TITLE Abstract 1 Chapter – I Introduction and Literature

TITLE OF THE PROJECT

 

 

 

 

 

FIRST REVIEW / SECOND REVIEW REPORT

We Will Write a Custom Essay Specifically
For You For Only $13.90/page!


order now

 

 

 

 

 

 

B.Tech Mechanical Engineering /

B.Tech Production and Industrial Engineering

 

by

 

 

 

NAME OF THE CANDIDATES (With Reg. No.)

 

 

 

 

School of Mechanical Engineering

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MONTH & YEAR

    

 (Project Title here)

 

 :

 

 

 

 

 

Project
ID

Winter2018/SMEC/B.Tech/Mechanical/

Date
of Review

 

VIT
Guide

Prof.

External
Guide

Name:
Designation:
Mobile:
Email:
Business Unit:

Project
Team Members

Student 1
1.     
Name:
2.     
Reg. No:
3.     
Email:
4.     
Mobile:
Student
2
1.     
Name:
2.     
Reg. No:
3.     
Email:
4.     
Mobile:
Student
3
1.     
Name:
2.     
Reg. No:
3.     
Email:
4.     
Mobile:

Guide’s
Remarks

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Name
and Signature of the guide

 

Comments
of Reviewer(s)
 
 
 
 
 

 

Name
and Signature of the Reviewer

 

Table
of Contents

Chapter

Description

Pg. No.

 

Abstract

1

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter – I

Introduction and
Literature Review

 

 

1.1      

 

Introduction

2

 

1.2

 

Literature Review

3

 

1.3

 

Problem Definition

 

 

1.4

 

Objectives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter – II

Methodology

 

 

2.1
2.2

 

Work carried out so far
Work to be done

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Chapter – III

Results and Discussion

 

 

3.1

 

Base Metals

 

 

3.2

 

Microstructure Characterization

 

 

 

3.2.1

Weldments employing Filler A

 

 

 

3.2.2.

Weldments employing Filler B

 

 

3.3

 

Microstructure Characterization

 

 

 

3.3.1

Weldments employing Filler A

 

 

 

3.3.2

Weldments employing Filler B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.4

 

Work to be done

 

 

 

3.4.1

Gantt Chart

 

 

 

 

 

22

 

References

23

 

Appendix – A

24

 

Appendix – B

25

 

 

Abstract

Should
not exceed 200 words.

The design of race car for the Formula Student
competition involves more performance parameters then for regular racing. In
addition to achieving high strength and stiffness for a very low overall
weight, the car must be easily manufactured and maintained to stay within
budget. In this report an approach is presented on designing a lightweight
hybrid race car chassis consisting of a fibre reinforced composite cockpit
combining structural, aesthetic, ergonomic and crash properties, and a tubular
space frame engine compartment, meeting stiffness and strength demands while
remaining easy to maintain and manufacture, thus keeping production cost low.

Keywords:

A
minimum of 5 keywords to be provided

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The purpose of the Evaluation Plan is to provide the
Accountable Officer (ADG or DDG) with a detailed project plan identifying all
resources, milestones and deliverables. It should build on the broad
information from the Evaluation Proposal and detail how the evaluation will be
managed to deliver the report on time and on budget.

 (Select which
is applicable. Include a description of the project/program/initiative and its
objectives)

CHAPTER
–I

 

INTRODUCTION
& LITERATURE REVIEW

1.1       Introduction

Address
the importance of the topic in context to national or global scenario

The Challenge:

Every
year, teams from all over the world pit their designed and manufactured cars
against each other in performance, design as well as business tests in the
Formula Student competition. The students are to assume that a manufacturing
firm has engaged them to produce a prototype car for evaluation. The intended
sales market is the nonprofessional weekend autocross or sprint racer, and the
firm is planning to produce 1,000 cars per year at a cost below EURO 21000. The
car must be cost effective, easy to maintain, and reliable, with high
performance in terms of its acceleration, braking, and handling qualities.
Several leading industrialists and specialists volunteer to rigorously test the
teams from all over the world in events like:

Static
events:

·        
Design,
Cost and Presentation Judging

·        
Technical
and Safety Scrutineering

·        
Tilt Test
to prevent cars rolling over

·        
Brake and
Noise Test

Dynamic
Events:

·        
Skid Pad

·        
Acceleration

·        
Sprint/qualification

·        
Endurance
and Fuel Economy

(Why is the evaluation being done? i.e., what should
the Accountable Officer be able to decide as a result of the evaluation?)

