Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES 2000-01-3447

New Suspension Design for Heavy Duty Trucks:

Dynamic Considerations
M. O. A. Mokhtar
Cairo University

I. M. Ibrahim and A. M. El-Butch

Helwan University

Truck and Bus Meeting and Exposition

Portland, Oregon
December 4-6, 2000

400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

The appearance of this ISSN code at the bottom of this page indicates SAE’s consent that copies of the
paper may be made for personal or internal use of specific clients. This consent is given on the condition,
however, that the copier pay a $7.00 per article copy fee through the Copyright Clearance Center, Inc.
Operations Center, 222 Rosewood Drive, Danvers, MA 01923 for copying beyond that permitted by Sec-
tions 107 or 108 of the U.S. Copyright Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying such as
copying for general distribution, for advertising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works,
or for resale.

SAE routinely stocks printed papers for a period of three years following date of publication. Direct your
orders to SAE Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

Quantity reprint rates can be obtained from the Customer Sales and Satisfaction Department.

To request permission to reprint a technical paper or permission to use copyrighted SAE publications in
other works, contact the SAE Publications Group.

All SAE papers, standards, and selected

books are abstracted and indexed in the
Global Mobility Database

No part of this publication may be reproduced in any form, in an electronic retrieval system or otherwise, without the prior written
permission of the publisher.

ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE. The author is solely
responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions will be printed with the paper if it is published in
SAE Transactions. For permission to publish this paper in full or in part, contact the SAE Publications Group.

Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication through SAE should send the manuscript or a 300
word abstract of a proposed manuscript to: Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.

Printed in USA
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

2000-01-3447

New Suspension Design for Heavy Duty Trucks:

Dynamic Considerations
M. O. A. Mokhtar
Cairo University

I. M. Ibrahim and A. M. El-Butch

Helwan University

Copyright © 2000 Society of Automotive Engineers, Inc.

ABSTRACT been apparent. Furthermore maintaining lower

components costs was increasingly challenging. For this
It is well known that the excessive levels of vibration in purpose, the automotive suspension designers pay great
heavy vehicles negatively affect driver comfortability, attention to optimize the suspension system parameters.
cargo safety and road condition. The current challenge That is to increase both ride quality and vehicle safety
in the field of suspension design for heavy vehicles is to and to reduce roads wear or damage. In the
optimize the suspension dynamic parameters to improve seventeen’s and eighteen’s, comprehensive researches
such requirements. were concerned with analyzing vehicle responses
excited by the road surface irregularities [1-5]. In these
Almost all of the previous work in this field is based on papers different techniques were developed to provide
applying the mathematical optimization considering the trucking industry with tools to predict the vehicle
active or passive suspension systems to obtain the dynamic behavior.
optimal dynamic parameters.
Several optimization studies, considering passive
In this work a new passive suspension systems for suspension systems were made for optimizing
heavy trucks is suggested and compared with the suspension system parameters [6-10]. Different
conventional passive suspension systems. The new Objective functions were used and optimal suspension
systems rely on transferring the vertical motion, parameters, particularly damping coefficients, were
(vibration), into horizontal motion through a bell-crank generated. Using the optimized suspension parameters,
mechanism to be taken by a horizontal passive the vehicle ride quality was improved. Unfortunately,
suspension system. The system dynamic parameters due to the limitations of the passive suspension systems,
like body acceleration, suspension travel and dynamic it is difficult to tune it while it interact with vehicle
tire load are calculated assuming random excitation due structure covering wide excitation frequency ranges.
to road irregularities. The active suspension systems were designed for
solving such vibration problem [11-14]. Since the active
The new suspension system is examined using single suspension systems are too expensive, suspension
wheel station and tandem axle configurations. designers used to design intelligent controllable
Improvements in body acceleration, suspension working dampers. The requirements for offering controllable
space and dynamic tire load have been achieved dampers, sensors and control units still cause high
compared with the conventional passive systems. These costs.
improvements are qualitatively almost equal to the
improvement that usually achieved by using active In this paper, new suspension systems have been
suspension system. designed for heavy trucks. The new systems transform
most the vertical motions into horizontal motions through
The new design is worth applying to cut the cost a bell crank mechanism. The ride behavior of the new
consumed in employing expensive active suspension suspension systems is examined using quarter car
systems. models considering single wheel station and tandem
axle configurations. Using different geometry and
INTRODUCTION isolation parameters (stiffness and damping
coefficients), significant improvements in the ride quality
During the past three decades, significant developments are obtained. The random responses of the present
in the constructions of the suspension systems have
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

