Idiada Sim4u Workshop Motorsport 2010

8/21/2019 Idiada Sim4u Workshop Motorsport 2010

1/108

In collaboration with

Integration of experimental techniques for the

optimisation of motorsport dynamic simulationmodels


2/108

01_ Presentation of participants

02_ Motorsport chassis

development evolution

03_ Overview

Summary

04_ Typical software to correlate

05_ Laboratory tests

06_ Proving ground tests


3/108




03_ Overview

Summary

• APPLUS IDIADA

• SIM4U

• AERODYNE





4/108

Presentation of participants: Idiada

Joan PUIG

Vehicle DynamicsLaboratory [email protected]

n us r a eng neer

10 years as a vehicle dynamics test and manager engineer

• Proving ground testing (first 2 years)

• Laboratory testing (last 8 years)

Wide range of vehicles tested

• Passenger vehicles

• Motorsport vehicles (F1, WRCC, WTCC)

• Light and heavy commercial vehicles


5/108

IDIADA offers automotive product developmentservices to assist its clients in fulfilling all legal and

consumer requirements and in succeeding in their

different markets around the world

Passive

TESTING HOMOLOGATIONPRODUCTDEVELOPMENT

European whole-vehicle

Presentation of participants: Idiada

Reliability

Comfort

a ety

ActiveSafety

Accredited homologation

Japan, Brazil, Australia

etc.

type-approval agency

Participation in Geneva

working groups under

WP29

Project Management forhomologation programs

Environment


6/108

Complete development projects

Start Styling & packaging

freeze PrototypeRelease

ToolingRelease SOP Pre-Production

ConceptFinding &

Benchmarking

Styling &Feasibility

Package &Surfacing

ProductEngineering

Design(CAD)

ProductEngineeringSimulation

(CAE)

DevelopmentTest

Validation Homologation

Development led by vehicle functionalities and performance

Concept phase Development

Final validation &

Homologation Preparation

CADFeasibility

Styling

CAE

CAD 3D & 2DCAD 3D & 2D

Production Optimization

CAE CAE

IDIADA Engineering Management

Mule Test Prototype Testing Pre-production

Testing

Homologatio

n Tests

Testing

BenchmarkTests

Prototype Coordination

Supplier Coordination


7/108

Engineering

Passive Safety

Active Safety

Structural analysis / Restraint system integration / Occupant protection / Pedestrian protection

Advanced chassis evaluation techniques / Chassis tuning & system development / Brake systemdevelopment

PowertrainIntegration / Engine calibration / CNG conversion / Alternative fuels / Anti-pollution systems


8/108

EngineeringNVH

Comfort

Interior noise tuning / Noise and vibration releases / Exterior noise / Vibration fatigue

HVAC system development and validation / Thermal comfort

e a ty

Electronics

Structural, Powertrain and general vehicle durability / Market driver assessment, roadcharacterization and fleet validation

On-board electronics systems development support & validation / EMC engineering & technicalsolutions / Validation of ADAS


9/108

Presentation of participants

www.sim4u.eu

Benoit DAILLIEZ

[email protected]

Services offered

• Engineering consulting

• Dedicated project management

• Mechanical expertise

• Simulation tools development

• Test and validation engineering

Career headlines

• Toyota F1 (> 6 years)

Senior engineer chassis R&D

• Asian Elec Vehicle Society

• Cape town - Nuclear power

• Msc of advanced mechanics

• Msc of civil engineering and FEM


10/108


www.aerodyne.frRobert CHOULET

[email protected]

Services offered

• Ready to use simulation software

• Tailored simulation software

• Engineering consulting services

• Conferences and seminars support

Career headlines

• Toyota F1 (> 10 years)

Chassis R&D consultant

• Peugeot SportHead of Dynamics & Aerodynamics

• Bethenod Award (SIA)

• Massion Medal (Industry)

• Ecole Centrale de Paris (ECP)


11/108


Main clients Main cars developed

• Toyota F1 TF102 to TF109

• F1 Jordan Peugeot 196 & 197

• Peugeot WRC

• Porsche 917 Le Mans & Can-Am

• Alfa Romeo 33TT12• Ligier F1 JS5 to JS11

• Alfa Romeo F1 177 &179

• Lola Can-Am T350 Carl Haas


12/108


DYNLAT DYNLONGI

MAIN PRODUCTS

• For lateralsimulation

• 7 DOF model /

linear solver

• For verticalsimulation

• 15 DOF model /

non linear solver

DYNSIM

• includes both

models

• available English

& French

• 32 / 64 bits and

Win7 compatible


13/108




03_ Overview

Summary





14/108

V eh i c l e

D ev el o pm

S i gn of f

P r o d u c t P l a

n n i n g

Program: ‘V’ DiagramVehicleVerification:

Race!

Motorsport chassis devel. evolution

Vehicle PDSObjective:

Faster vehicle!

Chassis PDSInput:

Competition rules

Chassis TuningTools:

Try-error check

e

n t

PDS: Product Development Specifications

Many loops were required due to complexity of the systems,

number of parameters and changing conditions (wind,

temperature, circuits…)

Big room for improvement


15/108

P r o d u c t P l a

n n i n g

V eh i c l e

D ev el o pm

S i gn of f


Vehicle PDSObjective:

Faster vehicle!

Chassis PDSInput:

Competition rules

Concept

VehicleVerification:

Race!

