UNSW@ADFA Car #51 ACME Racing WS10

For 2010 ACME Racing is proud to present WS10, the sixth car from the University of New South
Wales at the Australian Defence Force Academy. WS10 is an open wheel, rear wheel drive autocross race
car with a semi-stressed engine, space-frame chassis, naturally aspirated, inline four cylinder engine and
beam axle suspension on ten inch wheels.
In designing a vehicle for the weekend autocross racer, ACME Racing reviewed the criteria that
autocross competitors use to select a suitable race car. Above all, superior dynamic competiveness is
required, closely followed by affordable cost (both purchase and running), reliability and maintainability.
The vehicle must require minimal maintenance between events with handling balance adjustments being
easily achievable by a single mechanic. These criteria were then translated into conceptual level design
criteria. WS10 has been designed using a top down, systems engineering philosophy striving for superior
dynamic performance (lowest aggregate time for all dynamic test events) in a vehicle with reliability
(minimal maintenance between events), simplicity (low purchase and running costs and ease of
adjustment), maintainability (ease of maintenance and set up changes), manufacturability (low
purchase cost) and safety. Safety was addressed during the design process by utilising a system of
design review and structural load cases for all safety critical items including harness attachments, brake
system and suspension. Specific emphasis was applied to ensure all driver controls were designed for
robustness by stressing components to the maximum driver force rather than the operating load. A key
constraint which influenced the design process was time available for machining and fabrication, requiring
manufacturing to be spread between construction methods and off the shelf components where practical.
The WS10 vehicle concept was developed by conducting an acceleration sensitivity analysis using a
simple constant acceleration equation lapsim seeking minimum lap time. The analysis was conducted
using a past FSAE-A endurance/autocross circuit which incorporated the majority of track features
described in the FSAE rules. The analysis focussed on the endurance event over the skid pan or the
acceleration test as the dynamic assessment criteria (competition points structure) is biased towards this
event. The lapsim result suggested that the vehicle should be conceptually biased towards lateral
acceleration over longitudinal acceleration as a 0.1G change in lateral acceleration yielded a 1.2 second
reduction in lap time, versus 0.09 second change in braking and 0.4 second change in acceleration. Whilst
being a very simple lapsim it was effective in quantifying the conceptual trade-offs. To bias the design
towards lateral acceleration a 50:50 weight distribution was chosen with four equal sized tyres in an
attempt to provide similar dynamic vertical loads on outside front and rear tyres. The weight distribution
was chosen knowing that both braking and acceleration would be compromised. By acknowledging this
conceptual compromise and benchmarking against past FSAE competition results a steady state lateral
acceleration capability target of 1.5G was chosen with corresponding 1.5G braking and 0.8G acceleration.
The lateral G capability requirement drove the majority of conceptual level specifications including a
track width to centre of gravity height ratio of 0.24 and a suspension system that would provide constant
wheel attitude control (minus compliance) with respect to vehicle roll angle and moments about the front
and rear wheel steer axes. Whilst there was no simulation conducted on the vehicles transient capabilities,
the ratio of turns to straights for typical FSAE circuits is significantly higher than typical road racing circuits,
prompting consideration of vehicle specifications that influence transient capabilities. WS10 was
conceptually designed to have high transient capabilities by striving for a low yaw polar moment of inertia,
low wheel base to track width ratio and low roll angle. The power train development was focussed towards
smooth power delivery over ultimate power as smooth, predictable control of tractive effort was required to
balance the slip angle drag of the front wheels during mid cornering and to blend lateral acceleration into
linear acceleration during corner exit.

