Suspension System Concepts

Prof. R.G. Longoria

Spring 2016

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Overview

Function and kinematic requirements

Describe independent and rigid or solid-axle
suspensions, including basic DOF or mobility
analysis
Suspension analysis and characteristics
Transition to vibration and ride

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Suspension functions [Gillespie, 1992]

1.

Provide vertical compliance so the wheels can follow an uneven

road/terrain, thus isolating the chassis from induced forces and vibration.

2.

Maintain the wheels in the proper steer and camber attitudes to the road
surface.

3.

React to the control forces produced by the tires-longitudinal (acceleration

and braking) forces, lateral (cornering) forces, and braking and driving
torques.

4.

Resist roll of the chassis. Keep the tires in contact with the road with
minimal load variations. (Ex. Table with 4 legs; shopping carts, etc.)

Achieving these functional objectives may be attempted through geometric

suspension design and/or through active suspension methods.

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

System solution
Motional requirements are met through kinematic considerations.
Isolation is achieved by including elastic and dissipative elements.
Since the kinematic, elastic, and dissipative design will impact how
the tire interacts with the road, as well as how the body reacts, it is
essential to understand each particular vehicles dynamics in
developing a suspension system.
A balance between handling and ride is almost always necessary.
Tires obviously play a critical role.

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Suspension influences cornering and handling

We know that lateral forces on tires
play a key role in cornering and
handling characteristics and that
these forces depend on factors such
as slip angle, tire camber angle,
vertical tire deflection (or force), and
longitudinal slip (or traction force).
Since a suspension will control how a
tire is held relative to the vehicle
chassis, it should be clear that
suspension properties directly
influence all of these factors.
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Analysis of suspension systems

Typically, you begin analyzing a suspension as if it is made up of
ideal joints and ideal rigid links, and you add effects of
compliance and inertia later.
Geometry: look at possible suspension mechanisms and the wheel
motion relative to chassis
Constitutive: understand compliant elements such as springs, antiroll bars, compliant links, and bushings; later look at frictional
effects (dampers, joints) and inertia of components

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Example: simple independent suspension

This example will be looked at later. When we want to analyze
ride characteristics, we can focus on equivalent stiffness rather
than complex mechanism.
Kw

Ks

How would you find Kw?

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Kinematic requirements [Matschinsky, 2000]

In responding to surface irregularities, a ground vehicle should be designed so that each
wheel has primarily vertical motion; a single degree of freedom relative to vehicle.
The figure shown shows how this degree of freedom can be
realized. For an independent wheel suspension, the
design might have:
a. strictly vertical travel,
b. a combination of vertical and lateral displacement and
a rotation (camber change),
c. a general non-linear coupler movement that exhibits
constrained motion
With two wheels mounted together on a single wheel
carrier, as on a rigid beam axle (d), the suspension
requires two degrees of freedom so that each wheel
will have one degree of freedom. The necessary
design will permit the axle both parallel travel and
rolling motion relative to the vehicle body.

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

From Matschinsky (2000)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Joint and link types commonly used in suspensions

Joints

Links (for indirect connection of wheel carrier to

f=1

turning
turning and
sliding

vehicle body)

rod link with ball joint at each

end
f=3+31=5
f=2

rotation
turning + ball = triangular or Aarm
f=1+3=4

ball

f=3

rubber

f = 1 (3)

ball and
surface

f=5

f=1

f=2

two turning (with skew axes) =

trapezoidal
f=1+1=2
Link with ball joint and a turningand-sliding joint = turning-andsliding link
f=3+21=4

f=4

f=2

Note: joints decrease a mechanisms DOF by 6 - f

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Typical independent wheel suspension

1 Wheel and tire

6 track rod, driven by 7

2 Wheel carrier, maintains

the wheel bearings, brake
caliper, and overall attitude
of the wheel

7 steering link/gearbox

3 Wishbone link or A-arm

8 spring

4 transverse link from

vehicle body to wheel
carrier

9 damper

5 tension link (compliant)

10 drive shaft

Adapted from Matschinsky (2000)

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Evolution of wheel suspensions [Matschinsky (2000)]

Wheel carrier
rigidly fixed to
vehicle (tractor)