Chassis TuningTools:

Program: ‘V’ Diagram

Chassis /Axle Targets

Components-SystemTargets

Chassis-AxleDevelopment

Component-SystemDevelopment

C o n c e p t D

e f i n i t i o n

C o

n c e p t

D ev e

l o pm en t

e

n t

PDS: Product Development Specifications


16/108

Linear, Neutral,Progressive,Balanced, …

Expert driver level

UndersteerGradient, Yawovershoot, Roll

damping, …

Concept definition: Target cascading


VVehicle PDS

ProductDevelopment

Specifications

Chassis /Axle PDS


Components-System Targets

VehicleVerification

ChassisTuning



P r o d u c t P l a n n i n g

C o n c e p t D e f i n i t i o

n

C on c e p t

D ev el o pm en t

V eh i c l e

D ev el o p

m en t

S i gn of f

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

5

10

15

20

25

ay-yawR

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

Frequency [Hz]

-180

-120

-60

0

60

120

180

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

0.5

1

Delay(deg)

Coherence

Frequencyresponsetest:ay-yawR

HyundaiJM

Delay(sec)

GAIN

Objective Test Driver

Suspension Engineer

Roll-steer, Rollstiffness, Lateralcompliance, …


17/108

Design Validation Component & System levelSuspension K&C

Packaging & clearance

Chassis TuningSubjective Evaluations

Objective testing

Laboratory testing

Simulation support

SIGN OFFVVehicle PDS

ProductDevelopment

Specifications

Chassis /Axle PDS


Components-System Targets

VehicleVerification

ChassisTuning



P r o d u c t P l a n n i n g

C o n c e p t D e f i n i t i o

n

C on c e p t

D ev el o pm en t

V eh i c l e

D ev el o p

m en t

S i gn of f

Concept and vehicle development


Packaging

Intelligent mass reduction

FEM

Aero CFD

NVH performance

Dynamic vehicle simulations

Full scale simulators

Fatigue testing

NVH validation

Virtual Development


18/108




03_ Overview

Summary





19/108

Overview

Typical correlation software

Laboratory tests

• Vehicle inertia measurements

• Vehicle centre of gravity

Different rigs and proving ground tests can be used for simulation

correlation

Proving ground tests

• Instrumentation

• Proving ground

• Testing

measurements

• Kinematics and Compliance

tests (K&C tests)

• Damper measurements

• Vehicle damping (4 postermeasurements)

• Crash test measurements

• Analysing


20/108




03_ Overview

Summary

04_ Typical correlation software




21/108

Typical type of software to correlate

DYNLAT, a module of

DYNSIM product

! SOFTWARE available on IDIADA stand !

.

• 7DOF linear solver

• Multiple runs / cars

comparison.

• User interface with graph

analysis toolbox.

• Load / export / Print / save

database and results


22/108

Typical type of software to correlate

DYNLAT, Database overview DYNLAT, Run compare overview


23/108




03_ Overview

Summary



measurements




• Kinematics and Compliance tests(K&C tests)


• Vehicle damping (4-poster

measurements)



24/108

Vehicle inertia measurements

Vehicle (or component) supported by an air bearing (without friction)

Body free to move around an axis

Free degree of freedom limited by a spring

Inertia measured by period of oscillation technique

Each principal and secondary axis calculated by modifying the spring

position


25/108

Vehicle inertia measurements

Moment of inertia (Ixx, Iyy, Izz)

Products of inertia (Ixy,Ixz,Iyz)

Determination of the principal axis

Centre of gravity location

Results:


26/108

INERTIA – Motorsport experience

Minimum testing for basic simulation software

• {Ix / Iy / Iz} of complete car on rigid springs @ nominal RH

• {Iy } of FT & RR corner rotating parts

Summary of main inertia to be measured

Testing for advanced simulation software• {Ix / Iy / Iz} of complete car on rigid springs @ nominal RH

• {Ix / Iy / Iz / Ixz} of suspended mass (car body)

• {Iy / Iz} of FT & RR corner rotating parts

• Non suspensed mass nominal COG and weight

• Note: complete car inertia may be re-calculated by simulation software (RH

taken into account


27/108

INERTIA – Motorsport experience

Impact of Yaw inertia

• Yaw acceleration Vs time on steer input

Impact of inertia simulated on a racing car (LMP_Le_Mans) - DYNLATImpact of Roll inertia

• Roll acceleration Vs time on steer input


28/108




03_ Overview

Summary



measurements






• Vehicle damping (4 poster

measurements)



29/108

Vehicle CoG measurements

Z coordinate

Simple vehicle weight

X & Y coordinates

vehicle and measuring the variation of axlevertical force

Knife edge under each wheel is used foravoiding tire contact patch dispersion

Test performed with the K&C test rig fromMTS

Suspension should be blocked


30/108

CoG – Motorsport experience

Usual measurement configuration

• No ballast (added by simulation software if advanced enough)

• No dummy driver (added by calculation if advanced CAD models)

• No fuel / no liquids in (simulated)

CoG impact on vehicle dynamics

Accuracy ranges

• IDIADA bench relevant for Rallye / DTM / Endurance / Touring cars

• F1 cars: CoG very low 200 / 230 mm and dry car weight too light (460/ 480

Kg) dedicated F1 bech required


31/108

CoG – Motorsport experience

Impact of CoG simulated on a racing car (LMP_Le_Mans) - DYNLATImpact of X_CoG

• Yaw acceleration Vs time on steer input

Impact of Z_CoG

• Roll acceleration Vs time on steer input


32/108




03_ Overview

Summary



measurements







measurements)


