2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Design, Static and Dynamic analysis of an All-

Terrain Vehicle Chassis and Suspension System
1
Mr. Dibya Narayan Behera, 2Rajesh Kumar, 3Kunal Abhishek, 4Sunil Kumar Panda
1
Asst. Professor, 2Under Graduate Student, 3Under Graduate Student, 4Under Graduate Student
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering,
Gandhi Institute of Engineering and Technology, Gunupur, Rayagada, BPUT, Odisha, 765022
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Abstract - This paper provides in-detail description of the design and structural analysis of chassis and suspension system
of a standard All-Terrain Vehicle. The design and development comprises of material selection, chassis and frame design,
cross section determination, and determining strength requirements of roll cage, stress analysis, design of the entire
double wishbone suspension system and simulations ton test the ATV against failure. The static and dynamic structural
analysis is also done on the chassis for validating the design. Initially, a prototype design of the chassis was made as a 3-D
CAD model using Solidworks CAD software. The designed ATV is an off-road vehicle powered by 305 cc, four strokes, 10
BHP engine Brigg Stratton engine and driven by manual transmission. Material selection was based on the basis of factors
like weight, cost, availability and performance during the entire design process, consumer interest through innovative,
inexpensive, and effective methods was always the primary goal. The manufacturing objective is to design a vehicle which
is safety ergonomic, aerodynamic, highly engineered and customer satisfaction which can make it highly efficient. The
proposed design of ATV can navigate all most all terrain which is the primary objective behind the design and fabrication
of any all-terrain vehicles.

Index Terms - Roll cage, material, finite element analysis, Front & Rear Suspension, Simulation of suspension system,
LOTUS, ANSYS
________________________________________________________________________________________________________
I. INTRODUCTION
The objective of the study is to design and analyze on static and dynamic failures of the chassis for All - Terrain Vehicle.
Material selected for the chassis based on physical strength, cost and availability. The roll cage is designed accordingly to
provide all the automotive sub-systems. A software model is prepared in Solid works software and for finite Element analysis
the design is tested against all modes of failure by conducting various simulations and stress analysis with the aid of Ansys
Software (14.0). Based on the result obtained from these tests the design is modified accordingly. After successfully designing
the roll cage, it is ready for fabricated. The vehicle is required to have a combination frame and roll cage consisting of steel
members. The ATV should run continuously for four hours in various terrains, especially loose and uneven roads with high
bumps, deeper potholes and muddy terrain on the surface. The input from the road surface to the ATV is hard/soft and always
varying its rattle space with body and suspension, longitudinal acceleration in forward motion and lateral acceleration when
cornering. This property results reduced in steering stability, controlling and handling performance of the ATV by drivers. So we
are giving a cost effective design of an All-Terrain Vehicle Frame and suspension system. Since the chassis is the integral part of
an automotive, it should be strong and light weight. Thus, the chassis design becomes very important. Typical capabilities on
basis of which these vehicles are judged are braking test, bumping, hill climbing, pulling, acceleration and maneuverability on
land as well as shallow waters. The aim is to design a frame with ultimate strength to show that the design is safe, rugged and
easy to maneuver. Design is done and carried out the linear static and dynamic failures of frame and suspension system.
II. DESIGN METHODOLOGIES
Roll cage Configuration, Design & Material
The roll cage plays a crucial role in providing the desired strength, endurance, safety and reliability to the vehicle. The roll cage
is designed in such a way that the driver seat, engine, transmission system, suspension system, brake system, fuel system and
steering mechanism can be mounted on it. The objectives considered were that the roll cage must be designed with high yield
and tensile strength steel tubes as a triangulated space frame, number of welded joints should be very less in favor of bent joints,
strength and weight ratios should be maintained at all times when vehicle is in dynamic mode, must provide maximum spaces
for the moving parts, must be designed in such a way that provides maximum driving reliability and most importantly the
drivers safety, must have ease of serviceability by ensuring that the roll cage members do not interfere with other subsystems
and the roll cage members should maintain their integrity in order to protect the driver in the event of a rollover or any impact.

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 120

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Fig.1.1: Front View of the Vehicle Fig.1.2: Top View of the Vehicle

Fig.1.3: Side View of Vehicle Fig.1.4: Isometric View of Baja Vehicle.

