77

Design Report of All-Terrain Vehicle “Spark 3.0”

Harsh Raj Jaiswal
Captain

Abhishek Pandey, Amit Kr. Singh, Ashish Bhardwaj, Salil Ankit, Vishal Saini,
Vishal

Sub-System Head

Copyright © 2019 SAE International

ABSTRACT The chassis is named Spark 3.0 after the team’s first venture
Spark during the season 2018-19.
Team synergy racing is a student design competition team of G
L Bajaj Institute of Technology & Management which started in ROLL CAGE
the year of 2018. The team participates in Baja SAE where
engineering students design and build an off-road vehicle that The roll cage is a 3-dimensional structural member which
will survive the severe punishment of rough terrain and in some incorporates different components of the vehicle and provides
competitions, water. Student work together as a team to safety to the driver.
discover and resolve technical challenges in design, test, and
manufacturing, as well as business issues. This paper highlights The main focus during the design was given to pack ageing of
the various aspect of sub-system design & component selection component and safety of driver.
during the development an all-terrain vehicle for Baja SAEINDIA
2020 held at NATRAX, Pithampur.
PROCEDURE- The design roll cage geometry was dependent
on suspension system for nose design, ergonomics for cockpit
INTRODUCTION & powertrain & rear suspension for the rear compartment. The
distance driver’s body & frame member was given appropriate
The BAJA SAE competition consists of static & dynamic events. as per the Baja SAEINDIA 2020 rulebook.
Static events include: Design Report, Cost Report, Technical
Inspection, Marketing Presentation and Design Presentation.
Dynamic event includes: Acceleration, Maneuverability, Sled
Pull, Suspension & Traction and a 4-hour endurance race. The
vehicle is designed considering situation as above-mentioned
dynamic event. The team has approached design with focus of
safety, economics, performance & manufacturability.

There were various parameters & the procedures involved

during the design of sub-system i.e. Roll cage (frame),
Powertrain, Suspension, Steering and Braking System. The
design process was started in February 2019 and was
completed in the end of June 2019, various iterations were
involved during the design phase of the vehicle and some
modification were done in design during the manufacturing to
accommodate them. This paper highlights those parameters &
procedures and contains values only from final iteration of the
design. Figure1. Roll Cage Design Process

The different computer tools were involved in development of

the vehicle. SOLIDWORKS 2019, Catia V5 and Ug NX were
used in computer aided design. ANSYS & SOLIDWORKS
Simulation were used in structural & thermal simulation of
various components. MSC ADAM/CAR was used to calculate
suspension parameter. MATLAB 2017 was involved in the
calculation of powertrain.
MATERIAL- Two different cross-sections of AISI 4130 for
primary & secondary were used to reduce the weight of roll
cage. The difference in the weight being round 50% per meter
length.
Table 1 Comparison Between AISI 1018 vs AISI 4130 Rw is the dynamic rolling radius of the tire
Nengine is the Engine rpm at Tmax
Vwheel = (0.283337*2*3.14*2600)/(60*30)
AISI 1018 AISI 4130 Vwheel = 2.448 m/s
Yield Strength (MPa) 365 638 Aerodynamic Resistance,
Ultimate Strength (MPa) 460 784
AR= ½ * 1.12* (2.5717)2 * 1.055* 0.44
AR= 1.55 N
Young’s Modulus (GPa) 205 205 Tractive Force, F = (Fw- TTE) (4)
F = (1600.92 - (115.5+0+1.55)
Cost (Rs/ m) 345 1175.83 F = 1483.87 N
Elongation at break (%) 19.0 15.0 Acceleration, a= (1483.87*9.81) / (2273.04)
Carbon Percentage (%) 0.18 0.288 Acceleration, a = 6.42 m/s2
Availability Delhi Coimbatore Therefore, maximum acceleration, vehicle can attain is 0.65g