vehicle models are concerned with the following

variables:
zs
• Body acceleration,
• Suspension working spaces, ms
• Dynamic tire loads. kb cb
z u1 z u2
CONVENTIONAL SUSPENSION SYSTEMS ks ks ks
cs ks 1 cs
This section describes two mathematical models for cs cs
conventional suspension systems; (a) single wheel mu u2 m u
u1
station suspension system and (b) linear tandem bogie Lb kt
system (tandem suspension system). The ride behavior
ct kt ct
of these models is compared with that of the new z r1
z r2
suspension systems.
L S
CONVENTIONAL SINGLE WHEEL STATION
SUSPENSION SYSTEM La

The model is 2 degrees of freedom system, Figure 1 Fig. 2 Conventional tandem suspension system [16]
[15]. The degrees of freedom represent the truck body
motion, z s , and the motion of wheel/axle assembly, z u .
zs
The vehicle is suspended on the wheel/axle assembly
through a vertical spring fitted in parallel with a viscous ms
damper. The tire is modeled as a spring and damper.
ks
Bell crank (2)
The formulation of the equations of motion and the
response variables of the conventional single wheel cs

a
station system can be found in [15]. The model (Z s + b c )
Bracket (1) mu
parameters represent the rear of a two axles truck and
c
given in Table 1 [16]. kt
ct
Pivot (3)
Table 1: Parameters of the conventional single wheel zr
station suspension system [16]
b
Body mass, 5979 kg
Mass of the wheel/axle assembly, 596 kg
Suspension damping , 29 kNs/m Fig. 3 New single wheel station suspension system.
Suspension stiffness, 0.583 MN/m
Tire stiffness, 2.4 MN/m
Tire damping, 1.2 kNs/m zs
ms
ks cs
ms zs
a

ks cs
mu mu
c1 c2 k
mu ct kt t ct
zu
z r1
z r2
kt ct b b
La
zr

Fig. 1 Conventional single wheel station suspension Fig. 4 New tandem suspension system.
system [15].
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

1
+ c s [( z
s − Lθ
1 ) − ( z
u 2 + Sθ
u 2 )]2 .
CONVENTIONAL TANDEM SUSPENSION SYSTEM 2
Substituting the partial derivative of the above energy
An air suspended tandem axle is used to generate a ride equation in the Lagrange’s equation, the equations of
vibration model for a vehicle equipped with two axle unit. motion can be generated.
The model is 6 degrees of freedom linear tandem bogie
system, Figure 2 [17]. The used model parameters are The response variables are
given in Table 2. The degrees of freedom represent the Body vertical acceleration = − ω 2 zs
vertical motions of the vehicle body and wheel/axle
assemblies and the angular motion of the suspension
Front suspension working space = z s − z u1
beams and the balancing beam. Rear suspension working space = z s − z u 2

The equations of motion of the vehicle system are Front dynamic tire force = k t ( z u1 − z r1 ) + ct ( z
u1 − z
r1 )
generated using the Lagrange’s energy equation which Rear dynamic tire force = k t ( z u 2 − z r 2 ) + ct ( z
u 2 − z
r 2 )
is expressed, for linear systems, as
Table 2: Parameters of the conventional tandem
d ∂KE ∂DF ∂PE
( )+ + = Fj suspension system [17]
dt ∂z
j ∂z
j ∂z j
Body mass, 8200 kg
Mass of the wheel/axle assembly, 400 kg
where
Mass moment of inertia of the
balancing arm, 1 kgm2
KE , PE are kinetic and potential energies, DF is the Suspension damping , 5 kNs/m
dissipative function, z j is the generalized coordinate Suspension stiffness, 0.4 MN/m
Angular damping of the balancing
number j, F j is the generalized force acting on the arm, 100 Nms/rad
generalized coordinate number j. Angular stiffness of the balancing arm, 1 Nms/rad
Tire stiffness, 2 MN/m
Since the systems in this work are passive systems, Tire damping, 1.2 kNs/m
there are no generalized forces. The excitation is Length of the balancing arm, 0.4 m
generated due the random road surface irregularities. Distance between the two axles, 1.4 m
The system energies are evaluated as follows:

