How Can You Model Car Oscillations Over a Speed Bump Using Excel?

  • Thread starter Thread starter _Bd_
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Excel Modeling
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around modeling the oscillation of a car as it goes over a speed bump using Excel. Participants explore the mathematical modeling of the system, including the forces acting on the car and the resulting motion, while addressing issues related to the implementation of these models in Excel.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • The initial setup includes parameters such as car speed, mass, and the dimensions of the speed bump, with a proposed equation for the vertical displacement of the wheel.
  • Some participants question the behavior of the damping forces, suggesting that the damping may be incorrectly applied, particularly in the upward direction.
  • There is a mention of the expected graph behavior, with one participant noting that the output does not converge as anticipated and instead continues to decrease.
  • Another participant points out a potential error in the implementation of the acceleration equation, suggesting a re-evaluation of the force equations used.
  • Concerns are raised about the distinction between spring constants for upward and downward forces, with a suggestion that a single spring constant should suffice.
  • Participants discuss the importance of the time step (dt) in the finite-difference equations and suggest experimenting with different values to improve the model's behavior.
  • There is a reference to the potential use of more advanced numerical methods, such as higher-order Runge-Kutta, in existing simulations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the implementation of damping forces and the equations used in the model. There is no consensus on the correct approach to modeling the oscillations, and several competing views are presented regarding the equations and their application.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the implementation of the Laplace transforms and the finite-difference equations may introduce complexities that affect the model's output. The discussion highlights the challenges of accurately simulating physical systems in Excel.

_Bd_
Messages
107
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



You have a car going over a speed bump, you need to model the oscillation of the car using excel only (no MATLAB or other software)


Simple Schematics:

|Mass of car|
| |
Spring Damper
| |
\ /
| Wheel | _____________/ Speed bump \________________


Car speed: 88 inches/s
Car mass: 700 lb (need to divide over G=386 in/s^2
Bump Max height (Hb) = 5
Bump length (Lb) =36
Bump Equation (y_wheel)= (Hb/2)*(1-COS(2*PI*X/Lb))
This is the vertical displacement of the wheel as it goes over the bump, the derivative (velocity) is then:
y'_wheel= (Hb/2)*(2PI*V'/Lb)SIN(2*PI*X/Lb)
damping frequency (w_d) = We can assume and play with this
damping ratio (zeta) = We can assume and play with this, values between 0 and .9


Homework Equations



Using force analysis ( on each element) and some solving here and there

Using Laplace transforms and my notes I came up with some equations, I won't list those processes since I verified with the professor that they are correct, but here are the results:


Assuming a zeta of .5 and a frequency of .825 Hz
(natural frequency) w_n=w_d/(1-zeta^2)^.5
(damping frequency) w_d= 5.184 radians
(spring constant) Ks= w_n^2*m
(ave. damping constant) Kd= 2*zeta*(K_s*m)^.5
NOTE: Kd will be divided into K_up and K_down which average to K_d and generally Kup < Kdown


The Attempt at a Solution


I've made my excel table, my problem is that I keep getting a weird wave:

Fs = force of spring
Fd= force of damper
y_w = vertical displacement of wheel
y_c = vertical displacement of car (y' is velocity and y'' is acceleration)

Time | Displacement | Y_wheel | Fs | Fd | K(up or down?) |Y''_c | Y'_c | Y_c

Fs=Ks(y_w - y_c)
Fd=Kd(y'_w - y'_c)
Y''_c= Fs+Fd/m
Y'_ci= Y'_c(i-1)+Y''*dt
Y_ci= Y_c(i-1)+Y'*dt
http://imageshack.us/a/img850/4871/tablegf.png


I get a really funky graph that initially looks good but then doesn't seem to "converge" towards the center like all the graphs in the internet.
I've searched all over and many webpages provide excel codes to do this, (so you can just input your variables and let it solve it by itself) but I want to code it myself (learn how to)

http://imageshack.us/a/img838/6452/graphlj.png

If I extend more time it keeps going down and down and down

and it should look similar to this
http://ese.wustl.edu/ContentFiles/Research/UndergraduateResearch/CompletedProjects/WebPages/2006/as12/identify%20single_files/image017.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Imperial units :/

What happens if you set the damping to 0?
I think the signs of the damping are wrong in some way - it is dampening in the upwards direction, but increasing the energy in the downwards direction.
 
_Bd_ said:
http://imageshack.us/a/img838/6452/graphlj.png

If I extend more time it keeps going down and down and down

and it should look similar to this
http://ese.wustl.edu/ContentFiles/Research/UndergraduateResearch/CompletedProjects/WebPages/2006/as12/identify%20single_files/image017.gif
One appears to have an equation of a form: ( b - ax ) sin (ωx) rather than a damped sine wave.

The cited image shows the behavior obtained from the convolution of a step function and function formed by the sum of a constant and damped sine wave.

I think though one wants a damped sine wave where the amplitude corresponds to the displacement from its equilibrium.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I assume that when you wrote Y''_c= Fs+Fd/m you actually implemented
Y''_c= (Fs+Fd)/m.

The equations look right. Of course I can't comment on how you implemented y_w(t) in Laplace.

I don't understand the distinction between ks_up and ks_down. Seems to me the force on the car is always ks(y_w - y_c) where ks is the one and only spring constant. That assumes y = y_c - y_w = 0 before hitting the bump. The fact that the spring is compressed at that point does not change the equation.

Finally, if all else looks right, have you tried different values for dt? Like 10dt or dt/10? Finite-difference equations are strange critters!

You also know I'm sure that there are many levels of transforming a differential equation into a finite-difference one. Some of those turnkey simulations you mention may well have used a higher-order Runge-Kutta or other equation.
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
15
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
9K
Replies
1
Views
11K