This presentation accompanied the delivery of SAWE Paper #3634 at the 74th SAWE International Conference held from May 18 to 21, 2015, at the Crown Plaza Hotel in Alexandria, VA, USA.
The purpose of this paper was to make explicit the exact role that mass properties play in determining the automotive deceleration performance during a crash. This has a direct bearing on the survivability of a crash, which can be enhanced through thoughtful mass properties engineering.
Mass Properties & Advanced Automotive DesignBrian Wiegand
The intent of this presentation is to show that a vehicle designed in true accordance with the balanced viewpoint of a professional mass properties engineer may not only demonstrate superior acceleration, braking, and handling, but superior ride, stability, fuel economy, and safety as well. If a design begins with the first principles of how mass properties affect automotive performance in all its aspects , and is optimized accordingly in an integrated manner, then the resulting advanced automotive design may truly “go where none have gone before”.
Colin Chapman and Automotive Mass PropertiesBrian Wiegand
As a small start-up company competing against long established automotive concerns such as Ferrari, Colin Chapman’s Lotus Engineering Company did not have the capability to gain advantage through advanced engine design, or even via the design of most of the other major mechanical systems. Most such components were commercially sourced, and so the only way a decisive advantage could be obtained was through an uncompromising emphasis on gaining performance “edges” from the remaining design elements of structure, body, and suspension. Because the automotive performance aspects of acceleration, braking, and handling are so dependent on various vehicle mass properties the optimization of those mass properties became the “Holy Grail” of Lotus design as directed by Colin Chapman.
Lowered crash risk with banked curves designed for heavy trucks, granlund et ...Johan Granlund
Slides from the presentation at HVTT13 in San Luis (Argentina) of our paper with the same title. Note that the full paper is available here at Slideshare.
Mass Properties & Advanced Automotive DesignBrian Wiegand
The intent of this presentation is to show that a vehicle designed in true accordance with the balanced viewpoint of a professional mass properties engineer may not only demonstrate superior acceleration, braking, and handling, but superior ride, stability, fuel economy, and safety as well. If a design begins with the first principles of how mass properties affect automotive performance in all its aspects , and is optimized accordingly in an integrated manner, then the resulting advanced automotive design may truly “go where none have gone before”.
Colin Chapman and Automotive Mass PropertiesBrian Wiegand
As a small start-up company competing against long established automotive concerns such as Ferrari, Colin Chapman’s Lotus Engineering Company did not have the capability to gain advantage through advanced engine design, or even via the design of most of the other major mechanical systems. Most such components were commercially sourced, and so the only way a decisive advantage could be obtained was through an uncompromising emphasis on gaining performance “edges” from the remaining design elements of structure, body, and suspension. Because the automotive performance aspects of acceleration, braking, and handling are so dependent on various vehicle mass properties the optimization of those mass properties became the “Holy Grail” of Lotus design as directed by Colin Chapman.
Lowered crash risk with banked curves designed for heavy trucks, granlund et ...Johan Granlund
Slides from the presentation at HVTT13 in San Luis (Argentina) of our paper with the same title. Note that the full paper is available here at Slideshare.
Mass Properties and Automotive Braking, Rev bBrian Wiegand
In 1984, for the 43rd Annual International Conference of the SAWE, this author presented Paper Number 1634, “Mass Properties and Automotive Longitudinal Acceleration”. In that paper the effects upon automotive acceleration of varying the relevant mass property parameters were explored by use of a computer simulation. The computer simulation of automotive longitudinal acceleration allowed for the study of each individual parameter because a simulation allows for the decoupling of the parameters in a way that is not possible physically. The principal mass property parameters involved were the vehicle weight and rotating component inertias, collectively known as the “effective mass”, plus the longitudinal and vertical coordinates of the vehicle center of gravity.
However, just as it is important for a vehicle to be able to accelerate, it is perhaps even more important for a vehicle to be able to decelerate. The same mass properties that were relevant to the matter of automotive acceleration are also relevant to the matter of automotive deceleration, a.k.a. braking, although for the braking case that collective of vehicle translational inertia and rotational component inertias known as the “effective mass” requires somewhat different handling. As was the case with automotive acceleration, automotive braking will be explored by use of a computer simulation whereby the effect of variation of each of the mass property parameters can be studied independently. However, this task is considerably easier as the creation of a braking simulation is a minor effort compared to the creation of an acceleration simulation.
Mass properties and automotive lat accel presentation, rev aBrian Wiegand
This presentation accompanied the delivery of SAWE Paper #3528 at the 70th International Conference of the SAWE at Houston, TX, USA during May 2011.
There are a number of automotive performance aspects which are associated with accelerations in the lateral direction: maneuver (transient and steady state), roll-over, and directional stability. For each of these automotive performance aspects certain mass property parameters play significant roles; it is the intent of this presentation to make explicit exactly how those mass property parameters affect each of those automotive performance aspects.
This is Part 10 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 9 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 8 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 7 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 6 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 4 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 3 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 2 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
MASS PROPERTIES and AUTOMOTIVE DIRECTIONAL STABILITYBrian Wiegand
The quantification of automotive directional stability may be expressed through various stability metrics, but perhaps the most basic of these automotive stability metrics is the “Understeer Gradient” (Kus). The Understeer Gradient (in degrees or radians per unit gravity) appears extremely uncomplicated when viewed in its most common formulation.