K&C Ri


33/108

MTS Single axle system with two platforms

Five degrees of motion on each platform

• Vertical, longitudinal and lateral

displacements

• Steer and roll angular movement

K&C tests: Rig

Platform motionsItem Range Accuracy

Longitudinal (x) ± 80 mm ± 0,2 mm

Lateral (y) ± 80 mm ± 0,2 mm-

Platform loadsItem Range Accuracy

Longitudinal force (Fx) ± 1400 daN ± 1.75 daN

Lateral force (Fy) ± 1400 daN ± 1.75 daN

Vertical force (Fz) 0-6000 daN ± 7.5 daN

Mx ± 900 daNm ± 5 Nm

My ± 900 daNm ± 5 Nm

Mz ± 200 daNm ± 2.5 Nm

,

Platform roll (αx) ± 12º ± 0,03º

Steer (αz) ± 50º ± 0,03º

Six degrees-of-freedom load cells of high

capacity

K&C t t Ri


34/108

Wheel centre motionItem Range Accuracy

Vertical (z) ± 50 mm ± 0,2 mm

Longitudinal (x) ± 50 mm ± 0,2 mm

Lateral (y) ± 50 mm ± 0,2 mm

Steer (αz) ± 5º ± 0,02º

Camber (αx) ± 5º ± 0,02º s m a l l r a n

g e

Spin (αy) ± 5º ± 0,02º

Vertical (z) ± 200 mm ± 0,5 mm g e

Six degrees-of-freedom wheel motion

sensors for wheel position and orientation

K&C tests: Rig

,

Lateral (y) ± 80 mm ± 0,4 mm

Steer (αz) ± 45º ± 0,10º

Camber (αx) ± 20º ± 0,10º E x t e n d e d r a n

Spin (αy) ± 45º ± 0,10º

Steering Wheel Rotation ControlItem Range Accuracy

Steering wheel angle ± 1080º ± 0,08º

Torque capacity ± 40 Nm ± 0,07Nm

Steering wheel robot

K&C t t Ri


35/108

Confidential work area Improved body fixing system

K&C tests: Rig

Spindle coupling tests Tire coupling tests

K&C tests


36/108

Control the tyre attitude with respect to the road duringmanoeuvres

Ө

Fy


37/108

Suspension Compliance: Suspension

Suspension movement due to bodybounce (Vertical test)

Suspension Kinematics: Suspension performance as a result of its motion

K&C tests

Suspension movement due to steeringwheel input (Steering test)

Suspension movement due to bodyroll (Roll test)

performance under load.

Suspension compliance due to lateral forceinputs while cornering (Lateral test)

Suspension compliance due to longitudinal acceleration forces at wheel centre(Longitudinal acceleration test)

Suspension compliance due to longitudinalbraking forces at contact patch (Longitudinal

braking test)

Suspension compliance due to the aligning torque inputs at the tire contactpatch due to the pneumatic trail while cornering (Aligning torque test)

K&C tests: Kinematics tests


38/108


Vertical test

Symmetrical vertical motion ofboth left and right platforms

Roll angle maintained constant

Fx and Fy in force control tozero

Mz in force control to zero



39/108

Vertical test results: Useful for the study of the springs motion ratio and non-linearsprings, bump stop interference, kinematics steer and camber evolution….


Wheel rate

Ride rateSteer angle changeCamber anglechangeLateral wheel centrelocus

Lateral positionchangeWheelbase changeLongitudinal wheelcentre locusKinematics roll

centre heightKinematics anti-dive/anti-squatanglesKinematics pitchcentre



40/108

Possibility to work with one or two shifts

Data is given in Excel format

Each test is checked every run through in-house software

Draft results are given after the measurements

Report with the main chassis characteristics and summary K&C graphs is

provided one week after the measurement

Management and reporting


MTSapplication

Analysis

IDIADA application

Analysis

RearTireRadialRate

- 3500.00

- 3000.00

- 2500.00

- 2000.00

- 1500.00

- 1000.00

- 5 0 0.0 0

0

500.00

1000.00

1500.00

2000.00

2500.00

3000.00

3500.00

-

2 0

. 0 0

-

1 8

. 0 0

-

1 6

. 0 0

-

1 4

. 0 0

-

1 2

. 0 0

-

1 0

. 0 0

-

8 . 0

0

-

6 . 0

0

-

4 . 0

0

-

2 . 0

0 0

2 . 0

0

4 . 0

0

6 . 0

0

8 . 0

0

1 0

. 0 0

1 2

. 0 0

1 4

. 0 0

1 6

. 0 0

1 8

. 0 0

2 0

. 0 0

Tire Deflection(Z-Vert) (mm)

F z ( N )

Right

Left

Linear Slope(Right) =

240.7219N/mm

Linear Slope(Left)=

233.6238N/mm

Test Name

DateAcquired

Vehicle_Vertical_Test.tst

13-NOV-2003 12:38:39

Vehicle Make

Vehicle Model

SEAT

Cordova

VehicleYear

VehicleIdentification

1999

SC

Comment 1 Comment 2 Comment 3

Vertical Test

Static K&C tests

Linear Regression Lf Rf F Aver. Lr Rr R Aver.

Z [mm]

-10000

-8000

-6000

-4000

-2000

0

2000

4000

6000

8000

10000

Fz[N]

Z [mm]

-1

-0.75

-0.5

-0.25

0

0.25

0.5

0.75

1

Angle

[º]

Right rear wheel

Left rear wheel

Z [mm]

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

Angle[º]

Right front wheel

Left front wheel

Toe AngleChange [º/m] 1 2 3 4 5 6

CamberAngleChange [º/m] 1 2 3 4 5 6

WheelRate [kN/m] 1 2 3 4 5 6

Hysteresis at Z=0 m Lf Rf F Aver. Lr Rr R Aver.

