuart McIlwain (Dissertation Template)
Kyle Chisholm (Owner Chizfab)
Alistair Graham (Employee at Team JapSpeed)
Denis OBrien (Geometry specialist)
Moral support from 4th year colleagues
iii
Nathan Mawhinney
Table of Contents
Chapter 1: Introduction .................................................................................................. 1
1.1 Suspension Background ................................................................................................................... 2
1.2 Research Aim ................................................................................................................................... 3
1.3 Objectives ........................................................................................................................................ 4
1.4 Project Scope ................................................................................................................................... 4
Chapter 2: Literature Review ......................................................................................... 5

2.1 Suspension ....................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.1 Camber Angle .......................................................................................................................................... 6
2.1.2 MacPherson Strut ..................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.3 Multilink Suspension ............................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.4 Ackerman Angle ...................................................................................................................................... 7
2.1.5 Castor ....................................................................................................................................................... 8
2.1.6 Antiroll bar ............................................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Tyre Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 9

2.2.1 Slip angle.................................................................................................................................................10
2.2.2 Tyre pressures .........................................................................................................................................10
2.2.3 Lateral force ............................................................................................................................................11
2.2.4 Tyre load .................................................................................................................................................11
2.3 Centre of Gravity ............................................................................................................................ 12

2.4 Vehicle setup.................................................................................................................................. 16
2.4.1 Over steer ................................................................................................................................................16
2.4.2 Drifting ....................................................................................................................................................17
Chapter 3: Primary Research........................................................................................ 20

3.1 Planning and Technique ................................................................................................................. 21
3.1.1 Experimental Centre of gravity ...............................................................................................................21
3.1.2 Pre- Testing method ................................................................................................................................22
3.1.3 Vehicle Measurement Plan ......................................................................................................................22
3.2 Vehicle Measurement .................................................................................................................... 22

3.2.1 Prior to Measurement ..............................................................................................................................22
3.2.2 Track Width and Wheelbase: ..................................................................................................................22
3.2.3 Ride Height Measurement .......................................................................................................................24
3.2.4 Corner Weigh Results .............................................................................................................................26
3.2.5 Centre of gravity Testing.........................................................................................................................27
3.2.6 Co-ordinate Measurement Setup .............................................................................................................29
3.2.7 Co-ordinate Measurement Technique .....................................................................................................30
iv
Nathan Mawhinney
3.2.8 Chapter Summary....................................................................................................................................32
Chapter 4: Desired Suspension Attributes ................................................................... 33

4.1.1 Standard setup .........................................................................................................................................34
4.1.2 Suggested Setup Discussion ....................................................................................................................34
4.1.3 Limitation of Tyre Data...........................................................................................................................36
4.1.4 Conclusions .............................................................................................................................................37
4.1.5 Chapter Summary....................................................................................................................................37
Chapter 5: Creation of WinGeo Model ........................................................................ 38

5.1 First steps of Model Creation .....................................................................................................................39
5.1.1 Front suspension model construction ......................................................................................................41
5.1.2 Rear Suspension model creation .............................................................................................................41
5.1.3 Chapter Summary....................................................................................................................................46
Chapter 6: Suspension Model Optimization ................................................................ 47

6.1 Suspension model optimization..................................................................................................... 48
6.1.1 Castor Angle ...........................................................................................................................................48
6.1.2 King Pin Inclination Angle .....................................................................................................................51
6.1.3 Lengthening lower control arm ...............................................................................................................54
6.1.4 Ackerman adjustment ..............................................................................................................................55
6.1.5 Rear Traction Rod Adjustment................................................................................................................56
6.2 Corner simulation .......................................................................................................................... 59

6.2.1 Rear suspension .......................................................................................................................................62
6.2.2 Chapter Summary....................................................................................................................................63
Chapter 7: Project Discussion ...................................................................................... 64

7.1 Approach Step by step ................................................................................................................ 65
7.1.1 Background Reading ...............................................................................................................................65
7.1.2 Primary Research ....................................................................................................................................65
7.1.3 Creation of WinGeo model .....................................................................................................................66
7.1.4 Suspension Simulation ............................................................................................................................66
7.2 Project Changes ............................................................................................................................. 66

7.2.1 Constraining front wheels COG ..............................................................................................................66
7.2.2 Planning changes .....................................................................................................................................67
7.2.3 Limitations ..............................................................................................................................................67
7.2.4 Project planning and Costings................................................................................................................68
7.3 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 68

7.4 Future work.................................................................................................................................... 69
7.4.1 Knuckle Design .......................................................................................................................................69
7.4.2 Real World Testing .................................................................................................................................70
Nathan Mawhinney
7.4.3 Creation in Adams software ....................................................................................................................71
Chapter 8: Appendix .................................................................................................... 72

Appendix A: Presentation Slides ................................................................................. 73
Appendix B: Front Suspension layout ......................................................................... 76
Appendix C: Rear Suspension layout .......................................................................... 76
Appendix D: Project Definition ................................................................................... 76
Appendix E: Measurement Risk Assessment............................................................... 80
Appendix F: Pre-Measurement Testing ....................................................................... 85
Appendix G: WinGeo Centre of gravity calculator ..................................................... 87
Appendix H: Centre of gravity results ......................................................................... 88
Appendix I: Toe and camber change under bump ....................................................... 89
Appendix J: Standard Wheel Alignment ..................................................................... 90
Appendix K: Personal Correspondence ....................................................................... 91
Appendix L: Project Timeline ...................................................................................... 94
Appendix M: Project Summary.................................................................................... 95
Appendix N: Minutes from meetings ........................................................................... 96
Bibliography ................................................................................................................. 99
vi
Nathan Mawhinney
Table of Figures
Figure 1.1: Nissan 200SX S14a .................................................................................................... 2
Figure 2.1(a): Positive camber figure 2.1(b): Negative camber ............................................... 6
Figure 2.2: Centre of gravity diagram Milliken (1995) .............................................................. 13
Figure 2.3: Centre of gravity height ........................................................................................... 14
Figure 2.4: Coordinate convention ............................................................................................. 17
Figure 2.5: Steady state drifting ................................................................................................. 18
Figure 2.6: Slip angle graph (Abdulrahim, 2006). ..................................................................... 19
Figure 3.1: Wheelbase measurement .......................................................................................... 23
Figure 3.2: Ride height measurement technique ........................................................................ 24
Figure 3.3: Ride height measurement ......................................................................................... 25
Figure 3.4: Camber measurement ............................................................................................... 26
Figure 3.5: Corner weight measurement .................................................................................... 26
Figure 3.6: Centre of gravity testing ........................................................................................... 28
Figure 3.7: X-Y Coordinate system ............................................................................................ 30
Figure 3.8: Camber change due to bump .................................................................................... 31
Figure 4.1: Tyre plot lateral force vs. slip angle ......................................................................... 36
Figure 5.1: Coordinate system .................................................................................................... 39
Figure 5.2: Origin adjustment ..................................................................................................... 39
Figure 5.3: Front suspension modelled....................................................................................... 41
Figure 5.4: Rear suspension model............................................................................................. 42
Figure 5.5: Front toe validation .................................................................................................. 43
Figure 5.6: Front camber validation ........................................................................................... 44
Figure 5.7: Rear toe validation ................................................................................................... 45
Figure 5.8: Rear camber validation ............................................................................................ 46
Figure 6.1: Castor angle effect ................................................................................................... 49
Figure 6.2: Camber effects ......................................................................................................... 50
Figure 6.3: Vehicle drifting (Visser, 2005) ................................................................................ 50
Figure 6.4: Scrub radius diagram ............................................................................................... 52
Figure 6.5: KPI Angle simulation result ..................................................................................... 53
Figure 6.6: LCA adjustment ....................................................................................................... 54
Figure 6.7: Toe effects ................................................................................................................ 55
Figure 6.8: Ackerman effects ..................................................................................................... 56
Figure 6.9: Rear suspension traction rod .................................................................................... 57
Figure 6.10: Rear traction rod..................................................................................................... 57
Figure 6.11: Loaded wheel ......................................................................................................... 58
Figure 6.12: Camber effects ....................................................................................................... 58
Figure 6.13: Path file .................................................................................................................. 59
Figure 6.14: Scrub radius comparison ........................................................................................ 60
Figure 6.15: Comparison of toe effects ...................................................................................... 61
Figure 6.16: Camber angle comparison ...................................................................................... 62
Figure 6.17: Toe change comparison ......................................................................................... 62
vii
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 7.1: Optimised front knuckle........................................................................................... 70

Figure 8.1: Constraint testing ..................................................................................................... 85
Figure 8.2: COG testing equipment ............................................................................................ 86
List of Equations
Equation 2.1: Coefficient Formula ............................................................................................. 11
Equation 2.2: Lateral Force Coefficient formula ........................................................................ 11
Equation 2.3: Lateral slip............................................................................................................ 12
Equation 2.4: Z axis height ......................................................................................................... 15
Equation 2.5: Line height equation............................................................................................. 15
Equation 2.6: Rear height difference .......................................................................................... 16
Equation 5.1: Y point location front ........................................................................................... 40
Equation 5.2: Rear X co-ordinate location ................................................................................. 40
Equation 5.3: Rear Y axis position ............................................................................................. 40
List of Tables
Table 3.4: Vehicle Weights ........................................................................................................ 27
Table 3.5: Tension Effects .......................................................................................................... 28
Table 3.6: Centre of Gravity Location ........................................................................................ 32
Table 4.1: Standard Geometry .................................................................................................... 34
Table 4.2: Suggested Base Setup ................................................................................................ 37
Table 7.1: Costing Table ............................................................................................................ 68
Glossary of Terms
ARB
Anti roll bar
COG
Centre of gravity
KPI
King Pin inclination
SAT
Self-Aligning Torque
S14
Vehicle Model
viii
Nathan Mawhinney
Nomenclature
Symbol or contraction of term
Real, full name
S.I. units
Slip angle
Lateral velocity at contact centre
m/s
Longitudinal velocity at contact centre
m/s
Length from front track to CG location
Length from rear track to CG location
Wheelbase length
Track Width
WF
Sum of front wheel weights
KG
Sum of all wheel weights
KG
Individual wheel weight
KG
Individual wheel weight
KG
ix
Chapter 1: Introduction
200sx Suspension Optimisation
Nathan Mawhinney
1: Introduction
1.1 Suspension Background
This project was based on optimization of vehicle handling for drifting. The main focus of this
project will be around the suspension system of the Nissan 200SX S14, which is shown in
figure 1.1.
Figure 1.1: Nissan 200SX S14a

The Nissan 200SX (S14) was one of the later models in Nissans S body production line. This
series originated in 1975 with the Datsun 200SX (S10), the aim of this production line was to
market a compact, yet sporty rear wheel drive automobile to compete with rivals such as
Toyota and Mazda. A number of revisions were made to this chassis as it evolved, this project
will focus on one edition of this chassis known as the 200SX S14.
The front suspension system on the S14 consisted of a MacPherson strut, combined with a
lower control arm, tension rod and an antiroll bar. This design is a simple and compact package
with the ability to provide large steering angles if the correct changes are made. An overview of
the layout of this suspension can be found in appendix B.
The rear suspension fitted to this vehicle was first featured on the Nissan MID-4, this was a
concept car unveiled at the Frankfort motor show in 1985. The rear multilink setup design on
this vehicle did not reach production until four years later, when it was fitted to the Nissan
200sx S13 the predecessor to the S14.
2
Nathan Mawhinney
The same suspension arrangement was repeated on the updated S14 model, this model featured
revised body styling, a wider track width and a marginally longer wheel base amongst other
interior updates over its predecessor.
During the production run of the S14, the design was re-launched with the introduction of the
S14a in 1996. This revision featured updated body styling and various engine upgrades;
however the chassis and suspension remained the same. The model maintained the same
specification until 1999, which featured the release of the Nissan 200SX S15 which featured
thicker anti roll bars and a helical differential. An overview of the rear suspension layout can be
observed in appendix C.
The 200SX is suited to drifting due to its front engine rear wheel drive layout; this aspect
combined with a tuneable 2.0 Turbocharged engine which is widely supported by aftermarket
part companies makes it popular in this motorsport.
This concept of negotiating a corner using a high body slip angle originated from touring car
racing in Japan in the 1970s. Drivers would slide the vehicle through a corner to maintain exit
speed; this was found to be a more effective way of cornering on cross ply tyres of the era
while being spectacular for spectators.
From this origin Drifting has slowly developed into its own motor-sport with the first event
outside Japan being in held America in 1993, this has resulted in a number of championships
being created worldwide such as:
The British drift championship (BDC)
Formula Drift in America
D1 series in Japan
1.2 Research Aim

The main research aim was to investigate desirable handling characteristics in order to optimise
the Nissan 200SX suspension for drifting. This would be achieved through suspension
measurement, analysis and simulation in 3D kinematic suspension software.
Nathan Mawhinney
1.3 Objectives
The objectives of this project are listed below:
Research desirable handling characteristics for drifting.
Plan measurement technique and required factors.
Measure vehicle hard points in the workshop.
To build the suspension in WinGeo based on the measured points.
Analyse the suspension in WinGeo in order to optimise the suspension.
Make an educated decision on the optimal suspension setup based upon analysis and
simulation results while considering gathered research and literature.
1.4 Project Scope