Kinetic energy: NEW SUSPENSION SYSTEMS

1 1 1 1
KE = ms z
s2 + I bθ
12 + mu z
u21 + I uθ u21 + NEW SINGLE WHEEL STATION SUSPENSION
2 2 2 2 SYSTEMS
1 1
mu z
u22 + I uθ
u22
2 2 The configuration of the new suspension system is
Potential Energy: shown in Figure 3. The vehicle main suspension
1 1 1 elements are fitted horizontally between the bracket 1,
PE = k bθ 12 + k t ( z u1 − z r1 ) 2 + k t ( z u 2 − z r 2 ) 2 + which is assumed to be welded with the vehicle frame,
2 2 2 and the vertical face of the rotary link ( bell crank ) 2.
1 1 The center of the angular oscillation of the link 2 is the
k s [ z s − ( z u1 + Sθ u1 )] 2 + k s [ z s − ( z u 2 − Sθ u 2 )] 2 pivot 3 fixed in the bracket 1.
2 2
1
+ k s [( z s + Lθ 1 ) − ( z u1 − Sθ u1 )]2 The wheel mass ( mu ) is to be positioned at the wheel
2 axle position. The system degrees of freedom are the
1
+ k s [( z s − Lθ 1 ) − ( z u 2 + Sθ u 2 )] 2 . vertical motion of the vehicle body and the angular
2 motion of the bell crank 2. Based on this configuration,
Dissipative Function: the suspension system will stores and dissipates
energies in the horizontal direction. Also, it is expected
1
2 1 1
DF = cbθ 1 + ct ( z
u1 − z
r1 ) 2 + ct ( z
u 2 − z
r 2 ) 2 + that the offset distances ( a and b ) will play an important
2 2 2 role in transmitting vibrations from the wheel to the body
1 1 or vise versa. The nominal values of the model
c s [ z
s − ( z
u1 + Sθ
u1 )]2 + c s [ z
s − ( z
u 2 − Sθ
u 2 )] 2 parameters are given in Table 1. Additional values
2 2 related to the bell crank and the modified suspension
1 parameters are given in the result section of the present
+ c s [( z
s + Lθ
1 ) − ( z
u1 − Sθ
u1 )]2 work.
2
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

The system energies are expressed as follows: Suspension working space = aθ c1 − aθ c 2

Front dynamic tire force =
Kinetic energy:
1 1 1 kt [ zr1 − ( z s + bθ c1 )] + ct [ z
r1 − ( z
s + bθ
c1 )]
KE = ms z
s2 + I cθ
c2 + mu ( z
s + bθ
c ) 2 Rear dynamic tire force =
2 2 2
Potential Energy: kt [ zr 2 − ( z s + bθ c 2 )] + ct [ z
r 2 − ( z
s + bθ
c 2 )]
1 1
PE = kt [ zr − ( z s + bθ c )]2 + k s (aθ c ) 2
2 2
Dissipative function:
DISCRIPTION OF THE RANDOM ROAD
SURFACE
1 1
DF = ct [ z
r − ( z
s + bθ
c )]2 + cs (aθ
c ) 2 .
2 2 The vehicle is assumed to move over a random road
The response variables are: surface. The power spectral density of the road
Body vertical acceleration = − ω 2 zs irregularities, considering a single wheel station model,
can be expressed as given in [15];
Suspension working space = aθ c
v p −1
Dynamic tire force = PSDRS = G
kt [ zr − ( z s + bθ c )] + ct [ z
r − ( z
s + bθ
c )] fp
where
NEW TANDEM SUSPENSION SYSTEMS
-1
G is the roughness coefficient, 5x10 for a
In the proposed new suspension design, the axles of the
principle road,
tandem suspension system are hinged to two opposite
bell cranks as shown diagrammatically in Figure 4. The v vehicle velocity, m/sec,
bell cranks are hinged in a bracket welded to the vehicle
frame. The top ends of the opposite bell cranks are f frequency, Hz,
connected to a horizontal spring/damper flexible joint.
The nominal values of the model parameters are given
p is the slop of the log-log spectral density curve,
in Table 2. Additional values related to the bell cranks 2.5.
and modified suspension parameters are given in the For the two axles models, the power spectral density of
result section of the present work. The model is three the road excitation signals, including the cross
degrees of freedom system. These degrees of freedom correlation, can be expressed as;
are vertical motion of vehicle body and two angular
motions of the two bell cranks. é 1 e − iωD ù
PSDRD = PSDRS ê iωD ú
The system energies are expressed as follows: ëe 1 û
where
Kinetic energy:
1 1 1 ω = 2πf
KE = ms z
s2 + I cθ
c21 + mu ( z
s + bθ
c1 ) 2 +
2 2 2 D is the time delay between the two axles.
1
2 1
I cθ c 2 + mu ( z
s + bθ
c 2 ) 2
2 2 RANDOM RESPONSES
Potential energy:
1 The equations of motion of the vehicle system can be
PE = kt [ z r1 − ( zs + bθ c1 )]2 + written in a matrix form as follows:
2
1 [ M ]{
z
} + [C ]{z
} + [ K ]{z} = [C EX ]{z
O } + [ K EX ]{z O }
kt [ zr 2 − ( z s + bθ c 2 )]2 + k s (aθ c1 − aθ c 2 ) 2
2 The vector of the power spectral densities of the output
Dissipative function: variables can be expressed as:
1
DF = ct [ z
r1 − ( z
s + bθ
c1 )]2 + PSDRES = [H T (if )]PSDROAD [H T (−if )]
T
2
1
ct [ z
r 2 − ( z
s + bθ
c 2 )]2 + cs (aθ
c1 − aθ
c 2 ) 2 . [ ]
H T (if ) is the transformed transfer function of the
2 vehicle system.
The response variables are:
Body vertical acceleration = − ω 2 zs H T (if ) = [−(2πf ) 2 [T ACC ] + i (2πf )[TVEL ] +
TDIS ][ H (if )] + [TEDIS + i (2πf )TEVEL ]
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

