IJSTE - International Journal of Science Technology & Engineering | Volume 2 | Issue 01 | July 2015

ISSN (online): 2349-784X

Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car

Front Suspension Lower Arm
Mr.Sushilkumar P.Taksande Dr. A.V.Vanalkar
M.Tech Scholar Professor
Department of Mechanical Engineering Department of Mechanical Engineering
K.D.K.C.E. Nagpur, India K.D.K.C.E. Nagpur, India

Abstract
This paper presents design, modeling and analysis of car front suspension lower arm to study the stress condition and to select
the suitable materials for the front suspension lower arm. The main objectives of this study to determine critical locations and
strain distributions of the component. The paper aims to complete Finite Element Analysis of the front suspension lower arm
which consist the stress optimization loadings and analysis for deformation.
Keywords: Lower Suspension Arm, Fatigue Failure, Vehicle, Modeling, Fea Analysis
________________________________________________________________________________________________________

I. INTRODUCTION
The vehicle suspension system is responsible for driving comfort and safety as the suspension carries the vehicle-body and
transmits all forces between body and road. Positively, in order influence these properties, semi-active or active components are
introduced, which enable the suspension system to adapt to various driving conditions. From a design point of view, there are
two main categories of disturbances on a vehicle namely the road and load disturbances. Road disturbances have the
characteristics of large magnitude in low frequency (such as hills) and small magnitude in high frequency (such as road
roughness). Load disturbances include the variation of loads induced by accelerating, braking and cornering. Therefore, a good
suspension design is concerned with disturbance rejection from these disturbances to the outputs. A conventional suspension
needs to be soft to insulate against road disturbances and hard to insulate against load disturbances. Consequently, the
suspension design is an art of compromise between these two goals. The Wishbone lower arm is a type of independent
suspension used in motor vehicles. The general function of control arms is to keep the wheels of a motor vehicle from
uncontrollably swerving when the road conditions are not smooth. The control arm suspension normally consists of upper and
lower arms. The upper and lower control arms have different structures based on the model and purpose of the vehicle. By many
accounts, the lower control arm is the better shock absorber than the upper arm because of its position and load bearing
capacities In the automotive industry, the riding comfort and handling qualities of an automobile are greatly affected by the
suspension system, in which the suspended portion of the vehicle is attached to the wheels by elastic members in order to
cushion the impact of road irregularities.
The specific nature of attaching linkages and spring elements varies widely among automobile models. The best rides are
made possibly by independent suspension systems, which permit the wheels to move independently of each other. In these
systems the unsprung weight of the vehicle is decreased, softer springs are permissible, and front-wheel vibration problems are
minimized. Spring elements are used for automobile suspension, increasing order of their ability to store elastic energy per unit
of weight.

Fig. 1: Front Lower Arm

Suspension arm is one of the main components in the suspension systems. It can be seen in various types of the suspensions
like wishbone or double wishbone suspensions. Most of the times it is called as A-type control arm. It joins the wheel hub to the
vehicle frame allowing for a full range of motion while maintaining proper suspension alignment. Uneven tyre wear, suspension
noise or misalignment, steering wheel shimmy or vibrations are the main causes of the failure of the lower suspension arm. Most

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 235

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

of the cases the failures are catastrophic in nature. So the structural integrity of the suspension arm is crucial from design point of
view both in static and dynamic conditions. As the Finite Element Method (FEM) gives better visualization of this kind of the
failures so FEM analysis of the stress distributions around typical failure initiations sites is essential. Therefore in this
dissertation work it is proposed to carry out the structural analysis of lower suspension arm of light commercial vehicle using
FEM.
The suspension arm gets more attention by many researches like study dynamic analyses of the motor vehicle suspension
system using the point-joint coordinates formulation. The mechanical system is replaced by an equivalent constrained system of
particles and then the laws of particle dynamics are used to derive the equations of motion. Modeling and simulation are
indispensable when dealing with complex engineering systems. It makes it possible to do an essential assessment before systems
are developed. It can alleviate the 9need for expensive experiments and provide support in all stages of a project from conceptual
design, through commissioning and operation. The most effective way to improve product quality and reliability is to integrate
them in the design and manufacturing process.