Typical
rigid-axle
suspension

5 link
suspension

Two
wheels in
tandem

F = degrees of freedom
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Suspension DOF or mobility analysis, F

Example
Fixed part: S, vehicle body
Wheel carrier: K (6)
6 joints*
1.
Ball
2.
Ball
3.
Ball
4.
Ball
5.
Turning
6.
Turning and sliding

3 links
a.
Rod link
b.
Triangular link
c.
Turning and sliding link

*Joints decrease a mechanisms DOF by 6 - f

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(1 + 3 6) 2 + (4 3 + 1 + 2)
=1

k = 1 (number of wheel carriers)

l = 3 (number of links)
g = 6 (number of joints)
r = 2 (number of individual rotations of links)
f i = degree of freedom of joint i

From Matschinsky (2000)

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Independent suspension layouts

Double-wishbone or A-arm

1 joint = trailing arm suspension

If front, this can

be track rod.
k = 1, l = 3, g = 6, r = 1
Turning-and-sliding joint (2) with rod
link (-1):
(a) is rare suspension geometry, (b) is a
semi-trailing arm type

= 4 3 + 2 = 14
g

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(1 + 3 6) 1 + 14
=1

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

This is a common
race car rear
suspension.

Figures from Matschinsky (2000)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Independent suspension layouts 4-Link

Figures from Matschinsky (2000)

triangular link

If used with a
turning-and-sliding
joint, you form the
basic strut
suspension

3 rod links (f = 1), with a triangular

link (f = 2) to form the common
four-link suspension.

k = 1, l = 4, g = 8, r = 4

= 7 3 + 1 = 22

k = 1, l = 4, g = 8, r = 3 F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi

fi = 7 3 + 1 = 22

= 6(1 + 4 8) 3 + 22
=1

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(1 + 4 8) 3 + 22
=1

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Independent suspension layouts 5-Link

Figures from Matschinsky (2000)

5 rod links (f = 1),

with 5 rotations

k = 1 (number of wheel carriers)

l = 5 (number of links)
g = 10 (number of joints)
r = 5 (number of individual rotations of links)

f i = 10 3=30

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

F = 6(k + l g ) r + f i
1

= 6(1 + 5 10) 5 + 30
=1

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Rigid-axle suspensions
g

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(0 + 2 3) 1 + 3 3

rod-link

=2

ball-joint

Panhard rod

Need 3 rods to reduce

to F = 2

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(0 + 4 7) 3 + 6 3 + 1 5
= 18 3 + 18 + 5 = 2

ball-and-surface

These bottom 3 are alternatives to controlling lateral motion using a Panhard rod.
c uses a ball/surface, d a scissors mechanism, and e a Watt linkage.
Figures from Matschinsky (2000)

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Classic rigid-axle Hotchkiss

Analysis can also consider the

leaf springs.

Consider only the triangular link:

k = 0 (number of wheel carriers)

The springs are stiff in lateral

and longitudinal directions.

l = 1 (number of links)
g = 1 (number of joints)
r = 0 (number of individual rotations of links)

= 1 2

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(0 + 1 1) 0 + 1 2
=2

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Equivalent lever radius

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Rigid-axle suspensions
From Matschinsky (2000)

An indirect connection of the axle to

the vehicle is most commonly achieved
using a triangular link or the four-rod
(or link) suspension.

k = 0 (number of wheel carriers)

l = 5 (number of links)
g = 8 (number of joints)
r = 4 (number of individual rotations of links)

= 8 3=24
g

F = 6(k + l g ) r + fi
1

= 6(0 + 5 8) 4 + 24
= 18 4 + 24 = 2

Ford 4-link rear suspension

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Gillespie (1992)

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Suspension analysis and characteristics

1) Independent suspension forces
2) Wheel-rate determination
3) Roll center analysis to be discussed later

Gillespie summarizes both solid axle and independent suspension roll center
estimation
Steeds writes that it is hard to change roll center for a solid axle; you can change
the mounting of springs. Independent suspensions give you more options to
manipulate the roll center location. Steeds handout has good examples on finding
roll centers.
Roll center location can be useful in assessing suspension characteristics and how,
for example, lateral load transfer due to suspension influences vehicle handling.
Gillespies discussion on roll moment distribution shows how this can be done.
Blundell and Harty provide an example (using ADAMS) of finding instantaneous
roll center.