Suspension. The suspension design requirements were control of wheel attitude with respect to the
ground, low cost, ease of manufacture (both suspension and chassis) and adjustable steady state and
transient handling balance. A review of suspension concepts led to the selection of beam axles as
providing the best wheel attitude control in all vehicle acceleration modes (on smooth surfaces). Beam
axles also offered the benefits of a low number of parts and a low number of chassis pick up points. These
benefits were traded off against high unsprung mass and single wheel bumps affecting both sides of the
vehicle through gyroscopic procession and camber change. To offset the relatively high unsprung mass
and reduce the impacts of gyroscopic precession during single wheel bump, 10 inch wheels were specified.
The wheel choice made upright packaging design challenging, particularly using brakes on the inboard
side of the upright to obtain zero steering axis inclination while maintaining a small scrub radius of 17mm
(for reduced moment about the front and rear steering axes). The uprights were designed in an attempt to
reduce both camber and toe compliance by separating the pickups as far as possible to counteract the
steering axis moments generated by contact patch forces and moments. The separation of upright pickups
also aided the brake system design requirements of thermal capacity and system stiffness by allowing the
brake disc diameter to be maximised within the spatial constraints. The front and rear uprights share the
same basic architecture with differences for steering and toe links; the front upright design loads drove the
component sizing down to the limits of machinability at 2mm thickness for internal webs. The uprights
2
were chosen to be machined for dimensional accuracy and to spread manufacture between fabrication
and machining. To reduce machine time the uprights were designed for prismatic machining requiring only
two set ups. A four stud wheel centre hub interface was chosen over a centre lock type to allow use of
purchased wheel nuts and reduce machining requirements. The wheels have a very large offset of -46mm
to reduce scrub radius and therefore required the steering linkage design to incorporate an idler bell crank
for packaging purposes and to ensure that the desired steering kinematics could be obtained. The steering
kinematics (dynamic toe) can be altered by using substitute steering arms.
The front and rear beam axles require only four and six chassis pick up points respectively as
opposed to 12 for double A-arm suspension with push or pull rods (neglecting steering rack/toe link
mountings for both). The direct acting dampers restrict design freedom on motion ratio but reduce the
parts count and simplify the design. The front beam axle uses a vertically aligned peg and slot (ball
bearing on chassis with slot on beam) for lateral kinematic control and trailing arms converging to a single
spherical bearing which allows roll, pitch and heave. The steering rack is mounted to the beam axle which
increases unsprung mass but allows reduced bump steer by placing the lower steering column universal
joint as close as possible to the roll axis. The steering column utilises two universal joints and a telescopic
spline to accommodate pitch and heave.
The rear beam axle uses trailing arms with two spherical mounts and a Watts linkage for lateral
kinematic control. To allow the beam to be kinematically free in roll it required either a rotating coupling in
the centre or the simpler, chosen method of utilising a torsionally flexible member. By cutting a slot down
the centre of the rear beam tube it becomes torsionally flexible requiring a force couple of approximately
20N at the wheel centres to move through four degrees of roll. The rear beam can be described as a de
Dion twist axle. The de Dion configuration was chosen over a live axle to allow the use of a limited slip
differential and offset the associated higher unsprung mass. In the front suspension, caster is used to
provide increased negative camber with turn angle, whereas the rear beam trailing arm mount location
allows a small amount of negative camber gain in roll. The Watts linkage was chosen over Panhard Rod or
peg and slot designs as offering the best compromise between kinematic ability to compensate for beam
twist, straight line motion path in pitch and heave and structural integration.
The suspension was developed through a combination of skid pad testing and transient manoeuvres.
The skid pad was used to establish camber, toe, tyre pressure and roll stiffness distribution settings. The J
turn allows the brake bias and damper settings to be developed while fine tuning the steady state
cornering settings and developing damper settings for corner entry and exit. Slalom testing was used to
assess and develop direction changing capability and roll velocity. WS10 is instrumented with front and
rear accelerometers, infrared tyre temperature sensors, damper linear potentiometers, steering angle
potentiometer and a single axis gyro to measure yaw rate. Suspension compliance is being assessed by
applying representative cornering loads between wheel pairs and measuring the camber and toe
compliance for benchmarking of future designs and to identify areas requiring additional stiffness in the
current design.