This metric appears to depend only on the front and rear axle weight loads (Wf, Wr), and on the front and rear axle cornering stiffnesses (Csf, Csr). However, those last quantities vary with lateral acceleration, and the nature of that variation is dependent upon many other parameters of which some of the most basic are: Total Weight, Sprung Weight, Unsprung Weight, Forward Unsprung Weight, Rear Unsprung Weight, Total Weight LCG, Sprung Weight LCG, Total Weight VCG, Sprung Weight VCG, Track, Front Track, Rear Track, Roll Stiffness, Front Roll Stiffness, Rear Roll Stiffness, Roll Axis Height, Front Roll Center Height, and Rear Roll Center Height. Note that exactly half of these automotive directional stability parameters as listed herein are mass properties.
The purpose of this paper is to explore, through a skidpad simulation, the relative sensitivity of automotive directional stability (as quantified through the Understeer Gradient) to variation in each of the noted vehicle parameters, with special emphasis on the mass property parameters.
The simulation is constructed in a spreadsheet format from the relevant basic automotive dynamics equations; the normal and lateral loads on the tires are determined as the lateral acceleration is increased incrementally by a small amount (thereby maintaining a “quasi-static” or “steady-state” condition). The normal loads are used for the calculation of the lateral traction force potentials at each tire, with the required (centripetal) lateral traction forces apportioned accordingly. From those required (actual) lateral tire forces the corresponding tire cornering stiffnesses are determined; this determination is based upon a tire model developed through a regression analysis of tire test data.
This construction of a fairly comprehensive lateral acceleration simulation from basic automotive dynamic relationships, instead of depending upon commercial automotive software such as “CarSim” (vehicle model) and Pacjeka “Magic Formula” (tire model), constitutes a unique aspect of this paper; this return to basics hopefully provides a clearer view and understanding of the results than would be the case otherwise. Even more unique is this paper’s emphasis on, and exploration of, the role specific mass property parameters play in determining automotive directional stability.
5- MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS and CONTROL Brian Wiegand
This is Part 5 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
IT IS BECAUSE VEHICLE DYNAMICS IS SO DEPENDENT ON MASS PROPERTIES THAT AN ENTIRE ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE IS DEVOTED TO “MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS & CONTROL”. THIS CLASS PRESENTATION WAS CREATED WITH THE INTENT TO ACQUAINT THE STUDENT WITH THE BASIC MATHEMATICS UNDERLYING THE PRACTICE OF "MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS AND CONTROL".
It wasn't so long ago that, while President Ronald Reagan presided, the "Evil Empire" of the Soviet Union collapsed. But, while the empire collapsed, the evil lived on. Today, the evil nucleus of that fallen empire, Russia, is more dangerous than ever with a greatly enlarged and active covert secret service effort. That effort is being expended to undermine western democracies so as to neutralize them in a bid to regain its empire, if not even more. Since the useful ideology of "Communism" collapsed along with the empire, Russian efforts at "agitprop" have been directed not through the traditional "left wing" extremists, but through the "right wing". In just ten days from the time of this writing we here in the U.S. will find out just how successful this Russian effort has been in undermining the freedoms, justice, and liberty that we Americans have become so complacent about. The result will fundamentally change the course of world history, perhaps in the worst possible way. To all patriotic Americans, please think before you vote; it may be the last real election you'll ever see.
Estimation of the Rolling Resistance of TiresBrian Wiegand
Evaluation of the performance potential of an automotive conceptual design requires some initial quantitative estimate of numerous relevant parameters. Such parameters include the vehicle mass properties, frontal and plan areas, aero drag and lift coefficients, available horsepower and torque, and various tire characteristics such as the rolling resistance coefficient(s)...
A number of rolling resistance models have been advanced since Robert William Thomson first patented the pneumatic rubber tire in 1845, most of them developed in the twentieth century. Most early models only crudely approximate tire rolling resistance behavior over a limited range of operation, while the latest models overcome those limitations but often at the expense of extreme complexity requiring significant computer resources. No model extant seems well suited to the task of providing a methodology for the estimation of a tire’s rolling resistance “coefficient” that is simple to use yet accurate enough for modern conceptual design evaluation.
It is the intent of this paper to suggest a methodology by which this seeming deficiency may be rectified.
Mass properties have a profound effect on automotive fuel economy, emissions, safety, ride, acceleration , braking, and maneuver . Because of this fact, it is important to have a reliable and comprehensive methodology for the estimation of key mass property parameters in the conceptual design stage. Also, such a methodology would be important for researchers investigating aspects of automotive dynamics, for programmers creating realistic automotive simulations, and for investigators studying the dynamics of automotive crash scenarios .
There is a scarcity of published information of sufficient accuracy and/or completeness so as to constitute a viable methodology. Published automotive mass property estimation methods seem to be available only in a non-comprehensive fashion through a variety of scattered sources. It is the intent of this paper to systematize the information drawn from published sources and, with the employment of techniques based on those used in the aerospace industry, to augment and improve upon the published information so as to develop a basis for a comprehensive automotive mass properties estimation methodology.
Note the use of the word “basis”; it is not to be imagined that this paper will represent the “last word” in automotive mass properties estimation. What is presented herein is intended to provide a possible overall framework for, and an initial “first cut” at, the development of a comprehensive methodology. Automotive design practitioners working within the established industry may have a far more potent estimation methodology available to them, but in the form of proprietary techniques that they are not at liberty to divulge. Yet even such automotive industry insiders may find an independently derived methodology interesting, and perhaps even useful for comparison with in-house procedures. However, it is the independent designer or researcher that is most likely to find this paper to be of great value, and it is the purpose of this paper to aid such independent efforts through promoting the development of a publicly accessible methodology.
To that end this paper presents the development of a preliminary “top-down” methodology which requires as input only those most basic and common overall parameters as would be available in the earliest of design stages or, for existing designs, from the commonly available literature. This includes such parameters as vehicle dimensions, applicable general legal specification or regulation, general vehicle configuration and category, type of suspension, and level of technology (which is generally time dependent). The desired output consists of the curb weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, the unsprung weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, the sprung weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, and the sprung weight roll moment of inertia (i.e., a rotational inertia about an essentially longitudinal axis, the location of which is determined by the suspension geometry).
