8/2/2019 01408744
1/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-18
Early Introduction of CAE Tools Enhances Success
In Student Design CompetitionsCraig J. Hoff
1, Travis Slagle
2, Alan Lo
3, Paul Zang
4, William K. Waldron
5
1 Craig J. Hoff, Kettering University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Flint, MI, 48504, [email protected] Travis Slagle, Kettering University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Flint, MI, 48504, completed BSME December 2003.3 Alan Lo, Kettering University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Flint, MI, 48504, completed BSME December 2003.4 Paul Zang, Kettering University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Flint, MI, 48504, [email protected] William K. Waldron, Kettering University, Department of Mechanical Engineering, Flint, MI, 48504, [email protected]
Abstract The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE)
Formula Car events are the premier competitions for
automotive engineering students worldwide. Student
teams from accredited engineering educational
institutions are asked to design and build small open-
wheel, Formula-One style vehicles. Younger members on
the teams (freshman and sophomores) are often asked to
design parts for the vehicle, long before they have
completed the necessary core engineering courses. At
Kettering University early introduction of CAE tools in
the curriculum has helped to enhance the students ability
to compete. With a high level of motivation, the team
members are able to leverage their basic understanding ofengineering and engineering tools to perform engineering
analysis and design at a much higher level than one would
expect. The early exposure to CAE tools has resulted in a
number of successes for the Kettering Formula Car team
including a 6th placed finish (out of 140 vehicles) in the
Formula SAE design event
Index Terms Computer Aided Engineering, Design
Competitions, Student Design Projects
BACKGROUND
The Society of Automotive Engineers (SAE) Formula Carevents are the premier competitions for automotive
engineering students worldwide. Student teams fromaccredited engineering educational institutions are asked to
design and build small open-wheel, Formula-One style
vehicles. Since its humble beginnings in Texas with four
teams in 1981, the competition has grown to over 200 teams,participating in events held in the United States (Formula
SAE), Europe (Formula Student), and Australia (FormulaAustralasia) each year. The worlds automakers have
embraced the competition supporting it financially and
providing judges, stewards, and event workers. They also use
the event as a major recruiting ground for their future
engineering talent.The competition rules place restrictions on the car frameand engine to ensure that the vehicles are safe and to ensure
that the students knowledge, creativity, and imagination are
tested. The vehicles are judged in both static and dynamic
events. The static events consist of: an engineering design
review (written and oral), a manufacturing and cost report
(written and oral), and a marketing presentation (oral only).
The dynamic events consist of: an acceleration test, a skid
pad test, an autocross (to test maneuverability and handling),
and a demanding fuel economy and endurance test. Thevehicles must also pass a comprehensive safety inspection,
noise inspection, and brake test.
The points possible for each event are given in Table I.
Quality engineering design work is crucial, both directly (theengineering design is worth 150 points) and indirectly (as a
good engineering design is the key to being successful in the
dynamic events).
TABLE IAVAILABLE POINTS IN EACH EVENT [1]
Event Available Points
StaticPresentationEngineering DesignCost Analysis
DynamicAccelerationSkid PadAutocrossFuel EconomyEndurance
Total Points
75150100
7550
15050
350
1000
There are many models used for creating the Formula
Car team. At many universities the vehicle is used as the
subject of the capstone project course(s), in which case the
team members consist of senior-level students. In other
universities the vehicle is setup as a club activity, whichmeans students of all educational levels can join the team.
Other universities have a hybrid structure of the two basic
approaches.
At Kettering University the Formula SAE (FSAE) team
is a club activity. Historically, most of the team members aremechanical engineering students, although it is highlydesirable to recruit students from electrical engineering,
manufacturing engineering and even the managementprogram. Students may join the race team as freshman and in
fact it is very important to recruit them as freshman.
Experience shows that if a student does not join the team as a
freshman, the student will get involved in other campus
8/2/2019 01408744
2/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-19
activities and the chances of them joining the FSAE team are
small. To keep them on the team, it is important to get
students involved in club activities. This requires giving theteam members meaningful engineering projects.
The major disadvantage of this approach is that the
students are asked to design parts for the car long before they
take the core engineering courses which are essential to
designing a race car. For example the university offers
courses in Finite Element Analysis, Automotive Powertrains,Vehicle Dynamics and Chassis Systems, but those courses
are not available to the students until they have senior
standing. Other core courses such as Solid Mechanics,
Dynamics and Machine Design are not available to students
until they are sophomore or juniors. Still, even freshman team
members are able to contribute to the success of the projectdue to the early introduction of Computer Aided Engineering
(CAE) tools in the Kettering University mechanical
engineering curriculum.
Beginning with their first term at the university, studentslearn the essentials of Engineering Graphics and Solid
Modeling through the use of a series of software tools
obtained through the PACE Program Grant of GeneralMotors, EDS PLM Solutions and SUN Microsystems.
