Is my ODE solution correct for car suspension system?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the formulation and solution of ordinary differential equations (ODEs) for a car suspension system. Participants explore the implications of their equations, the application of Laplace transforms, and the resulting impulse response, with a focus on the correctness of their approaches and assumptions.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses concern that their impulse response differs significantly from an expected result, suggesting a potential error in their ODE formulation.
  • Another participant questions the placement of the force term f(t) in the equations, suggesting it should affect the motion of the sprung mass rather than the unsprung mass.
  • A participant acknowledges the complexity of the mechanics involved and admits to potential flaws in their understanding.
  • There is a discussion about whether f(t) represents a reaction force or a displacement, with differing views on its correct representation in the equations.
  • Revised equations are proposed, with one participant asserting that the new formulations seem correct except for a sign error in the damper force in one of the equations.
  • Concerns are raised about the stability of the system based on the derived transfer function, with one participant reporting an exponentially increasing impulse response despite attempts to adjust parameters.
  • Clarification is sought regarding the correct units for spring constants, with a participant noting the conversion from N/mm to N/m.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of the ODEs, particularly regarding the role of f(t) and the stability of the system. No consensus is reached on the correctness of the initial or revised equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of mechanics, and there are unresolved questions regarding the assumptions made in the formulation of the ODEs and the implications for system stability.

exidez
Messages
41
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


http://img27.imageshack.us/img27/2193/matlapassig2fig.jpg
http://img132.imageshack.us/img132/7126/matlapassig2.jpg

Homework Equations


My impulse response is entirely different which make me believe that i have messed up my ODE. I have taken the laplace tranform to get it into the from of y to f

The Attempt at a Solution


[tex]m_{s}\frac{d^{2}y}{dt^{2}}-c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) + k(y - y1)=0[/tex]
[tex]m_{u}\frac{d^{2}y1}{dt^{2}}+c(\frac{dy1}{dt} - \frac{dy}{dt}) + k(y1 - y) +k_{t}(y1-f(t))=0[/tex]

Laplace Transform:

[tex]Y(S)(m_{s}s^{2}-sc+k)+Y1(S)(sc-k)=0[/tex]
[tex]Y1(S)(m_{u}s^{2}+sc+k+k_{t})+Y(S)(-sc-k)-F(S)k_{t}=0[/tex]

Rearranging First Eqn:

[tex]Y(S)\frac{m_{s}s^{2}-sc+k}{sc-k}=-Y1(S)[/tex]

Substitution:

[tex]-Y(S)\frac{m_{s}s^{2}-sc+k}{sc-k}(m_{u}s^{2}+sc+k+k_{t})+Y(S)(-sc-k)=F(S)k_{t}[/tex]
[tex]-Y(S)(s^{4}(m_{u}m_{s})+s^{3}cm_{s}+s^{2}m_{s}k+s^{2}m_{s}k_{t}-s^{3}cm_{u}-s^{2}c^{2}-sck-sck_{t}+s^{2}m_{u}k+csk+k^{2}+kk_{t}+Y(S)(-c^{2}s^{2}+k^{2}=F(S)(sck_{t}-kk_{t}[/tex]

[tex]Y(S)(-s^{4}(m_{u}m_{s})-s^{3}(cm_{s}-cm_{u})-s^{2}(m_{s}k+m_{s}k_{t}+m_{u}k+s(ck_{t})-kk_{t})=F(S)(sck_{t}-kk_{t})[/tex]

So to get the transform from y to f we want this right?
[tex]\frac{sck_{t}-kk_{t}}{-s^{4}(m_{u}m_{s})-s^{3}(cm_{s}-cm_{u})-s^{2}(m_{s}k+m_{s}k_{t}+m_{u}k+s(ck_{t})-kk_{t}}[/tex]

When substituting the values in from the question my impulse response done through MATLAB doesn't look anything like the one given in the question...Have i done something wrong?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
[tex]m_{s}\frac{d^{2}y}{dt^{2}}-c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) + k(y - y1)=0[/tex]
[tex]m_{u}\frac{d^{2}y1}{dt^{2}}+c(\frac{dy1}{dt} - \frac{dy}{dt}) + k(y1 - y) +k_{t}(y1-f(t))=0[/tex]

Hey, at first look, I found these equations to be fishy: is the f(t) a force being applied on the sprung mass m_s? If so, then shouldn't the expression f(t) appear in the equation of motion of m_s as opposed to m_u as you have formulated?
 
tanujkush said:
Hey, at first look, I found these equations to be fishy: is the f(t) a force being applied on the sprung mass m_s? If so, then shouldn't the expression f(t) appear in the equation of motion of m_s as opposed to m_u as you have formulated?