Chassis. The WS10 chassis design requirements were high torsional stiffness, compliance with FSAE
rules, ease of manufacture, protection of the driver and systems packaging. The chassis was integrated
with the suspension design by seeking to minimise the number of accurate suspension pick up points and
thus reduce the dependency on complex jigs and tight manufacturing tolerances. The semi stressed
engine configuration was chosen to aid in engine removal and to reduce the number of chassis members
required. A steel spaceframe was chosen for ease of analysis and reduced structural equivalency analysis.
The spaceframe was deemed to provide an effective compromise in terms of required manufacturing skills,
structural efficiency, ease of design change and repairability. 4130 steel was selected over 350MPa steel,
primarily due to the ability to easily source the desired sizes in a range of wall thicknesses. The torsional
stiffness target was set at 6095Nm/deg based on the diminishing returns when torsional stiffness is greater
than 9 times roll stiffness. All harness attachment points were designed to the requirements outlined in FIA
standard 8853/98 - Safety Harnesses - updated: 01.01.2007 but with a factor of safety of 2.0. The chassis
was laid out in an effort to provide clear load paths between the front and rear suspension for torsional
rigidity while providing load paths for frontal, side and roll over impact scenarios.
To utilise the semi stressed engine configuration a structural sump plate was developed which
incorporates clevis mounts for attachment to the chassis and allows the engine to be lowered 70mm over
the donor engines sump. The rear of the chassis consists of a machined bulkhead which incorporates
Watts linkage pickups, differential mounts and provides an additional load path between the main roll hoop
supports and the base of the main roll hoop through the engine and sump plate. The bulkhead is
detachable to assist engine removal. The suspension pickups consist of trailing arm mounts, damper
pickups, a triangulated boss mount for the front peg and a double shear clevis for the Watts links. The
damper pick up points were designed as a removable structure for adjustable motion ratios.
The chassis torsional rigidity was estimated using linear finite element analysis with beam elements
and a rigid mesh in place of the engine. However this analysis was considered likely to overestimate the
3
actual situation so a torsional test rig was designed allowing hub to hub loading (testing will occur in Oct
2010). The impact attenuator received considerable analysis (using LSDyna nonlinear FEA and verified by
physical testing) as the initial concept of using expanded aluminium honeycomb was found to be too stiff
when crushed in the direction of the cell axis and too soft when crushed along the perpendicular direction.
The concept chosen was a dual, nested aluminium weldment which provides progressive energy
absorption and is easy and cost effective to manufacture.

Brakes. The brake system was designed to provide reasonable pedal force at lock up (500N), adjustable
brake bias, controlled bias, adequate thermal capacity and strength to withstand an emergency where the
driver is anticipated to apply up to 1500N. The design was constrained by the requirement to use inboard
side brake discs for reduced scrub radius. The largest brake disc that was able to be packaged within the
constraints was 180mm in diameter and had to be coupled with a relatively small caliper to fit within the 10
inch wheel and large 95mm OD wheel bearings. The Wilwood PS-1 was chosen with the larger 28.5mm
piston option in an effort to reduce line pressures leading to reduced system compliance and offset the low
coefficient of friction (0.42-0.45) of the only brake pads available. The calipers were produced with
threaded lug mounts meaning the single shear mounting bolts would load the threaded section in bearing.
To avoid this the threads were drilled and reamed to allow mounting with a through bolt. The decision to
use flexible brake lines throughout versus hard lines was made based on the reduced number of hydraulic
fittings (cost and mass) and mass per linear metre traded off against increased system compliance. The
brake discs were manufactured from 1045 steel and mounted with 0.2mm radial float and 0.2mm axial
float to prevent disc warping and stresses associated with rigidly mounting a steel disc to an aluminium
carrier. The discs were kept solid to increase thermal mass with slots milled to allow brake dust to clear. A
trunion style balance bar was chosen to reduce undesired variation in brake bias through pedal travel. The
brake system was instrumented with pressure sensors and infrared temperature sensors. The pressure
sensors were used to validate the designed lock up pressure and quantify brake bias settings while the
temperature sensors were used to monitor cooling rates and assess the thermal capacity of the system.

