Dynamic tests of Formula SAE car bodies
FILIPPO CAROLLO, GABRIELE VIRZÌ MARIOTTI, SALVATORE GOLFO, ANTONINO
PAPPALARDO
Engineering Department
Palermo University
ITALY
Abstract: - Palermo University (Italy) does not participate directly in the FSAE competition, but lets its students
compete "virtually" by organizing laboratories and working groups in order to design and simulate a car chassis
that meets the regulations, of Formula Student in particular. These works, which flow into the students'
graduate theses, are often placed together with a view to continuity and constant optimization and
improvement. The purpose of this paper is to pick up the work done in the design of an automotive chassis, and
to carry it out by shifting the focus no longer on the static resistance of the structure, but on the influence it has
on the dynamic behavior of the vehicle. To do this, a long work of reconstruction of past models was carried
out, adding to them what was necessary to complete the definition of an equivalent vehicle, and using materials
and technologies used in the automotive industry. The subsequent series of simulations on three vehicles with
different chassis and the comparison of the results have shown how at present the aluminum alloy frame is the
preferable one over the steel and carbon alloy one.
Key-Words: Formula SAE, Structural optimization, CarSim, Simulation test,
Received: May 22, 2021. Revised: April 12, 2022. Accepted: May 10, 2022. Published: May 31, 2022.
1 Introduction
According to the Formula SAE rule [1], students
have to conceive, design, manufacture and compete
with a small racing car. Restrictions on the chassis
and other parts of the vehicle exist to develop the
knowledge, creativity, and imagination of students
who have a limited budget. The cars must be built or
designed within a year and have to compete with
around 120 other cars from the world. The aim of
the competition is to make students assume that they
have been contacted by large companies to evaluate
a subsequent mass production of the prototype they
made (4 vehicles per day for a cost of £ 25,000). The
vehicles must stand out for their good results in
terms of acceleration, braking, quality of control,
low production cost, easy maintenance, reliability,
aesthetics.
Cars are judged during a series of static and dynamic
events which include: technical inspections, costs,
project presentation, technical drawing, testing and
performance, high performance endurance on the
track and are awarded scores for static and dynamic
events. As regards the design provisions, reference
should be made to the formula SAE regulation of
2021. Reference is made in particular to the
characteristics of the materials and the protection
against accidents.
In this paper a summary of what has been achieved
at the University of Palermo (Unipa) is reported,
regarding the design of a racing car according to the
criteria of the SAE formula.
Over the years, the trend of optimization has led to
great theoretical progress. For each of the projects
examined, operations were carried out to survey the
fundamental characteristics for the subsequent
comparative processing.
2 The single-seater from Unipa,
from2007 to today
2.1 The steel alloy frame EVO1
The prototype Evo1, of a single-seater, was designed
in 2007 [2][3][4]. This chassis prototype was created
using the following materials, and the final design
was determined by carrying out an optimization
process in Ansys to obtain the best stiffness-weight
ratio:
Tubes material:
Steel 25CrMo4 - E = 210 GPa, v = 0.30
Main Hoop:
De = 25.00 mm; Di = 20.00 mm; s = 2.50 mm;
Front Hoop:
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
104
Volume 21, 2022
De = 25.00mm; Di = 20.00 mm; s = 2.50 mm;
Absorber:
De = 15.00 mm; D1 = 12.00 mm; s = 1.50mm;
Other tubular elements:
De = 25.00 mm; Di = 21.50 mm; s = 1.75mm;
Wheelbase: l = 1600.00 mm;
Maximum length: s = 2211.45 mm;
Maximum width: b = 620,60 mm;
Maximum height: h = 1320 mm;
Figure 1: Perspective views of the EVO1 structure with the
driver model; reinforcements and engine scheme are enclosed.
Figure 2: Perspective view of the reconstruction of Evo1
The following path is followed to reconstruct the
model and execute the next elaborations:
1 A clear image of the photographs is acquired
through the Adobe Scansi software;
2 The measurements of length, width and height of
the drawing were taken with an electric twentieth
caliper. To reduce measurement errors, each
dimension was measured 10 times and the
statistically most correct value was determined;
3 Thanks to the dimensions of point 3 and the
maximum dimensions expressed in the project,
the scale factor of the drawing was calculated;
4 At this point, each element of the 2D drawing of
the frame has been measured, scaled and
reproduced on Solidworks;
5 Elements outside the frame, not originally
considered, have been added.