II. LITERATURE REVIEW

A. Hemin M. Mohyaldeen
This papers describes the analysis of lower automobile suspension arm using stochastic design improvement technique. The
suspension system is one of the most important components of vehicle, which directly affects the safety, performance, noise
level and style of it. The objectives of this study are to characterise the dynamic behavior, to investigate the influencing factors
of lower suspension arm using FEM incorporating design of experiment (DOE) and artificial neural network (ANN) approach
and to analysis the lower suspension arm using robust design method. The structural three-dimensional solid modeling of lower
arm was developed using the Solid works computer-aided drawing software. The three dimensional solid model then imported
to the MSC.PATRAN software and employed to generate meshes and defined material properties for the finite element
modeling. The linear elastic analysis was performed using NASTRAN codes. The optimization of lower suspension arm were
carried out using stochastic design improvement based on Monte Carlo approach, Response surface methodology(RSM) based
on central composite design (CCD) and artificial intelligent technique based on radial basis function neural network (RBFNN).
Tetrahedral element with 10nodes (TET10) and tetrahedral element with 4 nodes (TET4) mesh were used in the stress analysis.
The modal analysis was performed with using Lanczos method to investigate the deigen value and mode shape. The highest von
Mises stresses of TET10were selected for the robust design parameter. The development from the Stochastic
Design Improvement (SDI), RSM and ANN are obtained. The design capability to highest load with lower predicted stress is
identified through the SDI process.CCD used to predict and assess linear response Von Mises and Displacement on Lower arm
systems models. On the other hand, RBFNN used to investigate linear response of lower arm. It can be seen that the robust
design was capable to optimize the lower vehicle arm by using stochastic optimization and artificial intelligent techniques. The
developed linear model based on SDI and CCD is statistically adequate and can be used to navigate the design space. A new
parameter of material can be reconsidered in order to optimize the design. The results can significantly reduce the cost and time
to market, improve product reliability and custom confidence. These results can be use as guideline before developing the
prototype.

B. Lihui Zhao
The lower control arm was a key part of front suspension which controls the wheel trace and transmits load exerting on the wheel
by the road to other parts of the car. When the car was running on the road, the lower control arm was subjected to complex
loads alternating with time. Thus, the mechanical performances, usually relating to strength and stiffness were critical to the
safety and reliability of the car .Recently, many analysis and optimization methods and tools for structure design based on CAE
have been introduced into automobile industry. Most of them were based on static load conditions, which were derived from
multi-body dynamic analysis or experimental tests (Pan, 2007; Fu, 2009; Wang, 2009; Lu, 2011). However, accurately obtaining
the static load conditions exist two key issues: A large number of analyses on load history should be done which requires
engineers experience Constraints at different time were different due to the different motion state of the parts This made
engineers spending lots of time in analyzing and extracting the correct load and boundary conditions and finally increased the
developing cycle of automobile products. In this study, optimization of draw-bead distribution of lower control arm under
dynamic load conditions was applied by combining the traditional optimization techniques.Thus the time spent in the traditional
process of structure optimization design for determining boundaries conditions could be reduced. In this study, dynamic
optimization of lower control arm of front double wishbone suspension was performed by combining the FMBD analysis and
widely used structure optimization techniques through ESL method. After analysis of the new design after optimization, results
revealed that the strength and stiffness of lower control arm were improved significantly, while the mass was almost unchanged.
Moreover, the new design obtained from the results of dynamic optimization based on ESL method can satisfy the actual
requirements of manufacturing process. In addition, structure dynamic optimization based on ESL method can avoid the
dependency on personal experience, improve the accuracy of the optimal results, meanwhile decrease the time in product design.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 236

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

C. MohdKhairilAzirul Bin Khairolazar

This project presents the development of robust design of lower suspension arm using stochastic optimization. The strength of
the design analyze by finite element software. The structural model of the lower suspension arm was mode by using the solid
works. The finite element model and analysis were performed utilizing the finite element analysis code. The linear elastic
analysis was performed using NASTRAN codes. TET10 and TET4 mesh has been used in the stress analysis and the highest
Von Mises stress of TET10 has been selected for the robust design parameter. The development of Robust design was carried out
using the Monte Carlo approach, which all the optimization parameter for the design has been optimized in Robust design
software. The improvements from the Stochastic Design Improvement (SDI) are obtained. The design capability to endure more
pressure with lower predicted stress is identified through the SDI process. A lower density and modulus of elasticity of material
can be reconsidered in order to optimize the design.
The area of the design that can be altered for the optimization and modification is identified through the stress analysis result.
As a conclusion, the robust design by using stochastic optimization was capable to optimize the lower arm suspension. Thus, all
the result from this project can be use as guideline before developing the prototype.

