16018_Nemesis _CAD/CAE Report

Authors Name: Aditya Vikram Agarwal

Co-Authors Name: Jai Kumar Ramrakhyani

1. INTRODUCTION
Computer-aided drafting (CAD) is the use of computer
systems to aid in the creation, modification, analysis, or
optimization of a design. Computer-aided engineering
(CAE) is the broad usage of computer software to aid in
engineering analysis tasks.
Firstly, we selected the type of steering, suspension
and transmission system to be used and according to
that made the design. The seatback angle was kept
such that it is most ergonomic. Considering the safety
of driver, the sitting space, ground clearance and height
of driver was kept in accordance with the rulebook.
3D CAD design was made in Solidworks 2015 SP0 x64
edition. Meshing and analysis of frame for front, side
and roll over impact was performed in Altair Hyperworks
13.0 (64 bit) edition. The other CAE analysis such as
fairing supports and seatback member supports was
performed in Ansys Workbench 15.0.

2.

FRAME MATERIAL OPTIONS

Material

Weight
(kg)

Price
()

Yield
Strength

Ultimate
Strength

45

7200

365
MPa

440
MPa

II

44

7040

365
MPa

440
MPa

3. CALCULATION OF BENDING STRENGTH

AND BENDING STIFFNESS

AISI 1018 Properties:

Material 1: steel 1018 Circular; 31.75x28.55x1.6

(mm)

Table: Chemical Composition

Outer diameter d2= 31.75mm

Inner diameter d1= 28.55mm
Yield strength sy = 365 Mpa
C = Distance from neutral axis to extreme fiber
= 15.875 mm

Table: Physical Properties

Moment of inertia I = pi/4(d24-d14)

= 17268.84 x 10-12 m4
Bending Strength, M= (sy x I)/c
= (365 x 106 x 17268.84 x 10-12)/15.875x10-3
M= 397.05 N m

Options of Different Cross section:

Bending stiffness = EI (we assume proportionality

constant to be 1 for comparative purpose)

1. STEEL (1018)
Circular; 31.75 x 28.55 x 1.6 (mm)

= 205 x 109 x 17268.84 x 10-12

= 3540.11 N m2

2. STEEL (1018)
Circular; 25.4 x 21.4 x 2 (mm)

Material 2: Steel 1018 Circular; 25.4x21.4x2 (mm)

(Reference)
Outer diameter d2= 25.4mm

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 1 of 14

Inner diameter d1= 21.4mm

Yield strength sy = 365 MPa
C = Distance from neutral axis to extreme fiber = 12.7
mm
Moment of inertia I = pi/4(d24-d14)
= 10136.74 x 10-12 m4
Bending Strength, M= (sy x I)/c
= (365 x 106 x 10136.74 x 10-12)/12.7x10-3
M= 291.33 N m

As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every

member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for front impact test, the frame is fixed from
the rear side and the front members will come across the
applied load. To properly analyze the impact force, we
need to find the deceleration of the vehicle after impact.
To approximate the worst case scenario that the vehicle
will undergo, momentum equations were used to
determine the deceleration of the vehicle. The vehicle
was considered to be at maximum speed of 36km/hr
having total weight of 355 kg and according to different
scenarios the conditions of head on impacts were
employed with a crash pulse consideration of 0.2s.
b) Calculation of Impact Forces:

Bending stiffness = EI (we assume proportionality

constant to be 1 for comparative purpose)

Weight of the Vehicle, M = 355kg (Including two driver

each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.2 seconds.

= 205 x 109 x 10136.74 x 10-12

=2078.03 N m2

Work done = Change in kinetic energy

W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 355 x 100 = 17750 N-m
MATERIAL

BENDING
STRENGTH

BENDING
STIFFNESS

397.05 N m

3540.11 N m2

II (Reference)

291.33 N m

2078.03 N m2

Work done = Force x displacement = F x s

(1)

Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)

Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1m
From (1) we get,
F = W/s
F = 17750/1 = 17750N

4. CAE ANALYSIS OF VEHICLE/FRAME

A frame of the vehicle plays the most important role in
safety of passenger. The frame contains the operator,
motor, brake system, steering mechanism and must be
of adequate strength to protect the operator in the event
of impact or rollover.
Finite Element Analysis is a mathematical modeling
technique used to determine the response of real
structures to external and internal loads. CAE Analysis
on the frame is performed to evaluate the safety offered
by the frame to drivers in case of any accident including
Frontal Impact, Side Impact and Rollover.

