Sei sulla pagina 1di 13

Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications

ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)


Volume 4, Issue 3
www.stmjournals.com

Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System with the


Combination of Helical Springs
Sachin Gayakwad*, Pushpendra Kumar Mishra, Ishan Patel
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Malwa Institute of Technology, Indore, Madhya Pradesh,
India

Abstract
This research article deals with a modified version of leaf spring suspension system
introduced for the optimization of existing leaf spring suspension system design, by the
combination of two helical springs with the master leaf. To furnish this end, a semi-elliptical
type mono leaf spring of light weighted mini truck is considered for design and modeling
work. On both the sides of this mono leaf, a helical spring is designed and modeled at equal
distances from the center of leaf. All the modeling and analysis work is performed in CATIA-
V5R20. Stress analysis results at various loading conditions are obtained by both theoretical
and FEA methods, separately for typical mono leaf spring model and proposed model with
helical springs. Results show an average 8.3% stress reduction for any of the loading
conditions, by the utilization of helical springs with the combination of master leaf. The
proposed work have some certain benefits which could definitely transform the existing leaf
spring design into a more optimized, stable and flexible one for the overall better
performance and comfort to passengers.

Keywords: Leaf spring, helical spring, FEA, stresses, CATIA

*Author for Correspondence E-mail: sgayakwad377@gmail.com

INTRODUCTION So, a leaf spring can be used in conjunction


Springs are key elements of any suspension with helical spring to enhance the spring rate
system and first line of its defense. Leaf adjustability function for chassis set up
springs and helical springs both are two basic balance and for overall better performance of
types of suspension springs. Leaf springs, the suspension system. The first automotive
especially the longitudinal laminated type are helical spring was on the model-T (Ford) in
reliable and persistent element in automotive 1910, where the suspension system was a
suspension system [1], and helical springs are combination of leaf spring and helical spring
also one of the mechanical elements used in [6]. The design of this leaf and helical spring
several industrial applications and automobile suspension was totally different from the
vehicles to satisfy the desired functions [2]. model presented in this work. Taking
Generally, helical springs are made of an consideration of these above mentioned
elastic material formed into the coil shape approaches, in this presented work, a
which returns to its initial length when conventional steel leaf spring (master leaf) is
unloaded [3]. Leaf springs are commonly combined with two helical springs, each at
formed by stacking leafs or plates of steel in both the sides of leaf spring. Modeling and
progressively longer lengths on top of each analysis results showed very significant
other, so that the spring is thick in the middle overall stress reduction in combined design
portion to resist bending and thin at the ends compared to typical leaf spring model without
where it attaches to the body [4]. Increasing helical spring.
the energy storage capability of a leaf spring
ensures a more compliant suspension system Several research articles were devoted on
[5]. researches related to suspension springs.
Research works which have been done by
Both the springs as a suspension element have researchers in the past are very useful for
their specific benefits and some limitations. efficient designing of the proposed model,

JoAEA (2017) 6-17 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 6
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

specially the papers on helical springs; fatigue performance of the suspension helical
because the overall better performance of the springs. Tsubasa Tsubouchi et al. [17] their
existing model will mainly depend upon the research work presented a new and cheap
design of employed helical springs. Jiang and forming technique of helical springs with
Henshall [7] presented a general and correct rectangle cross section and high rectangular
finite element model (FEM) for helical springs ratio. In the research work done by Basaran
subjected to axial loads. Vebil Yildirim and Ozmen et al. [18], a newly developed testing
ErolSancaktar [8] presented a detailed analysis and simulation methodology for the durability
of free vibration frequencies of a composite of leaf springs was presented so as to direct
helical spring. designers in the product development phase.