Material Selection
The material used for the required roll cage was circular steel tubing with an outside diameter of 25 mm (1 inch), wall thickness of
3.05 mm (0.120 inch) and a carbon content of at least 0.18 (Baja SAE et al, 2014). The research was conducted to choose the best
possible material. The choice of material was limited to steel as per SAE rules. The material was selected on the basis of cost,
availability, performance and weight of material. After thorough research, two best materials were found for the designing of the
roll cage i.e.: Steel AISI 4130 Chromoly alloy and Steel AISI 1018. The reasons for using round tubing (seamless) were it is lighter
than square tube as smaller gauge sizes can be used to handle the same stress as a wider square tube and a round tube always out
performs the square tube. Table 1.2 shows Mechanical properties of Steel AISI 1018 tube.

Physical properties Steel AISI 1018 Properties Steel AISI 4130 Chromoly alloy
Density 0.284 lb./in 0.284 lb./in
Ultimate Tensile Strength 63,800 psi 97,200 psi
Yield Tensile Strength 53,700 psi 63100 psi
Modulus of Elasticity 29,000 ksi 29,700 ksi
Bulk modulus 20,300 ksi 20,300 ksi
Shear modulus 11,600 ksi 15,400 ksi
Poissons ratio 0.290 0.290
Elongation Break 15% 25.5%
Hardness brinell 126 197
Table 1.1: Mechanical properties of Steel AISI 1018 Tube & Steel AISI 4130 chromoly alloy

Design of Roll Cage

According to the constraint in the rulebook, the maximum speed of the vehicle is assumed to be 60 km/h or 16.66m/s.
Calculations below were calculated in order to design the roll cage in best possible way.
Let Wnet = Net work done, f = Force and d = Distance travelled
Now,
Wnet = mv2 final - mv2 initial (1)
Wnet = - mv2 initial (2)
But, Wnet = Impact force d (3)

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 121

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

It was considered that for static analysis, the vehicle comes at rest within 0.1 seconds after impact (Sania and Karan et al, 2013).
Therefore, for a vehicle which moves at 16.66 m/s, the travel of the vehicle after impact is 1.66 m (Sania and Karan et al, 2013).
From equations (1), (2) and (3)

Impact force = mv2 initial 1/d (4)

Impact force = 235 (16.66)2 1/1.66
Impact force = 19,632.852 N
Therefore, Impact force by speed limit = 19,633 N

The Baja vehicle will have a maximum of 7.9 Gs of force during impact, G = Mass of the vehicle Gravitational force acting
on the vehicle (Sania and Karan et al, 2013).
F = m a = 235 7.9 9.81 = 18,212.265 N
Impact force by acceleration limit = 18,212 N
The above calculated values are practically comparable.

Fig. 1.5: Isometric View of Roll Cage Fig.1.6: Top View of Roll Cage

Fig.1.7: Rear View of Roll Cage Fig.1.8: Side View of Roll Cage

Triangular in structure
Chassis have been supported with all possible triangular structure so that forces acting on members can be distributed uniformly
throughout the members. Shocker has been mounted passing through the center line of triangle.

Finite Element Analysis

After finalizing the frame along with its material and cross section, it is very essential to test the rigidity and strength of the frame
under severe conditions. The frame should be able to withstand the impact, torsion, roll over conditions and provide utmost safety
to the driver without undergoing much deformation. The solution of a general continuum by the finite element method always
follows an orderly step by step process.
Step 1: Discretization of structural domain
Step 2: Selection of a proper interpolation model
Step 3: Derivations of element stiffness matrices (Characteristic matrices) and load vectors.
Step4: Assemblage of element equations to obtain the overall equilibrium equation.
Step 5: Solution of system equations to find nodal values of the displacements (field variable)
Step 6: Computation of element strains &stresses from the known model displacements
III. FRONT IMPACT ANALYSIS
Deceleration of 10 Gs was assumed for the loading which is equivalent to a static force of 26,698 N (equivalent to6000 lbf) load
on the vehicle, assuming the weight of the vehicle is 270.16 Kg (600 lbs.).Load applied: 26698N/m2 on front corner
Constraints: ALL DOFs=0 on Rear corner points
Note: Here we applied load of 10G. The research found that the human body will pass out at loads much higher than 9 times the
force of gravity or 9 Gs. A value of 10kGs was set as the goal point for an extreme worst case collision.

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 122

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Fig1.9: Finite element analysis of Front Impact Fig 2.0: Finite element analysis of Front Bump
Front Bump Analysis
The next step in the analysis was to analyze the stresses on the shock mounts caused by a 8G load on the shock mounts. The
loading was applied to the 2 shock mounts in the horizontal shock hoop in the front of the vehicle. Loading f=2000N is applied on
shock mounts Constraints: All DOFs=0 at rear wheels and opposite front wheels.

Rear Impact Analysis

In this analysis a load of 8G was applied on rear corners by keeping front corners Constraint. Load applied 14000N/m2 on rear
corners Boundary conditions: All DOFs =0 on Front corner points.