4) Anti-squat, anti-pitch, and anti-dive suspension geometry (see

Gillespie, Chapter 7). Not to be covered in this course; see
Gillespie should you need to do this type of analysis.
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Independent suspension forces

Refer to the handout from Steeds (1960), Section 1.11 Forces in an independent suspension
In his development, Steeds shows how to derive the upper link force, P, lower link force, U,
and suspension spring force, S, in the configuration shown given the simultaneous
application of ground contact force, W, and lateral force, N.
P

In this example, it is assumed that the stub axle assembly

or wheel carrier, WC, and tire in combination are rigid, so
well treat as a rigid connection/part. All the pivots (A, B,
O, and P) are assumed to be frictionless. The sprung mass
(vehicle body) is assumed fixed.

SPRUNG
MASS

AA
WC

Steeds (1960)
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Example: Independent suspension (cont.)

Steeds results require determination of the force, m., which he gives as,

m = (W OE + N OF ) OB
This is found by using the concept of an instantaneous center, O (refer to Steeds handout on
roll centers on VSDC clog). With m, the spring force can be found,

S = mL a
Then, in the equilibrium configuration shown, the two link
forces are found by summing forces in the y and z directions
leading to two equations in two unknowns:

sin
cos

sin P W m cos
=

cos U N + m sin

Solving gives,

P = (W cos N sin m ) sin ( )

U = (W cos N sin m cos ( ) ) sin ( )
Note that in this example, Steeds assumes that the upper link is in compression and the
lower link is in tension, as indicated by the reactions on the WC shown above.
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Example: Independent suspension (cont.)

A summary of the numerical values
given by Steeds is shown to the left.
The results below show that the
upper link is in compression,
however the lower link is in
compression as well (negative of
assumed sense).

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Wheel rate determination

The wheel rate is the effective stiffness seen at the wheel (spindle) due to the suspension
spring rate, Ks, and motion ratio, Rs. The motion ratio is defined by,

Rs =

dzs
dzw

Milliken and Milliken call this the installation ratio (IR).

Given this motion ratio, you should be able to find the wheel rate,

Kw =

dFw
dzw

Kw

Ks

2
s

If the motion ratio is constant, then K w = R K s

However, if the motion ratio changes as the spring is
deflected, then the wheel rate also becomes a function of
position (i.e., the spring is inherently nonlinear).
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Wheel rate some additional notes

From text by Milliken and Milliken (1995)

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

Summary
Suspensions control the orientation of the wheel/tire relative to road
and vehicle.
We generally need to have good estimates of slip angle and camber,
vertical tire deflection, longitudinal slip in order to predict vehicle
dynamics.
We also need to be able to convey key suspension characteristics into
our ride and vibration analysis for a vehicle for other types of
analysis.
These slides review common suspension types and geometries and wheel rate determination.
A more complete discussion would also briefly review anti-squat/pitch/dive and also review
roll center analysis and roll moment distribution. Handouts will be posted that cover these
topics.
ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria
Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin

References
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.

Steeds, W., Mechanics of Road Vehicles, Iliffe and Sons, Ltd., London,
1960.
Gillespie, T.D., Fundamentals of Vehicle Dynamics, SAE, Warrendale,
PA, 1992.
Wong, J.Y., Theory of Ground Vehicles, John Wiley and Sons, Inc., New
York, 2001.
Blundell, M., and D. Harty, The Multibody Systems Approach to Vehicle
Dynamics, Elsevier Limited, 2004.
Heisler, H., Vehicle and Engine Technology, SAE, Warrendale, PA, 1996.
Matschinsky, W., Road Vehicle Suspensions, Professional Engineering
Publishing Ltd., London (Translated from German), 2000.
Milliken, W.F., and D.L. Milliken, Race car vehicle dynamics, Society of
Automotive Engineers, Warrendale, PA, 1995.
Vehicle Dynamics Terminology, SAEJ670e, Society of Automotive
Engineers, Warrendale, PA.

ME 360/390 Prof. R.G. Longoria

Vehicle System Dynamics and Control

Department of Mechanical Engineering

The University of Texas at Austin