Del Llano-Vizcaya et al. [9] in their research, Ladislav Kosec et al. [19] provided a useful
they provided very useful relationships failure analysis of a motor car helical spring.
between stress relief effects and fatigue life of Sushanta Ghuku and Kashi Nath Saha [20] in
helical compression springs. It was proved that their work, large deflection behavior of an
smaller the residual stresses greater the fatigue initially curved cantilever beam (master leaf of
life of spring. The results of their work are a leaf spring) subjected to varied loading
very useful in design and manufacturing of conditions had been studied both theoretically
helical spring. and by experimentation using MATLAB
computational simulation.
Fuentes et al. [10] in their work, they
presented the basic reason of premature DESIGN AND MODELING
fracture in leaf springs employed in Following sections describe the designing and
Venezuelan buses. Aimin Yu and Changjin modeling procedures carried out for typical
Yang [11] performed free vibration analysis of (conventional) and proposed mono leaf spring
cylindrical helical springs by means of an models:
analytical study. Kaiser et al. [12] presented Modeling of Typical Mono Leaf Spring:
VHCF-behavior (very high cycle fatigue) of A typical single leaf spring is designed and
helical compression springs made of different modeled in CATIA-V5R20. The designed and
materials. The objective of Shishay Amare modeled mono leaf in fact is a master leaf of
Gebremeskel [13] in his contribution was any semi-elliptical leaf spring suspension
associated with designing, simulating and system, employed in light vehicle mini trucks
prototyping of a single leaf spring for light and buses. Modeling in CATIA-V5R20 is
weight 3-Wheeler vehicles from composite done considering the dimensions and
material. properties as mentioned in Table 1 and
selecting isotropic structural steel as design
Jamil M. Renno and Brian R. Mace [14] in material [4]. Figure 1 is showing the design of
their research, modeling and vibration analysis this mono leaf spring model.
of helical springs with non-uniform ends were
taken into consideration. The approach Table 1: Dimensions and Physical Properties
bestowed in their paper provides many of Mono Leaf Spring Model.
benefits in designing and modeling of helical S. Description Specification
springs. N.
1. No. of leaf (N) 01
Research work done by Dipendra Kumar Roy 2. Width of leaf (b) 60 mm
and Kashi Nath Saha [15] corresponds to non- 3. Thickness of leaf(t) 16 mm
linear analysis of leaf springs made of various 4. Eye-to-eye length of leaf 1025 mm
types functionally graded materials (FGM). (L)
Youli Zhu et al. [16], their work dealt with 5. Camber 90.8 mm
case study of failure analysis of a helical 6. Poisson’s ratio (μ) 0.266
compression spring for a heavy vehicle’s
7. Density of material(ρ) 7860 kg/m3
suspension system and the recommendations
were conjointly made for improving the 8. Coefficient of thermal 1.17×10-5 K-1Deg.
expansion

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 7
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

9. Young’s modulus (E) 2×105 N/mm2


10. Yield strength 250 N/mm2
11. Material type Isotropic, structural
steel
12. Weight 21.23 kg

Fig. 2: Proposed Leaf Spring Model with


Combination of Helical Springs.
Table 2: Dimensions and Physical Properties
of Helical Springs.
S. Description Specification
N.
Fig. 1: Typical Mono Leaf Spring Model. 1. No. of helical springs 02
2. Height of each helical 136 mm
DESIGNING THE MONO LEAF spring (h)
3. Wire diameter (d) 10 mm
SPRING WITH COMBINATION OF
4. Inner diameter of coil (D) 70 mm
HELICAL SPRINGS
Taking the same design parameters, 5. Pitch (p) 22.6 mm
dimensions and physical properties as 6. Number of coils (n) 6
mentioned in Table 1 of mono leaf spring, the 7. Poisson’s Ratio (μ) 0.266
model of leaf spring with combination of 8. Density of material (ρ) 7860 kg/m3
helical springs is designed in same software 9. Coefficient of thermal 1.17×10-5 K-1Deg.
CATIA-V5R20. First of all, previously expansion
designed mono leaf spring part is inserted in 10. Young’s modulus (E) 2×105 N/mm2
CATIA-V5R20 and then at both the sides of 11. Yield strength 250 N/mm2
mono leaf spring surfaces which are selected 12. Material Isotropic, structural
as a best location to mount the helical springs, Steel
a small rectangular platform of 60 mm ×100 13. Weight of each helical 4.3 kg
mm is made with a little height. On this spring
platform through the accurate axis helical
spring is designed and modeled using the Total weight of combined model is 34.23 kg.
wireframe feature of CATIA-V5R20. Number Total vertical height of each helical spring is
of coil turns in each helical spring is taken six. 136 mm. The dimensions and properties of
Both the helical springs are located at equal both the identical helical springs are covered
distance from the center hole on leaf spring in Table 2. And, the designed model with
surface. Center to center distance between combination of leaf and helical springs is
both the helical springs is 960 mm. To fix the shown in Figure 2.
helical springs from upper side, a square
shaped platform of 150 mm ×150 mm ×10 mm STRESS CALCULATIONS AND
is created, which is firmly attached with the ANALYSIS
top most coil of each helical spring. The theoretical maximum stresses and FEA
stresses produced in typical mono leaf spring
model and proposed modified model, at
various loading conditions are calculated and
analyzed as described in following sections.