Powertrain. The powertrain design requirements were smooth, controllable delivery of tractive force, low
fuel consumption, compliance with the mandated noise limit and reliability. Smooth delivery of tractive
force is being sought by focussing engine tuning and calibration on reducing dips in the power curve at the
cost of peak power. The intake and exhaust tuned lengths have been designed to ensure that resonance
is out of phase leading to a smoother power curve. Low fuel consumption is being achieved by tuning
lambda close to 1 for light loads and low rpm and only using lambda closer to 0.85-0.9 at high load and
high rpm. The engine has been calibrated using throttle position and rpm with throttle position as the
measure of load. To aid in lowering the centre of gravity the structural sump plate was made shallow
(22.5mm deep) and to prevent oil starvation an Accusump oil accumulator was fitted. Skid pan testing has
allowed the system to be developed by tuning the accumulator pressure and engine oil volume. The inlet
manifold was designed to ensure balanced mass flow to each cylinder to improve reliability by reducing
the likelihood of an individual cylinder operating too lean and damaging the piston crown or valves. The
cooling system was designed to reduce centre of gravity height and to maintain the engine temperature
between 90 and 95 degrees Celsius. The heat exchanger is side mounted to lower the centre of gravity
and utilises a bleed line back to the header tank to ensure the system is self bleeding, thus preventing
pockets of air forming in the heat exchanger tanks. The coolant flow is provided by dual electronic water
pumps which allow improved packaging over the donor engines pumps and also allow the coolant to
continue cycling when the engine is not running to reduce heat soak and resultant hot start problems. The
heat exchanger is ducted to a fan which ensures adequate airflow over the heat exchanger at low
oncoming flow velocities.

Drivetrain. The specific drivetrain design requirements were low rotational inertia, short distance between
engine sprocket and differential rotation axis, high efficiency, tuneable torque bias and adjustable final
drive ratio. The distance between the engine sprocket shaft and differential was reduced to achieve the
desired wheel base, weight distribution and reduce the polar moment of inertia. By using an 11 tooth front
sprocket and 10 inch wheels the distance was reduced to 180 mm. The differential mounts directly to the
rear bulkhead integrating the jacking bar and uses shims to adjust chain tension. A differential was chosen
over a spool as the primary objective of the suspension is to take advantage of the cornering capacity of
all four tyres and accurately control camber angles. To use a spool would require the rear inside wheel to
be unloaded thus reducing negative camber on the outside wheel in direct contradiction of the vehicle
conceptual design aims. A clutch pack limited slip differential was chosen as the torque bias can be easily
tuned by changing ramp angles. In a trade off between design and manufacturing workload and cost the
Drexler LSD was chosen. The Drexler is light at 5.8 kg (including mounts and sprocket carrier) and has a
low radial profile giving low rotational inertia. Care was taken to ensure the left and right drive shafts were
symmetrical for reduced spare part requirements and equal torsional stiffness to prevent undesired torque
steer effects. Taylor Race Engineering tripod joints were chosen as they provide higher efficiency than
4
Cardan and Rzeppa joints and provide the required plunge travel. The inboard tripod housings are custom
made from hardened 709M steel with truncated profiles to reduce the polar moment of inertia. This
reduces the angular limits of the tripod joints to 20 degrees. However, integrating the outer tripod housing
into the hub reduces the required angle by 1 degree. The outboard rear hubs incorporate the tripod joint
housing in a machined aluminium alloy hub with hardened steel inserts (60 Rc) shrink fit into the housing.
Integrating the outboard tripod housing and hub also reduces the angular misalignment of the driveshaft
with respect to toe angle adjustments. The final drive ratio was chosen using lap simulation software but
will be finetuned through testing with various rear sprocket sizes. The simulation sought to investigate the
relationship between final drive ratio and gear shift duration and resultant number of gear shifts required.