Toe AngleChange [º] 1 2 3 4 5 6

CamberAngleChange [º] 1 2 3 4 5 6

WheelRate [kN] 1 2 3 4 5 6

Wheel Rate Both axles vertical motion test

Toe Angle Change

Page 1/2

Camber Angle Change

Project number:



41/108

Steering motion test


Steering wheel motion

Vertical position maintainedconstant





42/108

Steering test results: Main steering geometry parameters while the steering systemis installed on the vehicle can be measured in different conditions (engine on-off,knuckles coupled and decoupled, ride height).


Steer angle change

Steering frictionWheel centre locusScrub radius, CastertrailSteer ratio

Absolute Ackerman

DifferentialAckermanAckerman ErrorCamber anglechangeLong. Displacement

(TCP & WC)Lat. Displacement(TCP & WC)



43/108

Roll motion test

Roll motion (asymmetricvertical travel) of both left andright platforms keeping coplanarroad surface


Axle Fz in force control keptconstant





44/108

Roll test results: Enables the study of the front and rear axles independently withdifferent stab bars. Useful for stab bar tuning considering also the effect of the axleroll on the understeer and oversteer behaviour.


Roll moment

Wheel rateWheel loadsSteer angle changeCamber anglechange

Axle steer

Lateral positionchangeLongitudinal positionchangeTread changeKinematics rollcentre height

K&C tests: Compliance tests


45/108

p

Lateral aiding test

Lateral forces in phase areapplied at center of pressures oftire contact patch

constant

Fx in force control to zero




46/108

p

Lateral opposing test

Lateral forces out of phase areapplied at center of pressures oftire contact patch

constant

Fx in force control to zero




47/108

Lateral stiffness (WC

& TCP)Lateral forcecompliance steerLateral forcecompliance camber

p

Lateral test results (aiding and opposing): Study of the suspension compliance dueto the elastic components under lateral forces (particularly the compliance understeerbehaviour). Suspension and sub frame affects can be studied independently byperforming the tests aiding and opposing.

Lateral force

compliance axlesteerTread changeCompliance rollcentre height



48/108

Longitudinal braking test

Braking longitudinal forces inphase are applied at center ofpressures of tire contact patch

constant

Fy in force control to zero




49/108

Longitudinal braking test results: Study of the suspension compliance due to theelastic components under longitudinal braking forces (applied at the tire contactpatch).

Longitudinal stiffness(WC & TCP)Longitudinal forcecompliance steerLongitudinal forcecompliance camber

Longitudinal forcecompliance spinLongitudinal forcecompliance axlesteerLateral displacement

(WC & TCP)Compliance anti-dive/anti-squat



50/108

Longitudinal acceleration test

Transmission should beblocked

Acceleration longitudinal forces

wheel center

Vertical position maintainedconstant

Fy in force control to zero




51/108

Longitudinal acceleration test results: Study of the suspension compliance due tothe elastic components under longitudinal acceleration forces (applied at the wheelcentre).

Longitudinalstiffness (WC &TCP)Longitudinal forcecompliance steerLongitudinal force

compliance camberLongitudinal forcecompliance spinLongitudinal forcecompliance axlesteer

Lateraldisplacement (WC& TCP)Compliance anti-dive/anti-squat



52/108

Aligning torque aiding test

Aligning torques (Mz ) areapplied in phase at center ofpressures of tire contact patchon both left and right platforms

Vertical position and roll angleare maintained constant.

Steering wheel fixed




53/108

Aligning torques (Mz ) areapplied out of phase at center ofpressures of tire contact patchon both left and right platforms

Aligning torque opposing test

Vertical position and roll angleare maintained constant.

Steering wheel fixed




54/108

Aligning torque test results (aiding and opposing): Study of the play on a suspension

by measuring the toe hysteresis (especially on the front axle where the steeringsystem has more components liable to have a compliance). Wheel steeringhysteresis study affects the vehicle on-centre feel.

Steer anglechange

am er ang echangeAxle steer

K&C


55/108

TARGET 1: Correlation / Validation of simulated physical properties

• Includin SSB arameters: Sus ension / Steerin / Brakin

Professional testing teams have an extended usage of the K&C rig:

• K&C test done axle per axle (FT & RR results are independent)• Up to 50 runs in 3 working days.• Test after production phase & before the first test on track.

• Including Power train / tire model / Contact Patch position• The results are implemented in simulation software database

TARGET 2: R&D bench

• Load at Contact Patch… this is complementary to other bench where load is

applied directly at Wheel Center.

K&C


56/108

Conventional vehicle:

• Clamping with magnets on the floor of the car

CAR installation on bench:

Race vehicle / monocoque chassis:

• ½ car clamped on rear and front

• Bench installation designed on CADon car design position (time

optimization)

K&C – Motorsport experience


57/108

Ride height on rigid lat springs – car load on K&C pads

Nominal camber and toe change check when add camber shims

Check iso ride height for a torsion bar change

• S mmetr of corner load on TB desi n stiffness and mountin verification

AS CORRELATION TOOL \ Car design and manufacturing validation:

• TB are usually preloaded to the axle vertical load on race vehicles, a changeof TB at the pit should not change the car ride height (accuracy < +/- 0.1mm)

Neutral position of WC for wishbones with flexures

(instead of ball joints)

• Required in simulation software to calculate wheel

rate (flexures signed vertical spring at WC with

neutral position to be defined)