Included in this project was measurement and analysis of the suspension setup on the Nissan
200sx, the software suspension models will be steady state due to software limitations. The toe,
bump, droop and camber will be measured. The suspension hard points will be measured and
input into WinGeo for validation and analysis
Excluded is real world testing of the suggested setup fatigue testing and destructive testing of
the part which could be part of the future work on the component.
The project definition can be found as appendix D which includes the project stakeholders. A
presentation was undertaken as part of this project, the slides relating to this presentation are
located in appendix A.
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 2: Literature Review
Nathan Mawhinney
2: Literature Review
2.1 Suspension
2.1.1 Camber Angle
Smith (1978) provided a brief but comprehensive insight into the objective of a vehicles
suspension system. He stated the design must allow four wheel independence, while allowing
enough vertical displacement that the vehicle can withstand bumps without adversely affecting
the geometry of the wheels while moving. The final requirement cited by Smith (1978) was that
no compliance was desirable, in order to maintain chassis rigidity primarily while retaining
stiffness. Stoll (1996) cited The chassis of a passenger car must be able to handle the engine
power installed, and ever-improving acceleration, higher peak and cornering speeds and
deceleration demand safer chassis Stoll (1996) disagrees to an extent with Smith (1978) by
having different requirements from the suspension system, although both parties agree that a
low weight is a strongly desirable characteristic. It could be observed that Smith (1978) is
correct requirements from a vehicle suspension system; however aspects such as ride,
durability and driveability are overlooked.
Stoll (1996) cited ISO 8855 (2011), camber is the angle between the wheel centre plan and a
vertical to the plane of the road. This description was also stated by Milliken (1995) , however
Stoll (1996) went further in explaining that tilting the top of the wheel out results in positive
camber Figure 2.1(a). Camber force stated by Stoll (1996) as being the lateral force in the
direction of the tilt, predominatly road cars have between zero to negative 1.5 degrees of
camber(Fig 2.1(b)), however on race cars 2 4 degrees was seen.It could be viewed that both
parties are correct in their description of camber with the acknowledgement of an ISO standard
in both works, both describing the effects of camber adjustment by including camber force.
This is based on tyre attributes,slip angles and camber angle amongst numerous other aspects.
Figure 2.1(a): Positive Camber
Figure 2.1(b): Negative Camber

6
Nathan Mawhinney
2.1.2 MacPherson Strut

Bastow (1993) said the MacPherson strut construction was based on a tube which was
constrained to the hub at the lower end and fixed to an upper mount on the top section. He
stated the tube houses a telescopic damper and features a spring seat to constrain the vehicle
spring. Bastow (1993) stated the disadvantage of this design was the difficulty in engineering
longitudinal compliance into the design, as the strut acted like an extremely long upper control
arm. This had the effect of on the camber curve which reduces negative camber change caused
by bump, and Milliken (1995) agreed this was a particular limitation of this design in
performance applications.
Zuidijk (2009) said mono tube dampers are not suitable for this strut design, emphasising due
to the piston diameter being 12mm it was not substantial enough for the loads through the front
of the vehicle. To overcome this issue a 22 or 25mm diameter rod had to be used combined
with a gas pressure of six bar. Zuidijk stated the MacPherson design typically has a 1:1 velocity
ratio due to the method of its mounting.
2.1.3 Multilink Suspension

Bastow (1993) stated the multilink rear suspension features five links, designed to provide
longitudinal compliance without side effects on wheel geometry such as vertical travel, low
unsprung mass along with anti-dive and squat effects. Bastow (1993) went on to state that the
benefit of this system was zero steering change under vertical deflection, meaning this design
allowed satisfactory wheel geometry under a range of conditions. Bastow gave an in depth
description of the benefits of the multilink rear suspension.
2.1.4 Ackerman Angle

Staniforth (2010) gave an in-depth and understandable description of Ackerman; he stated it
was the ability of two wheels sharing the same axle to turn at a different degree, with this effect
being amplified as the applied steering lock is increased. It was further stated that Ackerman
gives a significant advantage when turning through slow hairpin corners, with considerably less
effect at high speed. Staniforth was correct in his description of the lessened effect at high
speeds as typically the steering lock applied is considerably reduced when compared to low
speed turning.
Nathan Mawhinney
Smith (1984) said the limitation of the Ackerman principle was that it does not acknowledge
the effect of the vehicles slip angle, and it presumes the geometrical turn centre is positioned on
a line which is projected from the rear axle of the vehicle. Smith (1984) went on to state
steering geometry in particular aims to reduce under steer, this under steer is caused by the
inside wheel being lightly loaded (in relation to the centre of a corner). This meant the outer
wheel is forced to provide 80-90% of the traction effort at the front of the vehicle at high lateral
acceleration. He said the benefit of increasing Ackerman angle was that both front tyres can be
maintained at their desired slip angles. This effect reduced the need for static toe out on the
front; however limitations were increased tyre temperatures due to scrubbing, instability during
braking and increased roll resistance on the front wheels. Smith completed his description with
a further benefit of increasing Ackerman angle involves the inside wheel continuously featuring
a greater steering angle than the outside wheel. It could be said that Smith provided a detailed
summary of the effects of adjustment of the Ackerman angle, outlining advantages and
disadvantages of Ackerman adjustment.
2.1.5 Castor
Milliken (1995) provided a insight into the effects of caster angle adjustment, he stated that
increasing caster angle will effect steering input force required to turn the wheels. Milliken
went on to importantly state when recoving from an oversteer situation, the steering camber
gained from opposite lock does not increase front grip, this is due to the camber gain gain being
in the wrong direction. It may be seen that Milliken(1995) was informative in his description of
the effects of caster, with particular insight into the effects during oversteer which is common
when drifting at high body slip angles.
Kojima (2012) stated castor has a self-steering effect on the front wheels while the vehicle
slides, castor not only helps self-centring steering it benefits the initial turn in of the vehicle by
creating negative camber on the outside wheel. Kojima went on to say as the vehicle turns the
outer wheel creates camber, this allows less negative camber to be run increasing straight line
stability. Staniforth (2010) backed up these statements saying Castor provides the self-centre
action that helps a car run true at high speed in a straight line, and will also pull the wheels
back to straight ahead coming out of a corner. Both parties agreed on the effects of castor
adjustment outlining the advantages of changing the castor angle.
Smith (1984) said that too little front castor would result in the vehicle being overly sensitive to
steering, it would lack of feedback and poor self-return steering characteristics. This further
backed up both Kojimas and Staniforths opinions on the subject.
Nathan Mawhinney
2.1.6 Antiroll bar

Kojima stated the ARB can be used to adjust the vehicles cornering characteristics; this
adjustment was said to be achieved by changing the position of the mounting point on a bladed
ARB. Kojima suggested each of these holes change the stiffness by around 10 - 30 per cent, he
went on to state that this could be considerable as the ARBs equated to around 30-60% of a
vehicles roll stiffness. Further stating that ARB adjustments allow the increase or reduction in
flop caused by limiting the roll moment through the roll centre, the roll centre is a theoretical
point in which the vehicle rolls around, this location is different at the front and rear. By
projecting a line between the front and rear roll centres the roll axis is found, the anti-roll bar
controls the rate at which the vehicle rolls. This can be adjusted to provide more grip at the
front or rear of the vehicle.
2.2 Tyre Discussion

Milliken (1995) Stated tyres as being extremely important in the handling performance of a
vehicle, tyres have to cope with the vertical force of the weight of the vehicle while supplying
traction in braking cornering and acceleration. Milliken further stated The tires also supply the
forces used for controlling and stabilizing the vehicle... this showed the importance of the
tyres performance and the significance in determining how the loads are passed to the contact
patch. Milliken stated The tire generates steering torques which give rise to centring effects in
the steering system and related torques felt at the steering wheel by the driver this can be
related to castor and a number of other factors such as KPI and static margin. Milliken finally
made an important summary on the aspects of tyre grip when the local coefficient of friction
limit is exceeded, the said that when this limit is reached the tyre print on the road which is
depicted begins to slide across the road rather than sticking. It can be said that Milliken
provided an in depth yet concise view on the large subject of grip generation from a tyre.
Nathan Mawhinney
2.2.1 Slip angle

Milliken (1995) discussed the tyre slip angle in relation to the elastic effect of the tyre, he stated
this effect creates a reactive force against the force acting through the tyre print, this force
results in a motion in relation to the ground which occurs without sliding of the print (Milliken,
1995). This elastic effect is caused by the tread being distorted resulting in a lateral slip angle,
this angle is defined as the angle between the direction of the wheel and the contact patch tread.
SAE (2008) said by increasing the lateral force the slip angle will become larger creating a higher
slip angle, when the tyre begins to slide the contact patch begins to break away starting at the rear
and progresses forward. This process was not instant it is progressive; however the rate of the
distortion is determined by the coefficient of friction and load applied.
Both parties give an important understanding of the tyre slip angle which plays a significant
part in drifting due to high tyre slip angles.
2.2.2 Tyre pressures

Kojima (2012) stated tyres play the most important role in how the vehicle behaves, by
adjusting the pressure he said the vehicles characteristics can be adjusted. Kojima went on to
state adjusting the pressures would give improved forward bite at the rear wheels, if the vehicle
is struggling to spin the rear wheels the tyre pressure can be increased to allow traction to be
lost with less longitudinal force.
Smith (1984) cited that increasing tyre pressures would result in increased wheel spin and
sliding, however this will cause tyre temperatures to rise. Smith further stated that too low a
pressure would result in an undesirable lack of response from the tyre.
Both Smith and Kojima agreed that increasing pressures would cause a reduction in achievable
longitudinal force, although Smith makes an excellent point that decreasing the pressure to
much is detrimental to the tyres performance.
Tyres when racing typically work within the linear zone, adjustment of tyre pressures can be
used to find the ultimate grip. By lowering tyre pressures the operating temperature would be
reached sooner, this may be beneficial in short drift sections during competition.
10
Nathan Mawhinney
2.2.3 Lateral force

With reference to SAE J670 the lateral force acting on a tyre originates at the centre of the
contact patch, this location is perpendicular to the wheels direction if there is no camber.
Milliken (1995) stated when the front wheels are steered the slip angle is initialized and
increased which causes a rise in lateral force. This allows the vehicle to yaw, furthermore this
backs up the point mentioned previously about the slip angle increasing the lateral force. As
slip angle is determined by lateral force there are a number of situations where one aspect
affects the other
2.2.4 Tyre load

Milliken (1995) said that tyre load sensitivity could be calculated from the physics of the
friction between two bodies; in this case the tyre and the road surface. The friction coefficient
was defined in equation 2.1:
Equation 2.1: Coefficient Formula

Milliken then stated This suggests normalizing the lateral force vs. slip angle curve by
dividing by the load to give a dimensionless measure of the amount of lateral force obtained in
relation to the load. In essence a coefficient based on the lateral force could be obtained from
the lateral force divided by the load applied to the tyre, this encompasses vehicle weight and
coefficients of friction, and the formula for this calculation is shown in equation 2.2.
Equation 2.2: Lateral Force Coefficient formula
Once the coefficient was known for a given tyre, the slip angle could potentially be plotted for
a number of loads which would provide improved correlation between loads on the tyre.
Milliken stated that the peak lateral force coefficient was typically lower for higher loads than
it would be for low tyre loads.
11
Nathan Mawhinney
SAE J670 (2008) referenced the tyre as steering through an axis at the centre of the contact
patch; Milliken (1995) stated that at medium to low slip angles the steered heading will be
followed by the tyre. Milliken went on to state the aligning torque through the steering was
caused at the outline of the contact patch; the distortion was stated to be in a triangular shape. It
was stated as being caused by the elastic distortion of the contact patch throughout its length as
it is not uniform.
Pacejka (2006) defined lateral slip as a ratio between, the longitudinal speeds of the tyre against
the velocity in the lateral direction which can be obtained by the following expression 2.3.
Equation 2.3: Lateral slip
2.3 Centre of Gravity

Stoll (1996) and Milliken (1995) both stated the same technique for calculation of the COG for
a vehicle, this involved lifting the rear of the car while measuring the proportion of weight
change onto the front wheels, measured in relation to the number of degrees inclination from a
zero horizontal. Stoll (1996) and Milliken (1995) further stated that in order to give an accurate
centre of gravity location the suspension should be constrained with solid links; the reason for
this is in order to remove any chance of inaccuracy caused by the compression in the shock
absorbers and spring setup. Both authors agree that the fuel tank should be either completely
full or entirely empty in order to have accurate results.
Milliken (1995) stated in order to have a competitive race car handling performance is vital, as
it is one of the main determinates in having success. Milliken (1995) then stated as centre of
gravity is the point at which the cars weight is working through, it has significant role in
attributing to increased achievable cornering speeds. This is due to COG governing the amount
of tyre cornering force which can be applied, by dictating the vertical load applied to the tyre.
Stoll (1996) said to generalise, the lower the centre of gravity the fewer dynamic driving
problems are created while increasing handling performance during braking and cornering.
Milliken (1995) in order to calculate the centre of gravity location moments were taken around
the rear axle as can be seen in figure 2.1. This showed the names of the dimensions used in the
following formulas; this figure can be used in conjunction with the expressions below.
12
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 2.2: Centre of gravity diagram Milliken (1995)
Calculation of the x axis location
And
Milliken (1995) stated moments should be taken around the x1-x1 which can be seen in figure
2.1 above, that was the line which runs through the centre of the left rear tyre parallel to the
centreline. Calculation of the position on the Y axis location on the vehicle would then be
obtained
( )
W = Sum of all wheel weights

d=
(tF = Front track dimension)
(tR = Rear track dimension)
13
Nathan Mawhinney
Milliken (1995) stated if the front and rear track widths are the same value a simplified version
of the formula may be used as seen below:
(
Finally Milliken cited if the track width is equal and the centre of gravity lies on the centre line
then w2 + w4 = with no lateral movement existing.
The calculation of the position on the z-axis would then be obtained, using the following
formulas, dimensions and names of lengths which can be viewed in figure 2.2.
Figure 2.3: Centre of gravity height Milliken (1995)

Milliken (1995) stated the following nomenclature for this example.
W= sum of vehicle weight

WF= weight of front wheels with rear raised
b = distance from rear axle to centre of gravity point
= wheelbase length
RLF =Radius of loaded front wheel while axle in air
RLR =Radius of loaded rear wheel while axle in air
= angle which the vehicle is raised to from horizontal
14
Nathan Mawhinney
By taking moments about the point O allowed the vertical force caused by the hoist, and the
force acting on the vehicle by the chalks to be disregarded.
(
By taking c/h1
: as an assumption
The example then calculated the distance above the horizontal line connecting both wheel
centres as h1, with both wheel centres defined as RL, it is worth noting that if both front and rear
have the same height then you may add h1 and RL to calculate the height above the ground.
This is displayed in equation
Equation 2.4: Z axis height
Milliken (1995) said if there was a difference in RL from front to rear then the following
expression 2.5 must be used to locate the height of the line.
( )
( )
Equation 2.5: Line height equation
15
Nathan Mawhinney
If there was a difference between the front to rear height, then the centre of gravity height was
calculated using the following formula in expression 2.6.
Equation 2.6: Rear height difference