III. OBJECTIVE
1) The main aim is to investigate the failure of the lower arm.
2) To describe a computer-based approach to the car front suspension design problem.
3) Study the existing component design and its function for identifying potential areas for modification
4) Evolve a Test plan for validating the F.E.A Methodology
5) Recommend the new design for implementation
6) To analysis of the suspension arm using ANSYS Software.

IV. RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

In this project, we are using CAD and Analysis softwares like Creo-Parametric 2.0 and ANSYS Version 13.0. Here we can
prepare a CAD model of lower arm in Creo-Parametric 2.0 and determine the stress value and deform value in ANSYS 13.0. To
study various stresses and deform values is acting on lower arm. CAD model of lower arm is designed in Creo-Parametric 2.0
was imported in ANSYS software for meshing and different results. Meshed model of the lower arm essentially consist of nodes
and elements. Tetra elements give enhanced result as compared to other types of elements, therefore the elements used in this
analysis is tetra elements. The material Fe410 and Fe510 was used for lower control arm. Calculated forces and boundary
conditions were applied on meshed model in ANSYS 13.0. Static and modal analysis was performed by using ANSYS 13.0.
Design parameters obtained from above Finite Element Analysis were compared for above stated materials and best one was
selected

V. ANALYTICAL CALCULATION

Fig. 2: The geometric parameter of wheel axle and arms

By the wheel of the car (if driving) torque applied and it rotates with angular velocity . Wheel of the car with the help of
independent suspension is related to the car body and has an angular stiffness , and stiffness compression springs.Some
numerical results are by definition a number of parameters that characterize the work areas 1 and 2 rod stabilizer which has the
following kinematic and geometric source parameters.
L=682.5mm, l=350mm lo=325mm, l1=320mm, lc=230mm, l=210mm, 21=26kgs/cm, 22=30kgs/cm, 21=22=204 kgs/cm

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 237

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

A. Calculate:
The angular stiffness front suspensions (1) :
p1 = 2Cp1 * L2
=26 * 68.252
p1 =121109.62 kgscm
The angular stiffness rear suspensions (2) :
p2 = 2Cp2 * L2
= 30 * 68.252
p2 =139741.87 kgscm
We also calculate the angular stiffness of the tire:
1 = 2 = 2 * L2
= 204 * 68.252
1= 2 = 950244.75 kgscm
Find given angular rigidity front suspensions (1) :
1 =
=
1=107418.96kgscm
Find given angular rigidity rear suspensions (2):
2 =
=
2=121826.24kgscm
Effective roll arm (h3) :
h3 = hg h2 *
h3 = 580 320 *
h3 = 420 mm
h3 = 42 cm

Fig. 3: Centre of gravity and parameters of car base

We define the angle of heel corresponding parameters calculated from the dependence :
=
when, -Specific lateral force applied at the center of gravity of the body and can be taken as 0.4,
Ws -Weight acting on one side of suspension = 1200 kg
=
=
=
= 0.112rad
= 641
With the effective rolling arm h3 defined, it is possible to calculate the roll moment (T roll) applied to the vehicle due to the lateral
acceleration imposed:
Troll = M * aL * h3
where, Troll= Vehicle Roll moment

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 238

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

M = Vehical mass, kg ; assume M = 1600 kg

aL = lateral acceleration, m/s
h3 = effective roll arm, m
Troll = M * aL * h3
Troll = 1600 * 22.22 * 0.42
Troll = 14931.84 Nm
Then calculate the roll gradient (Kroll) :
Kroll =
where, Kroll = Roll gradient
Kt = p1 = Vehicles total roll stiffness
Kroll =
Kroll =
Kroll = 0.12

Fig. 4: represents the turning of vehicle and its parameters

The forces per axle can be calculated as follows:

Front axle force (Ffront) :
Ffront = * M * aL
Ffront = * 1600 * 22.22
Ffront = 17776 N