Fleet management these days is next to impossible without connected vehicle solutions. Why? Well, fleet trackers and accompanying connected vehicle management solutions tend to offer quite a few hard-to-ignore benefits to fleet managers and businesses alike. Let’s check them out!
In this presentation, we have discussed a very important feature of BMW X5 cars… the Comfort Access. Things that can significantly limit its functionality. And things that you can try to restore the functionality of such a convenient feature of your vehicle.
5 Warning Signs Your BMW's Intelligent Battery Sensor Needs AttentionBertini's German Motors
IBS monitors and manages your BMW’s battery performance. If it malfunctions, you will have to deal with an array of electrical issues in your vehicle. Recognize warning signs like dimming headlights, frequent battery replacements, and electrical malfunctions to address potential IBS issues promptly.
What Exactly Is The Common Rail Direct Injection System & How Does It WorkMotor Cars International
Learn about Common Rail Direct Injection (CRDi) - the revolutionary technology that has made diesel engines more efficient. Explore its workings, advantages like enhanced fuel efficiency and increased power output, along with drawbacks such as complexity and higher initial cost. Compare CRDi with traditional diesel engines and discover why it's the preferred choice for modern engines.
Mass Properties and Automotive Braking, Rev bBrian Wiegand
In 1984, for the 43rd Annual International Conference of the SAWE, this author presented Paper Number 1634, “Mass Properties and Automotive Longitudinal Acceleration”. In that paper the effects upon automotive acceleration of varying the relevant mass property parameters were explored by use of a computer simulation. The computer simulation of automotive longitudinal acceleration allowed for the study of each individual parameter because a simulation allows for the decoupling of the parameters in a way that is not possible physically. The principal mass property parameters involved were the vehicle weight and rotating component inertias, collectively known as the “effective mass”, plus the longitudinal and vertical coordinates of the vehicle center of gravity.
However, just as it is important for a vehicle to be able to accelerate, it is perhaps even more important for a vehicle to be able to decelerate. The same mass properties that were relevant to the matter of automotive acceleration are also relevant to the matter of automotive deceleration, a.k.a. braking, although for the braking case that collective of vehicle translational inertia and rotational component inertias known as the “effective mass” requires somewhat different handling. As was the case with automotive acceleration, automotive braking will be explored by use of a computer simulation whereby the effect of variation of each of the mass property parameters can be studied independently. However, this task is considerably easier as the creation of a braking simulation is a minor effort compared to the creation of an acceleration simulation.
Mass properties and automotive lat accel presentation, rev aBrian Wiegand
This presentation accompanied the delivery of SAWE Paper #3528 at the 70th International Conference of the SAWE at Houston, TX, USA during May 2011.
There are a number of automotive performance aspects which are associated with accelerations in the lateral direction: maneuver (transient and steady state), roll-over, and directional stability. For each of these automotive performance aspects certain mass property parameters play significant roles; it is the intent of this presentation to make explicit exactly how those mass property parameters affect each of those automotive performance aspects.
This is Part 10 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 9 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 8 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 7 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 6 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 4 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 3 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
This is Part 2 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
MASS PROPERTIES and AUTOMOTIVE DIRECTIONAL STABILITYBrian Wiegand
The quantification of automotive directional stability may be expressed through various stability metrics, but perhaps the most basic of these automotive stability metrics is the “Understeer Gradient” (Kus). The Understeer Gradient (in degrees or radians per unit gravity) appears extremely uncomplicated when viewed in its most common formulation.
This metric appears to depend only on the front and rear axle weight loads (Wf, Wr), and on the front and rear axle cornering stiffnesses (Csf, Csr). However, those last quantities vary with lateral acceleration, and the nature of that variation is dependent upon many other parameters of which some of the most basic are: Total Weight, Sprung Weight, Unsprung Weight, Forward Unsprung Weight, Rear Unsprung Weight, Total Weight LCG, Sprung Weight LCG, Total Weight VCG, Sprung Weight VCG, Track, Front Track, Rear Track, Roll Stiffness, Front Roll Stiffness, Rear Roll Stiffness, Roll Axis Height, Front Roll Center Height, and Rear Roll Center Height. Note that exactly half of these automotive directional stability parameters as listed herein are mass properties.
The purpose of this paper is to explore, through a skidpad simulation, the relative sensitivity of automotive directional stability (as quantified through the Understeer Gradient) to variation in each of the noted vehicle parameters, with special emphasis on the mass property parameters.
The simulation is constructed in a spreadsheet format from the relevant basic automotive dynamics equations; the normal and lateral loads on the tires are determined as the lateral acceleration is increased incrementally by a small amount (thereby maintaining a “quasi-static” or “steady-state” condition). The normal loads are used for the calculation of the lateral traction force potentials at each tire, with the required (centripetal) lateral traction forces apportioned accordingly. From those required (actual) lateral tire forces the corresponding tire cornering stiffnesses are determined; this determination is based upon a tire model developed through a regression analysis of tire test data.
This construction of a fairly comprehensive lateral acceleration simulation from basic automotive dynamic relationships, instead of depending upon commercial automotive software such as “CarSim” (vehicle model) and Pacjeka “Magic Formula” (tire model), constitutes a unique aspect of this paper; this return to basics hopefully provides a clearer view and understanding of the results than would be the case otherwise. Even more unique is this paper’s emphasis on, and exploration of, the role specific mass property parameters play in determining automotive directional stability.
5- MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS and CONTROL Brian Wiegand
This is Part 5 of a 10 Part Series in Automotive Dynamics and Design, with an emphasis on Mass Properties. This series was intended to constitute the basis of a semester long course on the subject.