 

1.2       Literature Review

Every
team that intends to compete does an FSAE chassis and suspension design yearly.
Various design types offer their own benefits and costs. All of these designs
follow the mandated specification given by the competition rules, yet each of
them is full of unique characteristics. In general, the distance between the
axis of the front and rear wheel has to be 60 in. minimum, and is called the
vehicle’s wheelbase. In addition, the track width, which is the distance
between the centre of the left and right tires, is typically kept larger in the
front than the rear. This results in the rear of the car taking a tighter path
without hitting the cones that mark the edge of the track. The vehicle can hence
clear the corners tighter. The ratio of the vehicle’s wheelbase to its front
track width ranges from 1.3 to 1.7 and affects the polar moment of the vehicle
across its longitudinal and lateral axis. This has a tremendous effect on the
handling characteristics of the vehicle. When discussing vehicle dynamics, the
vehicle axis system needs to be determined. Figure-1 shows the axis system as
wheel as the sprung and unsprung masses of the vehicle; forwards of the vehicle
is the X-axis, the Y-axis projects laterally from the side of the vehicle and
the Z-axis points downwards.

Figure 1: Vehicle axis system, along with
sprung and unsprung masses.

 

Vehicle Handling Characteristics:

The purpose of a vehicle’s suspension is to
maintain the tire’s contact with the road and ensure that the tire remains in
its optimal position at all times. The suspension must allow enough wheel
travel to absorb bumps in the surface and to allow the chassis and the sprung
mass, which are the components supported by the springs, to move under
accelerations. The suspension geometry does this by controlling the path of
relative motion between the wheel and the unsprung mass, which are the components
of the vehicle not supported by the springs, and the sprung mass, and allows
for the transfer of forces between them.

A vehicle’s handling characteristics are
divided into three categories: neutral-steer, under-steer or over-steer. These
characteristics refer to a geometrically perfect curve that the vehicle’s
center of mass will take while turning a corner. A neutral steering vehicle
follows this path perfectly, while an under or over steering vehicle will
either take a wider or narrower path, respectively. A neutral-steering vehicle
is typically not desired; for passenger vehicles the suspension is designed to
provide under-steering characteristics. This is because under-steering is more
predictable and easier to handle under the limit of traction. An under-steering
vehicle in a corner losing grip will tend to travel tangent to the curve, but
can be brought back under control by reducing speed. For racing applications,
an over-steering vehicle is desired. Although this vehicle will tend to spin
out of control at the limit of traction and requires more skill to be brought
under control, the vehicle requires less steering input to navigate a corner,
which is desired in very technical courses where the vehicle is expected to
transition quickly between left and right corners.

Another concept found in suspension design is
the concept of “Ackermann Steering.” Since the front left and right wheels will
travel around different but concentric paths around the center of the turn,
ideally they should be at different steering angles while negotiating the turn.
Ackermann Steering refers to the setup of the front left and right wheels to
give theoretically perfect steering at low speed by causing the outside wheel
to be at a shallower angle than the inside wheel, allowing both wheels to
travel at their perfect geometric path.

Figure 2: Ackermann Steering. (a) Classic
Ackermann. (b) Parallel Steering. (c) Reverse Ackermann 4

Vehicles either employ a certain amount of
Ackermann angle, maintain normal parallel steering or employ reverse Ackermann.
Ackermann is done to aid in low speed situations and to avoid having the
outside tires slip sideways while navigating around a corner. Vehicles can be
designed to not use Ackermann at all and keep a parallel steering setup,
typically because while Ackermann Steering is perfect for low speed maneuvers,
it does not account for the force and compliance that occurs at larger speeds.
Race vehicles, such as Formula 1, employ the use of Reverse Ackermann because
they corner only at high speeds under the effects of large amounts of
aerodynamics. The Reverse Ackermann setup accounts for the difference in the
tire slip angles between the inner and outer wheels that occur at high speeds,
effectively reducing tire temperatures and reducing wear.

 

Chassis
Design:

In regards to chassis
alone, a lot of variants are allowed in the competition, with each type having
certain advantages and certain disadvantages. A carbon fibre mono-coque is used
along with extensive amounts of research and resources into the development of
carbon fibre structures. Carbon fibre is a composite that possesses twice the
strength of steel, yet is five times lighter, making it the perfect choice for
a chassis. Many of the top tier teams and certain classes of motorsports such
as Formula 1, employ this chassis design, taking advantage of its lightweight
and relative strength. A monocoque is essentially a structural skin, where the
body of the vehicle supports the external loading that is being applied from
the suspension, brakes, engine, etc. Since the monocoque is also the external
body of the vehicle, it is also made to be aerodynamic. The monocoque chassis
also must be crash tested and proven to satisfy minimum safety standards set by
the design judges. Despite the advantages of this chassis design, there is one
glaring drawback; it is very expensive in both cost and time to design and
manufacture. At this current stage, a carbon fibre mono-coque is not a feasible
design choice for this project.

