Search Results

The high performance brake systems of today are usually in a delicate balance - walking the fine line between being overpowered by some of the most potent powertrains, some of the grippiest tires, and some of the most demanding race tracks that the automotive world has ever seen - and saddling the vehicle with excess kilograms of unsprung mass with oversized brakes, forcing significant compromises in drivability with oversized tires and wheels. Brake system design for high performance vehicles has often relied on a very deep understanding of friction material performance (friction, wear, and compressibility) in race track conditions, with sufficient knowledge to enable this razor’s edge design.

Disc brakes operate with very close proximity of the brake pads and the brake rotor, with as little as a tenth of a millimeter of movement of the pads required to bring them into full contact with the rotor to generate braking torque. It is usual for a disc brake to operate with some amount of residual drag in the fully released state, signifying constant contact between the pads and the rotor. With this contact, every miniscule movement of the rotor pushes against the brake pads and changes the forces between them. Sustained loads on the brake corner, and maneuvers such as cornering, can both produce rotor movement relative to the caliper, which can push it steadily against one or both of the brake pads. This can greatly increase the residual force in the caliper, and increase drag. This dependence of drag behavior on the movement of the brake rotor creates some vehicle-dependent behavior.

The importance of achieving good (low) assembled lateral runout of the brake disc is well recognized in the industry - it is a critical feature for avoiding issues such as wear-induced disc thickness variation and vibration/shudder during braking. Significant efforts and expense has been invested by the industry into reducing disc brake lateral runout. However, wheel assemblies also have some inherent runout, which in turn cause cyclical forces to act on the brake corner during vehicle movement. Despite the stiffness of the wheel bearing (which aligns the brake disc with the caliper and knuckle), these “tire non-uniformity” forces can be sufficient to promote deflection of the assembly that is appreciable compared to typical disc lateral runout tolerances. This paper covers measurements of this phenomenon on three different vehicles (compact, mid-size, and large cars), under a variety of operating conditions such as speed, wheel assembly runout, and wheel assembly balance.

In the course of this paper, a model suitable for studying the performance - in terms of response time, current draw, and peak pressure capacity - of an electric booster-based brake system is introduced. Some discussion about the need the model is attempting to fulfill and how it fits into the vehicle development process is offered, before explaining the model in full. The equations describing the physics of the model are presented, and an explanation of how the elements of the model are integrated together into an easy to use, fast-running spreadsheet environment is given. Case study examples, validating the model against physical test (hardware in the loop) test results are shown, followed by sensitivity studies testing how changing parameters such as caliper Pressure-Volume curves, hydraulic system flow characteristics, voltage supply, and temperature conditions affect performance.

Very few activities the brake engineer engages in can induce as much vexation as trying to find a satisfying routing for the flexible brake components such as hoses, wheel speed sensors, and electric parking brake cables. Ever increasing wheel end content, ever decreasing space, more complex suspensions, and bulkier (but lighter weight) suspension components provide quite the morass through which the components must be routed through. When routing is finalized - and free of any major issues - there frequently remains some combinations of articulation position and component tolerances that allow a light “friendly” touch between components (such as a sensor wire and a surface of a bracket or strut tube), or near misses where clearance exists but raises “what if” questions around what would happen if the tolerances would stack up slightly differently on another vehicle.