Theoretical Stress Calculation of Typical


Mono Leaf Spring Model

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 8
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

The design of mono leaf spring modeled in 5. 3000 300.29


CATIA-V5R20 is a uniform width master leaf 6. 3500 350.34
of a semi elliptical leaf spring. It is like a 7. 4000 400.39
simply supported beam of uniform width, 8. 5000 500.48
clamped at both the ends during the loading 9. 7000 700.68
conditions. Therefore, the theoretical 10. 10000 1000.97
maximum bending stresses produced in this 11. 15000 1501.46
mono leaf spring model will be calculated by STATIC STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS
the following equation [21]: OF TYPICAL MONO LEAF SPRING
pWL MODEL
Maximum Bending Stress, σ max= 2 (1)
Nbt The static structural analysis of the mono leaf
Where, p=3 (a constant for simply supported spring model is carried out using the finite
beam of uniform width) element analysis (FEA) in CATIA-V5R20.
L=eyetoeyedistance=1025 mm , The load is applied at the center point of leaf
N=numberofleafs=1, spring (as shown in Figures 3–6) in upward
b=width=60 mm, direction. Meshing of the model is done with
t=thickness=16 mm octree tetrahedron mesh elements. For all the
Case (1): At load W =1000 N model analysis in this work it is kept the same.
σ Figures 5 and 6 are showing the mesh
Maximum Stress (Bending), 3 × 1000 ×512.5
max=¿ ¿ generation in models with stress analysis
1× 60× 16 2
σ max=100.09 MPa. results. By applying the load and performing
Case (2): At load W=1500 N analysis and simulation, we get the stress
distribution over the whole span of leaf, in the
Maximum stress,
σ 3 × 1500×512.5
max=¿ ¿ numeric as well as in the form of color
1× 60× 16 2
σ max=150.14 MPa scheme. By varying the load in constant but
incremental order, and keeping all the
Similarly, other calculations can also be done parameters and conditions unchanged, stress
at various incremental loads to find out the analysis is carried out, and various result
maximum stresses produced in the mono leaf oriented informational images are captured.
spring model by Eq. (1). Table 3 shows these Figures 3–6 are showing the distribution of
theoretical stresses at various loading Von-Mises stresses produced in mono leaf
conditions. spring model at varied loads by FEA in
Table 3: Theoretical Maximum Stresses in CATIA-V5R20. From Figures 3–6, it can be
Mono Leaf Spring Model. observed that the maximum stress level is near
S. Applied load Theoretical stresses
N. (Newton) (MPa) the center position of leaf where load was
1. 1000 100.09 applied and near the eye ends. All the
2. 1500 150.14 performed stress analysis results at various
3. 2000 200.19 incremental loads are shown in Table 4 and
4. 2500 250.24 are described in Figure 7 with a plot between
loads versus stress diagram.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 9
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

Fig. 3: Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring Model at Load 1000 N.

Fig. 4: Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring Model at Load 1500 N.

Fig. 5: Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring Model at Load 3000 N.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 10
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

Fig. 6: Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring Model at Load 5000 N.


