Why is there a 3° variation in angles when calculating the Ackerman percentage?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Reddy
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Angle
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the calculation of Ackerman angles for steering geometry, specifically addressing a 3° deviation from true Ackerman geometry. The user calculated inner and outer wheel lock angles, finding discrepancies that led to questions about tie rod length adjustments. It was established that reducing tie rod lengths is not a viable solution for achieving true Ackerman geometry, as the geometry is primarily influenced by the placement of the steering knuckle arm. A 3° variation resulting in 71% Ackerman performance is considered acceptable in this context.

PREREQUISITES
  • Ackerman steering geometry principles
  • Understanding of wheel lock angles
  • Knowledge of tie rod adjustments
  • Basic geometry related to vehicle dynamics
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the impact of steering knuckle arm placement on Ackerman geometry
  • Learn about advanced steering geometry calculations
  • Explore methods to optimize tie rod lengths without compromising geometry
  • Investigate the effects of wheel alignment on steering performance
USEFUL FOR

Automotive engineers, vehicle dynamics specialists, and anyone involved in steering system design and optimization will benefit from this discussion.

Reddy
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Hiii...
I have caluclated my inner wheel lock angle(38.25°) and outter wheel lock angle(26.16) from formulae ...and I tried to caluclate for X degree rotation of my inner wheel how much my outter wheel rotates...ex:- at 20° rotation of inner wheel...17.7° of outter wheel ...nd at 38.25 I got outter wheel angle as 29.35° ...but actually that should be 26.16°, ryt?
Why this happens ??
And i reduced my tie rods length by 0.1inch on each in my calculations...I got the required outter wheel angle 26.16°..
But I can't reduce my tie rods lengths according to geometry...
If reducing tie rods length is d solution, thn how to satisfy geometry too??
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Reddy said:
If reducing tie rods length is d solution, thn how to satisfy geometry too??
Because, reducing tie rod lengths is not the solution. Ackerman geometry is mainly a function of the steering knuckle arm placement, i.e., tie rod end joint placement relative to the steering axis of rotation for the wheel. Since these axes are not vertical, the geometry gets complicated. If you're getting only 3o deviation from true Ackerman geometry at full lock, you're doing well.
 
Tq ..
3° varaiation in angles giving me 71% Ackerman .i.e..,less than true Ackerman..I didn't fix it for less than true Ackerman ...it came automatically... I don't know what makes in design
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
4K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K