Two different cross-sectional size were selected to reduce the SUSPENSION

weight
The objective of suspension system to prevent the road shocks
Table2. Weight & Strength Comparison Between Primary & Secondary from being transmitted to the vehicle parts, thereby providing
suitable riding and cushioning effect to occupant.
Primary Secondary
O.D. (mm) 29.20 25.4 The design process is done where the suspension parameter
Wall Thickness 1.65 1 like camber gain, motion ratio, angle correction factor etc. Where
Weight per meter(kg/m) 1.12 0.60 analyzed which are required for designing the ATV.
Bending Stiffness (Nm²) 1518.5 621.66
Bending Strength (Nm) 470.41 152.34 Front suspension should be compatible with nose design and
rear suspension should be compatible with transmission shaft
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS- Roll cage structure was and rear compartment design.
subjected to various static structural analysis using ANSYS Double wishbone with unequal and non-parallel a-arms was
Workbench. Suspension mountings were constrained during the selected for front because it provides better controls on
analysis and the loads were subjected to the outer most member suspension parameter like castor, camber & toe. To reduce the
during impact in various condition. linkages, weight, and better packaging h-arms with toe link was
selected for rear.
Table 3 Result of Various Loading Condition
𝜙 𝑊×𝐻
Load Stress Deformation Roll Gradient, =𝐾 (5)
𝐴𝑦 𝜙𝐹 +𝐾𝜙𝑅
Front 10G (25KN) 280.4 1.478
Side 5G (12.5KN) 149.6 1.544
Rear 10G (25KN) 295.5 0.907 = 3°/g
Rollover 2G (5KN) 195.45 4.061
1
Torsional 3G (7.5KN) 212.5 7.011 𝐶𝑎𝑚𝑏𝑒𝑟 𝐶ℎ𝑎𝑛𝑔𝑒 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 = TAN −1 (𝑓𝑣𝑠𝑎) (6)

= 2.5°
POWERTRAIN
%𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖 − 𝑑𝑖𝑣𝑒 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡 =
𝑎𝑥
The objective of powertrain system was to enhance the 𝑚(
𝑔
)(% 𝑓𝑟𝑜𝑛𝑡 𝑏𝑟𝑎𝑘𝑖𝑛𝑔)(𝑠𝑣𝑠𝑎−ℎ𝑖𝑒𝑔ℎ𝑡⁄𝑠𝑣𝑠𝑎−𝑙𝑒𝑛𝑔𝑡ℎ)
performance of the vehicle without compromising durability and 𝑎 = 71% (7)
𝑚×( 𝑥)×(ℎ ⁄𝑙 )
𝑔
safety of the vehicle along with the driver.
tan 𝜃
Point of convergence was done on optimizing fixed gear ratio, %𝑎𝑛𝑡𝑖 𝑠𝑞𝑢𝑎𝑡 = × 100 (8)
ℎ ⁄𝑙
serviceability, maintainability and incorporating inboard braking.
=52%
Engine torque, Te =19.2 N-m
Low gear ratio, iglow = 31.5
Torque on wheel, Tw = Te * iglow *ηtransmission (1) STEERING SYSTEM
Tw= 453.6 N-m
Steering systems provides directional stability to moving vehicle.
Pull at wheels, Fw = Tw/dynamic radius of tire (2) The focus was given to reduce the turning radius of vehicle to
Fw = 453.6/(0.283337) improve the maneuverability.
Fw = 1600.92 N
Total Tractive effort required (TTE) = RR+ AR+GR Steering Geometry- In order to reduce tire, slip sideways and to
Rolling resistance, RR= GVW* 0.05 reduce friction between steering linkages, Ackerman Steering
RR = 115.5 N (dry road) geometry is selected.
Gradient Resistance,GR= GVW*sin(tan-1(0)) (3)
GR = 0 N (0% Gradient track)
Vwheel = ( Rw *2*Π*Nengine )/(60* iglow )
Where
Vwheel is the wheel velocity at 2600 rpm
 𝑘 = 𝜎𝑐2 × cos 𝜑 × sin 𝜑 (1⁄𝜖1 + 1⁄𝜖2 )⁄1.4 (26)

𝑘 = 0.45(𝐵𝐻𝑁⁄100)2 (27)

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS – Static structural analysis was

done using ANSYS Workbench for material selection & to verify
the parameters of different component of steering system such
as rack & pinion, steering column, steering wheel and tie-rod.