58/108

Car sensor calibration & motion ratios validation

• Lateral spring and central element Vs WC characteristic

• Check sensor rate Vs. bench displacement validates sensors & MRCamber change Vs wheel bump validation (including raising rate)

• Comparison of simulation software curve & test bench curve

AS CORRELATION TOOL \ Validation of kinematic laws:

Steering displacement kinematic laws• Comparison of simulation software

curve & test bench curve

• Including warp load transfer on

corners:o Run wheels on air

o Run with initial load and then constant

altitude



59/108

Car vertical stiffness measured at WC on

several load paths:• On rigid rocker (WC to rocker chain)

• Lateral spring / damper path / central element

AS CORRELATION TOOL \ Validation of suspension structural stiffness predictions:

• Etc … check each stiffness path for database

Check of rims stiffness

• Radial (Fz @ WC)

Lateral (Fy @ CP)• Measurement on

wheel nut and on rim

flange



60/108

Car body local stiffness

• Measurement lateral load opposed (displacement sensors at suspension brackets)• Measurement lateral load simultaneous (comparison)

AS CORRELATION TOOL \ Validation of chassis structural stiffness predictions:

Check of non symmetrical braking

• Braking test simultaneous (Left and Right side)

• Braking test one side

• Rear => GBX lateral bending impact on toe => Not negligible !

• Front => test done with hydraulic power on (but steering back lash dueto the steering valve spring plays a big role for non symmetrical braking

• This is important to measure those values and then to decide to have it

integrated in your simulation or not => usually not taken into account



61/108

AS CORRELATION TOOL

\ comparison of SIMULATION / TEST BENCH / TRACK:

Race setup simulation software

• Implementation of IDIADA

measurements results in software

database

Simulation of the first race setup

SIM – BENCH – TRACK deviations are the value of the test

R&D work inputs / Why ?

If no deviation also happy => simulation software validated !!

(ex: RH Vs Speed / Roll Vs lat G)

Race setup K&C meas

Race setup on track data

• Calculated channels from car sensors



62/108

Standard non linearity evaluation:

• Results are stiffness curves and not only values

• Play and back lash in suspensions• Investigation of friction in joints / “sticktion”

AS CORRELATION TOOL \ Advanced validations

Hysteresis evaluation:

• Investigation of end stops like bump rubber

• Return to neutral position or permanent

displacements

Setup optimisation

• Playing with gaps and adjustments packers: K&C test is the perfect

engineering validation of your theoretical setup adjustments (adjustments

steps are relevant or not / does the car sees a setup change etc…).



63/108

Chassis stiffness measurements:

•

AS R&D TOOL \ Chassis compliance test½ car tested in 2 configurations:

• Front and Rear extremity clamped (chassis bending not allowed)

• Only one extremity clamped

• Lateral (Lateral simultaneous load)• Torsion (roll test)

Bench requirements

• Car usually on rigid lateral springs (max measurement accuracy)

• Test bench stiffness recorded and corrected

• Test bench fixations to be properly designed

• Load at CP going through the real suspension arms (good !)



64/108

Power train stiffness chain can be broken

down and measured:

AS R&D TOOL \ Power train compliance (acceleration)

• Tire spin: braking test disk blocked

(delta spin on rim flange / pad disp)

• Rim spin: braking test disk blocked

(delta spin @ WC / spin on rim

flange)

Driveshaft stiffness

• Compliance contribution of power train chain optimization (measurements are usually closer to

reality than model in this field)

• Inputs of power train & grip model / launch control simulations

• Driveshaft stiffness tuning (diff protection / engine delays etc…)

• u + r ves a comp ance:

braking disk open, diff blocked

• Diff compliance: diff open / GBX 7th

gear solid gear

• GBX internal compliance: GBX free

/ engine shaft blocked


AS R&D TOOL \ St i t d l t


65/108

AS R&D TOOL \ Steering system development

R&D test to break down the steering system

stiffness chain:

• Self align torque opposed

evaluation of the suspension stiffness

• Self align torque simultaneous – no support

evaluation of mechanical stiffness and friction of the valve spring

Advanced investigations

• Steering system “equivalent hysteresis”

optimization

rack friction tuning and valve lapping optimization

• Toe under lateral load key parameters

rack friction tuning and valve lapping optimization

• Self align torque simultaneous – with support

evaluation of valve opening delay / and lateral stiffness of the axleunder hydraulic support



66/108

Assumed and never measured

what is your simulation error ?

• Track width is a 1st order

parameter in any simulation

• CP lateral position can be under

the WC

AS R&D TOOL \ Contact Patch (CP) lateral position

• CP lateral position can be in

wheel plane

• 320 * tan(3°Camb) = 17mm !!

Possible measurements

• Tire CP center of pressure (in lateral) Vs. vertical load @ given camber

• Tire CP center of pressure (in lateral) Vs. camber angle @ given Fz

Limitations

• Static conditions



67/108

When braking

• The suspension bends at WC• The wheel bearings deform depending on their relative stiffness

• The rim bends depending on the load application point in Y

AS R&D TOOL \ Toe deformation under braking (braking stability)

• + some more complex phenomenum (caliper stiffness etc…)

Toe under braking is a complex phenomenon

• Very difficult to simulate (measurements are much more accurate)

• The K&C is the right bench to understand what is going on there !