STATIC STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS point of leaf where load is applied and near the
OF COMBINED LEAF AND eye ends, but now stress level is reduced here
HELICAL SPRING MODEL significantly (i.e. more than 8–10 MPa based
The static structural analysis of proposed on load), compared to typical mono leaf spring
combined leaf and helical spring model is model as shown in Figures 3–6. Stress levels
carried out similarly as discussed above. on helical springs are very low. Therefore,
Figures 8–11 are showing the finite element helical springs could be imagined in safe
analysis results pertaining to stresses produced condition from the severe effects of stresses.
in this model at varied loads by CATIA- All the stress analysis results of this model are
V5R20. From Figures 8–11, it is clear that the shown in Table 4 and described in Figure 12
maximum stress level is still near the center with a plot between loads versus stress
diagram.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 11
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

FEA Stresses in Typical Mono Leaf Spring


Model
16000 15000

14000

12000
10000
Load (Newton)

10000

8000 7000

6000 5000
4000
3500
4000 3000
2500
2000
1500 1490
2000 1000
99.28 148.92 199 248.2 298 347.5 397.1 496.4 695
0 993
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Stresses (MPa)

Applied Load (Newton) Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring by FEA


Fig. 7: FEA Stresses in Typical Mono Leaf Spring Model.

Fig. 8: Stresses in Combined Model at Load 1000 N.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 12
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

Fig. 9: Stresses in Combined Model at Load 1500 N.

Fig. 10: Stresses in Combined Modal at Load 3000 N.

Fig. 11: Stresses in Combined Model at Load 5000 N.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 13
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

FEA stresses in Combined Leaf and


Helical Springs Model
16000 15000

14000

12000
10000
10000
Load (Newton)

8000 7000

6000 5000
4000
3500
4000 3000
2500
2000
1500 1375.9
2000 1000 642 917
183.4 275.18 367 459
0
91.72 137.6 229.32 321
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Stresses (MPa)

Applied Load (Newton) Stresses in Proposed Model by FEA


Fig. 12: FEA Stresses in Combined Leaf with Helical Springs Model.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS and helical springs model are significantly less
The outcomes of the whole study and than the theoretical bending stresses (by
accomplished work are described under the mathematical calculations)and FEA Von-Mises
following sub sections. stresses by CATIA-V5R20, induced in typical
mono leaf spring model of same dimensions and
Results parameters. Therefore, the design of introduced
All the stress analysis results are tabulated in combined leaf and helical spring’s model can be
the form of Table 4, and their correlations are said safe and considerable. The average %
shown in Figures 13 and 14. From the reduction in overall maximum stresses at
mentioned Table, Figures and stress analysis different loading conditions is achieved by 8.3%,
colored images, it is clear that the maximum by the utilization of proposed combined model
stresses produced in proposed combined leaf in comparison to typical mono leaf spring model
(Table 5).

Table 4: Comparison of Stress Analysis Results (M Pa).


S. Applied Theoretical stresses in mono leaf spring (M Stresses in mono Stresses in proposed
N. load Pa) leaf spring by FEA model by FEA (M
(Newton) (MPa) Pa)
1. 1000 100.09 99.28 91.72
2. 1500 150.14 148.92 137.60
3. 2000 200.19 199.00 183.40
4. 2500 250.24 248.20 229.32
5. 3000 300.29 298.00 275.18
6. 3500 350.34 347.50 321.00
7. 4000 400.39 397.10 367.00
8. 5000 500.48 496.40 459.00
9. 7000 700.68 695.00 642.00

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 14
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

10. 10000 1000.97 993.00 917.00


11. 15000 1501.46 1490.00 1375.90

Comparison of Stress Analysis Results


16000

14000

12000

10000
Load (Newton)

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
0 2 4 6 8 10 12

Stresses (MPa)

Applied Load (Newton) Theoretical Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring


Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring by FEA Stresses in Proposed Model by FEA
Fig. 13: Comparison of Stress Analysis Results (Using Line Graph).

Comparison of Stress Analysis Results


16000

14000

12000

10000
Load (Newton)

8000

6000

4000

2000

0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11

Stresses (MPa)

Applied Load (Newton) Theoretical Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring


Stresses in Mono Leaf Spring by FEA Stresses in Proposed Model by FEA

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 15
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

Fig. 14: Comparison of Stress Analysis Results (Using Column Graph).