Table4. Material properties of various steering system components

Component Material Load Stress FOS

S. Wheel SS 250 N 21.87 MPa 1.9
Figure2. Ackerman Geometry Considering Zero Slip S. Column 4130 15 N-m 68.43 MPa 2.2
Tie Rod 4340 500N 112.76 MPa 1.7
Steering Effort Calculation- Rack& Pinion EN24MS 900N 148.36 MPa 2.01

Torque on steering arm, 𝑇𝑠 = 𝑙 × 𝑓 × 𝑆𝑅 = 24.34 𝑁𝑚 (10)

BRAKING SYSTEM
Force on steering arm 𝐹𝑠 = 𝑇𝑠⁄𝐿𝑠 =284.4 N (11)
The braking system was designed to inhibit the motion of vehicle
Force on rack 𝐹𝑟 = 2 × 𝐹𝑠 / cos 18 = 568.8 𝑁 (12) in the least stopping time. In order to achieve this in-board
braking with dual master cylinder with custom manufactured
Torque at pinion 𝑇𝑝 = 𝐹𝑟 × 𝑅𝑝 = 8.532𝑁𝑚 (13) balance bar was incorporated. Master cylinder & calipers were
connected using F-R split configuration with steel braided brake
T lines.
Steering effort , 𝑆𝐸 = R p = 56.88 𝑁 (14)
w
Table5. breaking components data
Lock to Lock Steering wheel angle
Steering Ratio = = 4.74 (15)
Sum of Inner & Outer Wheel Brake Power 26000W
Pad Area 40mm x 29mm
Fundamental Steering Equation Conv. Coeff. 20 W/m2K

𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑐𝑘𝑤𝑖𝑑𝑡ℎ Initial Temp 298K

cot 𝜃 − cot 𝜑 = 𝑤ℎ𝑒𝑒𝑙𝑏𝑎𝑠𝑒
= 0.844 (16) Transient time 2 sec
Mesh Size 0.7-2.1mm
length ofrack Load on disc Front-4400N Rear-4000N
Rack Travel = circumference of pinion = 3.73 𝑖𝑛𝑐ℎ𝑒𝑠 (17)

Rack & Pinion Design-

Brake factor for standard fixed type caliper
Material- EN24 MS
BF = 2FD/FA = (2µL FA)/FA = 2µL= 2×0.4=0.8 (28)
Ultimate Tensile Strength – 900 MPa
Hydraulic Brake Line Pressure:
Teeth Profile – Spur with 20° involute
Pl= Fp lp ηp⁄A mc = 4.3849 MPA (29)
𝑆𝑢𝑡
Bending Endurance of Pinion 𝜎𝑏𝑝 = 3
= 300 𝑀𝑃𝑎 (18) Deceleration: a = (2⁄WR)[(pl − po )f (Awc BFrηc )f + (pl −
po )r (Awc BFrηc )r = 5.886 m/S 2 (30)
𝑆𝑢𝑡
Bending Endurance of Rack 𝜎𝑏𝑟 = = 300𝑀𝑃𝑎 (19)
3
Maximum Deceleration a = μ ∗ g (31)
Lewis Form factor 𝑌𝑝 = 0.484 − (2.87⁄𝑧𝑝 ) = 0.3632 (20)
Brake power average = 12599.4 W
Lewis Form factor 𝑌𝑔 = 0.484 − (2.87⁄𝑧𝑔 ) = 0.2846𝜎𝑏𝑝 × 𝑌𝑝 < Brake Fluid Volume Produced by Master Cylinder: Vmc = A mc X =
𝜎𝑏𝑟 × 𝑌𝑔 (21) ηs Awc d =24.131 cm3 (32)

