Finite Element Analysis of Mini Baja Frame Ariana L. Gonzalez April 29, 2003 MECE

Problem Statement The Mini Baja Frame needs to withstand any collision that it might be subjected to as part of the testing process or competition. Four impact scenarios were analyzed to ensure the frame design will not fail.  Front Impact  Rear Impact  Side Impact  Roll Over

Material Properties The frame material is 4130 N Chromoly Steel with an outer diameter of 1.125” and wall thickness of 0.058” but was modeled as solid rods with1.125” diameter. Elastic Modulus 29 * 10^6 psi Poisson’s Ratio.25 Yield Stress 1.16 * 10^5 psi

Pro/Engineer Model

Actual Frame Design

Calculation of Front Impact Force

Forces and Constraints The force of 7111 lbf was divided by four and applied to the four front most points of the car ( lbf). The rear most points of the car was constrained to prevent movement.

Finite Element Analysis of Front Impact

Close Up

Calculation of Rear Impact Force

Forces and Constraints The force of 9026 lbf was divided by four and applied to the four rear most points of the car ( lbf). The front most points of the car was constrained to prevent movement.

Finite Element Analysis of Rear Impact

Close Up

Finite Element Analysis of Rear Impact

Calculation of Side Impact Force

Forces and Constraints The force of 9026 lbf was divided by four and applied to the right most points of the car ( lbf). The left most points of the car was constrained to prevent movement.

Finite Element Analysis of Side Impact

Close Up

Calculation of Roll Over Force

Forces and Constraints The force of 7111 lbf was divided by two and applied to the top most points of the car ( lbf). The bottom of the car was constrained to prevent movement.

Finite Element Analysis of Roll Over

Close Up

Alternative Design

FEA of Alternative

Close Up

Conclusions The solid model can only be used to determine places where there is a stress concentration. The proposed alternative reduces the stress concentration at desired location.