IT IS BECAUSE VEHICLE DYNAMICS IS SO DEPENDENT ON MASS PROPERTIES THAT AN ENTIRE ENGINEERING DISCIPLINE IS DEVOTED TO “MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS & CONTROL”. THIS CLASS PRESENTATION WAS CREATED WITH THE INTENT TO ACQUAINT THE STUDENT WITH THE BASIC MATHEMATICS UNDERLYING THE PRACTICE OF "MASS PROPERTIES ANALYSIS AND CONTROL".
It wasn't so long ago that, while President Ronald Reagan presided, the "Evil Empire" of the Soviet Union collapsed. But, while the empire collapsed, the evil lived on. Today, the evil nucleus of that fallen empire, Russia, is more dangerous than ever with a greatly enlarged and active covert secret service effort. That effort is being expended to undermine western democracies so as to neutralize them in a bid to regain its empire, if not even more. Since the useful ideology of "Communism" collapsed along with the empire, Russian efforts at "agitprop" have been directed not through the traditional "left wing" extremists, but through the "right wing". In just ten days from the time of this writing we here in the U.S. will find out just how successful this Russian effort has been in undermining the freedoms, justice, and liberty that we Americans have become so complacent about. The result will fundamentally change the course of world history, perhaps in the worst possible way. To all patriotic Americans, please think before you vote; it may be the last real election you'll ever see.
Estimation of the Rolling Resistance of TiresBrian Wiegand
Evaluation of the performance potential of an automotive conceptual design requires some initial quantitative estimate of numerous relevant parameters. Such parameters include the vehicle mass properties, frontal and plan areas, aero drag and lift coefficients, available horsepower and torque, and various tire characteristics such as the rolling resistance coefficient(s)...
A number of rolling resistance models have been advanced since Robert William Thomson first patented the pneumatic rubber tire in 1845, most of them developed in the twentieth century. Most early models only crudely approximate tire rolling resistance behavior over a limited range of operation, while the latest models overcome those limitations but often at the expense of extreme complexity requiring significant computer resources. No model extant seems well suited to the task of providing a methodology for the estimation of a tire’s rolling resistance “coefficient” that is simple to use yet accurate enough for modern conceptual design evaluation.
It is the intent of this paper to suggest a methodology by which this seeming deficiency may be rectified.
Mass properties have a profound effect on automotive fuel economy, emissions, safety, ride, acceleration , braking, and maneuver . Because of this fact, it is important to have a reliable and comprehensive methodology for the estimation of key mass property parameters in the conceptual design stage. Also, such a methodology would be important for researchers investigating aspects of automotive dynamics, for programmers creating realistic automotive simulations, and for investigators studying the dynamics of automotive crash scenarios .
There is a scarcity of published information of sufficient accuracy and/or completeness so as to constitute a viable methodology. Published automotive mass property estimation methods seem to be available only in a non-comprehensive fashion through a variety of scattered sources. It is the intent of this paper to systematize the information drawn from published sources and, with the employment of techniques based on those used in the aerospace industry, to augment and improve upon the published information so as to develop a basis for a comprehensive automotive mass properties estimation methodology.
Note the use of the word “basis”; it is not to be imagined that this paper will represent the “last word” in automotive mass properties estimation. What is presented herein is intended to provide a possible overall framework for, and an initial “first cut” at, the development of a comprehensive methodology. Automotive design practitioners working within the established industry may have a far more potent estimation methodology available to them, but in the form of proprietary techniques that they are not at liberty to divulge. Yet even such automotive industry insiders may find an independently derived methodology interesting, and perhaps even useful for comparison with in-house procedures. However, it is the independent designer or researcher that is most likely to find this paper to be of great value, and it is the purpose of this paper to aid such independent efforts through promoting the development of a publicly accessible methodology.
To that end this paper presents the development of a preliminary “top-down” methodology which requires as input only those most basic and common overall parameters as would be available in the earliest of design stages or, for existing designs, from the commonly available literature. This includes such parameters as vehicle dimensions, applicable general legal specification or regulation, general vehicle configuration and category, type of suspension, and level of technology (which is generally time dependent). The desired output consists of the curb weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, the unsprung weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, the sprung weight/c.g. coordinates/inertias, and the sprung weight roll moment of inertia (i.e., a rotational inertia about an essentially longitudinal axis, the location of which is determined by the suspension geometry).
Fleet management these days is next to impossible without connected vehicle solutions. Why? Well, fleet trackers and accompanying connected vehicle management solutions tend to offer quite a few hard-to-ignore benefits to fleet managers and businesses alike. Let’s check them out!
In this presentation, we have discussed a very important feature of BMW X5 cars… the Comfort Access. Things that can significantly limit its functionality. And things that you can try to restore the functionality of such a convenient feature of your vehicle.
5 Warning Signs Your BMW's Intelligent Battery Sensor Needs AttentionBertini's German Motors
IBS monitors and manages your BMW’s battery performance. If it malfunctions, you will have to deal with an array of electrical issues in your vehicle. Recognize warning signs like dimming headlights, frequent battery replacements, and electrical malfunctions to address potential IBS issues promptly.
What Exactly Is The Common Rail Direct Injection System & How Does It WorkMotor Cars International
Learn about Common Rail Direct Injection (CRDi) - the revolutionary technology that has made diesel engines more efficient. Explore its workings, advantages like enhanced fuel efficiency and increased power output, along with drawbacks such as complexity and higher initial cost. Compare CRDi with traditional diesel engines and discover why it's the preferred choice for modern engines.