H (if ) = [[ K ] − (2πf ) 2 [ M ] + i (2πf )[C ]] −1[[ K Ex + suspension working space at this ratio that can be
acceptable in certain circumstances if compared in the
i (2πf )[C EX ] gain in other parameters.

T ACC , TVEL and TDIS are the transformation matrices of The second step in the optimization technique is to
the system acceleration, velocity and displacement guess the optimum spring stiffness that achieves low
vectors, levels of the three dominating performance
TEVE , TEDIS are the transformation matrices of the characteristics under study. After trying a quite large
number of spring stiffnesses while keeping the rest of
excitation displacement and velocity. the parameter unchanged, it is found that employing
very stiff springs deteriorates the dynamic stability of the
The root mean square ( RMS ) values of the response suspension while relatively softer ones improve it, Fig 7.
variables can be expressed as A stiffness value of about 75% of the nominal value is
found to give the lowest level of vertical vibrations and
f2
RMS j = ò dynamic tire load. No significant improvement in the
j
PSD RES (if )df
f1 suspension working space is noticed., Fig. 7 b.

where j is the number of the response variable, The last step in the used optimization procedure is to
f 1 , f 2 are the minimum and maximum values of the optimize the damping coefficient of the used damper.
excitation frequency, Hz. Similar technique is used and it is found that big gain
can be achieved by using dampers with relatively higher
damping coefficient. Doubling the nominal value of the
RESULTS
damping coefficient gives the lowest dynamic tire load,
vertical body acceleration and suspension working
In the following section, the attained results for the new
space, Fig. 8 a, b and c. Low and very high damping
suspension design will be presented and discussed. The
coefficients are found to be disadvantageous in the
main goal of employing such new design is to optimize
optimization process.
the dynamic tire load, vertical body acceleration and
suspension working space without the need for active
Tables 3, 4 and 5 gives the RMS values of the new
suspension system.
system response as being affected by the leverage ratio,
spring stiffness and damping coefficient respectively.
NEW SINGLE WHEEL STATION SYSTEM
From which it is clear that there are significant
improvement of the dynamic tire load and the vertical
In Fig 5 a, b and c, the power spectral density of the
body acceleration.
vertical body acceleration, dynamic tire load and
suspension working space are plotted versus frequency
Table 3 Effect of a/b ratio on the RMS values of the
for three road types. It is found that using a leverage
response variables
ratio of the bell crank mechanism, a/b=1 gives the same
performance like the traditional passive suspension a =0.3m = 0.25m = 0.25m =0.35m
system. From these figures, it can be also noticed that b =0.3m = 0.3m =0.35m =0.3m
the tested parameters are higher for minor road, 1.0457 0.8831 0.7682 1.2086
-6
G=5x10 which confirms with the previous findings [15]. z
s
sws 0.0087 0.009 0.0093 0.0085
The current study focusing on optimizing the passive dtl 6835.5 6361.7 6355 7632