It is worth mentioning at this point that the reason Milliken takes moments around point O, was
to eliminate two forces. One force is acting on the vehicle trying to move the vehicle forward,
this is resisted by the wheel chalks, and the other is the vertical force from the hoist holding the
vehicle. (Milliken, 1995)
2.4 Vehicle setup

Blundell (1997) cited that the handling characterstics weither they be desireable or not is down
to human perception, however he went on to state that vehicle characteristics such as under
and oversteer can be simulated in steady state conditions. Efstathios Velenis a, (2011) said
handling performance is typically measured by data logging and through experienced drivers
carrying out various manovours.
2.4.1 Over steer

Over steer was defined in ISO 4138 (2004) as Cornering compliances greater in the front than
in the rear increase path radius from the Ackermann condition, and produce under steer; while
cornering compliances greater in the rear than in the front reduce path radius, causing over
steer. ISO4138 further defined under steer as the vehicle washing out wide due to insufficient
grip at the front, and over steer which was common in drifting as the vehicle loosing grip at the
rear before the front.
Kennedy (2013) discussed over steer in relation to the ideal vehicle, he said that the steady state
response of the vehicle was to roll around a radius path, this being dependant only on steering
input and is independent of longitudinal velocity. Kennedy (2013) defined over steer in relation
to the ideal vehicle in respect to yaw velocity, an over steer situation was defined as the yaw
velocity being greater than ideal (Kennedy, 2013).
Both definitions of over steer were correct with Kennedy (2013) relating over steer to the ideal
vehicle with neutral steer, where the ISO standard defined it similarly to cornering compliances
relating to path radius.
16
Nathan Mawhinney
2.4.2 Drifting
Abdulrahim (2006) defined drifting as ... the art of exploiting dynamic nonlinearities to
balance forces and moments at large angles of sideslip. This was an accurate definition of
drifting as tyre grip was determined by the amount of vertical load acting on the tyre thus the
amount of available traction, while counter steer is applied to counter yawing moments
allowing large angle of body slip to be controlled.
Abdulrahim (2006) further stated that during drifting each tyre creates a number of forces, he
defined longitudinal force as
which was the force of acceleration and braking, lateral was
stated as being , and the moment trying to rate the vehicle as . Figure 2.4 below gives a
visual aid in understanding this convention.
Figure 2.4: Coordinate convention
As stated previously the force and moment acting on the tyre are determined by the
longitudinal slip and local sideslip angle ( ).
Abdulrahim (2006) said the total force acting though the centre of gravity was a sum of the
combined moments and forces acting on each tyre. The figure 2.5 outlined the important
dimensions as a,b and c, this diagram showed the vehicle in steady state drift depicting the
forces and moments acting on the centre of gravity of the vehicle though each tyre. The
distance to the centre of the contact patch is important in determining the agility of a vehicle
17
Nathan Mawhinney
(a,b) and the lateral distance (c) from the centre of the contact patch to the body centreline were
depicted.
Figure 2.5: Steady State drifting
Pacejka (2006) stated a formula to allow calculation of side force for both longitudinal slip (K)
and slip angle ( ), this expression was based on the forces
and
being determined by both
slip conditions. Abdulrahim (2006) used Pacejkas formulae, and stated that the force response
peaks beyond the near-linear range then declines towards a steady value at high slip angles
such as
which are seen in drifting. It was further cited that the force acting laterally
was anti-symmetric around
resulting in side forces acting in both ways, for this reason
camber can be negated from this equation. Figure 2.6 below shows a plot of slip angle against
longitudinal slip, with the effect on lateral force.
18
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 2.6: Slip angle graph (Abdulrahim, 2006).
Abdulrahim (2006) stated the front wheels act near the vicinity of the linear range at low slip
angles, tyres would operate at a range of values through a variation in braking and steering
inputs around
with any slip angle ( ). The rear wheel function was cited as operating in
the nonlinear plateau regime during a typical drift manoeuvre; these tyres operate in a wide
range of a slip angles well above the linear range while being controlled by braking and
acceleration torques.
Abdulrahim (2006) gave a rational description of the front tyre working with less than or equal
to zero longitudinal slip at a range body slip angles, the rear tyre however was described as
working in a nonlinear zone with a large variation in slip angles. Abdulrahims understanding
and description of the tyre slip angles seems reasonable, with less lateral force achievable at the
rear wheels due to the nonlinear working zone.
19
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 3: Primary Research
20
Nathan Mawhinney
3: Primary Research
3.1 Planning and Technique
3.1.1 Experimental Centre of gravity
To allow optimization of the vehicle a variety of factors had to be found, one particular factor
was the location of the centre of gravity (COG) of the vehicle. This was required in WinGeo to
allow optimization of the vehicle model, this measurement was conducted under colleague
supervision, the requirement of supervision was outlined in the risk assessment found in
appendix E and suggested by the project supervisor prior to measurement.
In order to locate a vehicles COG it was primarily accepted that lifting the rear of the car,
while measuring the change in weight onto the front wheels was the standard method of
predicting where the COG is positioned. The rear of the vehicle must be lifted vertically in
order to give an accurate weight change; there are three primary methods of undertaking this
task.
An engine hoist could be used to lift the rear of the car vertically up as the front wheels rest on
the corner weight scales, however due to the Nissan 200sxs design locating the lifting strap to
obtain a vertical lift is almost impossible due to the body shape. A car jack could be used in
order to raise the rear of the vehicle however; complications would arise when jacking on the
differential as this mounts onto the rear sub frame of the vehicle. It is possible to use a car
trailer in order to find the point at which the car will balance, by balancing the weight on the
trailer the COG position could be calculated. In this case from reviewing the other
methodologies and drawing conclusions it was decided that the workshop four post ramps
would give the best repeatability and results.
21
Nathan Mawhinney
3.1.2 Pre- Testing method

Before conducting this method on the Test vehicle, a research mock experiment was conducted
on the Locust race car. The reason was to outline any issues or anomalies which occur during
measurement of the test vehicle. A detailed method of this pretesting can be found in appendix
F.
3.1.3 Vehicle Measurement Plan

In order to obtain the necessary values to create the model in WinGeo, measurements from the
test car were located. The values were then input into the simulation program by the use of
X,Y,Z co-ordinates. To obtain these locations a combination of plumb bob, measurement rules
and marker pens were utilised to find the hard points of the components on this suspension.
3.2 Vehicle Measurement
3.2.1 Prior to Measurement
Primarily before taking any measurements the tyre pressures were set to 32 psi in order to
ensure that result accuracy was improved, discrepancies could be caused by the vehicle resting
at a lower height on one side due to low tyre pressure. The workshop's flat floor was utilized
which is accurate to a tolerance of +/- 1mm.
3.2.2 Track Width and Wheelbase:
Measurement of the track width and wheelbase was conducted by using a measuring tape. To
measure track the distance between the centre of each front wheel was taken with the same
method being adopted for the rear of the car, this reading was taken four times and an average
taken to reduce the chances of error and importantly ensure accuracy of measurement. Table
3.1 shows the track width results.
Table 3.1: Measured track width

Vehicle Track Width(mm)
Front
Rear
1480
1470
22
Nathan Mawhinney
The wheelbase was measured in a similar way to track width by measuring the location same
location on the wheel time from front and rear wheels. This measurement will be taken four
times at each side, the reason being if the vehicle has been in an accident each side will give
different lengths, which will impact geometry results if only one side is measured. Figure 3.1
shows the wheelbase measurement technique.
Figure 3.1: Wheelbase Measurement

Results showed both sides had equal length of 2525mm which is exactly the same as
manufacturer specification.
The ride height was be measured from the flat floor to the wheel arch eyebrow on each corner
of the vehicle using a measurement tape, figure 3.2 shows measurement of this point which was
repeated for each corner.
23
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 3.2: Ride height measurement technique

The ground to arch height was then measured for each corner of the vehicle and is shown
below in table 3.2. These results were consistent with a 35mm reduction in ride height and
displayed a reasonable level for this vehicle, showing a maximum difference of 2mm across an
axle.
Table 3.2: Measured ride height

Arch brow height
(mm)
Front
Right
625
Left
624
Rear
Right
622
Left
620
3.2.3 Ride Height Measurement

This technique involved raising the transmission jack until it reached a point where the spirit
level bubble was in the centre, with the bar placed on the peak of the roof (show in figure 3.3).
The height was then obtained by using a measuring tape from the ground to the bottom of the
metal bar; this measurement was 35mm less than the standard quoted ride height by Nissan
(Nissan, 1999).
24
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 3.3: Ride Height Measurement
The measured ride height was compared to manufacturer specifications in table 3.3, thus the
vehicle would be raised by 35mm in WinGeo to represent the standard height.
Table 3.3: Ride height difference

Manufacturer stated ride
height(mm)
1295
Actual ride height(mm)

1260
Difference(mm)
35
Now that the basic measurements were complete the current vehicle setup could be attained,
the first process of this stage was to obtain vehicle corner weights and other geometry settings.
A camber gauge was used to measure the camber in degrees, placing the gauge on the wheel in
the straight ahead position gave the following results for each corner seen in figure 3.4.
25
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 3.4: Camber measurement

3.2.4 Corner Weigh Results
The vehicle was placed on corner weight scales to obtain base weights; this was shown in
figure 3.4.
Figure 3.5: Corner Weight measurement
26
Nathan Mawhinney
The results from weight measurement are shown below; these measurements were taken four
times. The averaged results are displayed in table 3.4.
Table 3.1: Vehicle Weights
Front left (kg)
352
Rear left
281
Total
Front right(kg)
364
Rear right
275.5
1272 kg
3.2.5 Centre of gravity Testing

The method for conducting this test was outlined in the pre testing technique discussed
previously.
The location of the centre of gravity can be obtained from the X axis, using the following
formula combined with measurements of the vehicle. When calculated the value b gives the
distance of the centre of gravity from the rear axle, figure 2.3 outlines the symbols within these
equations
b = 1418.33 mm
The location could then be obtained from the front axle.
The location in the x direction from the front hub was found to be 1106mm; this location was
further validated once the model was created in WinGeo. This program had a built in COG
calculator which placed the centre of gravity at 1104mm from the front hub. This obtained the
centre of gravity location on the X axis based on the vehicles weight distribution and
wheelbase, an image of this calculator is located in appendix G.
27
Nathan Mawhinney
As outlined previously the centre of gravity test was conducted on the four post ramp in order
to obtain the centre of gravity height location, the vehicles rear wheels were placed on the four
post ramp with a ratchet strap constraining it. The vehicle was then set to a levelled height by
adjusting the ramp height, with this set the rear was then raised through a range of angles up to
6 degrees. Figure 3.6 shows the testing setup at 3 degrees.
The vehicle was raised in increments, with the tyre deflection being measured at each point on
the front wheel. The reason for measurement of wheel deflection is to account for the effects of
high profile tyres which deflect as the weight was transferred to the front wheels as this could
potentially have an effect on the centre of gravity location. The dial gauge was zeroed on the
corner weight scale with the vehicle at a level zero height; the tyre deflection was measured
at each two degree angle increment.
Figure 3.6: Centre of gravity testing

A limitation found in pre-testing was the change in weights caused by the tension strap, table
3.5 below shows the considerable change in weight when the tension was released.This could
have lead to large inaccuracies within the suspension simulation conducted later.
Table 3.2: Tension Effects
Angle
2
3
4
5
6
No tension
395.69
443.02
466.60
480.64
499.34
Tension
54.62517129
215.7579561
353.0449318
355.8494514
446.6069422
Percentage Difference
624.38%
105.33%
32.16%
35.07%
11.81%
The table of results from centre of gravity testing can be viewed in appendix H.
28
Nathan Mawhinney
3.2.6 Co-ordinate Measurement Setup

To build the geometry simulation in WinGeo, a number of suspension points must be known.
These measurement locations are listed below:
Lower Ball joint

Tie rod end mounting location
Strut axis
Half shaft mounting locations both inner and outer
Antiroll bar mounting point, axis and thickness
Camber, toe and castor
To measure the vehicle initially the vehicle was placed on the two post ramp, the ramp arms
were adjusted until the vehicle was level on the ramp. As the suspension in drooped when
raised, support was placed underneath the front and rear tyres prior to lowering the vehicles
weight onto these plates. Measurements from the centre of the hub to the brow of the arch were
taken to ensure the vehicles height was equivalent to the vehicle being on the ground. A
potential area of risk could be found in this process due to the suspension lifting the vehicle
body from the ramp arms, this effect could result in the vehicle falling from the support plates.
With the vehicle levelled on the ramp it was possible to project the baselines in the X and Y
directions to enable measurements to be taken. This origin was set as in the WinGeo software,
using the centre of the front wheel as the origin. With the vehicle level and square on the ramp
a number of datum lines were drawn to base the suspension measurements from, the Y axis was
initially projected by measuring a set distance from the ramp base to the centre of each front
tyre. A datum line was projected between each of these points to obtain the Y axis datum; the X
axis was then obtained by projecting a line from the centre of the front tyre at a right angle
using a straight edge as shown in figure 3.7.
29
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 3.7: X-Y Coordinate system
3.2.7 Co-ordinate Measurement Technique