Things to remember while upgrading the brakes of your carjennifermiller8137
Upgrading the brakes of your car? Keep these things in mind before doing so. Additionally, start using an OBD 2 GPS tracker so that you never miss a vehicle maintenance appointment. On top of this, a car GPS tracker will also let you master good driving habits that will let you increase the operational life of your car’s brakes.
"Trans Failsafe Prog" on your BMW X5 indicates potential transmission issues requiring immediate action. This safety feature activates in response to abnormalities like low fluid levels, leaks, faulty sensors, electrical or mechanical failures, and overheating.
Ever been troubled by the blinking sign and didn’t know what to do?
Here’s a handy guide to dashboard symbols so that you’ll never be confused again!
Save them for later and save the trouble!
What Does the PARKTRONIC Inoperative, See Owner's Manual Message Mean for You...Autohaus Service and Sales
Learn what "PARKTRONIC Inoperative, See Owner's Manual" means for your Mercedes-Benz. This message indicates a malfunction in the parking assistance system, potentially due to sensor issues or electrical faults. Prompt attention is crucial to ensure safety and functionality. Follow steps outlined for diagnosis and repair in the owner's manual.
Symptoms like intermittent starting and key recognition errors signal potential problems with your Mercedes’ EIS. Use diagnostic steps like error code checks and spare key tests. Professional diagnosis and solutions like EIS replacement ensure safe driving. Consult a qualified technician for accurate diagnosis and repair.
𝘼𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙦𝙪𝙚 𝙋𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘 𝙏𝙧𝙖𝙙𝙚𝙧𝙨 𝙞𝙨 𝙫𝙚𝙧𝙮 𝙛𝙖𝙢𝙤𝙪𝙨 𝙛𝙤𝙧 𝙢𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙪𝙧𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙥𝙧𝙤𝙙𝙪𝙘𝙩𝙨. 𝙒𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘 𝙜𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙡𝙚𝙨 𝙪𝙨𝙚𝙙 𝙞𝙣 𝙖𝙪𝙩𝙤𝙢𝙤𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙖𝙪𝙩𝙤 𝙥𝙖𝙧𝙩𝙨 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙖𝙡𝙡 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙛𝙖𝙢𝙤𝙪𝙨 𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙖𝙣𝙞𝙚𝙨 𝙗𝙪𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙜𝙧𝙖𝙣𝙪𝙡𝙚𝙨 𝙛𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙪𝙨.
Over the 10 years, we have gained a strong foothold in the market due to our range's high quality, competitive prices, and time-lined delivery schedules.
Why Is Your BMW X3 Hood Not Responding To Release CommandsDart Auto
Experiencing difficulty opening your BMW X3's hood? This guide explores potential issues like mechanical obstruction, hood release mechanism failure, electrical problems, and emergency release malfunctions. Troubleshooting tips include basic checks, clearing obstructions, applying pressure, and using the emergency release.
Core technology of Hyundai Motor Group's EV platform 'E-GMP'Hyundai Motor Group
What’s the force behind Hyundai Motor Group's EV performance and quality?
Maximized driving performance and quick charging time through high-density battery pack and fast charging technology and applicable to various vehicle types!
Discover more about Hyundai Motor Group’s EV platform ‘E-GMP’!
Core technology of Hyundai Motor Group's EV platform 'E-GMP'
MASS PROPERTIES and AUTOMOTIVE CRASH SURVIVAL, Rev. A
1. Brian Paul Wiegand, PE
74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015
2. …WAS INITIALLY CONSIDERED SOMETHING
ABOUT WHICH LITTLE COULD BE DONE. A
DECELERATION LEVEL GREATER THAN 18
G’s WAS THOUGHT TO BE UNAVOIDABLY
FATAL. SAFETY EFFORT WAS FOCUSSED ON
AVOIDING THE CRASH THROUGH BETTER
BRAKES, HANDLING, LIGHTING, SPEED
LIMITS, TRAFFIC LIGHTS, ROADWAY
CONSTRUCTION, DRIVER EDUCATION, ETC.
THE PASSIVE ASPECT OF AUTOMOTIVE
CRASH SAFETY WAS IGNORED…
74th SAWE International Conference 2
3. …ATTITUDES BEGAN TO CHANGE IN
THE 1930’s. DR. CLAIR L. STRAITH (1891-
1958), JOESEPH CHAMBERLAIN
FURNAS (1906-2001), HUGH DeHAVEN
(1895-1980), COL. JOHN PAUL STAPP
(1910-1999), & RALPH NADER (1934-????)
INVESTIGATED AND/OR AGITATED
FOR GREATER AUTOMOTIVE PASSIVE
CRASH SAFETY.
74th SAWE International Conference 3
4. …DEPENDS ON A NUMBER OF FACTORS:
1. MAGNITUDE OF DECELERATION.
2. RATE OF ONSET OF DECELERATION.
3. DURATION OF DECELERATION.
4. POSITION W.R.T. THE DECELERATION
VECTOR.
5. OSCILLATION OF THE DECELERATION.
6. ANGULAR COMPONENT PRESENCE.
7. PHYSICAL CRUSH &/OR PENETRATION.
74th SAWE International Conference 4
5. …IS POSSIBLE FOR VERY HIGH LEVELS OF
DECELERATION IF:
1. THE DURATION IS SHORT.
2. THE RATE OF ONSET LOW.
3. THE POSITION W.R.T. DECELERATION
VECTOR IS FAVORABLE, WITH PROPER
RESTRAINT AND SUPPORT.
4. THE DECELERATION PULSE IS SMOOTH.
5. THERE IS NO ANGULAR COMPONENT .
6. THERE IS NO BODILY CRUSH AND/OR
PENETRATION.