Figure 1 show the original image.
The figure 2 shows the Rendering of the rebuilt
chassis, with a 95th percentile shape built according
to the proportions dictated by the 2021 regulation of
the FSAE, driver's seat and front and rear
suspensions:
Once the model was reconstructed, the values of the
suspended masses, the position of the center of
gravity and therefore the main axes and moments of
inertia are obtained, for the definition of the model
to be used in the simulations.
Mass = 168.43Kg;
Position of the center of mass with respect to the
point of the straight line passing through the
contact points of the front wheel passing through
the plane of symmetry (with Z axis length and Y
axis height)
∆X= 0 mm ∆Y=414,18 mm ∆Z=1051,74
mm
Principal axis of inertia and principal moments
of inertia: (kg m2) In the center of the mass.
Ix = (0.00, 0.00, 1.00) Px = 12.75
Iy = (1.00, -0.01, 0.00) Py = 49.06
Iz = (0.01, 1.00, 0.00) Pz = 49.72
Inertia Moments (kg m2) in the mass center and
aligned with the resulting coordinate system
Lxx = 49.06 Lxy = -0.01 Lxz = 0.05
Lyx = -0.01 Lyy = 49.72 Lyz = -0.12
Lzx = 0.05 Lzy = -0.12 Lzz = 12.75
2.2 Il telaio in tubi di alluminio EVO2
Two years later, in 2009 [5] [6] [7], the research
group carried out the development of a frame, with
the main objective of reducing the weight of the
structure as much as possible, while maintaining
high torsional stiffness parameters. To do this, 7005-
T53 aluminum tubes are used for all the tubes that
do not include the Main and Front Hoop, and G41
steel tubes for the two roll bars. Table 1 reports the
mechanical properties of the materials used [8] [9]
[10] [11] [12] [13].
Table 1: Mechanical properties of the materials in EVO2
Alluminium
7005-T53
Steel G41
Density
Young
modulus
Poisson
coefficient
Yield
stress
Ultimate
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
105
Volume 21, 2022
stress
Tubes have the following dimensions:
Main Hoop:
De = 25.00 mm; Di = 22.00 mm; s = 1.50 mm;
Front Hoop:
De = 25.00 mm; Di = 22.00 mm; s = 1.50 mm;
Aluminum tubes:
De = 35.00 mm; Di=29.00 mm; s = 3.00 mm;
The maximum dimensions of the frame are:
Wheelbase: l = 1600.00 mm;
Maximum length: s = 2211.45 mm;
Maximum width: b = 1150.00 mm;
For this structure, the project was available in
electronic format, so there was no need to scan the
paper.
To obtain the data necessary for the simulations, the
same procedure described in paragraph 2.1 was
followed starting from point 2.
Figure 3 shows the original images and the figure 6
the reconstruction.
Figure 3: rendering of EVO2 frame with the pilot silhouette and
engine scheme.
In reconstructing the solid model of the structure,
some gaps in the original version were realized,
probably born from the fact that they fell into
secondary aspects for the designer's purpose
After discarding other solutions that compromise the
original characteristics as weight and flexibility, it
decided to take advantage of the different diameters
of the tube: the aluminum truss is initially welded
whole (figures 4 and 5), with two straight tubes to
simulate the straight part of the two roll bars, closed
at the lower end by a welded cap, perforated in the
center. A perforated flange is welded on the upper
edge of the pipes, and acts as a stop. At the same
time, a perforated stop flange and a perforated cap at
the end are welded to the steel pipes at an
appropriate height, and a second tubular is fitted at
certain predetermined heights, capable of bringing
the external diameter of the roll bar to coincide. with
the internal diameter of the aluminum section. In
this way, once the piece has been inserted by sliding
into its seats, the connection is completed,
preventing axial sliding by means of bolts in the
upper part and a structural rivet in the lower part. It
is also possible, as shown in the rendering, to
remove the non-contact part of the aluminum seat,
but only after the connection; this has been made to
prevent the release of any residual stress from
misaligning the sleeves that are formed. The
corrosion problems due to galvanic currents that
would arise from the contact of the two metals, the
steel should first be galvanized and then painted.