Summary


68/108




03_ Overview



measurements







measurements)• Crash test measurements

Damper measurements


69/108

Vehicle handling response affected by dampers

Dampers tuning:• Iterative process which implies thecharacterisation and evaluation of a large number

• Time consuming process if evaluation tools arenot available

Rig dampers essential for:

• Checking dampers with respect to desiredspecifications

• Understanding the limitations observed in thevehicle response and proposing a damperconfiguration for the next iteration

Damper measurements


70/108

8.8 kN Peak force capability

4 m/s max velocity

Stroke 0.25 mm to 177 mm

Rig technical specifications

Frequency response

IT Temperature sensor

Damper measurements

Results


71/108

Force versus velocity characteristics

Front damper

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

( N )

F1

F4

F7

Results

Force versus displacementcharacteristics

-1000

-800

-600

-400

-200

0

200

400

600

0 200 400 600

Speed (mm/s)

D a

m p i n g e f f o r t s

Peak force versus peak velocity characteristics

Peak force versus temperature

DAMPERS – Motorsport experience

Damper investigations @ usual simulation software limits


72/108

Aim 1: correlate what is simulated

• Damper friction test

• Damper Force Vs Speed / bump and rebound

characteristic

Aim 2: understand what is usually not simulated

• Dam er d namic behavior Force Vs Acc

Damper investigations @ usual simulation software limits

• Performance Vs time fatigue test

• Heat impact on performance

Aim 3: R&D advanced dampers developments

• Inerter dampers (rotational mass) optimization (highly dynamic loads)

• Inerter dampers fatigue test (heat / friction / wear and play of helicoil …)

AERODYNE / SIM4U have advanced models (on stand)

Summary


73/108




03_ Overview



measurements




•

Kinematics and Compliance tests(K&C tests)




Test procedure

4 poster measurements


74/108

p

Vertical (or roll) excitation of the 4-poster bench:

Sinusoidal vertical (or roll) signal withfrequency sweep

Inputs with constant maximum amplitudeof platform velocity

Instrumentation

Accelerometers on the 4 corners of:

Platforms

Frequency range from: 0.5 Hz to 30 Hz

Sprung masses Unsprung masses

Main influences on vehicle damping behavior



75/108

Sprung and unsprung massesBump stops influenceSprings and stab barShock absorber characteristics

Rebound

r c e [ N ]Definition of three maximum damper velocity

Main influences on vehicle damping behavior

Effect of damper properties on overall vehicle behavior:

Low damper speed range (low andmoderate handling)

Intermediate damper speed range (intensivehandling and low comfort)

High damper speed range (moderate andintensive comfort)Compression

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13

0

Damper speed [m/s]

D

a m p e r f o

Damper characterization at each speed range

Tire contact patch and wheel hub displacement time history

Transmissibility graphs:



76/108

Tire contactpatch vertical (x)

Unsprung vertical

movement (y)

Sprung verticalmovement (z)

Input:

Output:Transmissibility between unsprung masses and platforms

) / ( a p l a t f o r m ) ]

Time [s]

0

d i s p [ m m ]Wheel

hub (y)

Tirecontachpatch (x)

Gain = Output/Input

Transmissibility graphs:

11

G a i n [

( a u n s p r u n

1

010

Phase between unsprung masses and platforms

101101 Frequency [Hz]

0

P h a s e [ d e g ]

Phase=Output vs Input delay



77/108

Body equilibrium and stability: Transmissibility Sprung vs Platform

Wheel road copy: Transmissibility Unsprung vs Platform

Tire grip: Transmissibility Tire Compression vs Unsprung

Masses link: Transmissibility Sprung vs Unsprung

Transmissibility studies:

4 POSTER – Motorsport experience

Basic scan example


78/108

Principle of the setup scan test

• Car shaking / standard input (sin wave etc…) or track measured input

• Scan of FT and RR spring stiffness or damping force

• Colored maps for results visualization (normalized performance criterions)

• Mech grip / body heave / body pitch / body roll / phase FT – RR axle …

es se up

Summary


79/108




03_ Overview



measurements




• Kinematics and Compliance tests

(K&C tests)




Crash test facility


80/108

Technical specifications:

Electric motor, 500 kW (110 km/h up to 3.5 t Veh.)

Movable impact block, 130 t

Two acceleration lanes (160m & 90m)

HMI Light system for high speed cameras (160.000 lux)

Phototunnel 11 x 5 m, 4 m deep

Official

FIA Accreditation

Vehicle safety integration

From concept to final validation: FIA passive safety requirements


81/108

CRASH TEST – Motorsport experience


82/108

Homologation tests

• This is regulation dependent• This concerns rear crasher / front nose box and monocoque.

• IDIADA has got the FIA accreditation

Crash test is a mandatory test

Summary


83/108




03_ Overview




Extensive range of possibilities for handling tests on proving ground

Proving ground tests


84/108

offered by Applus+ IDIADA.

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

On centre

Linear range

Turn

-0.4

-0.3

-0.2

-0.1

0

0.1

0.2

0

60

120

180

Frequency analsyis: delta-yawR

Delay (sec)

Gain [º/s/º]

Amplitude &offset level


Preparation andinstrumentation

Data analysisTest execution…

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

0.2 -180

-120

-60

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 30

0.5

1

Delay (º)

Coherence

Frequency (Hz)

…at IDIADA’S proving ground

Summary


85/108




03_ Overview




• Instrumentation

• Proving ground

• Testing

• Analysing

Instrumentation

Large range of test equipment offered by IDIADA for proving ground measurements:


86/108

Steeringrobot

GPS unit (withgyro., accel., vel)

Acquisitionsystem

Steering robot

Speed of the ground

sensor

GPS unit with

integrated

accelerometers and

gyroscopes.