c) Analysis Results:
Maximum Stress = 26.1 MPa
Minimum Stress = -58.6 MPa

4.1. FRONTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS

It is the impact wherein there is a possibility of vehicle
crashing into another vehicle head on during the race.
Material-1 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter - 1.25 inch,
Thickness 1.6mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:
effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 2 of 14

Weight of the Vehicle, M = 354 kg (Including two driver

each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.2 seconds.
Work done = Change in kinetic energy
W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 354 x 100 = 17700 N-m
Work done = Force x displacement = F x s

(1)

Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)

Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1m

Total deformation = 76.6mm

From (1) we get,

F = W/s
F = 17700 N-m

Factor of safety = Yield Strength/ Max Stress = 365/58.6

= 6.22

c) Analysis Results:

d) Optimizations:
No optimization required as factor of safety is large
enough to sustain front impact.

Maximum Stress = 26.9 MPa

Minimum Stress = -60.23 MPa

Material-2 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter 1 inch,

Thickness 2mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:
As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every
member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for front impact test, the frame is fixed from
the rear side and the front members will come across the
applied load. To properly analyze the impact force, we
need to find the deceleration of the vehicle after impact.
To approximate the worst case scenario that the vehicle
will undergo, momentum equations were used to
determine the deceleration of the vehicle. The vehicle
was considered to be at maximum speed of 36km/hr
having total weight of 354 kg and according to different
scenarios the conditions of head on impacts were
employed with a crash pulse consideration of 0.2s.

Maximum Deformation = 127mm

b) Calculation of Impact Forces:

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 3 of 14

Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)

Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1.25m
From (1) we get,
F = W/s
F = 17750/1.25 = 14200N

Factor of safety = 6.06

d) Optimizations:
No Optimization necessary as maximum stress is less
than yield stress.

4.2. SIDE IMPACT ANALYSIS

The side impact analysis is carried out as there is a
possibility of collision with another vehicle from either
direction.

c) Analysis Results:
Maximum Stress = 42.7 MPa
Minimum Stress = -44.1 MPa

Material-1 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter - 1.25 inch,

Thickness 1.6mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:
As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every
member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for side impact test, one side of the roll cage
elements are fixed while the other side will be applied
with load. Thus, the stresses acting on the side members
of the roll cage are analyzed. To properly analyze the
impact force, we need to find the deceleration of the
vehicle after impact. To approximate the worst case
scenario that the vehicle will undergo, momentum
equations were used to determine the deceleration of the
vehicle. The vehicle was considered to be at maximum
speed of 36km/hr having total weight of 355 kg and
according to different scenarios the conditions of head
on impacts were employed with a crash pulse
consideration of 0.25s.

Maximum deformation = 36.5mm

b) Calculation of Impact Forces:

Weight of the Vehicle, M = 355kg (Including two driver
each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.25 seconds.
Work done = Change in kinetic energy
W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 355 x 100 = 17750 N-m
Work done = Force x displacement = F x s

effi.saenis.org

(1)

Factor of safety = 365/44.1 = 8.27

d) Optimizations:
Since factor of safety is large enough, no optimization of
vehicle is required.

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 4 of 14

Material-2 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter - 1 inch,

Thickness 2 mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:
As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every
member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for side impact test, one side of the roll cage
elements are fixed while the other side will be applied
with load. Thus, the stresses acting on the side members
of the roll cage are analyzed. To properly analyze the
impact force, we need to find the deceleration of the
vehicle after impact. To approximate the worst case
scenario that the vehicle will undergo, momentum
equations were used to determine the deceleration of the
vehicle. The vehicle was considered to be at maximum
speed of 36km/hr having total weight of 354 kg and
according to different scenarios the conditions of head
on impacts were employed with a crash pulse
consideration of 0.25s.

Maximum Deformation: 65mm

b) Calculation of Impact Forces:

Weight of the Vehicle, M = 354kg (Including two driver
each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.25 seconds.