The process of obtaining the measurements was to utilize a combination of plum bob,
measuring stick and pens to mark and measure mounting point locations. Only half the vehicle
was measured in this case which allowed the model to be created in WinGeo. By dividing the
track width the software can build a full model rather than having to measure the full vehicle.
As the wheel base was the same on both sides of the vehicle, it was assumed that the vehicle
was square thus measurements would be identical on each side of the vehicle.
The various suspension locations were measured using the X and Y datum lines as a reference,
the method used was to position the plum bob against the location to be measured. The plum
bob was then allowed to settle just above the floor, the position on the floor was then marked
directly below the plum bob. Measurement of the distance from the datum lines of each point in
the X and Y coordinates was obtained; finally for the Z axis the plum bob length was measured.
As the vehicle was supported above the ground, this additional height had to be subtracted from
the height before inputting the Z coordinate into WinGeo. This measurement process was
repeated for all required locations on the test vehicle for both the front and rear suspension.
Detailed locations of each measured location can be observed in figure B and C in the appendix
highlighted in red; in addition the rear bottom ball joint location was measured as this is not
detailed in appendix C.
30
Nathan Mawhinney
To allow validation of the simulation models accuracy the change in toe and camber through a
range of movement was recorded, by moving the wheel through a range of motion the effects
of bump on the front and rear of the vehicle were measured. To measure these values the wheel
was jacked through a range of motion, the vehicle was lifted on the two post ramp to allow for
any wheel droop. On this vehicle the suspension droop was negligible; the jack was placed
under the centre of the tyre then using the tape measure set to standard static ride height based
on the distance between the hub and eyebrow. The wheel suspension was then compressed in
inch increments; the change in toe was measured using a bump steer gauge.
The change in camber through suspension bump was measured using a similar method, in this
case a flat plate was placed against the face of the wheel to ensure a level surface to measure
from and reduce potential errors. A camber gauge was then placed on the face at each inch
increment throughout the suspension range until full bump had been reached, this was repeated
three times to reduce sources of error. The outline of this technique is shown in figure 3.8.
Figure 3.8: Camber change due to bump
The results of both toe and camber testing are displayed in appendix I.
31
Nathan Mawhinney
3.2.8 Chapter Summary

From this primary research there were a number of factors limiting the effectiveness of this
measurement technique, a limitation was found in the drive train of the test vehicle in this case.
As the 200SX was rear wheel drive an issue was found in constraining the vehicle to the front
corner weight scales, as the scales were placed on wheeled dollies these had the ability to
move. This resulted in the vehicle falling from the scales as the tension was released from the
vehicle, this was caused by the weight transfer effectively causing the dollies to roll from under
the front wheels when the tension was realised from the ratchet strap. This effect was not
displayed on the pre-measurement testing; however the potential of this occurrence was
outlined in the risk assessment. The measurement was conducted up to an inclination of 6
degrees.
The centre of gravity location was found to be in the following position shown in table 3.6.
Table 3.3: Centre of Gravity Location
Axis
X (From front axle)
Y(From drivers side wheel centreline)
Z
Location (mm)
1106.67
738.15
378.9
Scale resolution was a limiting factor, as these scales have a resolution of 0.5kg a potential of
1kg difference in weight transferred could be measured, this would equate to a change in height
of 11mm from the addition of 1kg to the front weight. This would show a significant change in
cornering force as the vehicle rolls more and would considerably effect the roll moment.
The centre of gravity was located to allow the model to be created in WinGeo, improvements in
accuracy could be found by using a lower resolution scale or a COG pendulum rig designed for
this task, a significant limitation of this test was the angle the vehicle was raised too. Due to
limitations of the drivetrain the vehicle was lifted to a maximum of 6 degrees, this could be a
source of inaccuracy in results.
32
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 4: Desired Suspension Attributes
33
Nathan Mawhinney
4.1.1 Standard setup

As standard the vehicle was set to the following settings shown in table 4.1, these were
obtained from the Nissan Service manual for this vehicle. Where a range of values were
specified a median value was utilized in applicable cases, the toe results were obtained by the
conversion of mm to degrees. A screenshot of the wheel alignment settings stated by Nissan
can be found in appendix J. (Nissan, 1999).
Table 4.1: Standard Geometry

Location
Front
Rear
Camber ( )
-0.7
-1
Toe In ( )
0.3
0.9
KPI( )
12.55-14.25
Castor( )
6.00 - 7.30
4.1.2 Suggested Setup Discussion

Due to empirical nature of drifting information on desired vehicle setup was limiting,
authoritative literature relating directly to drifting setup is virtually non-existent currently.
As this subject of setup was largely empirical on the subject of drifting, the best solution was to
seek personal correspondence on the subject with a number of people who setup these cars.
Personal correspondence from Kyle Chisholm who competes in the British Drift Championship
at a professional level was conducted; furthermore he owns an automotive company entitled
Chizfab. Chisholm (2013) said setup was very dependent on the driving style, going on to
state that there were a number of general guidelines for drifting setup.
Chisholm (2013) went on to state that camber settings vary between drivers, some opt for
between 3-6 degrees negative camber on the front wheels. This based on the theory that at high
lock during a large body slip angled drift the tyre will have more contact with the road; this
would result in increased grip at the front.
Personal correspondence with Dennis OBrien, who has considerable experience setting up
geometry particularly performance vehicles, OBrien (2013) agreed with Chisholms
suggestion based on increasing the castor, as this would increase the self-centring effect when
drifting. OBrien (2013) further stated that camber was used to control traction; by reducing the
negative camber at the rear grip would be regained quicker as the throttle was lifted. Slight toe
out on the rear was suggested to aid transitions as the weight transfers. This adjustment meant
the vehicle would automatically want to steer continue sliding as the vehicle transitioned,
however this would decrease the transition and straight line grip.
34
Nathan Mawhinney
OBrien further stated a typical value of front camber is -3.5 to -4 degrees with 0.5 degrees toe
out. This toe out would result in a quick initial turn in however; he did state that drivers vary
considerably on their opinion on front toe settings dependant on driving style.
Importantly large steering lock was stated as being not essential to drifting, although the benefit
in competition would be considerable due to judging based on vehicle angle. Both Chisholm
(2013) and Graham (2013) agreed that having the ability to generate massive steering lock was
only useful if the setup provided grip at these massive angles.
All corresponding parties agreed that increasing the castor was a must to provide more steering
lock and SAT, this agrees with literature from Staniforth (2010) and Smith (1984) who agree
that the self-centring effect will be increased with more castor angle.
It was suggested that the rear should feature reduced rear camber when compared to the front
suspension, typically between zero and negative 1.5 degrees. The intention is to have the
maximum amount of tyre in contact with the road to prompt even tyre wear. (Chisholm, 2013)
Graham (2013) stated that typically the large value of negative camber at the front helps
improve the contact patch of the tyres while counter steering, further stating that an increase in
the lower control arm length would result in better stability and lock. Graham (2013) further
said this aids steering lock by spacing the wheel further from the inner arches and other
components, another benefit would be an increase in negative camber as the lower ball joint is
moved away from the centreline.
This correspondence agrees with Kojimas (2012) views that negative camber should be set to
between 3-4 degrees, this correspondence further agrees on the increase in lower control arm
length to increase static camber and improve clearance.
To allow the maintenance of the vehicle in over steer situation a considerably higher static
camber angle is required, the reason for this was as the vehicle rolls the inside of the tread, this
effect can be compensated for by the addition of negative camber. By increasing camber at the
front of the vehicle, the front grip during roll situations is increased, this results in decreased
under steer under when cornering. Typically a negative camber setting of 4 degrees will be
used on vehicles with a MacPherson strut, allowing the rear wheels to break away rather than
having the vehicle under steer. Another basic adjustment on a vehicle setup for drifting is to set
the front wheels to toe out slightly, the benefit of this being the front will turn in sharply which
is desirable when initiating a slide, if a large amount of toe out was set the vehicle will turn in
quickly but may be unpredictable when changing direction while maintaining a high yaw angle.
Camber at the rear is typically set between zero and negative one degree although this is
subjective to the driver and vehicle, this is where a drift setup differs from a grip setup as less
camber is required on the rear to allow it to over steer yet retain the ability to regain grip
quickly when the throttle is lifted. (Kojima, 2012)
35
Nathan Mawhinney
By relating these requirements to the ideal vehicle model, the increased toe out at the rear
would increase the vehicles tendency towards increased yaw velocity (Kennedy, 2013).
This would induce over steer at a lower speed which is desirable for drifting, toe settings at the
rear tend to be down to driver preference and vehicle power. A low power vehicle toe out may
be used to help the tyres loose traction with less effort from the driver, this would allow the
yawing to be maintained however, would reduce forward traction when trying to regain grip
and the straight line stability.
Opinion varies on rear toe settings, the notion of the effects of the toe adjustment at the rear
during drifting is correct. Graham (2013) view disagreed with the opinion that toe out should be
used on the rear, this may be due to the view of the vehicle having high power thus not
struggling to break traction meaning toe out was not so necessary. For this reason the toe was
set to parallel for the suggested base setup.
Increasing the KPI angle will increase the scrub radius; in turn this will create a larger moment
arm meaning an increase in self-aligning torque. This would result in the driver having more
feel and the steering having a considerably larger self-centring steering motion. KPI can only
be increased to an extent; relocation of the suspension top mount is prohibited under British
Drift Championship rule which was a limitation of this suggestion.
4.1.3 Limitation of Tyre Data
Another limitation of drifting information was how tyre performance was effected at large slip
angles, the best tyre test facilities can reach a maximum of around 20 degrees slip angle on
their test rigs. Approximation from projecting graphs for the nonlinear zone of the tyres
performance above 10 degrees is shown in figure 4.1. It can be observed that before 7 degrees
the graph is fairly linear with a peak lateral force for each tyre, however beyond this point as
the slip angle increases the achievable lateral force declines as the tyre begins to slide.
Unfortunately little data was known on how tyres react at angles above 15 degrees.
Figure 4.1: Tyre plot lateral force vs. slip angle

36
Nathan Mawhinney
As a drift is controlled by modulation of both the steering and longitudinal slip through control
of the throttle, the relationship between longitudinal slip and lateral force is of particular
importance. As tyre data at high slip angles is uncertainty within how the tyre acts at these
extreme angles, and the effect the change in tyre performance has on vehicle stability.
(Abdulrahim, 2006)
4.1.4 Conclusions
As the suspension setup was determined to be driver dependant a perfect setup simply cannot
be specified, there are too many variables as with conventional racing. Variables such as local
coefficient of friction, weather conditions, and track surface and tyre compounds will all play a
part in a setup for a given circuit, not to mention the drivers preference and the vehicle being
used.
From consideration of the literature review and discussion above a suggested base setup can be
observed in table 4.2.
Table 4.2: Suggested Base Setup

Location
Front
Rear
Camber ( )
-3.5
-1.5
Toe In ( )
-0.5
0
KPI( )
15.25
Castor( )
8
The setup mentioned above will provide an excellent basis for a drift setup, giving good grip
regeneration at the rear when the throttle is lifted. The combination of increased KPI and castor
will increase available steering lock, with the increased negative static camber would reduce
the tendency for the loaded wheel which is counter steering to have positive camber. The lower
control arm should be lengthened to allow for increased component clearance, at the rear

This section of research has successfully outlined suggested changes in geometry within the
suspension system, due to the lack of literature on drifting setup personal correspondence was
conducted with drivers whom compete in this motorsport. From this a potential base setup was
created, the standard vehicle setup was stated from the Nissan service manual (Nissan,
1999).This was required to allow the base setup to be compared against the suggested setup;
conclusions were drawn in respect to required attributes. This section of research went well
after an initial struggle to obtain data from sources, the personal correspondence can be
observed in appendix K.
37
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 5: Creation of WinGeo Model
38
Nathan Mawhinney
5.1 First steps of Model Creation

The default location for the origin in WinGeo was the centre line at the front of the car on the
ground. When measuring the vehicle an origin was placed in the centre of the front wheel at the
contact patch (0, 0,-215). By adjusting the coordinate system within the software it was
possible to compensate for the vehicle being raised above the ground, the coordinate system
used in this case is displayed in figure 5.1 below.
Figure 5.1: Coordinate system
Figure 5.2: Origin adjustment
Before inputting co-ordinates the track length, wheel base and tyre diameter were set as a basis
for the model. As the Y axis origin was measured from the centre of the front wheel opposed to
the centre of the vehicle as WinGeo states, it was necessary to calculate the Y axis results
before inputting values, by working with the following expression 5.1 the Y axis points were
obtainable for the front:
39
Nathan Mawhinney
Equation 5.1: Y point location front
This operation gives the distance from the centre of the wheel to position the members
correctly on in the program; a spread sheet was utilized to obtain these positions efficiently, an
overview of the model with the data input can be seen in figure 5.3. To obtain the rear points on
for use in WinGeo, 2525mm was added to each X co-ordinate location to account for the
wheelbase distance. Equation 5.3 calculates the rear X location, with equation 5.3 used for the
Y position.
Equation 5.2: Rear X co-ordinate location
Equation 5.3: Rear Y axis position
40
Nathan Mawhinney
5.1.1 Front suspension model construction

By inputting values using the prior formulae the front and rear suspension models were created,
figure 5.3 shows the created frontal model. The ARB was removed due to software limitations
resulting in the program crashing regularly, after discussion with the project supervisor this was
deemed to be acceptable.
Figure 5.3: Front suspension modelled
5.1.2 Rear Suspension model creation

The rear model was created using a similar method as the front, however as this suspension was
a multilink setup a different base model was utilized in order to create this model, after
discussion with this projects supervisor it was deemed that a double wishbone would provide a
suitable base model for this task, figure 5.4 below shows an overview of the completed model
with included half shafts.
41
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 5.4: Rear suspension model
4.3 Model Validation
By measurement of the vehicles change in toe and camber through typical suspension
movements, the model could be validated by showing correlation to real world vehicle results.
Figure 5.5 displays the correlation between the measured and simulated front toe. The ride in
the software was changed through the same range of motion as it was in the workshop, to
simulate the effects of bump steer on the suspension.
Simulation results showed an accurate correlation between results, showing the highest
percentile difference of 6.1%. This equated to a maximum difference of 0.01 degrees of toe,
when this value was compared vehicle alignment machines. The resolution of these machines is
0.1 which justified negating this angle. A table of the values used to create figure 5.5 can be
found in appendix I. The toe validation was successful showing excellent correlation
throughout the range of ride.
42
Nathan Mawhinney
Front Toe Validation
Degrees of toe out ()
0.25
0.2
0.15
Measured toe change
0.1
WinGeo
0.05
0
0
20
40
60
80
Distance Raised (mm)
Figure 5.5: Front toe validation
The same method of moving the suspension through a range of motion was utilized to obtain
the camber change caused by bump on the wheel, figure 5.6 below displays a plot of the
difference in camber change through a range of motion. On first glance the correlation of the
plots looks poor however a maximum of 1.2% difference was observed between the real world
and simulated values, to place a perspective on this the camber gauge used to obtain the values
was accurate to 0.25 degrees. The highest difference in values between the two plots was 0.03
degrees, thus the camber results were deemed to be of sufficient accuracy. The table of values
plotted in this graph including percentile difference can be located in appendix I. Camber
results displayed excellent correlation between measured and simulated results.
43
Nathan Mawhinney
Front Camber Validation

