International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

Meshing selection for AVT components

Sumit Jain1
1
(Student Researcher / Department of Mechanical Engineering / JCERC, Jaipur)

Abstract: An ATV roll cage is a specially designed protective frame around the driver that protects the driver
in each & every condition. During the designing of roll cage take few objectives like diver safety, easy of
manufacturing, light weight, ergonomics. This paper outline dynamic analysis of roll cage of ATV by doing per
& post processing in ANSYS 18.2 & CAD modelling done in solid works 2018 to obtain optimum FOS (factor of
safety) in worst condition under a set of particular rules given by Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Which
ensure that the roll cage of ATV will be safe in all conditions.
Keywords: Meshing selection, AVT components, Theory of failure, Roll cage, Stress analysis, Ansys

1. INTRODUCTION
The design of a component or structure often calls upon the engineer to minimize the possibility
of failure. Thus, it is important to understand the mechanics of the various failure modes fracture,
fatigue, and creep and, in addition, be familiar with appropriate design principles that may be
employed to prevent in-service failures.

The roll cage is the skeleton of an all train vehicle that protect the driver & support all the control
system & sub assembly. The design objective of the roll cage are driver safety, easy of manufacturing,
light weight, ergonomics, durable etc. The start designing of the roll cage with taking few
assumptions wheelbase & track width & the design of the driver cockpit according to average of
human dimension & comfort then design the bulk-head & engine compartment with the help of
suspension pickup points & engine integrals. By taking this making several prototypes & ensure with
best one with the help of FEA & Baja SAE rulebook 2018 [1]. It is very important to ensure all failure
modes of roll cage. This research discus about the meshing of the roll cage of ATV, and components.
1.1. MESHING ELEMENTS QUALITY AND CHECKS
1.2.1. SKEWNESS
It is one of the primary quality measures for a mesh. According to the definition of skewness, a
value of 0 indicates an equilateral cell (best) and a value of 1 indicates a completely degenerate cell
(worst).
1.2.2. JACOBIAN
FEA Software, the Jacobian (also called Jacobian Ratio) is a measure of the deviation of a given
element from an ideally shaped element. The Jacobian value ranges from -1.0 to 1.0, where 1.0
represents a perfectly shaped element. The ideal shape for an element depends on the element type.
1.2.3. ASPECT RATIO
It is the ratio of Maximum edge length to the minimum edge length of an element. The ideal value of
aspect ratio is 1. That means all the sides of an element are of equal length. However, an aspect ratio of
less than 5 is generally acceptable value for 2d element.
1.2.4. WARPING ANGLE
It is defined as the angle between normal of the two-triangle plane formed by splitting the quad
element along diagonals. Maximum angle out of the two possibilities reported as warp angle. In case of
solid element and element’s face deviates from a being planar. the quad is divided into two trias along
its diagonals and angle between the trias normal is measures.

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 1 | Page

 International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

Ideal value =0° ( acceptable ≤5° to 10°)

Fig 1. Warping angle

2. TYPE OD MESHING REQUIRED FOR ROLL CAGE

2D meshing should be done on Roll cage.
1. It captures the whole geometry properly.
2. The deformation starts from the core if we make the element at the core then the result is
quite good ( In 2D meshing elements are build up at the mid surface of the pipe that is the
core of pipe and when we give the thickness in mechanical(pre and post processer of ANSYS)
then it apply half thickness in upper side and half below the mashing)
3. It covers all types of stresses (but in 1D meshing shear stresses are not taken in the account)
4. As we know that deformation starts from the core so there must be an element at the core but
in the 3D meshing we have to give element size less then pipe thickness then only meshing is
created and if we want element in the core then we have to keep element size less then half of
pipe thickness. In that case the number of elements is very high. So, solving time is high. That
is not good at all.

Fig 2. Roll cage (highlighted part is zoom view below)

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 2 | Page

 International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

Fig 3. 1D meshing (capture bend area improperly)

Fig 4. 2D meshing (bend area captured properly)

3. MATERIAL SELECTION
The frame material “CHRO-MOLY” (AISI 4130) is selected based on availability, strength,
machinability, light Weight, economical, high weight to strength ratio.

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 3 | Page

 International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

Material Selection
Outer Dia Thickness Yield Bending Stiffness Mass / length
Material (inches) (mm) Strength (N-mm²)
(MPa)

1 3 370 2763.12 1.66

AISI 1018 1.15 1.2 370 2126.82 0.83

1.15 1.65 370 2790.54 1.12

1 3 465 2763.12 1.66

AISI 4130 1.15 1.2 465 2126.82 0.83

1.15 1.65 465 2790.54 1.12

4. ANALYSIS AND RESULTS

4.1. ON ROLL CAGE
We have done explicit dynamic analysis on the roll cage
Because there is confusion in force and fixture. That is how much force is applied on it in front
impact. Some researchers calculate force value by impulse momentum equation and some apply 4g to
8g force in front impact. And another problem is what will be the fix support. Some assume the
suspension hard points as a fixed support and some assume end pipe of roll cage (last vertical member
what is come in contact in case of rear collision). In both cases the results are different.
For front impact we create a wall in front of the roll cage and give velocity of 45km/hr

Fig 5. Analysis at velocity 45 km/hr

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 4 | Page

International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

4.2. SIDE AND REAR IMPACT
For side and rear impact, we also did the explicit dynamic.

Fig 6. Dynamic rear impact

Fig 7. Dynamic side impact

4.3. ANALYSIS ON WHEEL ASSEMBLY
We did 3D (HEX meshing) on wheel assembly because all dimension of component is comparable.
The force value in cornering, braking is 4G and in case of bump, it is 6G.
Note: Forcing value are derived only for a particular case. (Not a standard value)

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 5 | Page

International Research Journal in Engineering and Emerging Technology (IRJEET)

Volume – 01, Issue – 01, March – 2020

Fig 8. Cornering analysis on hub

Fig 9. Braking analysis on knuckle hub

CONCLUSIONS
Analysis of components are done successfully. This study covers the area to do analysis of AVT
Components and select the mesh properly. Whole study is done based on rules and limitation to make
a AVT vehicle for SAE Event.
REFERENCES
[1] 2019 Collegiate Design Series Baja SAEINDIA® Rulebook.
[2] MODLING AND FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF ATV ROLLCAGE, Siddhant Jain, Palash
Goyal, Rahul Dabi.

www.we-irjeet.com 2019 IRJEET – All Right Reserved 6 | Page