suspension system to the maximum extent by using
different leverage ratios for the bell crank mechanism Table 4 Effect of spring stiffness the RMS values of the
and using different values for the spring stiffness and response variables
damping coefficients to achieve the most minimum
values of the parameter under study. This will lead at the k =0.75 k n kn = k k =1.25 k n
end to a very good suspension with minimal cost z
s 0.6948 0.7555 0.8238
compared with the active suspension systems.
sws 0.0066 0.0065 0.0064
The first step in optimization technique is to get the dtl 5296.2 5500 5770
leverage ratio that gives minimum levels of dynamic tire Table 5 Effect of suspension damping on the RMS
load, body vertical vibration and minimum suspension values of the response variables.
working space. Different values for the leverage ratio,
a/b have been used while keeping other system c = 0.8 c n c = cn c = 2 cn
parameters unchanged. Based on results in Figures 6
a,b and c, the best leverage ratio of the bell crank z
s 0.8136 0.7682 0.7555
mechanism to give minimum levels of dynamic tyre load sws 0.0105 0.0093 0.0065
and vertical body acceleration is a/b= 0.25/0.35. It is 6927.6 6330 5500
dtl
important to note that there is a slight increase in the
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

5.00E+08 1.20E+00

2)/Hz
4.50E+08 a=b=0.3m

PSD of body vertical acceleration, (m/s**

2/Hz.

Motorway, G=1E-07
1.00E+00 a=0.25m and b=0.3m
4.00E+08
PSD of Dynamic Tyre Load, N^

Principal road, G=5E-07 a=0.25m and b=0.35m

3.50E+08 Minor road, G=5E-06
8.00E-01
3.00E+08

2.50E+08 6.00E-01

2.00E+08
4.00E-01
1.50E+08

1.00E+08
2.00E-01
5.00E+07

0.00E+00 0.00E+00
0.25
1.25
2.25
3.25
4.25
5.25
6.25
7.25
8.25
9.25
10.25
11.25
12.25
13.25
14.25
15.25
16.25
17.25
18.25
19.25

0.25
1.35
2.45
3.55
4.65
5.75
6.85
7.95
9.05
10.15
11.25
12.35
13.45
14.55
15.65
16.75
17.85
18.95
Frequency, Hz
Frequency, Hz
a- Vertical body acceleration a- Vertical body acceleration

1.40E+01
2.00E-04

2/HZ
2)^2/Hz

PSD of Suspension working space, m**

1.20E+01 1.80E-04
Motorwa, G=1E-07 a=b=0.3m
PSD of body acceleration, (m/s^

Principal road, G=5E-07 1.60E-04 a=0.25m and b=0.3m

1.00E+01 a=0.25m and b=0.35m
Minor road, G=5E-06 1.40E-04

8.00E+00 1.20E-04

1.00E-04
6.00E+00
8.00E-05

4.00E+00 6.00E-05

4.00E-05
2.00E+00
2.00E-05
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.30
1.30
2.30
3.30
4.30
5.30
6.30
7.30
8.30
9.30
10.30
11.30
12.30
13.30
14.30
15.30
16.30
17.30
18.30
19.30

0.25
1.30
2.35
3.40
4.45
5.50
6.55
7.60
8.65
9.70
10.75
11.80
12.85
13.90
14.95
16.00
17.05
18.10
19.15
Frequency, Hz
Frequency, HZ
b- Suspension working space
b- Suspension working space

1.20E-03
2/Hz

5.00E+07
PSD of Suspension working space, m^

Motorway, G=1E-07 4.50E+07

1.00E-03 a=b=0.3m
2/Hz

Principal road, G=5E-07

PSD of Dynamic tyre load, N**

4.00E+07 a=0.25m and b=0.3m

Minor road, G=5E-06
a=0.25m and b=0.35m
8.00E-04 3.50E+07

3.00E+07
6.00E-04
2.50E+07

2.00E+07
4.00E-04
1.50E+07

2.00E-04 1.00E+07

5.00E+06
0.00E+00
0.00E+00
0.30
1.30
2.30
3.30
4.30
5.30
6.30
7.30
8.30
9.30
10.30
11.30
12.30
13.30
14.30
15.30
16.30
17.30
18.30
19.30