74th SAWE International Conference 5
11. 74th SAWE International Conference 11
PACKAGING CONCEPT: PROPER RESTRAINT
AND SUPPORT WITHIN AN INVIOLATE
PASSENGER COMPARTMENT SURROUNDED
BY SACRIFICIAL CRUSHABLE STRUCTURE.
13. 74th SAWE International Conference 13
THE FORCE “F” IS NOT CONSTANT BUT
FLUXES AS THE VEHICLE STRUCTURE
CRUSHES IN SPURTS:
14. 74th SAWE International Conference 14
THE KINETIC ENERGY AT IMPACT WILL BE
DISSIPATED MAINLY AS THE WORK DONE
CRUSHING THE VEHICLE STRUCTURE:
EXPRESSED IN RAMP MODEL TERMS:
15. 74th SAWE International Conference 15
Wt = Weight of the vehicle (lb).
g = Gravitational constant, “g” = 32.174 ft/s2.
I1 = Rotational inertia about front axle line (lb-ft2).
I2 = Rotational inertia about the crankshaft axis (lb-ft2).
I3 = Rotational inertia about transmission 3rd motion axis
(lb-ft2).
I4 = Rotational inertia about rear axle line (lb-ft2).
TR = Transmission gear ratio (dimensionless).
AR = Axle gear ratio (dimensionless).
RD = Dynamic rolling radius at drive wheels (ft).
16. 74th SAWE International Conference 16
TWO TYPES:
1- FMVSS or COMPLIANCE TESTING
2- NCAP or 5-STAR RATING TESTING
NCAP TESTING IS THE MORE “RIGOROUS”
(35 MPH vs. 30 MPH FIXED BARRIER CRASH,
ETC.) AND MANUFACTURERS TEND TO
DESIGN SO AS TO GET A HIGH NCAP 5-STAR
RATING.
17. 74th SAWE International Conference 17
CONSISTS OF A NUMBER OF TESTS:
1) 35 MPH FRONT FIXED BARRIER CRASH
2) 38.5 MPH SIDE MOVING DEFORMABLE BARRIER CRASH
3) 20 MPH SIDE POLE CRASH
4) ROLLOVER RESISTANCE (SSF CALC + “FISHHOOK” TEST)
THE 35 MPH FRONT FIXED BARRIER CRASH IS THE MOST
SIGNIFICANT TEST, AND DRIVES THE DESIGN OF VEHICLE
FRONT STRUCTURES
18. 74th SAWE International Conference 18
HEAD INJURY CRITERION (HIC): FOR FMVSS THE HIC VALUE
MERELY HAS TO BE LESS THAN 1000 FOR THE 95th PERCENTILE
DUMMY AND LESS THAN 700 FOR THE 5th PERCENTILE
DUMMY. FOR NCAP RATING IS BASED ON BEST SCORE IN
CLASS.
NECK INJURY CRITERION: FOR FMVSS THIS CRITERION
MERELY HAS TO BE LESS THAN 937 lb TENSION/899 lb
COMPRESSION FOR THE 95th PERCENTILE DUMMY AND LESS
THAN 589 lb TENSION/566 lb COMPRESSION FOR THE 5th
PERCENTILE DUMMY. FOR NCAP RATING IS BASED ON BEST
SCORE IN CLASS.
CHEST ACCELERATION/COMPRESSION CRITERION: FOR
FMVSS HAS TO BE LESS THAN 60 g’s DECELERATION OR LESS
THAN 2.5 in COMPRESSION. FOR NCAP RATING IS BASED ON
BEST SCORE IN CLASS.
19. 74th SAWE International Conference 19
PC/Mi (Passenger Car/Mini): 1,500-1,999 lb (680-906 kg).
PC/L (Passenger Car/Light): 2,000-2,499 lb (907-1133 kg).
PC/C (Passenger Car/Compact): 2,500-2,999 lb (1134-1360 kg).
PC/Me (Passenger Car/Medium): 3,000-3,499 lb (1361-1587 kg).
PC/H (Passenger Car/Heavy): 3,500 lb and up (1588 kg and up).
LTV (Light Trucks, Vans): includes SUV’s.
20. 74th SAWE International Conference 20
Where:
HIC = Head Injury Criterion (dimensionless).
t1 = Time at start of interval of interest (seconds).
t2 = Time at end of interval of interest (seconds).
a = Resultant (total) deceleration (g’s) as per:
24. 74th SAWE International Conference 24
LIGHTER VEHICLES ARE NOW AT AN EVEN
GREATER DISADVANTAGE TO HEAVIER VEHICLES
IN A CRASH; THE LIGHTER VEHICLE OCCUPANTS
ARE MORE LIKELY TO BE INJURED OR KILLED.
THE OCCUPANTS OF ALL VEHICLES ARE
MORE LIKELY TO BE INJURED OR KILLED WHEN
THE CRASH IS NOT ORTHOGONAL TO A FIXED
FLAT BARRIER, OR WHEN THE BARRIER IS NOT
SMOOTH AND FLAT, OR WHEN THE IMPACT
VELOCITY IS GREATER THAN 35 MPH.
25. 74th SAWE International Conference 25
MANUFACTURER’S DESIGN VEHICLES TO HAVE
THE LOWEST DECELERATION POSSIBLE WITHIN
THE AVAILABLE CRUSH DISTANCE (I.E., WITHOUT
ENGAGING THE PASSENGER SPACE STRUCTURE).
THIS MEANS THAT HEAVIER VEHICLES WILL
ALWAYS HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY STIFFER FRONT
STRUCTURE THAN LIGHTER VEHICLES, AND THAT
ALL VEHICLES ARE NOW ONLY FIT FOR FRONT
END CRASHES THAT EXACTLY DUPLICATE CRASH
TEST CONDITIONS.