Aluminium has been
successfully used by various universities in the FSAE competition. As a space
frame, aluminium is not a likely candidate; as per the rules, any aluminium
tube member must be made thicker than a comparable steel member. This, combined
with the fact that aluminium is not as rigid as steel and is much tougher to
weld reliably, makes it a poor choice for a space
frame. Similar to a carbon fibre monocoque, the aluminium frame is also
considered the external body of the vehicle. Nevertheless, an aluminium
monocoque does not offer as much weight savings as a carbon fibre one. Thus,
for the purpose of this project, the extra expense needed for an aluminium
space frame is not justified by the benefits expected.

The steel space frame
is the standard among FSAE team. Although heavier than other chassis design, it
offers ease of use in material machinability, welding, and cost. Plenty of
other motorsport classes use this type of frame, such as GT and Touring car
racing. For teams who are new to the FSAE competition and who may not have a
myriad of manufacturing resources, this chassis is the perfect starting point
for the first few prototypes. Thus for our project, a steel space frame seems the most logical choice. (What aspects of the project/program/initiative are to be evaluated?)

 

1.3       Problem Statement

From the literature, the goal of
this project is to meet all the necessary rules and regulations as decided by
the Formula Student Organizing Committee, including dimensions of the chassis,
materials used, safety features & costing to accommodate any 95th
percentile driver safely in the chassis of the car to be designed.

 

 

1.4       Objectives of the Work

 

Provide
three or four core objectives

 (Insert
additional rows as necessary)

 

1.5               
Design Elements included (Atleast one apart from the marked ones)

 (List the
approved evaluation questions the evaluation should answer to aid
decision-making.)

 Engineering
Standards*              Prototype
and Fabrication

 

 Design
Analysis*                           Experimentation

 

 Modelling and Simulation            Software
Development

 

1.6               
Realistic Constraints to be addressed (Atleast two to be selected)

 Economic                                                     Ethical

 

 Environmental                                            Health
and Safety

 

 Social                                                            Manufacturability

 

 Political                                                        Sustainability

 (Insert
additional rows as necessary)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CHAPTER
–II

 

METHODOLOGY
AND EXPERIMENTAL PROCEDURE

2.1 Methodology

Begin with
the development of a project plan, whereby students define end-user needs,
client needs, design objectives and constraints, and metrics for success.
Proceeding through concept generation and selection, and then through the
system- and component-level design stages, each team ultimately produces a
working prototype that is tested and refined to meet the project objectives.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2.2 Experimental Procedure

 

 

 

 

 

(Insert additional rows as
necessary)

CHAPTER –III

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

PHASE I

3.1 Base
Metal and Welding

 

 

3.2
Microstructure Characterization

3.2.1
Weldments employing Filler A

3.2.2
Weldments employing Filler B

3.3
Mechanical Characterization

3.3.1
Weldments employing Filler A

 

3.3.2 Weldments employing Filler B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 (Specify the funding and human
resource capacity for the evaluation. Include materials, travel, external
evaluators etc.)

(Insert additional rows as necessary)

3.4 Work
to be done

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

3.5  Gantt chart

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

To be
arranged alphabetically

 

 

1.      Baek Jong-Hyun, Kim Young-Pyo, Kim Woo-Sik,
Young-Tai Kho. Fracture toughness and fatigue crack growth properties of the
base metal and weld metal of a type 304 stainless steel pipeline for LNG
transmission. Int J Press Vessels Pip 2001;78:351–7.

2.      Jha Abhay K, Diwaker V, Sreekumar K. Metallurgical
investigation on stainless steel bellows used in satellite launch vehicle. Eng
Fail Anal 2006;13:1437–47Chen TF, Chen YR, Wu W. Properties of Cu–Si enriched
type 304 stainless steel welds. Sci Technol Weld Joining 1998; 3:75–9.

3.      Muthupandi V, Srinivasan P Bala, Seshadri SK,
Sundaresan S. Effect of weld metal chemistry and heat input on the structure
and properties of duplex stainless steel welds. Mater Sci Eng, A 2003;358:9–16.

4.      Yan Jun, Gao Ming, Zeng Xiaoyan. Study on
microstructure and mechanical properties of 304 stainless steel joints by TIG,
laser and laser-TIG hybrid welding. Opt Lasers Eng 2010; 48:512–7.

 

(Insert additional rows as necessary)