Rear Bump Analysis

The next step in analysis was to analyze the stresses on the shock mounts caused by a 4G load on rear shock mounts. The loading
was applied to the 2 shock mounts in the horizontal shock hoop in the rear of the vehicle. Loading F=2500N in applied on rear
shock mounts. Here for loading we consider weight of driver and vehicle.

Fig 2.1: Finite element analysis of Rear Impact Fig 2.2: Finite element analysis of Rear Bump

Side Impact Analysis

Side impact occurs mostly when a Baja vehicle collides other side ways. In side impact a load of 4G is applied on side impact
members by constraining base and opposite side. Load applied on side members 14000N/m2 Constraints: Assuming vehicle at
static Opposite side impact members ALL DOFs =0.

Roll Over Analysis

Roll over mainly occurs at time of Cornering .RHO and FBM are subjected to loads. A load of 2G is applied on RHO and FBM
junction. Loading F=7000 N is applied on top front points. Boundary conditions: ALL DOFs =0 on all key points of bottom
members.

Fig 2.3: Finite element analysis of Side Impact Fig 2.4: Finite element analysis of Roll over

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 123

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Overall Analysis Result

Particulars Front Rear Side Roll Torsional Front Rear
Impact impact impact Over rigidity Bump Bump
test Test
Total applied Force
(N) 8G 8G 4G 2G 2G 1G 1G
Maximum total
Deformation(mm) 6 13 18 7 2 3 4
Max. Combined stress
(Mpa) 214 290 325 178 105 43 150

Factor of Safety
2.03 1.5 1.33 2.44 4.14 10.11 2.9
Table 1.2: Analysis Result Table
Suspension System Design
Suspension is a compromise between conflicting requirements. The suspension imparted to the vehicle was designed to provide
maximum traction during cornering, stability in straight, to minimize the shock transferred to the roll cage and to provide enough
ground clearance. Double A-arm suspension of unequal length was chosen to meet the above stated requirements. This design
takes up a relatively large amount of space, but provides the most optimized wheel control, limiting tire scrub which can wear out
tires quickly, and providing the maximum cornering grip. The front and rear suspension were simulated in optimum software. It
also ensured the design was safe and compact.

Design Methodology & Objective

Designing a suspension which will influence significantly on comfort, safety and maneuverability contributing to vehicle road
holding/ handling and braking for good active safety and driving pleasure. Protect the vehicle from damage and wear from force
of impact with obstacles with maintaining correct wheel alignment. The overall purpose of suspension system is to absorb impacts
from coarse irregularities such as bumps and distribute that force with least amount of discomfort to the driver. We completed this
objective by doing extensive research on front suspension arms geometry to help reduce as much body roll as possible. Proper
camber and caster angles were provided to front wheels. An independent rear suspension will be achieved with semi trailing arm
links (with control links). The shocks will be set to provide the proper dampening and spring coefficient to provide a smooth and
well performing ride. This whole analysis was done on LOTUS SUSPENSION software

Vehicle suspension specification Values

Lateral Track Width (Front/Rear) 1517/1594.8 (mm)
Wheelbase 1710 mm
Ground Clearance 295.3 mm
Vehicle Weight 235 kg (518.086 lbs.)
Table 1.3: Vehicle Suspension Specifications
Front Suspension System
For our front suspension we have chosen a double arm wishbone type suspension. It provides spacious mounting position, load
bearing capacity besides better camber recovery. Front unequal non parallel double wishbone suspension. The tire needs to gain
negative camber in rolling situation, keeping the tire flat on the ground. Fox float R shocks feature an infinitely adjustable air
spring, velocity-sensitive damping control, external rebound damping adjustment and ultra-light weight of 2 to 2.25lbs depending
on size.

Rear Suspension System

An independent suspension system was chosen to be semi trailing link with upper & lower control arms keeping into
consideration the rear loading and impact effects. The trailing link along with the upper and lower control arms helps in checking
camber changes to be better. Since the motion of the semi trailing link is in the same plane as that of tires which allows proper
motion of the shock absorber mounted on it. FLOAT R EVOL shocks feature a main air chamber with an infinite adjustable air
spring, velocity sensitive damping control, additional air volume chamber (EVOL) for bottom-out adjustment, external rebound
adjustment, and an ultra-light weight of 4 to 4.5lbs depending on size.