-2.74
-2.76
10
20
30
40
50
60
Camber ()
-2.78
WinGeo
-2.8
Measured Camber Angle
-2.82
-2.84
-2.86
-2.88
-2.9
Distance (mm)
Figure 5.6: Front camber validation
The rear suspension was validated using the same method of moving the suspension through a
range of motion measuring the change at each increment, figure 5.7 below shows the rear toe
results. This does not show an accurate representation beyond a 30mm compression, as the
measured values show significantly less toe change in compression than the simulated model.
The reason for the lack of correlation may have been due to measurement error or compliance
in the rear suspension bushes. To eliminate this error the toe could be retested with the spring
removed from the strut and suspension joints loosened to allow the suspension to move more
freely. In this case only the effect on change in toe is required, opposed to the toe value itself to
test the effect of adjustment through certain suspension members within the next section. The
values for toe at the rear can be found in appendix I. After discussion with the project
supervisor this toe change was deemed to be reasonable, thus validation was successful in this
respect.
44
Nathan Mawhinney
Rear Toe Validation

1.2
Toe out degrees ()
1
0.8
0.6
Measured
Wingeo
0.4
0.2
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Range of motion
Figure 5.7: Rear toe validation
Figure 5.8 below shows the rear WinGeo model, measured results show good camber
correlation with a difference of +/- 0.1 degree over the majority of the range, after 65mm the
WinGeo model deviated from the measured results this could be due compliance in the
suspension bushes. Numerous sources suggest that as standard the rear sub frame bushes
displayed 14mm of movement from standard, this may have contributed to the variation in
plots. The values for camber at the rear are displayed in appendix I.
By comparison of results at full bump the WinGeo model simulated 0.25 degrees more camber
change than measured results, the rear suspension setup reduces camber in bump which may
aid traction under hard acceleration by allowing more of the contact patch provide a tractive
force.
As toe and camber at the rear both reduce in accuracy as bump increased, this was an indicator
that the vehicle may have started to be lifted from the ramp. It could be due to compression of
the suspension, or compliance within the suspension bushes and linkages.
45
Nathan Mawhinney
Rear Camber Validation

0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
Camber ()
-0.5
-1
Camber (degrees)
WinGeo
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Range of motion (mm)
Figure 5.8: Rear camber validation

In summary the front suspension provided an accurate representation of the front suspension
system due to its close correlation between values, the rear was accurate in camber change with
bump however the toe results may have displayed improved correlation if retested. Due to time
restraints within this project the rear toe change in bump could not be retested, this is included
in the future work section later in this report. As suggested setup changes in order to optimize
the vehicle for drifting describe the effects on the vehicle, rather than providing desired values
it was possible to still deem the rear toe is viable was showing the effects these changes would
have. This chapter was required to allow the optimization and validation of work to commence
in the following section.
46
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 6: Suspension Model Optimization
47
Nathan Mawhinney
6.1 Suspension model optimization

As the vehicle model was now validated the simulation could be optimized for a number of
selected factors. In order to validate the suggested drift setup the WinGeo model was adjusted
to determine the effects of adjusting these parameters:
Caster angle
King pin inclination
Lowering centre of gravity
Lengthening lower control arm at front
Ackerman Angle
Increasing rear traction rod length
The use of 3 degrees of roll is typical in a drift situation; this roll angle was obtained from
literature. (Abdulrahim, 2006)
6.1.1 Castor Angle
The reason Kojima suggests increasing the castor angle was to increase the self-centring
steering effect; this effect known as the steerings self-aligning torque is created by the distance
between a projected line from the steering axis and the contact patch of the tyre. The particular
benefit of increasing castor is the increase it has on self-aligning torque, during a drift
maneuver the driver will often be required to remove a large angle of steering quickly. By
setting up the vehicle to naturally want to have the steering in the straight ahead position it
actually can counter steer quicker than the driver may be able to, it is not uncommon when
observing drifting to see drivers briefly let go of the steering which allows the geometry setup
to bring the vehicle back into line. Adjusting the castor had a further effect on the negative
camber gain during cornering allowing a potential reduction in static camber allowing more
efficient braking. It would be suggested that no more than 8 degrees of castor should be used in
order to stop issues with bump steer and potential issues with wider wheels. Figure 6.1 shows
that adjustment of castor has little effect on camber; however the benefits entailed with the
increased steering lock justify this change.
48
Nathan Mawhinney
Castor effect on camber

2
1
0
Camber angle ()
-1
Camber right 8 degrees
-2

Camber left 8 degrees
-3

-4
-5
-6
-7
Roll angle ()
Figure 6.1: Castor angle effect
A comparison of standard ride height against a -35mm decrease in height is outlined in figure
6.2 below; this graph depicts the change in camber through a range of roll peaking at 4 degrees
with a counter steer of 500 at the wheel applied, in this case the right front wheel is unloaded it
can be seen that in both cases the negative camber on each wheel is increased. This is a
common effect caused by simply lowering the vehicle and not correcting the geometry, by
lowering the vehicle more negative static camber was induced which was maintained
throughout the roll angle. When opposite lock is applied to counter the yawing moment trying
to spin the car the inner wheel in relation to the corner will generate a significant increase in
negative camber, this manoeuvre has the opposite effect on the outer wheel due to a decrease in
negative camber as the vehicle rolls, this results in positive camber on the outer wheel which is
depicted in an overview of a drift depicted in figure 6.3. By lowering the vehicle by 35mm the
effects of positive and negative camber gain on each wheel are increased, the left (outer) wheel
recorded a greater positive camber with a crossover point from negative to positive camber
occurring at a lesser roll angle.
49
Nathan Mawhinney
Front camber effect: standard vs lowered

2
1
Camber degree ()
0
-1
5
Camber left standard
-2
Camber left lowered
-3
Camber right standard
-4
Camber right lowered
-5
-6
-7
Roll Angle ()
Figure 6.2: Camber effects
Yaw
moment
trying to rotate
the vehicle.
Inner wheel displays

negative camber during
over steer.
Outer
wheel:
experiencing
positive
camber
during over steer.
Figure 6.3: Vehicle drifting (Visser, 2005)
50
Nathan Mawhinney
Lateral load transfer is determined by a number of factors such as centre of gravity height, roll
centre and track width. Adjustments such as toe, camber, castor, and steering will not affect the
amount of lateral load transfer, and these will only change the effect this transfer causes. By
reducing ride height the centre of gravity will increase negative camber and toe in if
uncorrected after lowering, typically when lowering a vehicle a stiffer spring rate will be
utilized to cope with the reduction in ride. Another effect of lowering the vehicle would result
in a reduction in roll centre height; this roll centre is the point where the sprung and unsprung
mass. As the vehicle rolls the lateral force is applied through cornering a moment is created
using force times the distance between the centre of gravity and roll centre height.
A higher roll centre will result in lateral force being transferred quicker; however this rapid
transfer causes a margin of the force to be displaced through the suspension members rather
than the spring. By lowering this roll centre height the moment will be greater, however it will
act though the spring which controls this motion more effectively, another benefit of this would
be an increase in roll stiffness which may cause the rear of the vehicle to rotate at a faster yaw
rate than at standard height which is desirable in drifting. Roll centre height is dependent on the
vehicle in question and the effects of moving the height of this point can be adjusted through
tuning of the anti-roll bars.
6.1.2 King Pin Inclination Angle

King pin inclination has a similar effect to castor by increasing the stability of the vehicle and
the SAT, king pin inclination had the disadvantage of introducing positive camber when
turning. The positive camber can be removed by increasing the castor angle reducing the
positive camber gain while retaining the feel for the driver through the steering wheel. The
200SX as standard features a high self-aligning torque, when considering adjustment too much
KPI will result in a strong self-aligning torque, however will be impacted by significant
increase in negative camber which may be detrimental to the tyres performance. Typically in
drifting the castor and KPI are set to the same angle allowing a strong self-centring moment
thus providing good feedback to what the vehicle is doing to the driver.
Adjustment of the king pin inclination angle was achieved by moving the upper MacPherson
mounting location; this adjustment increased the scrub radius. This is the distance between the
centre line of the tyre and the projected pivot line between the upper mount and ball joint as
shown in figure 6.4 below. By increasing the scrub radius a larger self-aligning torque and thus
kickback through the steering system should be observed.
51
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 6.4: Scrub radius diagram
The point where the projected king pin inclination axis contacts the ground acts as a fulcrum
point for the tyre. The location of this point determines the feel, effort and effectiveness of the
steering. Initially on the simulation model the scrub radius was 15.4 degrees creating a scrub
radius of 11.3 mm, a simulation was conducted to determine the effects of adjusting the
location of the upper strut mount. An iterative simulation was conducted to determine how
changing the KPI would affect the steering in and over steer situation; the upper mount was
then moved 20mm further away from the centre line of the vehicle and the simulation re-run.
The results of this change in mounting location resulted in a decrease in KPI angle to 13.4
degrees however this increased the scrub radius to 17mm; the effects of this adjustment are
displayed below in figure 6.5.
52
Nathan Mawhinney
Effects of changing KPI angle

Moment arm distance (mm)
350
300
250
200
Standard
150
20mm moment arm
100
50
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Steering rack travel (mm)
Figure 6.5: KPI Angle simulation result
It can be observed that the moment arm is increased consistently throughout the steering range
at 3 degrees roll; this would result in a larger turning moment if the force was equal in both
cases. This agrees with the expected results that increasing the scrub radius would effectively
increase the force at the tyre, in turn this would result in a higher self-centring force caused by
the longer moment.
The steering would feel heavier which may equate to improved driver feel and stability, caused
by the increased distance between the KPI angle and the centre of the contact patch. Another
effect of scrub angle was the way it loads the tyre, with a positive scrub angle which this
vehicle has the tyre would be loaded towards toe out.
Smith (1984) stated The steering must offer enough feel to the driver so that he can sense
what is happening as he approaches the cornering limit of the front tires. Thus it would not be
unwise to state that by increasing the steering feel the driver would sense the limits of the tyres
earlier, and gain confidence within the vehicle. Smith further stated that increasing the scrub
angle by the addition of wheel spacers would increase the scrub radius by the thickness of the
spacer however will have little benefit on the steering.
53
Nathan Mawhinney
6.1.3 Lengthening lower control arm

By lengthening the lower control arm an increase in static camber was predicted, this
adjustment moves the ball joint and the bottom of the wheel away from the vehicle centre line.
This adjustment will increase negative static camber and is commonly used in grip racing.
The need for large angles of steering lock is met by increasing the LCA length; by lengthening
the LCA length the clearance between the wheel and front traction arm would be increased.
This adjustment would allow for increased steering lock meaning a higher body slip angle can
be achieved.
A limitation of the software used for this simulation was that it automatically resets the camber
to the previously set value, thus the camber remains constant. Increasing the lower control arm
length would increase the KPI angle amongst other attributes which would change the
geometry significantly.
To check the effects of adjusting the length of the front lower control arm the Y coordinate was
increased by 20mm at the ball joint, figure 6.6 shows the effects of 20mm adjustment of this
parameter. By increasing this length the scrub radius was changed from positive to negative,
this would increase the vehicles stability under braking. The KPI angle was increased
considerably by this change resulting in higher camber when turning, this would be desirable
positive camber on the outer wheel during over steer which may permit the loaded tyre to work
more effectively.
Comparision of LCA length

17.5
17
KPI Angle()
16.5
16
Standard vehicle
15.5
+20mm increased LCA
15
-75
-55
-35
14.5
-15
25
45
Range of ride (mm)
Figure 6.6: LCA adjustment
54
65
Nathan Mawhinney
6.1.4 Ackerman adjustment

The Ackerman angle was adjusted through a range of values, this should increase toe out on the
inner wheel facing the corner during typical racing. In drifting the outer wheel would feature
increased toe out as counter steer was applied. Ackerman angle was adjusted by moving the
steering rod mounting location further away from the vehicle centre line to reduce the angle.
The steering arm was moved in increments of 10mm, the plot below in figure 6.7 shows the
effect that moving the steering mounting point had on the net toe, when steering lock was
applied with no roll.
As expected the adjustment of Ackerman angle would cause an increase in toe change on the
unloaded wheel, this would be the trailing wheel during a drift. This would result in the trailing
wheel featuring a much closer slip angle to the loaded wheel, meaning that the trajectory of
each wheel with less variation in tyre slip.
Toe on Unloaded wheel

35
30
Toe change()
25
Standard (Unloaded)
20
Modified by
20mm(Unloaded)
15
10
Modified by
30mm(Unloaded)
5
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Steering Rack Travel (mm)
Figure 6.7: Toe effects

The graph in figure depicts the effects of adjustment of Ackerman angle, it can be clearly seen
that reducing the Ackerman angle will increase the change on the unloaded wheel as expected.
This can be observed more clearly in figure 6.8 which shows the net toe change.
55
Nathan Mawhinney
Net Toe Change Comparison

1
0
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
Toe change ()
-1
-2
Standard
-3
Modified by 20mm
-4
Modified by 30mm
-5
-6
-7
Steering Rack Travel (mm)
Figure 6.8: Ackerman effects
6.1.5 Rear Traction Rod Adjustment

When lowering the vehicle a negative effect on the traction rod is it becomes less effective, this
results in toe out on droop before toeing in, on 200sx chassis toe in is desired on both droop and
compression. This attribute was attained by setting the tension rod in a certain position, when
the vehicle was lowered this position is changed resulting in reduced forward bite in droop
under braking and hard cornering. By lengthening the rear traction arm the toe in through both
droop and bump could be maintained, this would result in a more stable car throughout the
braking and cornering phases.
Kojima (2012) stated On a Nissan S chassis, shortening the traction rod increases toe in under
roll which gives you more forward bite. Lengthening it has the opposite effect.
Through personal correspondence with David Kennedy (2013) the project supervisor it was
decided that moving the X coordinate of the upper ball joint would lengthen or shorten the
length of this component, thus give an indication of the effects, an iteration of roll was used to
allow a comparison to standard. The vehicle was simulated from zero to three degrees of roll;
figure 6.9 below shows this member.
56
Nathan Mawhinney
Figure 6.9: Rear suspension traction rod