Initially, students use Solid Edge to produce solid models and
then progress to Unigraphics and I-DEAS as the models grow
in complexity and sophistication. A follow up course in thestudents sophomore year
6extends the students knowledge of
solid modeling and introduces the concepts of finite element
analysis (FEA) and mechanic system dynamics simulation
(MSD).
USAGE OF CAETOOLS
With the early introduction of basic CAE tools in the
students curriculum along with a high-level of motivationthe team members are able leverage their basic understanding
of engineering and engineering tools to perform engineering
analysis and design at a much higher level than one would
expect. A partial list of the CAE tools employed by theFormula Car team is given in Table II.
TABLE IIPARTIAL LIST OF ENGINEERING SOFTWARE USED BY TEAM
Software Name Use
EDS I-DEAS Solid Modeling, Mechanical andThermal Modeling
EDS Unigraphics Solid Modeling
MSC. Adams Mechanical System DynamicsGT Power Engine Simulation
Fluent Computational Fluid DynamicsPi Sim Racecar data acquisitionElectronics Workbench Electrical Design
6 Beginning in 2004 Solid Mechanics will be a prerequisite to the secondCAE course, to better prepare the students for the discussion of FEA. Thismeans that the second course will be pushed back to the first term of thestudents junior year.
For purposes of this discussion the software may be used
in two ways, either to do analytical work or to do non-
analyticalwork. Analytical work requires a greater level ofengineering knowledge on the part of the student than non-
analytical work. Analytical tasks include FEA and MSD
analysis. Non-analytical tasks, such as basic component
design and computer-aided manufacturing, can be assigned to
lower-level students than the analytical tasks.
One of the first tasks that younger students take on isbasic component design. Before the vehicle can be
manufactured the vehicle and its components need to be
visualized. Solid modeling allows the students to design their
components and to check on how their components will fit
into the vehicle. Exploded views (such as Figure 1) can be
used to look for interferences, assembly and packagingissues. The use of solid models allows the student to focus
on the overall product development rather than simply
drafting.
FIGURE 1EXPLODED VIEW OF FRONT UPRIGHT ASSEMBLY GENERATED USING
I-DEASSOFTWARE
The first use of analytical software by the team members
is usually conducting FEA analysis of their components. The
basic concepts of FEA (create part, mesh part, apply
boundary conditions, apply load, calculate stress, evaluatestress, redesign part as needed to minimize stress ordeflection) is quickly learned, although considerable
monitoring of their work is required. At this point the
students do not have the necessary experience to recognize agood mesh from a bad mesh, understand the appropriate size
for the mesh (they tend to use a much finer mesh than is
necessary), nor do they have a feel for knowing when it isappropriate to simplify a part (for example by taking out
9011234
(McMaster)
3/8-24 x 2
24 lb-ft
9152834
(McMaster)
5/16 shoulder
1/4 20 x 1/2
20 lb-ft
04-G2-120/5
Front UCA
block (L/R)
04-G2-100/5
Front upright
(L/R)
04-G2-150/5
Steer arm
block (L/R)
02-G2-251
Front brake
rotor
02-G2-227
Front brake
rotor hat
44610-HN2
(Honda)
Hub
5206BZZ/2A
(NTN)
Wheel bearing120-2498
(Wilwood)
Front brake
caliper
02-G2-202
Front brake
caliper bracket
9011234
(McMaster)
3/8-24 x 2
24 lb-ft
9152834
(McMaster)
5/16 shoulder
1/4 20 x 1/2
20 lb-ft
04-G2-120/5
Front UCA
block (L/R)
04-G2-100/5
Front upright
(L/R)
04-G2-150/5
Steer arm
block (L/R)
02-G2-251
Front brake
rotor
02-G2-227
Front brake
rotor hat
44610-HN2
(Honda)
Hub
5206BZZ/2A
(NTN)
Wheel bearing120-2498
(Wilwood)
Front brake
caliper
02-G2-202
Front brake
caliper bracket
8/2/2019 01408744
3/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-20
fillets) before they mesh. Of most concern is the fact that
they are not always able to recognize bad results.
What they do understand that FEA is a powerful tool thatallows them to make endless iteration attempts without
spending a penny on materials. They also learn that even if a
FEA package does not provide exact results, the relative
increase/decrease in part stiffness or strength is a valid tool
for evaluating competing designs.
An example of this is the design of the vehicles frame.The students started out with a target for the frames torsional
stiffness of 2000 ft-lb/deg, which is a value that they arrived
at through their independent reading of books on the subject
and from discussions with the design judges at previous
competitions. To complicate the process this stiffness must
be achieved while keeping the weight of the frame under 45lb. After evaluating many frame topologies and considering
alternate tubing size, their FEA analysis (Figure 2) indicated
that the target was met. However, after building the frame
and physically testing the structure, they found the stiffness tobe much smaller than expected, around 1200 ft-lb/deg.