Figura 5:detail on
the seat of the
joint
Figura 4: detail on the
thickening of the rollbar
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
106
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 6: Perspective view of the reconstruction of the Evo2
chassis
Also for this model, the values of the suspended
masses, the position of the center of gravity and axes
and main moments of inertia were extracted:
Mass = 138.29Kg;
Position of the center of mass with respect to the
mean point of the straight line passing between
the contact points of the front wheel with the
ground, passing through the plane of symmetry
(with axis Z and Y in the direction of length and
height respectively):
∆X= 0 mm; ∆Y=369,4 m; ∆Z=1171,43 mm
Principal axis of inertia and principal moments
of inertia: (kg m2) in the center of the mass.
Ix = (0.00, -0.04, 1.00) Px = 12.75
Iy = (0.00, -1.00, -0.04) Py = 49.06
Iz = (1.00, 0.00, 0.00) Pz = 49.72
Inertia moments (kg m2) in the center of mass
and aligned with the coordinate system.
Lxx = 32.37 Lxy = 0.00 Lxz = 0.00
Lyx = 0.00 Lyy = 32.04 Lyz = -0.83
Lzx = 0.00 Lzy = -0.83 Lzz = 9.41
2.3 The frame in carbon fiber
The latest evolution of the single-seater chassis
taken into consideration is designed in 2012 [14]
[15], which is indicated with the initials EVO3. In
this particular iteration of the problem, always
keeping as target the lowering of weights with the
same resistance to torsion, the idea of developing a
lattice cell was abandoned in favor of a carbon fiber
body.
The final developed frame has a symmetrical
laminate composed of 24 sheets, 4.8mm thick and
the mechanical properties in Table 2 [16] [17].
Table 2: Mechanical properties of the laminate in carbon fibre
Theoretical
density
Longitudinal
breaking tension
Longitudinal
Young's
modulus
Transverse
Young's
modulus
Major Poisson's
ratio
Minor Poisson's
ratio
Transversal
breaking stress
Transversal
modulus of
elasticity
This has led to the generation of a very light frame:
only 18.83kg, weighed down only by three steel
reinforcements positioned halfway up the body,
coinciding with the front suspension attachments
and on the sides of the driver's seat, for a total of
24,83kg (figure 7).
Figure 7: the three original steel reinforcements
Also in this case, as the models no longer exist, the
acquisition and measurement process had to be
repeated. Less importance was given to the aspects
related to the general vehicle, providing only a few
dimensions on which to base the reconstruction: the
distance between the backrest and the outer edge of
the frame, of 450mm, the distance between the
backrest and the attachment of the front suspensions
to 800mm and the position of the rear axle, 400mm
from the edge of the frame. The reconstruction of
the model was implemented by a steel tube trellis
(the same steel tubes 25CrMo4 of the first model)
for the MainHoop, the front and rear suspensions,
and the subframe on which they engage. The
addition of these components led to the vehicle
presented in figure 8. The final model has the
characteristics reported in table 3.
Table 3: Characteristics of the final model in carbon fiber.
Max height
1301,41mm
Maximum length
2591,22mm
Maximum width
1230,00mm
Wheelbase
1670,00mm
Total mass
152,68kg
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
107
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 8: Perspective view of the reconstructed frame
The addition of the rear steel structure, in order to
comply with the parameters of the FSAE regulation,
has canceled the weight advantage compared to the
aluminum frame, and also the center of mass is
moved towards the rear due to the lightness of the
front end, therefore the weight distribution differs
from the optimum by 50% on the two axles.
This is evident in the moments of inertia
encountered by the modeler:
Position of the center of mass with respect to the
mean point of the straight line passing between
the contact points of the front wheel with the
ground, passing through the plane of symmetry
(with axis Z and Y in the direction of length and
height respectively):
∆X= 0 mm; ∆Y=362.46,4 mm; ∆Z=868,56 mm
Principal axis of inertia and principal moments
of inertia: (kg m2) in the center of the mass.