26. 74th SAWE International Conference 26
THE NCAP 5-STAR RATING SYSTEM AS IT
IS NOW CONSTITUTED INSTUTIONALIZES A
MINIMUM LEVEL OF SAFETY AND PENALIZES
MANUFACTURES WHO WOULD AIM HIGHER.
HUMAN BEINGS CAN SURVIVE FAR HIGHER “G”
LOADINGS THAN THOSE RESULTING FROM
PRESENT NCAP SYSTEM, AND SMALL LIGHT
VEHICLES SHOULD BE ALLOWED HIGHER “G”
LOADINGS WITH ATTENDENT BETTER
PACKAGING SO AS TO “EVEN THE PLAYING
FIELD” W.R.T. LARGER HEAVIER VEHICLES.
27. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 27
28. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 28
WHEN CRUSH DISTANCE IS EXCEEDED:
g’s
29. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 29
SHEDDING KINETIC ENERGY (PARTS):
g’s
30. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 30
CRASH MODELING SUMMARY: g’s
31. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 31
WHEN CRASHES DO NOT FOLLOW
NCAP SCENARIO: g’s
32. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 32
RACE CAR DRIVERS ROUTINELY
SURVIVE WHAT NHTSA CALLS FATAL
g’s
“…(Purley) survived an estimated 179.8 g’s when he decelerated from 173 km/h
(108 mph) to 0 in a distance of 66 cm (26 inches)… This was the highest measured
(sic) g-force ever survived by a human being…(until in 2003, Kenny Bräck's crash
violence recording system measured 214 g).
“David Charles Purley…(26 January 1945 – 2 July 1985) was a
British racing driver… best known for his actions at the 1973 Dutch Grand
Prix, where he abandoned…(his race car)…and attempted to save…fellow
driver Roger Williamson, whose car was…on fire...Purley was awarded the George
Medal for his courage in trying to save Williamson, who suffocated...During pre-
qualifying for the 1977 British Grand Prix Purley sustained multiple bone fractures
(when)…he crashed into a wall. His deceleration from 173 kph (108 mph) to 0 in a
distance of 66 cm (26 in) is thought to be one of the highest G-loads in human
history…He died in a plane crash in…1985.”
33. 74TH SAWE International Conference on Mass Properties Engineering
Alexandria, VA, 18-22 May 2015 33
1948 TUCKER “TORPEDO” AFTER NEAR 100 MPH ROLLOVER AT INDY
DEMONSTRATION
Editor's Notes
MASS PROPERTIES & AUTOMOTIVE CRASH SURVIVAL IS SOMETHING THAT SHOULD CONCERN US ALL AS JUST ABOUT ALL OF US DRIVE, YET IT DOESN’T. WE JUST ACCEPT THE FACT THAT THE MATTER IS IN THE HANDS OF THE BIG AUTOMOTIVE MANUFACTURERS AND THE GOVERNMENT REGULATIORY AGENCIES AND ASSUME THAT THEY ARE DOING THE BEST JOB POSSIBLE…
OF COURSE, AT ONE TIME CRASH SURVIVAL WAS PRETTY MUCH IGNORED COMPLETELY, SO THERE HAS BEEN SOME IMPROVEMENT…
THAT INITIAL ATTITUDE BEGAN TO CHANGE IN THE 1930’S…
With respect to duration we are talking milliseconds for very high deceleration levels up to around 200 g’s. A rate of onset less than 1000 g/sec is good…
How some of those factors interrelate is illustrated in the Lovelace Chart, which conveniently relates deceleration level, duration, deceleration distance, and initial velocity all in one handy graph. It establishes the upper limits for human survivability (narrow yellow band). Hugh DeHaven is primarily responsible for the initial collecting and organizing of this sort of data. The “55 ft fall with 4 in deceleration” (145 g’s average) is one of the many cases he investigated.
A chart of this sort is less concerned with fatality but the level of deceleration which is endurable allowing for continued function. Col. Stapp is primarily responsible for the initial collecting and organizing of this sort of data, which comes in handy for carrier landings, ejection systems, rocket launches, etc.
Another Stapp type data graph. Note that here the rate of onset is about 1000 g’s/sec when the situation starts to become critical…
This a sort of NASA chart which illustrates the importance of positioning w.r.t. the acceleration vector…
RESTRAINT AND SUPPORT IS RELATED TO THE MATTER OF PROPER POSITINING W.R.T. THE DECELERATION VECTOR, THAT IS, THE MAINTAINING OF THAT POSITIONING AND THE SPREADING OUT OF DECELERATION LOADS ON THE HUMAN BODY.
The “packaging concept” for human survival in car crashes has been around for quite awhile, and is universally accepted (not that the automotive manufacturers pay strict adherence to it). Béla Barényi (1907-1997) while working for Mercedes patented (DBP 854,157) the automotive “crumple zone” in 1951. 1963 Mercedes 230 SL body incorporated a rigid passenger cell and crumple zones at the front and rear as per the concept of Barényi. In 1966 Barényi and Hans Scherenberg created the division of auto safety into the active and passive.
The force generated “F” causes not only a deceleration “a” but also dynamic moments about the contact point of “F dz” and “F dy” (latter not shown). This gives the height of the CG and the lateral offset of the CG w.r.t. the line of action special significance. In the fixed barrier crash test depicted note how the “F dz” moment causes the rear wheels to lose contact with the ground plane.