The upper ball joint location was increased in two 20mm increments; this moved the ball joint
location towards the rear of the car. This movement decreased the length of this traction rod, by
viewing figure 6.10 it can be said that decreasing the length resulted in a reduction in overall
toe out under roll.
Traction Rod : Length Decreased

0.4
0.2
Toe in (Degrees)
0
-0.2
-0.4
Traction rod shortened

20mm
Standard
-0.6
-0.8

40mm
-1
-1.2
-1.4
Roll Angle (Degrees)
Figure 6.10: Rear traction rod

By looking deeper the reduction in toe change it can be traced back to the effects on the loaded
wheel, the toe change is considerable through the range of roll. The change in the length of this
rod resulted in less toe change with roll after 0.5 degrees; this is outlined in figure 6.11.
57
Nathan Mawhinney
Traction Rod : Loaded Wheel

0.2
0.1
Toe in (Degrees)
0
-0.1
-0.2

20mm
Standard
-0.3
-0.4

40mm
-0.5
-0.6
-0.7
Figure 6.11: Loaded wheel
This adjustment had a very slight effect on the camber, resulting in less camber change through
roll at the rear. By reducing the positive camber on the loaded wheel the tyre can work more
effectively, shown in figure 6.12.
Effect on camber: Loaded wheel

2.5
2
Camber Change
1.5
1

20mm
0.5
0
-0.5
Standard
0
4
40mm
-1
-1.5
-2
-2.5
Figure 6.12: Camber effects
58
Nathan Mawhinney
6.2 Corner simulation

WinGeo had the ability to allow corner simulation to be conducted; this allowed a comparison
between the standard vehicle setup against the suggest setup. By using Path simulation the
software allowed an over steer situation to be created. This was created by inputting steer, rides
and roll angle parameters for each step in a drift. Once complete the program ran these steps in
order recording data at each point allowing a comparison to be drawn.
The path file used in this case for both setups is shown below in figure 6.13; this figure depicts
the stages of vehicle over steer.
Figure 6.13: Path file
In conclusion WinGeo allowed parameters such as roll rate, slip angles, the yaw rate and
camber amongst other factors to be computed efficiently within a short period of time. This
saved considerable time over real world testing as the results of adjustments can be observed in
seconds rather than minutes at a track.
Both setups were compared using this path file which simulates the vehicle braking turning in
and over steering around a corner.
The following
1. Full braking.
2. Half braking at drift initiation.
3. Full over steer with counter steer applied.
4. Power applied and counter steer reduced.
5. Full power and steering centred.
59
Nathan Mawhinney
The graph below plots the difference in scrub radius as the vehicle has lock applied, it can be
seen that the optimized setup creates a larger scrub radius.
This would provide a larger self-centring effect through the steering system, the vehicle would
tend towards correcting itself from the over steer situation which was desirable. A comparison
of simulated results can be seen in figure 6.14.
Scrub Radius
2
0
Scrub Radius
-2
-4
-6
Standard Setup
-8
Optimized Setup
-10
-12
-14
-16
Drift Simulation locations
Figure 6.14: Scrub radius comparison
The toe effects between both setups are shown in figure 6.15, the Y axis in this cash plots toe
against points in the simulation. On this axis system negative values are toe out, it can be said
that there is considerable difference in toe values. The standard vehicles limitation in respect to
drifting would be the overall toe in, on initial turn in the vehicle would be slow to react which
may lead to under steer and an unwillingness to turn in.
60
Nathan Mawhinney
Overall Toe Effects

1
0.5
Toe In
0
0
Standard
Optimized
-0.5
-1
-1.5
Simulation Points
Figure 6.15: Comparison of toe effects
By making adjustments to the lower control arm and static camber on the suspension, moved
that camber curve considerably as expected. The loaded outer tyre which was counter steering
features less positive camber, this would result in more of the tyre making contact with the road
at high steering angles.
The unloaded tyre featured an increase in negative camber throughout the range (shown in
figure 6.16, this could be attributed to the increase in castor angle. In this case the improved
performance on the loaded tyre may outweigh the negative effects caused on the unloaded
wheel.
61
Nathan Mawhinney
Camber Angle Comparison

12
10
8
Camber Angle()
Standard Loaded wheel
Optimized Loaded wheel
Standard Unloaded Wheel
0
-2 0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
Optimized Unloaded Wheel
-4
-6
-8
-10
Steering Travel (mm)
Figure 6.16: Camber angle comparison

6.2.1 Rear suspension
The toe change with roll in the rear suspension was fairly linear for the unloaded wheel in both
cases, adjustment of the static toe resulted in an increased toe out at the rear suspension under
roll on the loaded wheel. This may make the vehicle change direction quickly at the rear which
the driver may find desirable.
Toe Change Under Roll Comparison

1.5
1
Toe in ()
0.5
Optimised Unloaded
0
-0.5
Optimised Loaded
Standard Loaded
-1
Standard Unloaded
-1.5
-2
Roll Angle ()
Figure 6.17: Toe change comparison

62
Nathan Mawhinney

In this chapter suggested setup changes to optimize geometry for drifting was validated,
adjustment of Ackerman reduced the overall toe change through a range of steering angle.
Increasing KPI was proven to increase the self-aligning torque at the wheel as suggested by
Kojima (2012). Kojimas setup suggestions were validated and proven to have the suggested
effects on this vehicle. Toe in on the rear under drift simulation was desirable to retain
cornering speed and would allow traction to be regained quickly.
If this section was to be conducted again a range of setups would be compared and conclusions
drawn from the results.
63
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 7: Project Discussion
64
Nathan Mawhinney
7.1 Approach Step by step

7.1.1 Background Reading
The approach adopted in this project began with research relating factors included in drifting to
literature. A literature review was conducted focusing on suspension and tyre research;
although information on the subject of drifting was limited a range of literature was adapted
from traditional racing, along with information on tyre behaviour at large slip angles.
Research took considerable time which could have been reduced by undertaking personal
correspondence with drivers and experienced specialists earlier in the project. Handling
characteristics were successfully researched.
7.1.2 Primary Research

The measurement of the vehicle went smoothly with the exception of the slight mishap in the
centre of gravity location height; this primary research took a few days which was more than
was planned. This resulted in the project being pushed back slightly, furthermore the coordinate
measurement would have benefited from a data sheet to improve efficiency and make model
creation from these points quicker. Measurements of the test vehicle correlated with expected
results from standard manufacturer values.
When testing for bump steer and camber change through ride, under large spring compression
the vehicle began to lift. To improve results further the spring could be removed to negate this
effect and allow more results to be measured.
Co-ordinate measurement could have been completed quicker by the inclusion of the
coordinate measurement arm; this was available at the start of the project. The reason for this
arm not being used was due to complications with staff opinions on mounting this on a portable
rig due to its significant cost. If the project had waited on the rig being mounted it would have
fell significantly behind on the timeline, for this reason measurement with the Romer arm has
been included in the future work section.
Through discussion with various members who compete in this sport a base setup was
determined, this seemed reasonable with assumptions detailed where required. This method
could be improved with more informed opinions on the subject, although a range of persons
and companies did not want to divulge information on the subject when contacted. The base
setup was successfully stated which completed one of the main objectives of this project; the
measurement technique was planned and conducted effectively.
65
Nathan Mawhinney
7.1.3 Creation of WinGeo model

The model was successfully created in WinGeo without any issue and within timescale from
measured points, validation showed excellent correlation on the front suspension and an
acceptable range at the rear. The suspension model was successfully created based on measured
points, from this it was analysed and optimized.
Issues were found with adjusting parameters within the software, frequently the software would
crash resulting in time delays.
7.1.4 Suspension Simulation

The vehicle model was simulated using roll with applied opposite lock, difficulties were found
in understanding that effectively the tyres typical operating zone is reversed with the
application of counter steer.
7.2 Project Changes

7.2.1 Constraining front wheels COG
If the project was to be conducted again the front wheels when testing of the centre of gravity
height should be constrained to the wheel dollies, this would reduce the risk of the vehicle
falling from the wheel dollies considerably reducing risk to participants.
This was a limitation of rear wheel drive, in this case was the difficulties involved with
constraining the front wheels to the corner weight scales. Due to the increased weight of the
200SX when compared to the locust, issues were found when releasing the tension from the
strap. This would be caused by the increased weight transfer on this vehicle in comparison to
the vehicle used in pretesting, the Nissan 200SX weighed around the order of twice the weight
of the Locust.
This could be remedied by using a system called line lock, this is commonly used in drag
racing and would allow the front brakes to be locked on while allowing the rears to rotate.
66
Nathan Mawhinney
7.2.2 Planning changes

Another change would be to measure the vehicle earlier within the project, this would allow the
issues found in analysis of WinGeo to play less of an impact on the project timeline.
The timeline should be adjusted to have increased working hours towards the beginning of the
project, this would reduce the increased labour towards the end of the project.
Another change would be to undertake spring testing on a dynamometer to further validate the
model by adjustment of spring rates within WinGeo; this would result in a more complete
suspension simulation.
7.2.3 Limitations
This project was limited by the lack of tyre data at large slip angles; tyre companies invest a
significant amount of expenditure into researching tyres. This resulted in a lack of accessible
information due to the unwillingness of companies to distribute tyre data, this was due to the
risks of competitors obtaining the data and the costs involved in recording tyre data.
To test this setup the vehicle would require adjustable suspension components which are listed
below:
Adjustable rear camber and toe arms
Adjustable front traction rod
Adjustable rear tension rod
A final limitation from this project would be the proposed increase in KPI, in the majority of
regulations such as the BDC the vehicle is not allowed suspension mounting point
modifications. This would mean the maximum increase in KPI would need to be found in
adjustability within the suspension system.
The project definition was changed to disregard the front knuckle design to allow the
Ackerman angle to be adjusted, by raising the wheel mounting spindle the vehicle could be
lowered which would allow the suspension to function within its standard arcs. The knuckle
design was removed due to time constraints.
67
Nathan Mawhinney
7.2.4 Project planning and Costings

This project was predicted to cost 10,110 and end on the 22/03/13, however due to delays in
WinGeo analysis a delay in the timeline occurred. This did not affect the project significantly
due to this task still being completed within scheduled time.
The working days for this project were initially set to two days per week, as the project fell
behind schedule the working days were increased to include the weekend. The hours were also
increased from 9am 5pm to a 9pm finish, furthermore towards the end of the project the
working days increased allowing for the project deadline to be met.
The project timeline can be found in appendix L, this schedule shows the delay in the WinGeo
analysis task.
This project was planned within a realistic and conservative timescale, the predicted man hours
672 with the actual up to this point in the project being 1120 hours. This affected the project
cost by 1630 meaning the total was in the order of 11,740, with the project now ending on
02/05/13 before the deadline of 10/05/13.
This costing was based on the following resources shown in table 7.1, a full summary sheet of
this project can be found in appendix M.
Table 7.1: Costing Table
Resource Name
Workshop
WinGeo Software License
Labour
Office Space (1 year)
Office 2012 Software License
Supervisor Costing
Type
Material
Material
Work
Material
Material
Work
Initials
W
W
L
O
O
S
Std. Rate
35.00
320.00
10.00/hr
2,000.00
280.00
100.00/hr
7.3 Conclusion
This project was successful as it met the main research aim by investigating desirable handling
characteristics for this vehicle model. The vehicle was successfully measured allowing the
validation of the vehicle model within the software; this allowed the analysis and simulation of
adjustment within a range of researched parameters.
Conclusions were drawn from personal correspondence on desired handling characteristics for
this vehicle, these suggestions were rationalised in respect to literature which could be related
to this subject.
68
Nathan Mawhinney
The measurement component of this project was planned and conducted efficiently, however if
the vehicle was to be re-measured it would be beneficial to use a coordinate measurement
machine. This would reduce the time taken to measure the vehicle considerably; furthermore it
would increase measurement accuracy which has been discussed further in the future work
section.
The benefit of using Mitchells software was that it allowed analysis of the vehicles handling
characteristics without costly testing at the track, the software required measurements from the
test vehicle in this case a Nissan 200SX.
With the recorded information input into the program it was possible to analyse how the
vehicles handing which can be simplified to steering and suspension reactions in relation to the
chassis.
By adjustment of the vehicle ride height it was possible to show the effects of lowering the
COG height, furthermore by rolling the vehicle to a typical angle and applying opposite lock it
was possible to observe how the vehicle would react in steady state drifting. The effects on
camber, slip angle and steering angle were displayed and discussed.
An indication of how well the vehicle would perform in a corner was simulated; with an added
benefit of validation of suggested adjustments to the vehicles setup. Using the measured
parameters the vehicle was successfully created in WinGeo, this met another objective of this
project. Research and literature allowed the model to be analysed and conclusions drawn on a
suggested base setup for this vehicle.
This project successfully created a validated base suspension setup; this could serve as a basis
for individual driver testing allowing tailoring to driver requirements through adjustability
within the system.
Results from this project could lead with further studies allowing authoritative literature and a
greater understanding of the subject to be complied.
A number of meetings were conducted with this projects supervisor, these can be found in
appendix N.
7.4 Future work
7.4.1 Knuckle Design