Table 5: % Reduction of Stresses by Combined Model.
S. Load Theoretical maximum stresses in mono FEA stresses in combined model with Stress
N. (Newton) leaf spring model (MPa) helical springs (MPa) reduction
in %
1. 1000 100.09 91.72 8.36
2. 1500 150.14 137.60 8.35
3. 2000 200.19 183.40 8.38
4. 2500 250.24 229.32 8.35
5. 3000 300.29 275.18 8.36
6. 3500 350.34 321.00 8.37
7. 4000 400.39 367.00 8.34
8. 5000 500.48 459.00 8.30
9. 7000 700.68 642.00 8.37
10. 10000 1000.97 917.00 8.38
11. 15000 1501.46 1375.90 8.36

Benefits and Scope of the Proposed Model trucks and buses. Proposed model and work in
Following points describe the advantages of this study can lead researchers in the field of
the proposed model:- conventional leaf spring system to work on
I. By incorporating such suspension springs more optimized typical leaf spring suspension
model overall stresses can be reduced system design. Therefore, further more
significantly. scientific researches and work can be done in
II. By applying properly designed helical order to make proposed model more beneficial
springs, deflection characteristics of leaf and efficient.
spring suspension can be controlled and
maintained, so as to achieve optimized CONCLUSIONS
comfort during the vehicle ride [22]. The improved efficiency and optimized
III. Number of graduated leafs in existing performance of the presented combined leaf
conventional leaf spring system could be and helical spring’s suspension system model
reduced by employing proposed model. will majorly depend upon the best
So, a new compact design of existing leaf combination of design parameters of helical
spring system could be possible. springs (i.e. wire diameter, pitch, number of
IV. A good balance between stiffness and coils) in proportion to leaf spring’s design.
rigidity of the typical leaf spring Therefore by maintaining the best combination
suspension could be maintained, so energy of these suspension spring’s design
storage capacity can be increased by using parameters, we can take advantages of benefits
such model to optimize the overall of each type suspension spring. And, this is to
performance of the suspension. achieve a more optimized, flexible, stable and
V. It seems, no necessity of heavy changes in efficient typical leaf spring suspension system
any accessory part or design of existing by incorporating the proposed designed model.
leaf spring suspension to incorporate
proposed model. NOMENCLATURE
σ max Maximum bending stress
SCOPE L Eye-to-eye length of leaf spring
From the above mentioned expected and b Width of leaf spring
possible benefits by utilization of such model, t Thickness of leaf spring
it can be surely stated that, the proposed p A constant for simply supported beam
combined leaf and helical spring suspension p Pitch of helical spring
could have a great scope in future work related W Applied load
to suspension system design for light weighted N Number of leafs

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 16
Journal of Automobile Engineering and Applications
Volume 4, Issue 3
ISSN: 2455-3360 (Online)