0.25
1.25
2.25
3.25
4.25
5.25
6.25
7.25
8.25
9.25
10.25
11.25
12.25
13.25
14.25
15.25
16.25
17.25
18.25
19.25

Frequency, Hz Frequency, HZ
c- Dynamic tire load c- Dynamic tire load
Fig. 5 Variation of response variables of conventional Fig. 6 Effect of leverage ratio on the response variables
single wheel station and the new suspension design with -7
of the new single wheel model (G=5x10 , v=20 m/sec.).
leverage ratio of a/b=1 (v=20 m/sec.).
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

5.00E-01 1.60E+00

2)/Hz
2)/Hz

PSD of body vertical acceleration, (m/sec**

4.50E-01 0.75*Nominal stiffness 0.8 *Nominal damping
PSD of body vertical acceleration, (m/s**

1.40E+00
Nominal Stiffness Nominal damping
4.00E-01
1.25*Nominal stiffness 2*Nominal damping
1.20E+00
3.50E-01
1.00E+00
3.00E-01

2.50E-01 8.00E-01

2.00E-01
6.00E-01
1.50E-01
4.00E-01
1.00E-01
2.00E-01
5.00E-02

0.00E+00 0.00E+00
0.25
1.25
2.25
3.25
4.25
5.25
6.25
7.25
8.25
9.25
10.25
11.25
12.25
13.25
14.25
15.25
16.25
17.25
18.25
19.25

0.25
1.20
2.15
3.10
4.05
5.00
5.95
6.90
7.85
8.80
9.75
10.70
11.65
12.60
13.55
14.50
15.45
16.40
17.35
18.30
19.25
Frequency, Hz Frequency, Hz

a- Vertical body acceleration a- Vertical body acceleration

5.00E-05 3.00E-04
2/Hz

2/Hz
0.75*Nominal stiffness
PSD of suspension working space, m**

PSD of suspension working space, m**

4.50E-05
0.8*Nominal damping
Nominal stiffness 2.50E-04
4.00E-05 Nominal damping
1.25 *Nominal stiffness
2*Nominal damping
3.50E-05
2.00E-04
3.00E-05

2.50E-05 1.50E-04

2.00E-05
1.00E-04
1.50E-05

1.00E-05
5.00E-05
5.00E-06

0.00E+00 0.00E+00
0.25
1.25
2.25
3.25
4.25
5.25
6.25
7.25
8.25
9.25
10.25
11.25
12.25
13.25
14.25
15.25
16.25
17.25
18.25
19.25

0.25
1.20
2.15
3.10
4.05
5.00
5.95
6.90
7.85
8.80
9.75
10.70
11.65
12.60
13.55
14.50
15.45
16.40
17.35
18.30
19.25
Frequency, Hz Frequency, Hz

b- Suspension working space b- Suspension working space

6.00E+07 6.00E+07

0.8*Nominal damping 0.8*Nominal damping

2/Hz

5.00E+07 5.00E+07
Nominal damping
PSD of Dynamic tyre load, N**

2/Hz

Nominal damping
PSD of Dynamic tyre load, N**

2*Nominal damping
2*Nominal damping
4.00E+07 4.00E+07

3.00E+07 3.00E+07

2.00E+07 2.00E+07

1.00E+07 1.00E+07

0.00E+00 0.00E+00
0.25
1.10
1.95
2.80
3.65
4.50
5.35
6.20
7.05
7.90
8.75
9.60
10.45
11.30
12.15
13.00
13.85
14.70
15.55
16.40
17.25
18.10
18.95
19.80
0.25
1.20
2.15
3.10
4.05
5.00
5.95
6.90
7.85
8.80
9.75
10.70
11.65
12.60
13.55
14.50
15.45
16.40
17.35
18.30
19.25

Frequency, Hz
Frequency, Hz

c- Dynamic tire load c- Dynamic tire load

Fig. 7 Effect of suspension stiffness on the response Fig. 8 Effect of suspension damping on the response
-7
-7
variables of the new single wheel model (G=5x10 , v=20 variables of the new single wheel model (G=5x10 , v=20
m/sec.). m/sec.).
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