I did think of that, but being a car suspension system, it will be traveling on a road which will have the forces acting on m_u. So i put f(t) as the reaction force due to the road...

much like this
mechanics_small.jpg


Mind you, i am not strong in mechanics, so there could be other flaws in it too
 
exidez said:
I did think of that, but being a car suspension system, it will be traveling on a road which will have the forces acting on m_u. So i put f(t) as the reaction force due to the road...

much like this
mechanics_small.jpg


Mind you, i am not strong in mechanics, so there could be other flaws in it too

Even so, the way you have used f(t) in the expressions, it appears to be the road displacement rather than a road reaction force. If that is the case then your formulation seems correct. If however, f(t) is a force on the sprung mass (like you showed in your first illustration), then f(t) should just appear as a force in the first equation.
 
tanujkush said:
Even so, the way you have used f(t) in the expressions, it appears to be the road displacement rather than a road reaction force. If that is the case then your formulation seems correct. If however, f(t) is a force on the sprung mass (like you showed in your first illustration), then f(t) should just appear as a force in the first equation.
So, with that being said

[tex]m_{s}\frac{d^{2}y}{dt^{2}}-c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) + k(y - y1)=f(t)[/tex]
[tex]m_{u}\frac{d^{2}y1}{dt^{2}}+c(\frac{dy1}{dt} - \frac{dy}{dt}) + k(y1 - y) +k_{t}(y1)=0[/tex]

I will see how this spans out in the impulse response latter but just as a check, do those new ODE's seem correct?
 
exidez said:
So, with that being said

[tex]m_{s}\frac{d^{2}y}{dt^{2}}-c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) + k(y - y1)=f(t)[/tex]
[tex]m_{u}\frac{d^{2}y1}{dt^{2}}+c(\frac{dy1}{dt} - \frac{dy}{dt}) + k(y1 - y) +k_{t}(y1)=0[/tex]

I will see how this spans out in the impulse response latter but just as a check, do those new ODE's seem correct?

Ok so assuming downward direction as positive and also assuming that the spring damper push the sprung mass upwards(i.e. the spring gets compressed), here are the ODEs:
[tex]F = ma[/tex]
[tex]f(t)-k(y - y1)-c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) = m_{s}\frac{d^{2}y}{dt^{2}}[/tex]
and
[tex]c(\frac{dy}{dt} - \frac{dy1}{dt}) + k(y - y1) -k_{t}(y1)=m_{u}\frac{d^{2}y1}{dt^{2}}[/tex]

So your equations are correct except for the sign on the damper force in the first equation.
 
doing what i did before i gte the transfer function to be

[tex] \frac{s^{2}m_{u}+sc+k+k_{t}}{s^{4}(m_{u}m_{s})+s^{3}(cm_{s}+cm_{u})+s^{2}(m_{s}k+m_{s}k_{t})+s(ck_{t})+kk_{t}}[/tex]

plugging in the values i get an unstable system and the impulse response is exponentially increasing

for k = 30 N/mm (and also kt) i put in the value of 30*10^-3 right ?
I have tried it both with 30 and 30*10^-3 and it is still the same response...

and i thought this was going to be a simple question...
 
exidez said:
doing what i did before i gte the transfer function to be

[tex] \frac{s^{2}m_{u}+sc+k+k_{t}}{s^{4}(m_{u}m_{s})+s^{3}(cm_{s}+cm_{u})+s^{2}(m_{s}k+m_{s}k_{t})+s(ck_{t})+kk_{t}}[/tex]

plugging in the values i get an unstable system and the impulse response is exponentially increasing

for k = 30 N/mm (and also kt) i put in the value of 30*10^-3 right ?
I have tried it both with 30 and 30*10^-3 and it is still the same response...

and i thought this was going to be a simple question...

k (and kt) are in N/mm so their values in SI units would be 30N/mm or 30x10^3 N/m
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K