This project could be progressed in a number of directions, when lowering the centre of gravity
of a vehicle the geometry is typically significantly changed. A number of aftermarket
companies produce optimized front suspension knuckles which state that they allow the
vehicle to be lowered without inducing negative effects, such as: increased bump steer,
dynamic toe and camber change issues and retaining a desirable front roll centre height.
69
Nathan Mawhinney
Future work could involve testing these optimized front knuckles to validate their
effectiveness in comparison to a standard OEM item, this comparison would include theoretical
research into what effects these components are aiming to achieve with comparable simulation
and tested results. This aspect of improving the design of the front knuckle could lead to
potential improvement of the design of the knuckle to attain desirable suspension
characteristics to optimize the vehicle for Drifting.
If a new knuckle design was created in CAD it could be analysed using finite element analysis
to determine a suitable material, and highlight any issues with the design. A detailed product
design process could be created including initial concepts, a detailed product specification and
rapid prototyping with the potential to test fit the component to the Nissan 200sx.
7.4.2 Real World Testing
A common design of revised mounting design was produced by Drift works known as the
Geomaster 2. Figure 7.1 below shows this orange knuckle fitted to a vehicle, this gives an
indication of the increased lock over a standard vehicle. Future work may involve testing the
effects of lateral G and achievable angle, between a standard vehicle and one fitted with these
knuckles. By fitting acceleration to the front and rear of the car the lateral acceleration could be
logged. This could then be compared to the angle achieved during testing round a circuit; the
angle would be logged using GPS logging software.
Figure 7.1: Optimised front knuckle

70
Nathan Mawhinney
7.4.3 Creation in Adams software

Another technique to allow optimization of the front knuckle design would be to create the
vehicle in Adams software by MSc software; this is a multi-body dynamics program which
would allow loads and forces to apply through the model. This software has the ability to
optimize suspension attributes for a given scenario.
Another aspect of progression could be in track testing of a standard vehicle setup against
proposed optimized settings; this would require research into data logging on the vehicle during
drift manoeuvres. Potentially showing a correlation between simulated and actual results from
testing, from this work conclusions could be drawn from driver feedback and recorded data
from potentiometers and various other sensors fitted to the vehicle.
71
Nathan Mawhinney
Chapter 8: Appendix
72
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix A: Presentation Slides
73
Nathan Mawhinney
74
Nathan Mawhinney
75
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix B: Front Suspension layout
Appendix C: Rear Suspension layout
76
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix D: Project Definition

Part 1 - Details of Specific Project
Title: Investigation into the suspension characteristics of the Nissan 200SX
Student: Nathan Mawhinney (B00184019)
Supervisor: David Kennedy

2nd Supervisor: Kenny Cameron
Overview:
This project is of interest to me as the Nissan 200sx is a popular choice in the continually
growing form of motor sport known as Drifting, this is where predominantly rear wheel cars
aim to drive at high yaw and slip angles through a given course at the highest angle possible
while maintaining control. This requires the vehicles to have specific suspension setup
characteristics to be able to control the car at high speed in an over steer situation, I also have
the added benefit of owning the vehicle in question which adds to my interest in this project.
The aim of the project is to investigate the standard suspension geometry, hopefully resulting in
a set-up which has desirable handling characteristics for drifting while reducing any detrimental
characteristics which are induced by changing the cars suspension.
Equipment and resources required for this project are:
Access to the UWS motor sport workshop to allow measurement of the car (both front
and rear) and fitment of any manufactured parts
Access to Pro Engineer and WinGeo for simulation and design of parts
Digital callipers
Tape Measure
Steel Rule
Motor sport Workshop tools (jack, axel stands, ramps etc.)
Technicians time
Stakeholders
University of the west of Scotland
Technicians
Supervisors
Myself
77
Nathan Mawhinney
Activities required
In order to complete this project successfully a number of activities must be completed

primarily a plan of how the measurement will be completed, analysis of measurements
including any causes for error in measurement technique, solution to any suspension issues
from design to manufacture then final testing of the component.
Research into what is a desired setup or vehicle handling characteristics for Drifting
Measurement of Nissan 200sx hard points front and rear
Input measurements into WinGeo software
Analyse current suspension setup in a variety of conditions
Research a desirable suspension setup for drifting
Improve suspension setup potentially with new parts allowing more desirable
geometry and potential for adjustment
Draw conclusions from project
Objectives / Outcomes:
To successfully measure both front and rear hard points accurately

To Analyse and compare the suspension (normal height vs. lowered) in WinGeo
Design and create a prototype model using pro engineer
Test fit prototype on test vehicle ensuring it fits
To make recommendations for future work
Destructive testing of parts

Cyclic loads
Fatigue testing
Heat Cycle test the part
Look into the effects on rear suspension
Scope of Project :
Included in this project is measurement and analysis of the front suspension setup on the Nissan
200sx, the software suspension models will be steady state due to software limitations. The toe,
bump, droop and camber will be measured however castor and KPI will not be included. The
suspension hard points will be measured and input into Win Geo for analysis. Excluded is
fatigue testing and destructive testing of the part which could be part of the future work on the
component.
78
Nathan Mawhinney
New Knowledge required
Knowledge of how to correctly measure the car accurately

Correct use of the Romer Arm
How to compare and analyse results in Win Geo
Appropriate skills to fit new parts
Knowledge of how suspension works and the effects changes have.
Learn the settings for a desirable and controllable drift setup for the car.
Investigate how lowering the car effects geometry
Research appropriate materials
79
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix E: Measurement Risk Assessment

Who/what may
WHAT ARE THE HAZARDS WHICH MAY
BE CAUSED
What is done now?
How bad
What needs to be done?
By when?
Be harmed?
is the risk?
Slips/trips and falls?
Trips over car jack
Tripping over cables
Spillages
All
workshop
staff
and
students
All
workshop
staff
and
students
All
workshop
staff
and
students
Clean tools away when not

in use, be vigilant when
moving around workshop
Tidy cables when not in use
Clean all spillages if the

occur to reduce chances of
spilling
80
LOW
Users in workshop should be vigilant

when jacking car and use axel stands
LOW
Ensure cables are tidy and protected

from causing trip hazards
LOW
Clean all spillages before any work

starts in the workshop
On-going
Before
starting/
On-going
As soon as they
are created or
found when in the
workshop
Nathan Mawhinney
Manual handling injuries?
Jacking car
Contact/Impact with objects, equipment

and substances?
Trapping fingers
Vehicle rolling from wheel dollies
Persons jacking
vehicle
Jack kept in cabinet away

from possibility of trip
hazard
LOW
LOW
Persons working
on
car
and
jacking vehicle
All persons
workshop
Supervision,
assessment to
testing is safe.
deem
risk
if
Jack vehicle in an appropriate place

ensuring axel stands are used before
removal of the wheel to ensure vehicle
is lifted safely
Supervision would be beneficial
HIGH
81
During
measurement
Reduce distractions when working on

vehicle
in
order
to
maintain
concentration thus reducing the chance
of error.
in
Supervision
When jacking the

vehicle
Use of two ratchet straps in measuring

COG, to retain safety as a priority. No
persons should stand near vehicle when
lifted.
During
testing
COG
Nathan Mawhinney
Fire or Explosion?
No smoking in workshop
Fuel Present in vehicle
MEDIUM
Ensure naked Flames are kept away

from vehicles
On-going
Make sure fuel cap is left on vehicles

at all times.
All persons in
building
Injury from use/contact with machinery?
Contact Two/ Four post ramp
Persons lifting
vehicle
Common sense, safety

brakes on ramp
82
LOW
Ensure no distractions when lifting

vehicles
When lifting
vehicle
Nathan Mawhinney
Electric Shock?
Careless use of plugs
Persons using
corner weight
machine
Standardised plugs used

LOW
83
Ensure plugs and electrics are free of

water
On-going
through
testing
periods
Activities/Hazards
Lifting rear of vehicle with engine hoist
Nathan Mawhinney
Who/what may be
harmed?
Everyone
in
vicinity
and
vehicle could be
damaged
What is done now?
Hoist will
falling
stop
vehicle
How bad is the

risk?
HIGH
What needs to be done?
Secure strap correctly

be vigilant when lifting car
Wheels chalked
Ensure safe zone around car
Strap located correctly
Use Axel stands
By when?
ASAP/when
doing
activity
Safety lock on engine hoist could be

beneficial
Avoid loading members in bending
Lower car slowly(transient load rather
than dropping load)
Strap Failure
Everyone
in
vicinity
and
vehicle could be
damaged
Wheels chalked
HIGHs
Secure strap correctly

Ensure suitable straps used
Use Axel stands
Lower Car slowly to reduce strain on
strap
84
Before/ when
conducting
experiment
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix F: Pre-Measurement Testing

The rear wheels must be restrained from movement, while the front wheels should be allowed
to move freely; when the vehicles rear is lifted the front wheels will have a tendency to move
as weight is transferred from the rear. The other main constraint is that the rear of the vehicle
must be lifted vertically in order to negate any horizontal force which could affect the weight
calculated on the scales.
Initially when conducting this test a risk assessment should be completed as this has the
potential to be dangerous and the main risks should be highlighted before any work is
undertaken, the risk assessment for this test can be found in the Appendix E.
Before measuring corner weights the suspension was allowed to settle on the flat workshop
floor, the vehicle was then pushed onto the four post lift. The rear of the Locust was placed on
the lift in order to locate the CG it was positioned as close to the edge as possible to permit a
greater achievable angle.
Safety must be considered when conducting this experiment, therefore in order to reduce the
chance of the vehicle falling off the ramp a ratchet strap was used to stop the vehicle moving
forward, which could result in injury to participants and damage to the vehicle. Initially the roll
cage was considered as the mounting point for the strap; however the Nissan 200sx does not
feature a roll cage as standard. The tow hook was deemed a more appropriate solution on the
Locust as the same constraint can be used on the test vehicle. Once the location for mounting
was selected the strap was attached to the tow hook and the other end clipped onto the four post
ramp with tension applied to stop the vehicle moving, two straps were used to improve safety.
Figure 8.1 shows the vehicle being lifted without the front scales to test vehicle constraints.
Figure 8.1: Constraint testing

For the COG to be calculated the proportion of weight transfer must be known, prior to the
vehicle being raised the weight on each wheel must be obtained, this was achieved by using
corner weight scales.
85
Nathan Mawhinney
As stated previously the front wheels must be free to move, to allow this the both front scales
were placed on top of automotive wheel dollies. In order to place the Locust on these scales a
trolley jack was used to lift the front of the vehicle, the same method was used at the rear
allowing all scales to be zeroed at once. From testing it was shown that when lifting the locust
to 39 degrees the weight on the scale actually decreased, and after consideration it was found
that the strap was in fact holding the vehicles weight.
This issue was resolved by loosening the tension on the ratchet strap at each angle, this allowed
the weight to transfer onto the front wheels resulting in an expected weight increase on the
scale. A limitation of this technique involves the drivetrain of the test vehicle, due to the
vehicle being rear wheel drive it was only possible to lock the rear wheels. The limitation of
this was that the front wheels could roll as the rear was raised; this caused a potential danger as
the vehicle could possibility roll from the wheel dollies resulting in vehicle damage and danger
to participants. This danger was outlined in the risk assessment, figure 8.2 outlines the
equipment required to conduct this testing.
By setting the ramp elevation to the same height as the front wheels, the weights could be taken
before and after lifting the car. Inclining the vehicle 5 degrees at a time it was possible to
determine that the strap was excessively tight, this caused error in the results by the strap
applying a restrictive pulling force on the car as the angle increased.
Figure 8.2: COG testing equipment
86
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix G: WinGeo Centre of gravity calculator
87
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix H: Centre of gravity results

FL and FR in KG.
Zero
FL
359
2 degrees
FL
361
2 degrees
FL
363.5
3 degrees
FL
359
3 degrees
FL
364
4 degrees
FL
361
4 degrees
FL
363.5
5 degrees
FL
360.5
5 degrees
FL
365
6 degrees
FL
363.5
6 degrees
FL
366
tension on
tension off
tension on
tension off
tension on
tension off
tension on
tension off
tension on
tension off
Tyre Deflection
FR
355.5
Tyre Deflection
FR
351
Tyre Deflection
FR
353
Tyre Deflection
FR
353
Tyre Deflection
FR
354.5
Tyre Deflection
FR
355
Tyre Deflection
FR
356
Tyre Deflection
FR
355.5
Tyre Deflection
FR
365.5
Tyre Deflection
FR
357.5
Tyre Deflection
FR
353
88
0.865mm
Total
715
0.865mm
Total
710
0.865mm
Total
716
0.87mm
Total
712
0.87mm
Total
718
0.88mm
Total
716
0.879mm
Total
720
0.879mm
Total
716.5
0.92mm
Total
722
Total
720.5
Total
724.5
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix I: Toe and camber change under bump

Front toe validation
Measured Toe
change()
Metric Height Change

0
12.7
25.4
38.1
50.8
63.5
0.11
0.19
0.18
0.15
0.15
0.14
WinGeo Toe change

0.106
0.191
0.177
0.162
0.156
0.14
0.84%
-0.18%
-0.21%
-6.12%
-4.76%
-1.38%
Front Camber validation

0
12.7
25.4
38.1
50.8
Measured Camber
Angle()
-2.75
-2.8
-2.85
-2.85
-2.85
WinGeo Camber
angle
-2.75
-2.834
-2.88
-2.884
-2.884
Percentage difference
0.00%
1.21%
1.05%
1.19%
1.19%
Rear toe validation

Measured Toe
change()

12.7
25.4
38.1
50.8
63.5
0
0.21
0.38
0.52
0.6
WinGeo Toe change

0
0.199
0.474
0.762
1
0.00%
5.53%
24.74%
46.54%
66.67%
Rear camber validation

0
20
40
60
72
Measured Camber
Angle()
WinGeo Camber
angle
-2.2
-1.845
-2.2
-1.75
-1.5
-0.9
-0.75
-1.348
-0.89
-0.474
89
Percentage difference
0.00%
5.43%
11.28%
1.12%
58.23%
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix J: Standard Wheel Alignment
90
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix K: Personal Correspondence