Electronics. The specific electronics design requirements were durability and low mass. An electrical
loads analysis was conducted to size wires down to practical limits including connector pin size and
connector price and availability. Deutsch DTM connectors were specified as they are reusable and provide
for crimped connections aiding system robustness and reliability. The wiring loom has also been
assembled using Raychem non-adhesive heat shrink to provide strain relief, mechanical protection and
water-proofing for the wires. Where possible all sensor wires are 22 gauge Tefzel wire. A 12V sealed lead
acid battery was selected to provide adequate starting capacity and an Anderson plug has been integrated
to aid battery charging and jump starting when required. Data logging is conducted using a MoTeC
Advanced Central Logger and Synchronous Versatile Input Modules which communicate via a CAN Bus.
All sensors not required for engine operation are wired into the ACL with engine sensors being wired into
the ECU and then sent via CAN to the ACL for logging. The car is fitted with an LED shift light module to
assist with shifting for inexperienced drivers, aimed to prevent running at the rpm limit and reduce shift
times. It is also a prominent means of displaying warnings. The car makes use of an ignition module and
relays to power the sparkplugs, fuel pump, thermo fan, water pumps and Accusump in order to ensure that
the ECU does not have to support high loads. Each high load element has its own fuse allocated to ensure
that if an electrical element short-circuits, then only that system is disabled, thus making it is easier to
diagnose faults. The car uses coil-on plug spark plugs to reduce weight over other inductive ignition
systems that use high tension leads. Wheel speed and g-force sensors are used to enable driver aids
such as traction control and launch control.

Egonomics and Driver Controls. The primary ergonomic design goal of WS10 was to accommodate the
95
th
percentile American male and the 5
th
percentile American female, provide adequate vision and driver
comfort whilst ensuring all controls were robust enough to withstand emergency operation. Different sized
drivers are catered for by careful selection of the seat belt mounting location, an adjustable pedal box and
personal foam seat inserts. The pedal box was designed to allow the maximum amount of travel inside the
constraints of the chassis, to be as light as possible to reduce the polar moment of inertia of the car, while
being stiff with smooth operation to increase driver confidence. To achieve the desired range of pedal
travel and reduce the length of the foot-well the master cylinders are inclined. This requires the use of
telescopic link type master cylinders that pivot on both ends. The pedal box adjustment is achieved by
mounting the pedal box to rails with mil-spec quick release pins. While the adjustment cannot be
performed by the driver in the seated position, the pedals can be easily adjusted in less time than is
required for a driver change. Both the throttle and clutch pedals are made of fabricated 6061 aluminium
(post weld machined and heat treated to T6 condition) and are mounted on widely spaced ball bearings to
reduce any lateral free play and reduce system friction. The throttle cable is a very low friction push-pull
type to allow the driver to pull the throttle closed if required. This cable also allows a tight bend radius for
packaging and does not degrade at the temperatures experienced in proximity to the engine. The clutch
pedal motion ratio has been designed to balance operating force and pedal travel requiring approximately
30mm travel and 100N to disengage the clutch. The use of a cable clutch was chosen over a hydraulic
system as the donor engine utilises a cable clutch thus requiring minimal modification for integration. The
pedals and all subsequent systems are housed in a machined aluminium chassis to minimise weight. The
load paths have been biased to provide high installed stiffness to assist repeatability and driver confidence.
The throttle and the clutch structures have been designed to withstand, without permanent deformation,
the load (1500N) applied by a panicked driver in the case of mistaken pedal selection.
The seating position was selected to provide adequate vision to navigate the obstacles typical of
FSAE courses. Driver comfort has been addressed by complying with the FSAE rules relating to thermal
protection of the driver and providing adequate lateral support for both trunk and thighs.
The gear shift is a mechanical paddle shift operating a pull-pull cable actuation system designed to
withstand a driver applied load of 450N squeezing force as opposed to the 40-50N operating force. The
system was designed to be simple, light and cost effective and not require the driver to take their hands off
the wheel. The steering was designed to limit the steering wheel angle to 135 degrees from straight ahead
to lock so the driver does not have to cross their arms or feed the wheel hand over hand.
5
6

7
8