Fx

Fy

Fz

Mx

Mz

My

Speed of the

ground sensor

Dynawheel, a highly

accurate wheel motionmeasurement device.

Wheel force

transducers (MTS

SWIFT)Wheel lift sensors, light

barriers.

Ride height sensors

DynawheelMTS SWIFT Ride height sensor

01 P i f i i

Summary


87/108




03_ Overview




• Instrumentation

• Proving ground

• Testing

• Analysing

Idiada’s proving ground


88/108

Proving ground: Dynamic Platform B

Platform homologated for F1 testing


89/108

900m straight homologated for F1 testing

Proving ground: Dynamic Platform A



90/108



Proving ground: High-Speed Circuit


91/108


Proving ground: Handling circuits

Dry handling circuit Wet handling circuit


92/108

Proving ground: Off-Road Track


93/108

Car jumps simulation for rally cars

01 Presentation of participants

Summary


94/108




03_ Overview




• Instrumentation

• Proving ground

• Testing

• Analysing

Testing program can follow both standard procedures(ISO, NHTSA roll…) or client based procedures. Some

examples are:

Testing


95/108

examples are:Steady-state testing

• Constant speed with increasing angle

Transient testing

• Step-steer input• Frequency response

Cornering response

• Braking in a turn

Closed loop test• Several lane change• Slalom

Stability tests

• Fishhook• Crosswind

01 Presentation of participants

Summary


96/108




03_ Overview




• Instrumentation

• Proving ground

• Testing

• Analysing

Analyzing

IDIADA possesses a large experience in handling test data analysis.

DynAsoft, IDIADA software package used for specific analysis of handling test data.


97/108

Specifically designed checking and analysis protocols

On-track data checking options; validity of test

execution quick overview

Easy to use interface from project definition to result

y so t, so t a e pac age used o spec c a a ys s o a d g test data

Control over different vehicle, instrumentation anddata acquisition setups

Flexibility in use of instrumentation (e.g. separate time delay correction for eachsensor)

Easy integration of new analysis parameters (by IDIADA)

Powerful curve manipulation options and complete report generation in PDF format

Easy comparison of different vehicles or configurations

Testing program can follow both standard procedures(ISO, NHTSA roll…) or client based procedures. Some

examples are:

Testing detail


98/108

pSteady-state testing

• Constant speed with increasing angle

Transient testing

• Step-steer input• Frequency response

Cornering response

• Braking in a turn

Closed loop test• Several lane change• Slalom

Stability tests

• Fishhook• Crosswind

150200

250

ta[°]

Constant speed

Testing: Steady-state circular

Objective: To determine the steady-


99/108

Procedure: Vehicle driven atconstant speed with increasing

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 2270

75

80

85

90

vx[km/ h]

6

8

/s²]

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 220

50

100

150

deltObject e y

state behaviour of a vehicle.

.

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22

time [s]

0

500

1000

1500

Radius[m]

0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 220

2

4

ay[

Analysis: Vehicle handling parameters are represented with respect to lateralacceleration. Numerical results are calculated at a given lateral acceleration level.

160200

240Steering-wheel angle [º]

+/- 3 m/s2: 38.48 º / -42.11 º+/- 4 m/s2: 53.05 º / -56.26 º+/- 5 m/s2: 72 09 º / -74 6 º

Delta at :

Interesting results:

Representation of parameters vs lateralacceleration:

Testing: Steady-state circular


100/108

-240

-200

-160

-120-80

-40

0

40

80

120

- - - - Linearisation

RIGHT LEFT

- - - - Ackerman

+/- 5 m/s2: 72.09 / -74.6

+/- 6 m/s2: 101.96 º / -98.12 º

+/- 7 m/s2: 149.85 º / -130.66 º

p pacceleration:

• Steering wheel angle• Steering wheel torque• Yaw velocity

• Slip angle• Roll angle

Calculation of numerical values:

- - - - -

Lateral acceleration [m/s²]

-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8 10-6

-5

-4

-3

-2

-1

0

1

2

3

45

6

- - - - Linearisation

RIGHT

Roll angle [º]

LEFT

Lateral acceleration [m/s²]

• Steering angle at Y-crossing(from linearisation)

• Overall steering ratio• Understeering gradient• Roll gradient• Sideslip gradient• Maximum of yaw velocity / delta gain• Maximum roll angle• Maximum lateral acceleration• Maximum forward speed

Testing: Transient step steer

0 i S d S

Objective: To determine the transient behaviour of a vehicle.

Procedure:


101/108

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 755

60

65

vx[kph]

50% input Steady-State

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7-50

0

50

100

150200

delta[°]

Vehicle driven in a straight line (at a

defined speed).

A steering step input is applied and

the steering wheel angle is maintainedconstant for several seconds after the

vehicle has reached a steady-state

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7

time [s]

-2

02

4

6

8

ay

[m/s²]motion.

Test performed from very low lateralacceleration levels up to the limit of

adherence.

Analysis:

Analysis based on the time domain.

Special attention is paid to overshoot values (difference between the maximum

response of the vehicle during the transient phase and the steady-state

response) and delay of the response.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6-2.5

0

2.5

5

7.5

10

ay

[m/s²]

SS = 8.3

PEAK = 9.3


Overshoot values and/or peak

Testing: Transient step steer


102/108

0 1 2 3 4 5 6-505

1015202530

yawR

[ º/s]

-10

-7.5

-5

-2.5

0

2.5

slip

[º]

FrontREFRear

T01 = 3.1SS = 18.3

PEAK = 27.0

D = 0.2

INTrat = 1.0

O e s oot a ues a d o pea

values:

• Lateral acceleration• Yaw velocity

• Front/Rear axle slip angle• Reference sideslip angle• Roll velocity

All run results are represented vslateral acceleration.