NEW TANDEM SUSPENSION SYSTEM CONCLUSIONS AND SUGGESTIONS FOR

FURTHER WORK
In this model there is an interaction between the two
opposite bell crank mechanisms that led to a need for From comparisons between the configurations of the
another round of trials to calculate the optimum response variables (Power spectral densities, PSD, and
suspension parameters. root mean square values, RMS) for both conventional
After a large number of trials, it is found that the best and new suspension systems, the following conclusion
leverage ratio for this design is a/b =0.25/0.5. The can be drawn:
horizontal springs and dampers are also selected
carefully to reduce the dynamic tire load and the body NEW SINGLE WHEEL STATION SUSPENSION
vertical acceleration. A value of the spring stiffness of
0.5 of the equivalent nominal value and a value of the The design of the new single wheel station system gives
damping coefficient of 1.75 times its nominal value are the following advantages over the conventional one from
found to give minimum system responses, Fig. 9 a & b. the following points of view:
The eigenvalues (natural frequencies) of the coordinates
z s , θ c1 and θ c 2 are 1.4, 11.5 and 11.7 Hz respectively. • Simple to control the system vibration levels by
the variation of the leverage ratio of the bell crank
Good agreement has been found between these values (a/b).
and the observed values in the power spectral density
curves.
• Reducing the levels of the power spectral density
1.60E+01
curves and hence reducing the root mean square
values of the body vertical acceleration, suspension
2)/HZ

1.40E+01 working space and dynamic tire load.

PSD of Body vertical acceleration, (m/sec**

Conventional Tandem
1.20E+01
New Tandem
• For further work, the suspension mechanism (bell
1.00E+01 crank) can be used directly to design a new liftable
8.00E+00
axle/suspension system.

6.00E+00 NEW TANDEM SUSPENSION SYSTEM

4.00E+00
Based on the new system configuration and suspension
2.00E+00 parameters, the following conclusions can be stated:
0.00E+00
•
0.25
1.30
2.35
3.40
4.45
5.50
6.55
7.60
8.65
9.70
10.75
11.80
12.85
13.90
14.95
16.00
17.05
18.10
19.15
16.15
17.20
18.25
19.30

Significant improvements are achieved in the

-2.00E+00
body acceleration, suspension working space and
Frequency, HZ
dynamic tire loads (58%, 33%, 5% respectively) over
those of the conventional tandem suspension
a- Body acceleration system.
3.00E+08
• Reduction in the system degrees of freedom that
2/HZ

2.50E+08 Conventional Tandem makes the control of the vibration easy and reduces
PSD of Dynamic tire load, N**

New Tandem the system complexity.

2.00E+08
• The frequency of the peak value of the dynamic
1.50E+08 tire load is moved from 2 Hz (conventional tandem
suspension) to 11 Hz (new tandem suspension).
1.00E+08 This reduces the coupling between the vibration
levels of both body and wheel/axle assemblies.
5.00E+07 Therefore, for further work, the application of the
slow active suspension can be employed for such
0.00E+00 new tandem suspension system for a limited
bandwidth of frequency.
0.25
1.45
2.65
3.85
5.05
6.25
7.45
8.65
9.85
11.05
12.25
13.45
14.65
15.85
17.05
18.25
19.45
16.60
17.80
19.00

Frequency, HZ
REFERENCES
b- Dynamic tire load 1. Inoh, Takeshi and Aisaka, Masahru (1973) ‘Tuning
technique for controlling heavy-duty truck shak-
vertical, torsional, and lateral’ SAE paper No.
Fig. 9 Vehicle response considering conventional and 730650.
-7
new tandem suspension systems (G=5x10 , v=20
m/sec.).
 Downloaded from SAE International by Daimler AG - Germany, Monday, April 27, 2015

