Search Results

A 4t off-road military application vehicle was offered to the customers for assessment. During the evaluation adverse feedback of 1) harsh ride in off-road terrain, particularly during hump-crossing and 2) issues during high mobility were reported. Vehicle configuration was front and rear rigid axle suspension with leaf spring anti-roll bar, 4×4 and all terrain tyres. Vehicle application was “on-road” [GS (General-services)], as well as “off-road” (Reconnaissance purpose). The feedback was critically analyzed on the vehicle with the simulation of field conditions. Since the vehicle was still under customer evaluation, solution for the feedback required was quick and within boundary condition (maximum possible allowable limits of modification) of no major change in the suspension design as it was affects homologation cycle. Present paper describes the detailed analysis of the influence of each parameter on system.

In this paper, design methodology of antiroll bar bush is discussed. Typical antiroll bar bushes have slide or slip mechanism, to facilitate the relative motion between ARB and bush. Inherently, this relative motion causes wear and noise of bush. To eliminate stated failure modes, the next generation bushes have been developed, which are using torsion properties instead of slip function. These bushes are already being used in various vehicles. This paper focuses on developing the simple mathematical model, design approach and optimization of ARB bushes. Also, comparison study is presented exploring, the differences and design criteria's between conventional and new generation anti-roll bar bushes.