Fig 2.5: Front Suspension System Fig 2.6: Rear Suspension System

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 124

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Material Selecton
Tubing material: The suspension control arm are constructed of circular steel tubing. Factor such as strength, weight and cost
were considered when choosing the control arm tubing material. Table 1.4:
Summary of material properties compares the different aspects of some of the materials considered:

Material Carbon Yield Tensile Elastic Density(*1000

Content(%) Strength(Mpa) Strength(Mpa) modulus(Gpa) kg/m3)
DIN2391ST52 30% 436 670 190-210 7.7-8.03
Steel 1020 CD 20% 390 470 190-210 7.7-8.03
Steel 1018 CD 18% 370 440 190-210 7.7-8.03

DIN2391ST52 has higher carbon content than the other two alloys; therefore, it has better mechanical properties.
DIN2391ST52 was again chosen for the tabs materials due to its superior properties. It was decided to use a minimum thickness
of 0.08 inches steel plate for all the tabs in the suspension system.
IV. DESIGN AND ANALYSIS OF SUSPENSION ARMS AND UPRIGHT:
In order to withstand number of forces acting on suspension system which includes, wheel hub, stud/knuckle/upright and
suspension arms had been designed with different design sequence depending up on compatibility in vehicle and were analyzed in
ANSYS software. Most of the designs were completed in Soildworks and CATIA , CAD software.

Lower Wishbone A-Arm:

After of design changes, we came to finalize lower wishbone in the shape of A/V. Reason behind this is, It is the most effective
structure to distribute stresses acting over the members. As we know maximum forces will be acting on lower arm.

Specification of Lower A-arm:

Pipe cross section 2 mm thickness 1 inch OD & 2 mm thickness
Arm length 16 inches
Distance between Arm members 11 inches

Total forces acting on lower arm have been discussed earlier, considering all those forces lower arm was analyzed FEA static
structure with umber of cross section tube and final best results.

Fig 2.7: Analysis of Upright Fig 2.8: Lower A-arm CAD Model Fig 2.9: Analysis of A-arm

Upper wishbone Arm/U arm:

Wishbone suspension system is provide with an upper control system so that forces acting on lower arm will be distributed to
upper arm too and also vehicle will be more stable dynamically as well as in static condition. Basically, forces that act upper
wishbone are lateral force, breaking force and vehicle weight acting downward. Keeping in mind all these forces upper arm was
designed to withstand all forces acting on it statically as well as dynamically. Upper wishbone provides better control over
camber changes as well as caster arrangement. Just like lower arm, upper arm has also been checked for different size of tubes
and best result was found for AISI 4130 chromoly having cross section, OD1inch and 2mm thickness. Shape of upper arm has
been kept in shape of U, reason behind is that shocker is being mounted on lower arm which will pass through upper arm so
enough space to accommodate, another reason is that U shape will cover largest part of the chassis which will increase the
stability of vehicle.

Dynamic analysis of suspension on LOTUS software:

The suspension dynamics describes the orientation of the tire as a function of wheel travel and steering angle. The motions of the
tire are highly dependent on the type of suspension. The various suspension systems can be designed on LOTUS/ ADAMS
suspension software. The type of suspension system was selected by measuring the track width and chassis coordinates, steering
angle, caster and camber angle, wheel rates, roll stiffness, king pin angle and tire scrub. The roll center position and instant center
was found on LOTUS software. The characteristic curves of caster angle, camber angle toe, toe angle was drawn on different
bumping analysis.

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 125

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Determination of Roll center:

Determination of roll center plays a very important role in deciding the wishbone lengths, tie rod length and the geometry of
wishbones. Roll center and ICR is determined because it is expected that all the three elements- upper wishbone, lower wishbone
and tie rod should follow the same arc of rotation during suspension travel. This also means that all the three elements should be
displaced about the same center point called the ICR. Initially, wishbone lengths are determined based on track width and chassis
mounting. These two factors- track width and chassis mounting points are limiting factors for wishbone lengths. Later, the
position of the tire and the end points of upper arm and lower arm are located.
The vehicle center line is drawn. The end points of wishbones are joined together to visualize the actual position of the wishbones
in steady condition. When the lines of upper and lower wishbones are extended, they intersect at a certain point known as
Instantaneous Center (ICR). A line is extended from ICR to a point at which tire is in contact with the ground. The point at which
this line intersects the vehicle center line is called the Roll Center.
Now, extend a line from ICR point to the steering arm. This gives exact tie rod length in order to avoid pulling and pushing of the
wheels when in suspension.