B. Finite Element Analysis:

Finite Element Analysis (F.E.A) is a powerful technique used for solving complicated mathematical problem of engineering and
physics such as structural analysis, heat transfer, fluid flow, mass transport and electromagnetic potential. Modem F.E.A.
generated by computer software allows engineer to subject a computer model of structure to various loads to determine how it
will react. The environment is defined through a combination of loads and constraints and the decisions or assumptions that
about those loads and constraints are very important to the overall accuracy of the simulation. It also enables designs to be
quickly modeled, analyzed, changed, checked for feasibility and structural integrity, redesigned or discarded if they do not work.
FEA is used in problems where analytical solution not easily obtained Mathematical expressions required for solution not
simple because of complex geometries loadings material properties.

C. Basic FEA Equation:

The fundamental FEA equation is this assumption greatly simplifies problem formulation and solution.
[F] = [K] * [d]
where:
[F] is the known vector of nodal loads
[K] is the known stiffness matrix
[d] is the unknown vector of nodal displacements
This matrix equation describes the behavior of FEA models. It contains a very large number of linear algebraic equations,
varying from several thousand to several million depending on the model size. The stiffness matrix [K] depends on the geometry,
material properties, and restraints. Under the linear analysis assumption that the model stiffness never changes, those equations
are assembled and solved just once, with no need to update anything while the model is deforming. Thus linear analysis follows
a straight path from problem formulation to completion. It produces results in a matter of seconds or minutes, even for very large
models.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 239

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

D. Principal Steps Of Finite Element Analysis :

There are three steps of finite element analysis are
1) Pre-Processing
2) Solver
3) Post-Processing
a) Pre-Processing :
The user constructs a model of the part to be analyzed in which the geometry is divided into a number of discrete sub regions, or
elements," connected at discrete points called \nodes." Certain of these nodes will have fixed displacements, and others will have
prescribed loads. These models can be extremely time consuming to prepare, and commercial codes vie with one another to have
the most user-friendly graphical pre-processor" to assist in this rather tedious chore. Some of these pre-processors can overlay a
mesh on a pre existing CAD, so that finite element analysis can be done conveniently as part of the computerized drafting-and-
design process.
b) Solver:
The dataset prepared by the pre processor is used as input to the finite element code itself, which constructs and solves a system
of linear or nonlinear algebraic equations
Kijuj = fi
where u and f are the displacements and externally applied forces at the nodal points. The formation of the K matrix is
dependent on the type of problem being attacked, and this module will outline the approach for truss and linear elastic stress
analyses. Commercial codes may have very large element libraries, with elements appropriate to a wide range of problem types.
One of FEA's principal advantages is that many problem types can be addressed with the same code, merely by specifying the
appropriate element types from the library.

Fig. 5: FEA

c) Post Processing :
In the earlier days of finite element analysis, the user would pore through reams of numbers generated by the code, listing
displacements and stresses at discrete positions within the model. It is easy to miss important trends and hot spots this way, and
modern codes use graphical displays to assist in visualizing the results. A typical postprocessor display overlays colored contours
representing stress levels on the model, showing a full field picture similar to that of photo elastic or moir experimental results.
The operation of a specific code is usually detailed in the documentation accompanying the software, and vendors of the more
expensive codes will often over workshops or training sessions as well to help users learn the intricacies of code operation. One
problem users may have even after this training is that the code tends to be a black box" whose inner workings are not
understood. In this module we will outline the principles underlying most current Finite element stress analysis codes, limiting
the discussion to linear elastic analysis for now. Understanding this theory helps dissipate the black-box syndrome, and also
serves to summarize the analytical foundations of solid mechanics.