Ix = (0.00, 0.05, 1.00) Px = 11.80
Iy = (1.00, 0.00, 0.00) Py = 43.16
Iz = (0.00, 1.00, -0.05) Pz = 44.29
Inertia moments (kg m2) in the center of mass
and aligned with the coordinate system.
Lxx = 43.16 Lxy = 0.00 Lxz = -0.01
Lyx = 0.00 Lyy = 44.22 Lyz = 1.50
Lzx = -0.01 Lzy = 1.50 Lzz = 11.87
3 Dynamic tests simulation
Knowledge of the angles characterizing the wheel
alignment with respect to the ground has
considerable importance since the behavior of the
tire also varies with them, and therefore the dynamic
behavior of the car. Since the purpose of the paper is
to evaluate the influence of the chassis alone on
vehicle performance, the angles are mostly
standardized with the basic data provided by the
software, with the exception of the angles and
dimensions naturally derived from the geometry of
the chassis.
CarSim [18] is a software tool developed for
simulating the dynamic behavior of passenger cars
and light trucks.
Uses a dynamic multi-body 3D model to accurately
reproduce vehicle physics in response to driver
controls. These would be steering, throttle, braking
and gear shifting. Environmental conditions include
a 3D earth-road surface, as well as aerodynamic and
wind effects.
The mathematical models in CarSim are originally
developed for mechanical engineers in the
automotive industry and in research laboratories.
The intent is to reproduce the results on the test
bench or on the motorway, with the same degree of
reliability as that which would be obtained with
repeated live tests.
CarSim uses a combination of parameters and
variables to represent the vehicle. It contains special
screens in which the basic parameters that can be
easily measured on a real vehicle can be entered
manually; the software then independently obtains
the variables connected to them.
There are also tables that represent measurable
properties such as suspension kinematics, tires,
engine, transmission.
The selection of both the type of drive and the
nature of the engine: internal combustion, hybrid or
fully electric, is possible. CarSim comes with a
database with hundreds of simulations and consists
of a program file folder and a database folder.
It is possible to have multiple databases on PC.
3.1 Models, differences and similarities
Now follows the characterization, within the
simulator, of the vehicles and tests. First of all, let's
make explicit the steps of the simulator in which the
models are characterized.
The figures 9 shows that only the menus relating to
the Vehicle Body are different, in particular the
Sprung masses, since it was decided to neglect the
aerodynamic effects to reduce the number of
variables, and Animator Data.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
108
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 9 (a) (b) (c) :characterization of the three models: EVO1,
EVO2, EVO3 from the top to the bottom
The pages relating to suspended masses are then
shown in the figures 10, 11 and 12, which reflect the
data presented in the previous paragraph.
The remaining specifications have been swapped
from the generic B-class sports car present in the
system database.
This car category includes vehicles such as the Audi
TT, BMW Z4, Honda S2000, and Mazda MX-5,
conceptually very close to our cars, despite higher
weight, technology and power.
This choice is made in order to emphasize the
dynamic effects linked to the chassis variation:
having to carry out the tests under the same
conditions for all three cars, it is advantageous to
complete the definition of the models with the same
components.
Figure 10: suspended masses and vehicle geometries of Evo1
Figure 11: suspended masses and vehicle geometries of Evo2
Figure 12: suspended masses and vehicle geometries of Evo3
On this assumption it seems logical to make use of
pre-set and complete datasets already present in the
software used, rather than designing them from the
new one, an operation that is beyond the scope of
this discussion.
For the sake of the brevity the screens of front and
rear suspension, steering properties, braking system
properties, tire characterization are missed, while the
figure 13 shows the torque characteristic and the
figure 14 shows the transmission ratios that are used
in all the three vehicles.
Figure 13: the engine detail page (torque characteristic).
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
109
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 14: transmission ratios used on the three vehicles.
3.2 Selected tests
The following simulations are chosen among the
many available in the software:
Full Throttle Acceleration: this test was chosen
in analogy with the longitudinal acceleration test
provided for by the rule, and to identify the
maximum speed that can be reached;
Understeer (ISO 4138), 40m radius: this test was
selected to evaluate the lateral acceleration of
the vehicle;
Handling Course with Aggressive Driving: a
simulation of sports driving, which tries to
evaluate the behavior of the vehicle on the track.
