Gravity term in simple 2 DOF quarter car model?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of a quarter car model (QCM) for analysis in Simulink, specifically focusing on the role of gravity in the model's dynamics. Participants explore the implications of including gravitational forces on the sprung and unsprung masses and the resulting effects on model behavior, particularly concerning high-frequency vibrations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions the necessity of including the weight forces (Ms*g and Mu*g) in the model, noting that many existing models do not explicitly account for gravity.
  • Another participant suggests that the weight is compensated by the initial displacement of the spring, implying that gravity's effects may already be integrated into the model if deflections are measured from the static equilibrium position.
  • A third participant notes that while gravity can be omitted in a simple linear model, it becomes essential in a more accurate nonlinear model, where all forces must be included.
  • The original poster expresses concern about high-frequency vibrations in the model, speculating that the issue may stem from the initial conditions set in the Simulink model rather than the inclusion of gravity.
  • The original poster also mentions that the expected damping effect from the dampers is not occurring, leading to persistent large velocities and accelerations of the masses.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on whether the inclusion of gravity is necessary. There are competing views on the role of gravity in the model, and the discussion remains unresolved regarding the source of the high-frequency vibrations.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights potential limitations in the model setup, including the initial conditions of the integrator blocks and the assumptions regarding linear versus nonlinear modeling approaches. However, these aspects remain unresolved.

infini
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello all

I am trying to derive a quarter car model that i can use Simulink to analyse. The model is 2 DOF and consists of 1 sprung and 1 unsprung mass, suspension spring and damping co-effs, and tyre spring and damping co-effs. Positive is taken as upwards, compression is also taken as positive. There is also a road displacement input to allow for modelling bump response etc. at a later date, but this is set to 0 currently. Overall a fairly standard QCM setup.

My question is regarding gravity as one of the forces on the model. Most models I've seen don't seem to include an explicit weight force, they simply use m*a = ƩF where ƩF sums the forces acting on the unsprung and sprung masses due to the dampers and springs. On my model i have added a weight component for the sprung (Ms*g) and unsprung (Mu*g) masses which acts downwards.

Can anyone tell me if i am adding this weight component unecessarily? I seem to be getting very high frequency vibration in the model and can't tell if this is due to the added weight force. Or am i going about things correctly and simply using unrealistic values for the spring, damping co-effs etc.?

Thanks in advance for the help/advice
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
The weight is actually compensated by the initial displacement of the spring, so the two forces canceled each other's out throughout the masses' motions. See equation (1) and (2) on this page for more info.
 
The point that jack action is making is that the gravity force need not be included if you measure deflections from the static equilibrium position (under gravity loading). This means that the gravity effects have already been incorporated into the model.

This works just find for the simple linear model. This does not work if you want to use a more accurate, nonlinear model of the suspension system, in which case you simply need to include all forces in your model. You may wish to again re-linearize about the equilibrium point, but that is an additional step.
 
I'm beginning to wonder if the problem lies with the setup of the simulink model. Even if i don't need the gravity component it still doesn't seem to explain the extremely high frequency vibration I am seeing.

I've realized I've set my position and velocity integrator blocks' initial conditions to 0, i assume this means the masses are starting out on the ground plane. This would explain why the vibration is so severe at the start of the simulation, but i would expect the dampers to do their job and damp this oscillation out. This is not what I am seeing, the large velocities and accelerations of the masses seem to remain constant for a significant amount of time...

Not really sure if its possible to diagnose without a diagram of the model...
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
8K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
27K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
11K