THERE IS SOME RANDOM FLUX IN THE ACTUAL FORCE-CRUSH FUNCTION DUE TO THE COLUMN-LIKE NATURE OF MANY OF THE STRUCTURAL ELEMENTS. THIS FLUX IS MUCH LESS TODAY THAN YEARS AGO DUE TO THE EFFORT TAKEN TO SMOOTH OUT THE INHERENT HARSH VIBRATION TENDENCY. THE RANDOM VIBRATION FLUX OF “Fx” CREATS A VIBRATORY FLUX IN “Fz” AND “Fy” WHEN “dZ” AND “dY” ARE LARGE ENOUGH TO BE SIGNIFICANT. IF SO, THEN THERE WILL BE A FLUCUATING ACCELERATION IN THE X, Y, AND Z DIRECTIONS. NOTE THAT FOR SIMPLIFIED STUDIES THE FORCE-CRUSH FUNCTION CAN BE MODELED AS A “RAMP”, A.K.A. “PROGRESSIVE FORCE”, FUNCTION. THE AREA BOUNDED BY THE FORCE-CRUSH FUNCTION IS THE WORK ENERGY UTILIZED TO CRUSH THE STRUCTURE, AND IS EQUAL TO THE KINETIC ENERGY OF THE VEHICLE AT IMPACT.
IN A CRASH THE DRIVETRAIN IS OFTEN QUICKLY INCAPACITATED, SO THE I2 TERM AND MAYBE THE I3 TERM MIGHT NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE EFFECTIVE MASS IN A CRASH. ALSO THE BRAKES MIGHT BE LOCKED PRIOR THE CRASH, WHICH COULD EXCLUDE TERMS I1 AND I2. ALSO THERE IS THE UNCERTAINTY OF COMPONENTS BREAKING OFF FROM THE MAIN BODY DURING THE CRASH, AND THE POSSIBLE LOSS OF GROUND CONTACT BY THE REAR WHEELS WHICH WILL INFLUENCE HOW THE I4 ROTATIONAL ENERGY IS FED INTO THE CRASH. THIS IS WHY THE EFFECTIVE MASS IS OFTEN JUST APPROXIMATED AS THE WEIGHT MASS. THE OTHER SOURCE OF UNCERTAINTY INVOLVES ENERGY DISSIPATION IN WAYS OTHER THAN WORK CRUSHING STRUCTURE (FRICTION, VIBRATION, LIGHT, SOUND).
FOR FRONT FIXED BARRIER CRASH COMPLIANCE TESTING DUMMY MEASUREMENTS HAVE TO BE LESS THAN CERTAIN VALUES. FOR FRONT FIXED BARRIER CRASH 5-STAR TESTING THERE IS NO PASS/FAIL; RATINGS ARE RELATIVE TO THE REST OF THE VEHICLES IN CLASS.
THE NCAP VEHICLE CLASSES ARE EXPLICITLY WEIGHT DRIVEN FOR PASSENGER CARS, FOR LTV/SUV IT IS ASSUMED THAT WEIGHT IS PROPORTIONAL TO SIZE ALTHOUGH THIS ALLOWS FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF OVERLAP WITH THE HEAVIER PASSENGER CAR CLASS.
THE HEAD INJURY CRITERION IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT AND COMPLICATED. HERE WE CAN SEE THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE ACCELERATIONS IN THE LATERAL AND VERTICAL DIRECTIONS. THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY IT MAY BE BEST FOR CRASH PERFORMANCE TO HAVE THE LOWEST VERTICAL CG AND LEAST LATERALLY OFFSET CG POSSIBLE.
THE LARGE HEAVY VEHICLE (5122 lb) IS 1.7 TIMES THE WEIGHT OF THE SMALL LIGHT VEHICLE (3011 lb, PASSENGER CAR, MEDIUM), BUT ITS AVAILABLE CRUSH DISTANCE IS ONLY 1.11 TIMES THE SMALL LIGHT. MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE FRONT END AREA RATIO IS 1.28. EVEN THOUGH BOTH VEHICLES HAVE TO BE AS “SOFT” AS POSSIBLE STRUCTURALLY TO GET THE BEST SCORE (LOWEST DECEL), THE HEAVY VEHICLE HAS TO ABSORB 70% MORE KINETIC ENERGY IN ONLY 11% MORE DISTANCE AND WITH ONLY 28% MORE AREA; THE HEAVY VEHICLE MUST HAVE A 33% STIFFER STRUCTURE (1.7/1.28) THAN THE LIGHTER VEHICLE IF THE PASSENGER SPACE IS TO BE MAINTAINED.
(The volume ratio is 2.07. THE MODEL STIFFNESS RATIO IS 1.34)
NOTE THAT THE MODEL FRT STIFFNESS RATIO IS 1.34. THE 35 MPH NCAP BARRIER TEST DECELERATIONS ARE 24.34 g’s SL and 21.61 g’s LH, WHICH ARE CLOSE.
THE INDIVIDUAL DELTA VELOCITIES SMALL LIGHT TO LARGE HEAVY ARE 35.21 mph TO 20.70 mph (TOTALS 55.91 mph) with a closing speed of 57.9 mph (leaves 1.99 mph “unaccounted” for) AND DECELERATIONS ARE 24.34 g’s TO 14.31 g’s. THESE ARE THE MAX RESULTS POSSIBLE WITHOUT VIOLATING THE PASSENGER SPACE OF THE SMALL LIGHT VEHICLE.
YOU COULD TAKE SOMETHING THE SIZE OF A DODGE NEON AND, WITH BETTER PACKAGING AND STIFFER STRUCTURE, MAKE IT FAR SAFER THAN AT PRESENT, BUT IT WOULD SCORE FAR LESS IN NCAP 5-STAR “SAFETY” RATING.
In demonstration runs at Indianapolis Motor Speedway in 1948 seven Tuckers were driven around the 2 1/2-mile Indianapolis Speedway oval for two weeks at 90-95 mph average. Car #1027 had a tire blow out and rolled three times at about 95 miles per hour (153km/h) and the driver walked away with bruises. After the tire was replaced the car was re-started and driven off the track.