FIGURE 2FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS OF FORMULA CARFRAME
The reason for this discrepancy is that the joints are
infinitely rigid in the simple beam element FEA model.However, in building their frame manufacturing inaccuracies
mean that the frame tubes do not fit together perfectly. As
the students welded the frame together they filled the gaps
between the tubes with filler rod. The result being that the
joints were not anywhere near being perfectly rigid and therigidity of their frame was much lower than their FEA
predicted.This is an invaluable lesson. The FSAE team members
understand the limitations of their computer models. They
also understand that even though the absolute values of their
answers may not be correct, they can still use the relative
values of the results to identify designs that are superior toothers. This understanding helps the team to increase the
integrity of their future analyses.
The solid models then allow the students to quickly
move from the design environment to the manufacturing
environment. It is a relatively straight forward matter totransfer the solid models to CNC milling machines for
production. The CNC technique can significantly reduce the
time needed to produce a part, and as with any engineering
project time is precious commodity.
CNC manufacturing is not currently taught in the
Mechanical Engineering curriculum. Historically, the teamhas been able to identify one or two members who will
become the manufacturing expert(s). These students take the
CNC course offered in the Manufacturing Engineering
Department. Once they have been certified with the course
instructor, they are given access to the CNC machines.
Recently, a new approach has been tried with greatsuccess. The instructor of the CNC course has agreed to use
FSAE parts for projects in his course. This approach requires
that the design work be completed long before the start of the
term in which the CNC course is taught. This year one of thecourse projects was to manufacture the wheel hub assembly
(see Figure 3). In the future additional parts can be made this
way.
FIGURE 3WHEEL HUB ASSEMBLY MANUFACTURED USING CNCMACHINES
Another important application of analytical software is inevaluating the vehicles suspension. An MSC.ADAMS/Car
full-vehicle model is shown in Figure 4. The software gives
the user a wide variety of simulation tools both in kinematics
and dynamics. Suspension roll center locations and
movements, camber curves, damper motion ratios, bump
steer, roll steer, and many other parameters can bedetermined at the click of a mouse rather than laboriously
laying out the geometry by hand.
8/2/2019 01408744
4/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-21
FIGURE 4FULL-VEHICLE SUSPENSION ANALYSIS IN MSC.ADAMS/CAR
The full-vehicle dynamics capabilities allow the studentto test their vehicle on a track before a single part is made.
This requires that suspension geometry be determined,
masses and inertias of components be input, and criticalcomponents be chosen and modeled. The output of this
model may also be used to determine loads, which become
inputs to FEA analysis of the frame and suspensioncomponents.
The quality of the chassis design can be assessed in
several ways. Ultimately, it is assessed by the performance
on the vehicle on the racetrack. Additionally, it is possible to
instrument the vehicle with a data acquisition system to look
at specific measures of vehicle performance such as lateral
acceleration, roll rates, etc. The Kettering FSAE teamarranged for the donation of a Pi Research data acquisitionsystem and has used it to evaluate their car (see Figure 5).
The FSAE team uses parametric engine models, as
shown in Figure 6, to gain insight into internal combustionengines. This approach is much more accessible than
building prototype engines and gives a better starting point
for developing the engine on the dynamometer.
As a final example, thermal finite element analysis
module in I-DEAS allowed the team to properly size the
components for the custom engine igniter shown in Figure 7.This analysis allowed the team to quickly perform thermal
analysis of the part that resulted in a five pound reduction in
overall vehicle weight.
FIGURE 5SUSPENSION EVALUATION USING PI RESEARCH DATA ACQUISITION SYSTEM
FIGURE 6PARAMETRIC ENGINE MODEL DEVELOPED WITH GTPOWER
FIGURE 7THERMAL MODEL OF AN ENGINE IGNITER
8/2/2019 01408744
5/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-22
The use of these advanced CAE tools has paid off for the
Kettering Formula Car team. In 2000, the team won the
Formula Student Best Use of CAE Tools award and in2003 the team placed 6th (out of 140 vehicles) in the Formula
SAE design event. The early exposure to the CAE tools was
essential to making this possible.
PEDAGOGY
The SAE Formula Car events are unsurpassed as learning
opportunities for automotive engineering students. It has
been shown that the key to knowledge transfer is the amountof time devoted to acquiring skills within a domain [2]. The
main factor that influences the time that students will spend
working in a domain is motivation. Studies by NSF
Coalitions [3-7] and other math/science educational groupshave identified many methods which seem to motivate
students including problem-based learning, reality-basedlearning and service-learning.