E. ANSYS Simulation:
When performing finite element analysis (FEA) a virtual model of a real world situation is set up to see how a product will react
in its environment. The environment is defined through a combination of loads and constraints and the decisions or assumptions
that about those loads and constraints are very important to the overall accuracy of the simulation. The complicating factors
related to defining loads and constraints such as :
Difficult placing of loads and constraints particularly for situation involving motion, impact, time-dependent changes or
multiphysics phenomena. Historically, engineering experience and judgment was relied upon to determine loads and constraints
and how to best apply them. However, even experienced engineers can have difficulty determining accurate values for these
critical inputs.
Artificial loads and constraints complicate results revaluation by introducing "hot spots" in the model. For example, if the user
constrains a point the nearby results will be artificially spiked.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 240

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

VI. PART DESIGN & DETAILING OF LOWER ARM (CAD MODEL)

Part Design:
Existing Lower Arm:

A. Existing Lower Arm:

Fig. 6: CAD Model Of Existing Lower Arm

B. Modified Lower Arm:

Fig. 7: CAD Model of Modified Lower Arm

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 241

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

C. Drafting and Detailing Of Lower Arm:

1) Existing Lower Arm:

Fig. 8: Drafting Of Existing Lower Arm

2) Modified Lower Arm :

Fig. 9: Drafting of Modified Lower Arm

D. Material Properties:
We use three types of material are as :
EN 24
Fe 410
Fe 590
1) EN 24:
Density = 7850 kg/mm3
Young's Modulus = 2.1 x 105 Mpa
Poisson's Ratio = 0.3
Yield Tensile Strength = 680 Mpa
Yield Compressive Strength = 680 Mpa
Ultimate Tensile Strength = 850 Mpa
Ultimate Compressive Strength = 0 Mpa
2) Fe 410:
Density = 7685 kg/mm3
Young's Modulus = 2.1 x 105 Mpa
Poisson's Ratio = 0.285
Yield Tensile Strength = 290 Mpa
Yield Compressive Strength = 290 Mpa
Ultimate Tensile Strength = 510 Mpa

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 242

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Ultimate Compressive Strength = 0 Mpa

3) Fe 590:
Density = 7850 kg/mm3
Young's Modulus = 2 x 105 Mpa
Poisson's Ratio = 0.3
Yield Tensile Strength = 490 Mpa
Yield Compressive Strength = 490 Mpa
Ultimate Tensile Strength = 590 Mpa
Ultimate Compressive Strength = 0 Mpa

E. ANSYS Simulation Analysis:

1) Static Structural Analysis:
The ANSYS structural analysis software suite is trusted by organizations around the world to rapidly solve complex structural
engineering problems with ease. In this project FEA analysis tools from ANSYS provide the ability to simulate every structural
aspect of a product.
Linear static analysis that simply provides stresses or deformations. Modal analysis that determines vibration characteristics.
Advanced transient nonlinear phenomena involving dynamic effects and complex behaviors.
2) Meshing:
ANSYS meshing technologies provide physics preferences that help to automate the meshing process. For an initial design, a
mesh can often be generated in batch with an initial solution run to locate regions of interest. Further refinement can then be
made to the mesh to improve the accuracy of the solution. There are physics preferences for structural, fluid, explicit and
electromagnetic simulations. By setting physics preferences, the software adapts to more logical defaults in the meshing process
for better solution accuracy.
Other physics-based features that help with structural analysis include:
Automated beam and shell meshing
Editable contact definitions
CAD instance modeling/meshing
Rigid-body contact meshing
Solver-based refinement
Thin solid-shell meshing
After Meshing in ANSYS Software, find outs Nodes and Elements

F. Existing Lower Arm:

Nodes: 55735
Element: 28643

Fig. 10: Meshing of Existing Lower Arm

1) Modified Lower Arm:

Nodes: 52179
Element: 26483

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 243

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Fig. 11: Meshing of Modified Lower Arm

2) Boundary Condition :
Fixed Support
Frictionless Support
Force
a) Fixed Support:

Fig. 12: Fixed Support

b) Frictionless Support :

Fig. 13: Frictionless Support

c) Force:

Fig. 14: Force

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 244

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

VII. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

A. Results of Lower Arm:

Existing Lower Arm:
Material: EN 24
Modified Lower Arm
Material: EN 24
Fe 410
Fe 590

B. Existing Lower Arm :

1) EN 24
Total Deformation
Max.= 67.779 mm

Fig. 15: Results of Total Deformation

von-Mises Stress
Max. = 6068.2 MPa

Fig. 16: Results of von-Mises Stress

Max Shear Stress

Max. = 3166.5 MPa

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 245

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Fig. 17: Results of Max Shear Stress