2. Baum, J. H., Bennett, J. A. and Carne, T. G. (1977) Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering, pp. 215-
‘Truck ride improvement using analytical and 225.
optimization methods’ SAE paper No. 770609.
3. Foster, Albert W. (1978) ‘A heavy truck cab CONTACT
suspension for improved ride’ SAE paper No.
780408. Prof. M. O. A. Mokhtar
4. Dokainish, M. A. and El-Madany, M. M. (1980) Professor of machine design,
‘Random response of tractor-semitrailer system’ Department of Mechanical Design and Production,
Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. 9, pp. 87-112. Faculty of Engineering, Cairo Univ., Cairo, Egypt.
5. El-Madany, M. M. (1987) ‘An analytical investigation Fax: (202) 5723486
of isolation systems for cab ride’ Computers & E-Mail: mmokhtar@alpha1-eng.cairo.eun.eg
Structures, Vol. 27, No. 5, pp. 679-688.
6. Bruce, D. Van Deusen, (1971) ‘Truck suspension
optimization’ SAE paper No. 710222. LIST OF SYMBOLS
7. El-Madany, M. M. (1988) ‘Design and optimization of
truck suspensions using covariance analysis’ The majority of the notations are defined within the text
Computers & Structures, Vol. 28, No. 2, pp. 241- next to the equations in which they are first used.
246. Additional notations are listed here:
8. Pintado, P. and Benitez, F. G. (1990) ‘Optimization
of vehicle suspension I: Time domain’ Vehicle a : vertical arm distance of the bell crank, m
System Dynamics, Vol. 19, pp. 273-288. b : horizontal arm distance of the bell crank, m
9. Del Castillo, J. M., Pintado, P. and Benitez, F. G. z s : vertical displacement of the vehicle body,
(1990) ‘Optimization of vehicle suspension II:
Frequency domain’ Vehicle System Dynamics, Vol. z u : vertical displacement of the wheel/axle assembly,
19, pp. 331-352. θ u : angular displacement of the suspension arm of the
10. Rakheja, S. Ahmed, A. K. W. and Yang, X. (1999)
‘Optimal suspension damping for improved driver- conventional tandem suspension system,
and road friendliness of urban buses’ SAE paper No. θ b : angular displacement of the balancing arm of the
1999-01-3728, SP-1486, Roll stability dynamics, conventional tandem suspension system,
Ride, and Handling. θ c : angular displacement of the bell crank,
11. El-madany, M. M. and Samaha, M. E. (1992) ‘On the
optimum ride control of a stochastic model of a k s : suspension stiffness coefficient,
tractor-semitrailer vehicle’ Journal of Sound and cs : suspension damping coefficient,
Vibration, Vol. 156, No. 2, pp. 269-281.
12. Wilkinson, P. A. and Crolla, D. A. (192) k n : nominal value of suspension stiffness coefficient,
‘Development of sub-optimally controlled c n : nominal value of suspension damping coefficient,
suspensions for articulated truck to reduce vibration
and road wear’ XXIV FISITA Congress, London, pp. k t : tire stiffness coefficient,
239-245. ct : tire damping coefficient,
13. Cebon, D., Besinger, F. H. and Cole, D. J. (1996)
‘Control strategies for semi-active lorry suspensios’
v : vehicle velocity,
Proc Instn Mech. Engrs, Part D: Journal of G : is the roughness coefficient,
Automobile Engineering, pp. 161-178. f : frequency,
14. Ibrahim, I. M. (1999) ‘Finite element multibody I c : mass moment of inertia of the bell crank,
system control of tractor semi-trailers with active
suspension and controller time delay’ SAE paper No. [M ] , [C ] , [K ] : mass, damping and stiffness matricies
1999-01-0726, SP-1438, Steering and Suspension
Technology Symposium.
{z} is the vector of the system generalized coordinates,
15. Crolla, D. A., Firth, G. and Horton, D. (1993) ‘An {z O } is the vector of the road excitation signals,
Introduction to vehicle dynamics’ Mechanical
[C EX ] , [ K EX ] : are excitation distribution matrices of
Engineering Dept., Leeds University, UK.
16. Ibrahim, I. M., Crolla, D. A. and Barton, D. C. (1995) the road excitation signals,
‘Active suspension for trucks incorporating frame PSD : power spectral density,
flexibility effects’ Heavy Vehicle Systems, Special RMS : root mean square value,
Series of the Int. J. of Vehicle Design, Vol. 2, No. 1,
pp. 1-17. sws : suspension working space,
17. Potter, T. E. C., Cebon, D., Collop, A. C. and Cole,
D. J. (1996) ‘Road-damaging potential of measured dtl : dynamic tire load.
tyre forces in mixed traffic’ Proc Instn Mech Engrs,