3.2.1 Full Throttle Acceleration
The acceleration test with the pedal fully depressed
shows the behavior of the vehicle subjected to a total
opening of the throttle valve.
The test conditions are:
Test duration: 10 s
Valve opening interval: 0.1 s
Opening of the valve
No intervention on the brakes
Use of all gear ratios
No steering intervention
The figure 15 shows the acceleration and gear ratio
for the vehicle EVO1.
Figure 15: Acceleration and transmission ratio for Evo1
The correlation between the speed trend and the
inserted transmission ratio is evident, with the
acceleration decreasing as the engine runs out of
delivery capacity as the engine speed increases.
Equally evident is the absence of electronic controls
such as Launch Control: the speed of the rear
wheels, to which the transmission is connected,
shows the typical trend of skid. Top speed in this
simulation is obtained equal to: VEvo1 = 188.85
km/h
Figure 16: detail of the speed for every wheel and the vehicle
Evo1
Similar trends are obtained for the second
simulation, in which the tubular aluminum frame of
the Evo2 is tested. They are shown in figure 17 and
18.
Figure 17: Acceleration versus time for Evo2
Figure 18: Speed versus time for Evo2
Maximum speed is: V_Evo2=192,43 km/h
Figure 19 shows the difference in speed between the
two previous simulations of Evo1 and Evo2.
The mass difference causes transients to be lower
and top speeds higher, making the aluminum frame
an optimal choice.The results obtained in the
simulation of the carbon chassis are unexpected:
during the test the vehicle was overturned,
producing the graphs in figure 20 and 21. In the
analysis phase, this result was explained as the result
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
110
Volume 21, 2022
of a center of gravity displaced excessively towards
the rear, which meant that the lifting torques
generated at maximum acceleration led to the
detachment of the tires from the ground.
Figure 19: difference between the speeds in the two simulations
of EVO1 and EVO2
Figure 20: Acceleration versus time for Evo3
Figure 21: Speed versus time for Evo3
3.2.2 Understeer (ISO 4138), 40m radius
This test follows the directives of ISO 4138 and is
used to determine the understeer behavior of a
passenger vehicle.
In this case it was decided to perform the test with a
constant curve radius of 40m, the value
recommended as an ideal in the standard, by varying
the longitudinal speed from an initial value of 10
km/h, for a test duration of 81.5 s Under these
conditions it is possible to obtain the trend of the
vehicle lateral acceleration, the steering angle and
other parameters such as the yaw speed, the lateral
slip angle and the lateral speed, the vehicle roll
angle and the steering torque.
The lateral accelerations of the three vehicles are
presented in the figure 22, in the order Evo1, Evo2
and Evo3.
All the three vehicles behave almost identical to
each other, with the now known points of
discontinuity in those instants in which the driver
changes the transmission ratio, triggering a transient.
A comparative overview needs the data revision in
Excel.
Figure 22: Lateral acceleration [g] in Understeer test; Evo1,
Evo2, Evo3 from the top to the bottom.
Given that the acceleration values are given in
fractions of g, and therefore the differences fall
within an extremely small range of values, the use of
the speeds is convenient to visualize the differences
between the tests results.
The figure 23 shows the trend of the differences of
the speed if the vehicles Evo2 and Evo3 by making
use of the Evo1 results as reference.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
111
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 23: Speed difference of the models Evo2 and Evo3
respect to Evo1
Once again it is highlighted how the lower inertia
leads the Evo2 and Evo3 to be on average faster
than the Evo1, a value that is exacerbated in
transients, even if the order of magnitude of these
improvements is really small.
3.2.3 Handling Course with Aggressive Driving
Track test involves a lap on the track that uses the
control function of CarSim named "Target speed
from route preview".
It calculates a speed target over a specified preview
distance, to maintain lateral and longitudinal
acceleration within the specified limits.
Control of the throttle, brakes and steering is still
achieved through the closed loop controls of speed
and of the steering trajectory.
The target speed is closely linked to the exact
geometry of the path, so the maintenance of the
trajectory must also be closely linked to it and the
"look ahead" distances are short. In the case under
analysis, the path is a set of X-Y coordinates (which
could be obtained from GPS or other tools), but a
path can also be specified as an offset from a road
reference.