Face width 𝑏 = 10 × 𝑚 (22) Brake Hose Expansion: Vh = k h lh pl = 0.001 cm3 (33)

Beam Strength 𝑃𝑏 = 𝜎𝑏𝑝 × 𝑏 × 𝑚 × 𝑌𝑝 (23) Front Axle Dynamic Load: FxF = (1 − 𝜓 + 𝜒𝑎)𝑊𝜇 𝑇𝐹 =
1361.56N (34)
Wear Strength 𝑃𝑤 = 𝑏 × 𝑄 × 𝐷𝑝 × 𝑘 (24)
Rear Axle Load: FxR = (𝜓 − 𝜒𝑎)𝑊𝜇 𝑇𝑅 = 896.27𝑁 (35)
Ratio Factor 𝑄 = (2 × 𝑧𝑟 )⁄(𝑧𝑟 + 𝑧𝑝 ) (25)
Torque required on front wheel to locking
τFront = μ × Ff × R t = 227.925 Nm
Torque required on rear wheel to locking, τRear = μ × Fr × R t
= 149.78 Nm (37)
τTOTAL = 377.705 Nm
Braking torque generated on front axle = 117.81 x 2= 235.62 Nm
5. BAJA SAEINDIA 2019 Rules.
6. Suraj Aru, Pravin Yadav, Vinay Yadav, Akool Kumar
(36) and Pratim Angane, “Design, Analysis and
Optimization of Multi Tubular Space frame”,
International Journal of Mechanical & Production
Engineering Research and Development, ISSN(P)
2249-6890; ISSN(E) 2249-8001
7. Sahil Kakria, “Model & Simulation Study of BAJA
SAEINDIA All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) Using Integrated
MBD-FEA Approach”, SAE Technical Paper, 2015-26-
0219

Braking torque generated on rear axle= 162.79 Nm

Hence, the wheel will get locked as the torque generated is more ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
than required torque to lock wheels
Team Synergy Racing would like to thank SOLIDWORKS,
Component Selection: OEM master cylinder & caliper were ANSYS, MATLAB for providing us software for the development
selected on the basis above calculation, cost, & packaging. of the vehicle.
Part Vehicle Manufacturer Specification
Also, we would like to Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Master Hyundai TCIC 5/8”x1.2” G L Bajaj Institute of Technology & Management for their
Cylinder Verna (Bore x Stroke) support in the development of the Vehicle.
Caliper Piaggio/ KBX 30mm
Vespa (bore diameter)

For the above parameter custom disc was designed using

material AISI 4140 having diameter of 180mm and thickness
4mm for front wheels and 220mm diameter for rear wheel. The
structural and thermal analysis was done taking the parameters
given below rear wheel.

CONCLUSION
Development oriented towards a vehicle capable of completing
a four-hour endurance challenge has culminated in the design
and fabrication of a truly durable off-roader.

The Mechanical Engineering Department of G L Bajaj Institute

of technology and management has developed a vehicle worthy
of the Baja SAE competition and a standing in the commercial
all-terrain market.

REFRENCES

1. Milliken, William F. and Douglas L., “Race Car Vehicle

dynamics”.
2. Applied Mechanics and Materials Vol. 232 (2012) pp
819-822- SMBS, Vellore.
3. Rudolph Limpert, Brake design
4. Thomas D. Gillespie. Fundamentals of Vehicle
Dynamics. Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.
FRONT VIEW
SIDE VIEW
TOP VIEW
FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Figure8. Structural Analysis of Rack

Figure3. Front Impact Analysis

Figure4. Rear Impact Analysis

Figure9. Structural Analysis of Wheel Hub

Figure5. Side Impact Analysis

Figure10. Structural Analysis of Front Knuckle

Figure11. Structural Analysis of Gear

Figure6. Roll Over Analysis

Figure7. Torsional Analysis