FEA Finite element analysis 10. Fuentes JJ, Aguilar HJ, Rodriguez JA, et
μ Poisson’s ratio al. Premature Fracture in Automobile Leaf
ρ Density of material Springs. Eng Fail Anal. 2009; 16: 648–55p.
E Young’s modulus 11. Aimin Yu, Changjin Yang. Formulation
h Height of helical spring and Evaluation of an Analytical Study for
d Wire diameter of helical spring cylindrical Helical Springs. Acta Mech Sol-
D Inner coil diameter of helical spring ida Sinica. 2010; 23(1): 85–94p.
n Number of coils in helical spring 12. Kaiser B, Pyttel B, Berger C. VHCF-Be-
havior of Helical Compression Springs
REFERENCES Made of Different Materials. Int J Fatigue.
1. Mahmood MS, Rezaei D. Analysis and Op- 2011; 33: 23–32p.
timization of a Composite Leaf Spring. 13. Gebremeskel SA. Design, Simulation and
Compos Struct. 2003; 60: 317–25p. Prototyping of Single Composite Leaf
2. Fakhreddine D, Mohamed T, Said A et al. Spring for Light Weight Vehicle. Global
Finite Element Method for the Stress Anal- Journal of Researches in Engineering
ysis of Isotropic Cylindrical Helical Spring. (GJRE). Mech Mech Eng. 2012; 12(7): 21–
Eur J Mech A Solids. 2005; 24: 1068–78p. 30p.
3. Mohd. Izaham Zainal Abidin, Jamaluddin 14. Jamil RM, Brian MR. Vibration Modeling
Mahmud, Mohd Juzaila Abd Latif, et al. of Helical Springs with Non-Uniform Ends.
Experimental and Numerical Investigation J Sound Vibration. 2012; 331: 2809–23p.
of SUP12 Steel Coil Spring. The 15. Roy DK, Saha KN. Nonlinear Analysis of
Malaysian International Tribology Confer- Leaf Springs of Functionally Graded Mate-
ence (MITC2013). Procedia Eng. 2013; 68: rials. Chemical, Civil and Mechanical En-
251–57p. gineering Tracks of 3rd Nirma University
4. Sorathiya M, Dhaval SB, Vipul BM. Vari- International Conference (NUICONE
ous Numerical Analysis of Composite Leaf 2012). Procedia Eng. 2013; 51: 538–43p.
Spring for Light Vehicle Mini Truck. Se- 16. Zhu Y, Wang Y, Huang Y. Failure Analy-
lected Papers of Mechanical, Civil and sis of a Helical Compression Spring for a
Chemical Engineering Tracks of the 4th Heavy Vehicle’s Suspension System. Case
Nirma University International Conference Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis.
on Engineering (NUICONE 2013). Proce- 2014; 2:169–73p.
dia Eng. 2014. 17. Tsubouchi T, Takahashi K, Kuboki T. De-
5. Senthil Kumar M, Vijayarangan S. Analyti- velopment of Coiled Springs with High
cal and Experimental Studies on Fatigue Rectangular Ratio in Cross-Section. 11th
Life Prediction of Steel and Composite International Conference on Technology of
Multi-Leaf Spring for Light Passenger Ve- Plasticity, ICTP2014, 19–24 Oct 2014,
hicles Using Life Data Analysis. Mater Sci. Nagoya, Japan. Procedia Eng. 2014; 81:
2007; 13(2): 141–46p. 574–79p.
6. Prawoto Y, Ikeda M, Manville SK, et al. 18. Ozmen B, Altiok B, Guzel A et al. A Novel
Design and Failure Modes of Automotive Methodology with Testing and Simulation
Suspension Springs. Eng Fail Anal. 2008; for the Durability of Leaf Springs Based on
15: 1155–74p. Measured Load Collectives. 3rd
7. Jiang WG, Henshall JL. A Novel Finite El- International Conference on Material and
ement Model for Helical Springs. Finite Component Performance under Variable
Elem Anal Des. 2000; 35:363–77p. Amplitude Loading, VAL2015. Procedia
8. Yildirim V, Sancaktar E. Linear Free Vi- Eng. 2015;101: 363–71p.
bration Analysis of Cross-Ply Laminated 19. Kosec L, Nagode A, Kosec G et al. Failure
Cylindrical Helical Spring. Int J Mech Sci. Analysis of a Motor-Car Coil Spring. Case
2000; 42: 1153–69p. Studies in Engineering Failure Analysis.
9. Del Llano-Vizcaya L, Rubio-Gonzalez C, 2015; 4:100–5p.
Mesmacque G, et al. Stress Relief Effect on 20. Ghuku S, Saha KN. A Theoretical and Ex-
Fatigue and Relaxation of Compression perimental Study on Geometric Nonlinear-
Springs. Mater Des. 2007; 28: 1130–34p. ity of Initially Curved Cantilever Beams.

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 17
Stress Analysis of Leaf Spring Suspension System Gayakwad et
al.

Engineering Science and Technology. of Helical Springs. Journal of Automobile


2016; 19: 135–46p. Engineering and Application. 2016; 3(3):
21. Design of Leaf Springs, Lesson 3, Version 21–30p.
2 ME, IIT Kharagpur, (4/08/2016)
Cite this Article
http://nptel.ac.in/courses/Webcoursecontent Sachin Gayakwad, Pushpendra Kumar
s/IIT%20Kharagpur/Machine Mishra, Ishan Patel. Stress Analysis of
%20design1/pdf/mod7les3.pdf Leaf Spring Suspension System with the
Combination of Helical Springs. Journal
22. Gayakwad S, Patel I, Mishra PK. of Automobile Engineering and
Deflection Analysis of the Leaf Spring Applications. 2017; 4(3): 6–18p.
Suspension System with the Combination

JoAEA (2017) 6-18 © STM Journals 2017. All Rights Reserved Page 18