Fig 3.0 Determination of Roll Center

Design of Spring
A spring is an elastic object used to store mechanical energy. Springs are usually made out of spring steel. The force exerts in a
spring is proportional to its length of compression and elongation. The spring constant of a spring is the change in the force it
exerts, divided by the change in deformation of the spring. Spring is used in order to absorb shocks and for providing springing
action for better comfort of the passenger.
V. SIMULATION OF SUSPENSION SYSTEM
Lotus Engineering Software has been developed by automotive engineers, using them on many power train and vehicle projects at
Lotus over the past 15 years. It offers simulation tools which enable the user to generate models very quickly, using a mixture of
embedded design criteria and well-structured interface functionality.
VI. SUSPENSION SYSTEM IN LOTUS
Lotus simulation software has been used to simulate the suspension geometry of double wishbone suspension system. Various co-
ordinates of the entire system are given as input and the virtual model is built. It looks like as shown.

Fig 3.1: Suspension Geometry in Lotus Fig 3.2: Camber Change in Bump

Plot of Camber Angle Vs Roll Angle

From the below graph of Camber Angle vs. Roll Angle, it is clear that, as the camber of the tire varies in bump and droop then
roll angle also varies. The camber angle varies from -40 to +40 with roll angle.

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 126

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

Fig 3.3: Camber change during bump Fig 3.4 :camber change during bump

Suspension parameters Values

Suspension Travel in Jounce 140.5 mm
Suspension Travel in Drop 65.8 mm
Front Roll Center height 310.5 mm
Rear Roll Center Height 320.5 mm
Camber Angle 20
Camber Angle 10
Damper Travel 158.4 mm
Spring Rate 13.8
Spring Rate(Front/Rear) 266.7 mm
Spring Wire Diameter(Front/ Rear) 8 mm
Number of Turns of Spring(Front/Rear) 16
Toe change in Travel Minimal
Toe In (Degree) 0
Weight Distribution Bias (Front/Rear) 45/55%
Table 1.5: Calculated Suspension Parameters

Fig 3.5: camber angle vs. Roll angle Graph

VII. CONCLUSION
The objective of designing a single-passenger off-road race vehicle with high safety and low production costs seems to be
accomplished. The design is first conceptualized based on personal experiences and intuition. Engineering principles and design
processes are then used to verify and create a vehicle with optimal performance, safety, manufacturability, and ergonomics. The
design process included using Solid Works, CATIA and ANSYS 14.0 software packages to model, simulate, and assist in the
analysis of the completed vehicle. After initial testing it will be seen that our design should improve the design and durability of
all the systems on the vehicle. The Roll-cage Design by analyzing the failures on static structural analysis on ANSYS & the
suspension system designed by considering all the input parameters on LOTUS SUSPENSION SYSTEM can be further modified
for decreasing the weight and cost. Transverse leaf spring can be used to reduce the distribution of sprung weight on the
suspension assembly. Pneumatic suspensions can be added in the future for better performance.
VIII. RERFENCES
[1] Thomas D. Gillespie; Fundamental of Vehicle Dynamics; ISBN: 978-1-56091-199-9;
[2] Baja SAE International Rules 2015, Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) International..
http://www.sae.org/students/mbrules.pdf
[3] Lee, J. N., Nikravesh, P. E., Steady State Analysis of Multibody Systems with Reference to Vehicle Dynamics, Journal
of Nonlinear Dynamics, Vol. 5, 1994, pp. 181- 192. http://www.springerlink.com/content/jwu5842568731t84/
[4] Pal Arindam, Sharma Sumit, Jain Abhinav, Naiju C.D. (2013), Optimized Suspension Design of an Off-Road Vehicle, The

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 127

 2016 IJEDR | Volume 4, Issue 2 | ISSN: 2321-9939

International Journal Of Engineering and Science (IJES), and Vol. 2, pp. 57-62.
[5] Johansson, I., and Gustavsson, M., FE-based Vehicle Analysis of Heavy Trucks Part I Proceedings of 2nd MSC worldwide
automotive conference, MSC, 2000 http://www.mscsoftware.com/support/library/conf/auto00/p01200.pdf
[6] Oijer, F., FE-based Vehicle Analysis of Heavy Trucks Part II, Proceedings of 2nd MSC Worldwide Automotive
Conference, MSC, 2000 http://www.mscsoftware.com/support/library/conf/auto00/p01100.pdf
[7] Jin-yi-min, Analysis and Evaluation of Minivan Body Structure , Proceedings of 2nd MSC Worldwide Automotive
Conference, MSC, 2000 http://www.mscsoftware.com/support/library/conf/auto00/p00500.pdf
[8] John C. Dixon; Suspension analysis and computation geometry; ISBN: 978-0-470-51021-6; October 2009

IJEDR1602018 International Journal of Engineering Development and Research (www.ijedr.org) 128