The test path is shown in figure 24.
Figure 24: Simulation test circuit
A check is carried out at each step to make sure that
the vehicle is following the route correctly.
If the lateral deviation reaches a certain threshold,
set with the “Lat_Tolerance” parameter, the run
stops.
The simulation is set to record exactly one lap.
It is necessary to set the driving logic, the intervals
chosen to provide for speed control and the
maximum lateral and longitudinal acceleration
values allowed in the test.
The following results are collected:
The space traveled in the time interval of 141.25
s; figure 25 shows the space difference of Evo2
and Evo3 respect to Evo1, while the maximum
values are:
1. Evo1 – 2273,45 m
2. Evo3 – 2273,04 m
3. Evo2 – 2272,57 m
The fact that the Evo2 vehicle is in third
position should not be surprising, because, as
explained in the introductory paragraph to the
test, the control of trajectory, speed and
acceleration follows a logic of foresight on the
track, and the acceleration and deceleration
logics is practically identical in the three tests
and do not exploit the qualities of the three
vehicles.
Therefore, for the same duration of the transient,
the vehicle with lower inertia (the Evo3)
undergoes a greater variation; (the speeds are
compared in the figure 26).
Given that the cars are equipped with virtually
the same identical components except for the
chassis, it is evident that the deceleration
transients affect more than the acceleration ones,
resulting in a slightly lower average speed.
Trend of the longitudinal speed Vx with respect
to the trajectory and in the lap time, from which
the Vmax of the three vehicles:
1. Evo3 - V_max=116,75 km/h
2. Evo2 - V_max=116,71 km/h
3. Evo1 - V_max=116,71 km/h
while the deviations at each instant of Evo2 and
Evo3 respect to Evo1 are also shown in figure
25.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
112
Volume 21, 2022
Figure 25: Differences between the space traveled over time
between the simulations Evo1, Evo2, Evo3
Figure 26: Difference between speeds in lap time
4 Conclusions
The work in this paper is the beginning of a process
of recovering all those technical knowledge and
skills related to the automotive world, that in recent
years have been developed in the local context of the
University of Palermo, with the aim of
demonstrating that the team is ready to move on to
the actual construction phase.
The work of data recovery and reconstruction of
models born in past years as a case study for their
own sake, disconnected from the problems of
economic feasibility, technical implementation and,
even worse, from the concert of parts that make up
the "universe-machine" of which act as a skeleton,
has allowed the creation of a database useful for the
development of automotive components, with a
view to modularity and integration.
For example, it is now possible to design a steering
system with the awareness that it is installed on a
virtually existing vehicle, with predetermined
geometries and dimensions that cannot be ignored.
From this same perspective, advantages can be
obtained, in terms of context, in the realization of a
suspension scheme, in the evaluation of the
dimensions of an engine, in the estimation of the
forces that this can safely discharge on its anchor
points.
CarSim software allows to check whether or not the
individual components can work in synergy,
obtaining maximum efficiency in a test field that
simulates reality. Considering the little consolidated
experience with the team program and the almost
total absence of useful material in the public domain
on the net, the result of this work have given great
satisfaction.
Despite the many potentialities of the program still
unexplored and the simplifications adopted for the
purpose of the paper, it was still possible to bring to
light problems that, in the original projects for their
own sake, would have remained dormant.
For example, the acceleration test of the Evo3
highlighted a major flaw in the chassis: the carbon
fiber frame, despite the very high level of
optimization, turned out to be the worst choice once
coupled to a superstructure that is not efficient
enough (the overturning occurred in the acceleration
test).
The database of information collected and processed
in this work, as well as the experience gained in the
field of simulation, allows future team participants
to aim for the development of an efficient model in
all its aspects. Finally, with a view to a substantial
investment of resources in the Automotive field, the
acquisition of the module specially developed for
the Formula SAE competition by CarSim, of which
Mechanical Simulation, the software house, is the
official sponsor, could be evaluated.
This tool, in the hands of a consolidated team
accustomed to working in a perspective of
interchange and integration, allows not only to
readjust and verify pre-existing models, but also to
create a real prototype thanks to the reduction of the
time required for theoretical development. of the
components of the vehicle.
