PSI - Issue 14

Abhijit Kulkarni et al. / Procedia Structural Integrity 14 (2019) 158–167 Abhijit Kulkarni a , Rushikesh Nanaware b , Akhilesh Kulkarni c , Vikrant Garud d / Structural Integrity Procedia 00 (2018) 000–000 9

166

0 2 4 6

Axle1leftwheelorignal Axle1leftwheeloptimized Axle1rightwheeloriginal Axle1rightwheeloptimized

0

10

20

30

40

50

‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2

Error (Degree)

Articulation Angle (DEG)

Fig. 8. Optimized & Original Errors for Axle – 1, Degrees.

0 2

0

10

20

30

40

50

Axle2leftwheeloriginal Axle2leftwheeloptimized Axle2rightwheeloriginal Axle2rightwheeloptimized

‐10 ‐8 ‐6 ‐4 ‐2

Error (Degree)

Articulation angle (DEG)

Fig. 9. Optimized & Original Errors for Axle – 2, Degrees.

As seen in above graphs, it is evident that not all of the errors are reduced compared to the original mechanism. This is due to the inherent nature of the mechanism used to construct the system, errors can only be minimized and never diminished. For Tie Rod, original Error’s in degrees with existing mechanism is indicated by dotted line and its magnitudes is 30.4 mm. With optimization, tie rod errors indicated by continuous line and its magnitudes is 0.92 mm. From this discussion it was cleared that the magnitude of errors in the angle of the wheel is less than 50 and that of in the tie rod is less than 1.05mm, which can be nullified in tolerances of the joints and straining of the tie rod. Also, reduction in tie rod errors i.e. below 1.05mm fixed up the pin bending and shearing problem.

0 10 20 30 40

Error (mm )

TieRodErrorOriginal TieRodErrorOptimized

0

10

20

30

40

50

Articulation Angle (DEG)

Fig. 10. Optimized & Original tie rod error, mm.