0 1 2 3 4 5 6- .

Response time to achieve :

• 90% SS of lateral acceleration• 90% SS of yaw velocity• Peak value of lateral acceleration• Peak value of yaw velocity

0 1 2 3 4 5 6-2.5

0

2.5

57.5

10

12.5

rollR[°

/s]

PEAK = 10.1

Procedure:

Testing: Transient frequency resp.

Objective: To determine the frequency response characteristics of a vehiclesubjected to a sinusoidal steering input


103/108

Procedure:

Vehicle driven in a straight line at the required test speed.

An oscillation of gradually increasing frequency is applied to the steering-

wheel.

• Frequency should be increased from the lowest possible (limited by

vehicle speed and test track) to the highest achievable.

• Normally achievable range: approx. from 0.1 to 4 Hz.

Analysis:Analysis based on the frequency domain.

Transfer functions of different variables are given by plotting gain and phase

delay between input and output parameters versus frequency.

Testing: Transient frequency resp.


Gain and phase delay between input (Steering wheel angle) and output


104/108

0.8

1

On centre

Linear range

Turn-0.2

-0.1

00.1

0.2

Frequency analsyis: delta-yawRGain [º/s/º]

p y p ( g g ) p

parameters plotted in the frequency domain.

Frequency where

maximum gain isobtained gives

interesting information

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0

0.2

0.4

0.6 -0.4

- .

-180

-120

-60

0

60

120

180

0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3

0

0.5

1

Delay (º)

Coherence

Delay (sec)

Frequency (Hz)


about the

responsiveness of the

vehicle:

• Aggressive• Forgiving

Gain results are

speed dependent

Testing: Fishhook Stability

Objective: To determine transient behaviour of a vehicle with extreme steering inputamplitudes and rates

Procedure:


105/108

Procedure:

Triggered by roll rate feedback, so

looking for roll resonance frequency

response (worst case)Low level of repeatability due to tire

condition change, so test becomes

long and very complex

Far from realistic driving conditions

Steering robot and wheel lift

measurement device with optical

sensors required

Analysis:

Analysis based on the time domain.

Pass/ fail test looking for rollover tendency.3 4 5 6 7 8

-75

-50

-25

0

25

50

Wheel-lift[mm]

Front

Rear

Max: -3.3 mm Max: -5.6 mmStatus: OK

Testing: Crosswind Stability

Objective: To determine the vehicle sensitivity to crosswind

Procedure:


106/108

Wind generators located

on Dynamic Platform A

are usedAcceleration line 600 m

Crosswind zone 30.5 m

Wind Generators

Wind max. speed 30 m/s

Both subjective

evaluations and objective

measurements

Analysis:Analysis based on the time domain.

Observation of the yaw rate, lateral

acceleration and lateral deviation

0 25 50 75 100

X [m]

0.0

0.3

0.5

0.8

1.0

1.3

1.5

Y[m]

100 km/h

102 km/h

120 km/h

142 km/h

142 km/h

158 km/h

158 km/h

158 km/h

0 25 50 75 100

X [m]

-1

0

1

2

3

yawR[º/s]

0 25 50 75 100

X [m]

-1

0

1

2

3

ay[m/s^2]

Velocity Ay Peak yawR Peak Max Displacement

100

102

120

142

142

158

158

157

0.98

0.92

1.26

1.66

1.75

2.05

2.18

2.13

0.54

0.39

0.38

0.40

0.36

0.46

0.42

0.42

0.41

0.43

0.48

0.42

0.42

0.47

0.45

0.46

AERO TEST – Motorsport experience

Ai l t i d t l t ti

Wind tunnel correlation


107/108

Aim: correlate wind tunnel testing

• Because inhouse development

done on scale vehicle

• Because a back to back is good to

validate theoretical results

• Scan of ride heights

• Scan of roll

• Yaw simulation => Possibility of lateral wind at IDIADA

Method

• Car equipped with

pressure sensors / Pitots

/ wind sensors etc…

Applus IDIADA BrazilT +55 11 4330 9880e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA ChinaT +86 (21) 6210 0894e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA Czech RepublicT +420 493 654 811e-mail: [email protected]

A l IDIADA F


108/108

Applus IDIADA FranceT +33 (0) 1 41 14 60 85e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA GermanyT +49 (0) 841 8 85 38 0 (Ingolstadt)T +49 (0) 893 0 90 56 0 (München)e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA IndiaT +91 12 44201156

e-mail: [email protected] IDIADA IranT +98 21 88570466e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA ItalyT +39 011 3997 764e-mail: [email protected]

For further information:

Applus IDIADA

Main Technical CentreL’Albornar – PO Box 20

E-43710 Santa Oliva (Tarragona) SpainT +34 977 166 000F +34 977 166 007e-mail: [email protected]

www.idiada.com

T +81 (0) 42 512 8982e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA KoreaT +82 31 478 1821e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA MadridT +34 915 095 795e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA MalaysiaT +603 2140 2266e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA PolandT +48 61 6226 905e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA SwitzerlandT +41 219 22 12 85e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA TaiwanT +886 4 7810702e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA TurkeyT +90 262 679 1370e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA UKT +44 (0) 7 979 691 631e-mail: [email protected]

Applus IDIADA VigoT +34 986 900 300e-mail: [email protected]

Documents

Idiada Sim4u Workshop Motorsport 2010