2) Modified Lower Arm :

a) EN 24
Total Deformation
Max.= 47.907 mm

Fig. 18: Results of Total Deformation

von-Mises Stress
Max. = 4494.4 MPa

Fig. 19: Results of von-Mises Stress

Max Shear Stress

Max. = 2356 MPa

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 246

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Fig. 20: Results of Max Shear Stress

b) Fe 410
Total Deformation
Max.= 47.892 mm

Fig. 21: Results of Total Deformation

Stress von-Mises
Max. = 4490 MPa

Fig. 22: Results of von-Mises Stress

Max Shear Stress

Max. = 2359.8 MPa

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 247

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Fig. 23: Results of Max Shear Stress

3) Fe 590
Total Deformation
Max.= 50.302 mm

Fig. 23: Results of Total Deformation

von-Mises Stress Max. = 4494.4 MPa

Fig. 24: Results of von-Mises Stress

Max Shear Stress

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 248

 Design, Modeling and Failure Analysis of Car Front Suspension Lower Arm
(IJSTE/ Volume 2 / Issue 01 / 041)

Max. = 2356 MPa

Fig. 25: Results of Max Shear Stress

VIII. RESULTS COMPARISON

Fig. 26: Results Comparison

IX. CONCLUSION
In this project it has been seen that the maximum value of force transmitted by tyre to the body of vehicle through lower
suspension arm. During braking and cornering lower suspension arm is subjected to high stresses because of that Failure of lower
suspension arm of vehicle was reported. Plastic deformation and cracks were observed frequently during on road running of
vehicle. Stress analysis was performed using finite element method. Further corrective actions that are modifications in design
will be carried on the basis of results analysis.First stage results show higher stress effects on the component. The existing part is
concerned with material properties distribution in which optimization is performed on a model to create a new suspension lower
arm for the structure, removing any unnecessary material in the arm. In this project, the stress analysis is done with the help of
ANSYS 13.0 software.The stress and deformation effect on suspension lower arm was investigated under vehicle loading. The
behavior of lower arm are very important parameters in stress distribution near loading and bush portion of the lower arm. This
application are related experiments will be the subject of further modifications.
In this project, we conclude that the stress analysis for considering lower arm deformation, von-Misses Stress and Max shear
stress and also using different lower arm materials were tested and it was observed that Fe410 material was much better than the
EN 24 material.

REFERENCES
[1] HeminM.Mohyaldeen University Malaysia Pahang
[2] Lihui Zhao College Of Mechanical Engineering, University Of Shanghai For Science And Technology, Shanghai 200093, Pr China.
[3] MohdKhairilAzirul Bin Khairolazar Faculty Of Mechanical Engineering University Malaysia Pahang
[4] Kyrre, S.A. 2006. Fatigue life prediction of an alluminium alloy automotive component using finite element analysis of surface topography. PhD Thesis
Dissertation. Norwegian University of Science and Technology Department of Structural Engineering.
[5] Kyrre, S.A., Skallerud, B., Tveiten, W.T. and Holme, B. 2005. Fatigue life prediction of machined components using finite element analysis of surface
topography, International Journal of Fatigue. 27: 1590- 1596.
[6] Nadot, Y. and Denier, V. 2003. Fatigue failure of suspension arm: experimental analysis and multiaxial criterion. International journal of Fatigue, 11 (4):
485 499.
[7] Smith, R. A., 1999, Fatigue in transport: Background, Solutions and Problems, Fatigue 99, Proceedings of the Seventh International Fatigue Congress,
edited by Wu, X. R., and Wang, Z. G., Beijing, P.R. China, pp 2583-2590.
[8] Rill, G., 2006, Vehicle Modeling by Subsystems, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 28, No. 4.
[9] Shirahatt, A., Prasad, P.S.S., Panzade, P., Kulkarni, M.M., 2008, Optimal Design of Passenger Car Suspension for Ride and Road Holding. Journal of the
Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering, Vol. 30, No. 1.
[10] Wong, J.Y., 2001, Theory of Ground Vehicles, John Wiley & Sons Inc., New York, USA.
[11] Goldberg D.E., Genetic Algorithms in Search, Optimization, and Mechanical Learning, Addison Wesley, 1989
[12] Myers R. H., Montgomery D. C., Response Surface Methodology, Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments, Wiley Series in
Probability and Statistics, 1995.

All rights reserved by www.ijste.org 249