Factor of safety = 8.11

Work done = Change in kinetic energy

W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 354 x 100 = 17700 N-m
d) Optimizations:
Work done = Force x displacement = F x s

(1)
No optimization required.

Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)

Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1.25m
From (1) we get,
F = W/s
F = 17700/1.25 = 14160N

4.3. ROLLOVER ANALYSIS

The rollover impact analysis is carried out by considering
the stresses induced on the members of the roll cage
when the vehicle topples down from a slope with an
angle of 45.
Material-1 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter - 1.25 inch,
Thickness 1.6mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:

c) Analysis Results:
Maximum Stress = 45 MPa
Minimum Stress = -43.6 MPa

effi.saenis.org

As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every

member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for rollover impact test, the lower elements of
the roll cage are fixed. In this impact, the upper and rear
members of the vehicle will bear the force. To properly
analyze the impact force, we need to find the
deceleration of the vehicle after impact. To approximate
the worst case scenario that the vehicle will undergo,
momentum equations were used to determine the
deceleration of the vehicle. The vehicle was considered
to be at maximum speed of 36km/h having total weight
EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 5 of 14

of 355 kg and according to different scenarios the

conditions of head on impacts were employed with a
crash pulse consideration of 0.3s.
b) Calculation of Impact Forces:
Weight of the Vehicle, M = 355kg (Including two driver
each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.3seconds.
Work done = Change in kinetic energy
W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 355 x 100 = 17750 N-m
Work done = Force x displacement = F x s
Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)
Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1.5m
From (1) we get,
F = W/s
F = 17750/1.5 = 11834 N.

(1)

Factor of safety = 365/47.6 = 7.67

d) Optimizations:
Factor of safety is large enough to easily sustain the
rollover impact force.

Material-2 (AISI 1018, Outer diameter - 1 inch,

Thickness 2mm)
a) Assumption & Considerations:

c) Analysis Results:
Maximum Stress = 17.4 MPa
Minimum Stress = -47.6 MPa

As the roll cage was developed by plotting lines, so every

member of roll cage is considered to be properly
constrained at every joint. Altair Hypermesh 13.0 is used
to create 1-D meshing of the frame. For boundary
conditions for rollover impact test, the lower elements of
the roll cage are fixed. In this impact, the upper and rear
members of the vehicle will bear the force. To properly
analyze the impact force, we need to find the
deceleration of the vehicle after impact. To approximate
the worst case scenario that the vehicle will undergo,
momentum equations were used to determine the
deceleration of the vehicle. The vehicle was considered
to be at maximum speed of 36km/h having total weight
of 355 kg and according to different scenarios the
conditions of head on impacts were employed with a
crash pulse consideration of 0.3s.
b) Calculation of Impact Forces:
Weight of the Vehicle, M = 354kg (Including two driver
each of weight 115kg).
Initial Velocity before impact, u = 10 m/s
Final Velocity after impact, v = 0 m/s
Impact time, t = 0.3seconds.

Maximum Deformation = 38mm

Work done = Change in kinetic energy

W = 0.5 x M x ( 2 - 2 ) = 0.5 x 355 x 100 = 17700 N-m
Work done = Force x displacement = F x s

(1)

Also, s = u x t + (0.5 x deceleration x t x t)

Thus, v = u + (a x t)
s = 1.5m
effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 6 of 14

From (1) we get,

F = W/s
F = 17700/1.5 = 10800 N.

AISI 1018 mild/low carbon steel has excellent

weldability and produces a uniform and harder case
and it is considered as the best steel for carburized
parts. AISI 1018 mild/low carbon steel offers a good
balance of toughness, strength and ductility. Provided
with higher mechanical properties, AISI 1018 hot rolled
steel also includes improved machining characteristics
and Brinell hardness.
Machinability: The machinability of AISI 1018 mild/low
carbon steel is graded at 78% of B1112.
Weldability: AISI 1018 mild/low carbon steel can be
instantly welded by all the conventional welding
processes. Welding is not recommended for AISI 1018
mild/low carbon steel when it is carbo-nitrided and
carburized.

c) Analysis Results:

Low carbon welding electrodes are to be used in the

welding procedure, and post-heating and pre-heating are
not necessary. Pre-heating can be performed for
sections over 50 mm. Post-weld stress relieving also has
its own beneficial aspects like the pre-heating process.