According to Project Kaleidoscope, the ideal model for
learning science and mathematics in college has three
irreducible qualities:
The learner is enmeshed in a community of learners; The learning experience is personal; The learning established connections that place science
in context. [9]
The FSAE competitions more than meet each of thesecriteria. The FSAE team members are firmly enmeshed in a
community of learners. The team members spend countless
hours working together in order to determine how to make
the car faster, lighter, or more nimble. The more experienced
members of the team are constantly teaching and encouraging
the eager new team members.This community is not restricted to simply the members
of a single team, but it extends to the members of other teams
both nationally and internationally. A great amount of timeat the Formula Car events is spent talking with and learning
from the other teams that are present. Discussion boards,websites [8-11], and email exchanges are used by students to
share their ideas and to offer tips on how to successfully
overcome difficulties.
The learning experience is personal. Each member of
the team is trying to help make the vehicle more competitive.
They are willing to learn whatever they need in order toaccomplish their objectives. The most dedicated members of
the team are willing to devote countless hours to this effort.Often this means that the students are learning subjects on
their own, long before they take a class on the subject (or forthat matter long before they take the prerequisite to the class
on the subject).The learning is establishing connections that place the
science in context. For example the concept of stress has real
meaning to these students, particularly if a part fails in a race
or in practice. The goal for the students is clear to build a
winning car. Engineering becomes a tool to help them reach
their goal.
In many ways the members of the FSAE teams should beconsidered non-traditional or adult learners. There
learning behaviors are not characteristic of typical
undergraduate students. They are self-directed in their
learning and they tend to act more mature than theirclassmates. The behavior of FSAE team members fits neatly
into several of the key assumptions that help define Knowlesandragogy [12]. These behaviors include:
The need to know. Adult learners need to know whythey need to learn something before they undertake
learning it. In this case if FSAE team members are
shown that something is important to be learned (by aninstructor or by a team mate) they are much more likely
to attempt to learn it.
Learner self-concept. Adult learners need to beresponsible for their own decisions and need to be treated
as being capable of self-direction. Advising the FSAEteam is often challenging because the students often tend
to think that they dont need advising. On the other handit is also quite easy, since the team members dont have
to be told what to do and how to do it. They readily take
on that responsibility.
Orientation to learning. Adult learners are motivatedto learn what they perceive will be helpful in their own
life situations. In this case if the FSAE team members
see that what they are learning in the classroom can be
applied to making their vehicle more competitive, theypay much more attention in class.
This same orientation to learning is what drives the
students to tackle learning advanced CAE tools. They never
seem to stop to think Gee, I havent had that class yet, so Icant do it. They look at what they need to do to accomplish
a task, and then they proceed to learn what they need to learnin order to accomplish the task. This leads the team members
to conduct advanced engineering analysis that their school
mates would never considering doing.
CONCLUSION
The early introduction of CAE tools and the students high
degree of motivation allows them to accomplish tasks that
one would expect to be well beyond their capability. Formany students participation in the FSAE competition is the
educational highlight of their time spent at the University.The use of CAE tools clearly enhances the teams success in
the competition and better prepares them for their engineeringcareers.
8/2/2019 01408744
6/6
Session S2G
0-7803-8552-7/04/$20.00 2004 IEEE October 20 23, 2004, Savannah, GA
34th
ASEE/IEEE Frontiers in Education Conference
S2G-23
REFERENCES
[1] Formula SAE Rules, Society of Automotive Engineers, Warrendale,PA, 2004. (www.sae.org/students/fsaerules.pdf)
[2] Bransford, J.D., Brown, A.L., Cocking, R.R., Donovan, M.S.,Bransford, J.D., and Pellegrino, J.W.,How People Learn: Brain, Mind,Experience and School, National Academy Press, Washington, DC,2000. (http://www.nap.edu/catalog/9853.html)
[3]
NSF Foundation Coalition website (www.foundationcoalition.org)[4] NSF Gateway Coalition website (www.gatewaycoalition.org)[5] NSF Greenfield Coalition website (www.greenfield-coalition.org)
Author's Last name,
[6] NSF SUCCEED Coalition website (www.succeednow.org)[7] NSF Synthesis Coalition website (www.synthesis.org)[8] Official SAE Formula Car website
(www.sae.org/students/formulaseries.htm)
[9] Unofficial SAE Formula Car website (fsae.com)[10] Official IMECHE Formula Student website
(www.imeche.org.uk/formulastudent/index.htm)
[11] Official SAE Formula Australasia web site (www.sae-a.com.au/fsae/)[12] Knowles, M.S., Swanson, R.A., Elwodd, F.H., The Adult Learner: A
Neglect Species (5rth Edition), Elsevier Science & Technology, 1998.
Recommended