Kyle Chisholm
As you have said, vehicle setup is very dependent on the driving style of the driver, and the car,
but I suppose you can say that about a lot of setups for motorsport.
For example, for me, in my BMW e36, I set the car up to grip as much as I can. Its a lower
powered car in comparison to most of the other drifters. You would probably expect to see me
go for less grip, but I prefer the car to be fast and put power down. More grip = faster entries
and higher cornering speeds.
When setting up the car I use a base grip setting from a track day/race car, and then tweak it
from there. There are some general guidelines for drift specific use.
As you said caster increase is always good.
Front camber settings vary; some drivers run loads up front, working on the theory that when
you run lots of lock and you are on full lock, you will get more tyre contact on the ground. This
would result in more traction, but I always question how much front end grip you need when
youre on that amount of lock. The more camber you run, the more chance you sacrifice the
straight line/transitions grip levels, which for me is more important. I run around -3 to -6 up
front just depends on the car, more commonly around -3.5 to -4 in general is used.
Front toe settings are something people seem to vary on; personally I aim for around 0.5 toe out
on a drift car.
Steering lock, well, huge steering lock is not essential, its a luxury, look at it like skidding a
stock s14, or one with high power, and they will both drift. You will however have an easier
time in the higher powered vehicle, due to less effort.
The thing with lock is how people use it, used well, it looks awesome and makes for good
drifting, used badly, its just there to catch spins and slow you down.
Im sure if you ask another driver they may well completely disagree with my settings, like you
said its very driver, and car, dependent.
Denis OBrien
All drift cars get large amounts of castor this increases self-centering. They also run a large
scrub radius for, as far as I can tell aesthetic reasons. Outside of this its totally driver
dependent. Camber is used at the back to control traction (and again looks) always a little toe
out at the rear to assist on transitions, as the weight transfers the rear will steer in the correct
direction. I have had to make adjustments to reduce/eliminate wheel hop. Usually through
damper settings, or replacing failing bushings. Outside of that youre trying to analyze
something most people do by feel.
91
Nathan Mawhinney
Alistair Graham
Hi Nathan,
Thanks for your message - I must say that's a bit more complex than most of the messages we
get.
Drift car setups (as I'm sure you've realized by this point) are a lot more complicated than most
people would imagine, but once you've got behind the wheel of a drift car you quickly realize
how essential it is.
Lots of attention is focused on getting the maximum amount of steering lock out of a car, but in
all honesty lock is only a small part of the overall package as it is useless without grip.
At the front, the standard procedure is to run a decent amount of front camber, not only to
improve the contact patch of the tyres while on lock but also to help increase the amount of
lock available. Extended lower arms are also common place in order to increase the front track
width, another trick used to aid stability and lock (as it moves the wheels further away from key
components such as the brake lines and also the inner arches). A high amount of caster is also
preferable.
Ackermann is a whole other kettle of fish and is very important in drifting - unfortunately it
could take all day to go through the ins and outs as I'm sure you know, but how the leading and
trailing wheels react when on lock is obviously very important, as is bump steer (which needs
to be ironed out to make a car predictable to drift).
Rear suspension setup is also very important; with the main aspect being to run as little camber
as possible (anything between 0 and -1.5 degrees is commonplace, with some drivers even
preferring positive camber). The idea is to have as much of the tyres in contact with the ground
and to spread the wear load across the width of the whole tyre. Anything above 2degrees and
you will begin to see uneven wear.
Toe-in is also used to adjust the amount of forward traction the car has - the more toe-in, the
more the rear of the car tends to "bind", improving forward traction but reducing the flow of
sideways movement.
Hopefully that information is of some use to you and if you have any more questions please do
not hesitate to ask.
Alistair Graham
Hi Nathan,
With regards to camber, the more you run the further you can push the wheels outwards
without fouling the arches, aiding clearance within the arch cavity and preventing any issues
with scrubbing.
92
Nathan Mawhinney
I can't really speak specifics for the JapSpeed cars, but on my own personal car I run around 7.4
caster (7 degrees 4 minutes), 3 degree front camber, 1 degree rear camber and the rear toe in
escapes me about the moment but it is a minimal amount. As you have correctly stated though,
rear toe in is very much down to personal preference - I know drivers that have reduced their
rear toe in an aid to loosen the rear end feel and absolutely hated it.
The problem with moving top mounts is, aside from adjusting coil over top mounts, any
adjustments to the car's original strut towers would render the car unable to compete in the vast
majority of drift competitions due to rules and regulations against doing this.
My full name is Alistair Graham - please let me know if you need any more help.
93
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix L: Project Timeline
94
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix M: Project Summary
95
Nathan Mawhinney
Appendix N: Minutes from meetings

Minutes for meeting: 13th November 2012
Name: Nathan Mawhinney

First project meeting from beginning project, on 1st of October, due to supervisor absence.
Discussed with supervisor the car details from vehicle manufacturer documentation
obtained from Nissan Dealer and owners club
Discussion of centre of gravity test, comparison of accuracy on the corner weight scales
Test experiment conducted with Locust
Test vehicle not to be knife edged
Poor resolution of test due to accuracy of corner weight scales
Discussion of knife edging technique failures
Discussion of knife edging test car via projecting chassis point with bracket to lift the
car
Coil over does not need restricted or constrained
Previous testing showed deflection in damper was negligible
What will give me the car that will behave in the way I want it to behave?
Handling requirements-event I am aiming for
Circuit racing: positive neutral
Road: under steer
Drifting: over steer but good traction
Talk to driver but look at data about setup
Discuss difference in event setups
Likely accelerations lateral and longitudinal 1.25 G cornering,1.4-1.5 G Braking

How did I get to this geometry?
Achieved by doing? What changes?
Future work
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Spread sheet for CG height

Work backwards
What if scales were 5 kg heavier? In spread sheet
Resolution of experiment
Prove experiment was pointless
Classic measurement technique using plumbob
96
Nathan Mawhinney
Minutes from meeting on 5th march
Vehicle should be modelled with roll and steering lock applied in the opposite direction
to replicate over steer with counter steer.
Lengthening lower LCA will increase static negative camber stated by Kojima
Lowering COG, supervisor agreed
Discussion of the effects of lengthening traction rod at the rear of vehicle, suggested
that it would jack the front section of the rear suspension. This would be achieved in
WinGeo by adjusting the x coordinate location for the top upright towards the rear,
supervisor was unsure of the effect of this adjustment.
Limitation of WinGeo being that it would not generate toe out, instead it compensates
for this within the upright, by moving toe arm half as far back as x distance.
Adjustment of roll centre: Raising the roll centre will reduce roll angle which will allow
control of the geometry in a more desirable manner.
Different effects at different phases of a drift.
Supervisor suggested starting with standard setup then work from there to achieve a
desirable setup.
Self-aligning torque plays a significant part on driver feel and kickback effect of the
steering, due to high slip angles tyre data is difficult to obtain after 20 degrees.
Actions to be carried out

1.
2.
3.
4.
Obtain the effects of lengthening LCA on the simulation model.

Adjust roll couple by raising roll centre
Compare camber change against roll angle
Backup changes to geometry from literature
Minutes from meeting on 13th March
Suspension should be optimized for Drifting; supervisor suggested that a cautious

approach should be undertaken when undertaking suspension changes.
The steering rack could be moved for a reduction in bump steer.
Supervisor stated that suspension strut construction would be made of steel; however
detailed material specifications would be difficult to obtain.
Setup would rely on the front tyres having the ability to generate front grip well without
under steer.
Rear of the vehicle should be setup fairly stiff in relation to the front suspension.
Discussion of rear suspension design being double wishbone.
When optimizing suspension everything relates to the tyre performance.
A company called Maxxis produce an optimized tyre known as the MA- Z1 drift tyre,
research what differences there was between this a typical road tyre.
Rear tyres would have a large slip angle; the project supervisor suggested up to 90
97
Nathan Mawhinney
degrees however 30-40 is more realistic.

Literature review should include discussion of the suspension in relation to other styles.
Detailed drift setup details were found on the motoIQ website, work will include
discussion of rationality behind drift setup from website references
Test vehicle was lowered by 35mm, for this reason it was raised by the same height in
WinGeo
Optimization involves finding what characteristics are desirable, then use a researched
and educated assumptions for design.
Backup suggested drift setup by researched and justified points from published papers.
Validate the suggested settings from theory.
Actions to be undertaken
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Build vehicle model in WinGeo software.

Validate the model created in WinGeo.
Research Maxxis tyre data and characteristics.
Research forces and tolerance to camber + large slip angles.
Early stuff written up for end.
98
Nathan Mawhinney
Bibliography
Blundell, M. V., Nov, 1997. The Influence of Suspension and Tyre modelling on vehicle
handling simulation, Coventry: Coventry University .
Efstathios Velenis a, D. b. E. c. P. d. R., 2011. Steady state drifting stabilization of RWD
vehicles. Control Engineering Practice, Volume 19, p. 13631376.
ISO 8855 , 2012. Road vehicles. Vehicle dynamics and road-holding ability. Vocabulary.
s.l.:BSI.
Milliken, D., 1986. Anaylst Learning Guide, Ohio: Valentine Research Inc.
Milliken, W. M. a. D., 1995 . Race Car Vehicle Dynamics. Warrendale U.S.A : Thirteenth
Printing.
P.A. Simionescu, D. B., 2002. Mechanism and Machine Theory 37. Synthesis and analysis of
the five-link rear suspension, Issue 37, p. 815832.
Smith, C., 1978. Tune to Win. United States: Aero Publishers inc .
Stoll, J. R. &. H., 1996. The Automotive Chassis: Engineering Principles. London: Arnold,A
member of the Hodder Headline Group.
200SX Owners Club, 2013. [Online]
[Accessed 2013].
Abdulrahim, M., 2006. On the Dynamics of Automobile Drifting. Detriot: SAE international.
Chisholm, K., 2013. Drift Setup discussion [Interview] (04 28 2013).
Donalds Bastow, G. H. J. P. W., 1993. Car suspension and handling. London: Professional
Engineering Publishing.
Graham, A., 2013. Drift Setup Discussion [Interview] (29 04 2013).
ISO 4138, 2004. Passenger cars - Steady-state circular driving behaviour - Open-loop test
methods(ISO 4138), Switzerland : ISO Publishing.
Jornsen Reimpell, H. S. ,. J. B., 2001. The Automotive Chassis: Engineering Principle. Oxford:
Hodder headline group.
Kennedy, D., 2013. Vehicle Dynamics: Steady State Response notes. Hamilton: s.n.
Kojima, M., 2012. Basic Drift Chassis Setup. [Online]
Available at: http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/id/2382/basic-drift-chassis-setup-part3.aspx
[Accessed 31 01 2013].
99
Nathan Mawhinney
Kojima, M., 2012. The Ultimate guide to Suspension and Handling Part 2, Controlling Body
Motion. [Online]
Available at: http://www.motoiq.com/magazine_articles/id/1491/pageid/1880/the-ultimateguide-to-suspension-and-handling-part-2-controlling-body-motion.aspx
[Accessed 2 02 2013].
Milliken, W. F. M. a. D. L., 1995. Race Car Vehicle Dynamics. Warrendale: SAE publications.
Nissan, 1999. 200sx Owners Manual. [Online]
Available at: http://www.kuddy.net/200sx/vehicle_specs.html
[Accessed 06 12 2012].
O'brien, D., 2013. Geometery Discussion [Interview] (01 05 2013).
Pacejka, H. B., 2006. Tyre and Vehicle dynamics. Oxford: Elseviers Science and Technology .
SAE, 2008. SAE J670- Vehicle dynamics terminology, Warrendale PA, USA: Society of
Automotive Engineers.
Smith, C., 1984. Engineer to Win. 1st ed. Ocseola, Wisconsin: Motorbooks international.
Staniforth, A., 2010. Competition car Suspension. Yeovil,Somerset: Haynes Publishing.
Visser, P., 2005. s.l.:Visser.cx.
Zuijdijk, J., 2009. Vehicle Dynamics and Damping. Milton Keynes: AutorHouse UK Ltd..
100

Dissertation PDF

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Originalbeschreibung:

Originaltitel

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Dissertation PDF

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Investigation into the Suspension Characteristics of the Nissan 200SX

This dissertation is submitted in partial fulfilment for the

I Nathan Mawhinney B00184019 hereby declare the dissertation entitled

submitted by me in partial fulfilment for the B.Eng. in Motorsport Design Engineering is my

The vehicle was successfully modelled in 3D kinematic suspension software allowing

Kenny Cameron - (Supervisor at UWS.)

Dave Kennedy - (Supervisor at UWS.)

SXOC.com - (Dedicated Nissan owners website.)

Dr Stuart McIlwain (Dissertation Template)

Kyle Chisholm (Owner Chizfab)

Alistair Graham (Employee at Team JapSpeed)

Denis OBrien (Geometry specialist)

Moral support from 4th year colleagues

Chapter 2: Literature Review ......................................................................................... 5

2.2 Tyre Discussion ................................................................................................................................ 9

2.3 Centre of Gravity ............................................................................................................................ 12

Chapter 3: Primary Research........................................................................................ 20

3.2 Vehicle Measurement .................................................................................................................... 22

3.2.8 Chapter Summary....................................................................................................................................32

Chapter 4: Desired Suspension Attributes ................................................................... 33

Chapter 5: Creation of WinGeo Model ........................................................................ 38

Chapter 6: Suspension Model Optimization ................................................................ 47

6.2 Corner simulation .......................................................................................................................... 59

Chapter 7: Project Discussion ...................................................................................... 64

7.2 Project Changes ............................................................................................................................. 66

7.3 Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................... 68

7.4.3 Creation in Adams software ....................................................................................................................71

Chapter 8: Appendix .................................................................................................... 72

Figure 7.1: Optimised front knuckle........................................................................................... 70

Anti roll bar

King Pin inclination

Real, full name

Longitudinal velocity at contact centre

Length from front track to CG location

Length from rear track to CG location

Sum of front wheel weights

Sum of all wheel weights

Individual wheel weight

Individual wheel weight

200sx Suspension Optimisation

Figure 1.1: Nissan 200SX S14a

200sx Suspension Optimisation

The British drift championship (BDC)

Formula Drift in America

1.2 Research Aim

200sx Suspension Optimisation

Research desirable handling characteristics for drifting.

Plan measurement technique and required factors.

Measure vehicle hard points in the workshop.

To build the suspension in WinGeo based on the measured points.

Analyse the suspension in WinGeo in order to optimise the suspension.

1.4 Project Scope

200sx Suspension Optimisation

Chapter 2: Literature Review

200sx Suspension Optimisation

Figure 2.1(a): Positive Camber

Figure 2.1(b): Negative Camber

200sx Suspension Optimisation

2.1.2 MacPherson Strut

2.1.3 Multilink Suspension

2.1.4 Ackerman Angle

200sx Suspension Optimisation