Maximum Stress = 16.38 MPa

Minimum Stress = -33.2 MPa

Material

Factor of Safety

Maximum Deformation
(mm)

FI

SI

ROI

FI

SI

ROI

6.22

8.27

7.67

76.6

36.5

38

II

6.06

8.11

11

127

65

58

Where, F I Front Impact, S I Side Impact, R O I

Roll Over Impact.

Maximum Deformation: 58mm

Factor of Safety is more and Maximum Deformation is

less in case of Material I even though weight is
comparable.
Weight of Material I 45 Kg
Weight of Material II 44 Kg
Material Selected for Frame:
STEEL (1018)
Circular; 31.75 x 28.55 x 1.6 (mm)

Factor of safety: 11

6. CAE ANALYSIS OF OTHER PARTS

d) Optimizations:
No optimization required as factor of safety is large
enough to sustain roll over impact.

CAE Analysis of other fabricated parts such as

overhead support, side protection members, and
seatback support members was performed.

5. FINAL MATERIAL SELECTION

Material selected is AISI 1018.
effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 7 of 14

Maximum stress = 121 MPa

6.1.

SIDE SUPPORT MEMBERS

a) Assumption and Consideration:

Side protection members are placed such that the
drivers bodies must be completely inside the periphery
made by vehicle frame. It is rigidly attached to the frame
and made of same material as that of the frame. A load
is applied to the side protection member and the node
where it attaches the frame is kept fixed till the member
yields.
b) Calculations :
An arbitrary force of 1000N was applied on one side
support member and rear suspension and right front
suspension points were kept stationary.

6.2.

OVERHEAD SUPPORT MEMBERS

a) Assumption & Considerations:

The overhead protection members are extended
horizontally at least 12 inches (304.8mm) forward from
the center of each drivers heads. They are rigidly fixed
such that they provide enough support from anything
falling from above and also in case of rollover.
The overhead support members are assumed to be
rigidly fixed and force is applied to them from above
vertically till they yield.
b) Calculations :
Arbitrary forces were applied ranging from 1000N to 600
N till the required result was obtained which gives the
factor of safety above 1.

c) Analysis Results:
A safety factor of 2.08 was obtained which shows that
the side protection members can hold up to 2000N of
impact force on them directed upon them.

c) Analysis Result :
A safety factor of 1.03 was obtained on application of 600
N of force (200 N on each of three faces) which shows
that overhead support member can bear a total force of
600 N impacted upon it.

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 8 of 14

Maximum Stress corresponding to 600 N force = 354

MPa

6.3.

c) Analysis Results :
Maximum Equivalent Stress = 336 MPa

SEATBACK SUPPORT MEMBERS

Maximum Deformation = 8mm

a) Assumption and Considerations:

The purpose of providing a seatback support member is
to provide a rigid support to seatback and to restrict its
movement in case of failure of seatback adjustment or
locking system. It should be placed close to the seatback
such that minimal gap exists in between. The Vehicle is
considered to be in dynamic condition and made to halt
suddenly such that the maximum force is applicable to
the seatback support members by the drivers during
impact.
b) Calculation of force:
Total impact force that driver can apply because of his
shoulders to the seatback support members:
50 percent of total body weight of both drivers = 115kg.
Let us assume 1G force is applied by drivers, thus
Force = mg = 1150 N

Factor of Safety = 1.1

Thus even on application of force of 1150 N by the
drivers, the seatback support members wont yield and
the drivers will be safe.
7. VEHICLE VIEWS
Appendix 1 includes all the vehicle views.

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 9 of 14

APPENDIX-1: Vehicle Views

Figure-1 (Isometric View of Vehicle)

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 10 of 14

APPENDIX-1: Vehicle Views (contd...)

Figure-2 (Front View of Vehicle)

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 11 of 14

APPENDIX-1: Vehicle Views (contd...)

Figure-3 (Side View of Vehicle)

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 12 of 14

A
APPENDIX-1: Vehicle Views (contd...)

Figure-4 (Top View of Vehicle)

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 13 of 14

APPENDIX-1: Vehicle Views (contd...)

Figure-5 (CAD Model of Frame)

effi.saenis.org

EFFI-CYCLE 2016

Page 14 of 14