References:
[1] Formula SAE® Rules 2020,
www.fsaeonline.com
[2] Montaperto S., Modellazione Solida e
progettazione strutturale di un telaio per
autovettura di Formula SAE, graduate thesis,
Palermo University, Italy, a.y. 2006/2007
[3] Ingrassia T., Marannano G., VirzìMariotti G. -
Design and Optimization af a Chassis for a
Formula SAE Race Car - Proceedings 12th
EAEC Congress, Bratislava, June 29- July 1,
2009
[4] Ingrassia T., Marannano G., Montaperto S.,
Virzì Mariotti G. - Progettazione ed
ottimizzazione di un telaio per vettura di
Formula SAE - XXXVII Convegno Nazionale
AIAS, Rome, 10-13 september 2008.
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
113
Volume 21, 2022
[5] Caramanno R., Costruzione di telai per
autoveicoli con materiali alternative, graduate
thesis, Palermo University, Italy, a.y.
2007/2008
[6] Lo Vetere S.A., Progettazione e sviluppo del
telaio di un autoveicolo di Formula SAE,
graduate thesis, Palermo University, Italy,, a.y.
2008/2009
[7] Casi L.,Progetto e costruzione di telaio di
vettura F.SAE: parte posteriore, graduate
thesis, Alma Mater Studiorum – Bologna
University, Italy, a.y. 2009/2010
[8] Ducker Frontier: Auto aluminum content to
grow 12% by 2026, expect more closures,
fenders, repairerdrivennews.com,
https://www.repairerdrivennews.com/2020/10/
16/duckerfrontier-auto-aluminum-content-to-
grow-12-by-2026-expect-more-closures-
fenders/, (consulted 7/24/2021)
[9] Magnesium Alloys In Automotive Market:
Market Size, Trends and Growth Analysis,
lucintel.com,
https://www.lucintel.com/magnesium-alloys-
in-automotive-2020.aspx,
(consulted 9/28/2021)
[10] Barcellona A., Tecnologie generali dei
materiali, EVenus, Palermo, 2007
[11] Traverso M., Progettazione di telai
automobilistici Space Frame in lega leggera
con particolare riguardo a soluzioni di tipo
modulare, graduate thesis, Roma "La Sapienza
University, Italy, a.y. 2000/2001
http://www.marcotraverso.it/spaceframe
[12] Tisza M., Czinege I., Comparative study of the
application of steels and aluminum in
lightweight production of automotive parts, in
International Journal of Lightweight Materials
and Manifacture, Vol. 1, Issue 4, December
2018, Pages 229-238
[13] Light weighting, a new trend in the automotive
driving aluminum demand round the globe,
STAS.com,
https://www.stas.com/en/news/blog/lightweight
ing-a-new-trend-in-the-automotive-driving-
aluminium-demand-around-the-
globe/(consulted 7/24/2021)
[14] Costantino S.A., Progetto di telaio in fibra di
carbonio per autoveicolo di Formula SAE,
graduate thesis, Palermo University, Italy, a.y.
2011/2012
[15] Munaretto P., Studio di materiali compositi per
l'industria automobilistica, graduate thesis,
Padova University, Italy,, a.y. 2010/2011
[16] https://www.slideshare.net/PadmanabhanKrish
nan2/automotive-materials-kp,
(consulted 7/13/2021)
[17] https://www.yuk4woo.com/2020/08/06/qual-e-
stata-la-prima-automobile-ad-impiegare-un-
telaio-in-fibra-di-carbonio/,
(consulted 7/24/2021)
[18] Introduction to CarSim: Part 1-Overview,
YouTube,
https://www.youtube.com/w atch?v=x9Ee
Gjy9uZc, (consulted 12/05/2021)
Creative Commons Attribution License 4.0
(Attribution 4.0 International, CC BY 4.0)
This article is published under the terms of the Creative
Commons Attribution License 4.0
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/deed.en_US
WSEAS TRANSACTIONS on SYSTEMS
DOI: 10.37394/23202.2022.21.12
Filippo Carollo, Gabriele Virzì Mariotti,
Salvatore Golfo, Antonino Pappalardo
E-ISSN: 2224-2678
114
Volume 21, 2022
