See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/280940318

Stress analysis of standard truck chassis during Ramping on block using finite
element method

Article  in  Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences · June 2012

CITATIONS READS

11 886

3 authors, including:

Haval Kamal Asker Arkan Fawzi Saeed

The University of Sheffield University of Duhok
6 PUBLICATIONS   17 CITATIONS    7 PUBLICATIONS   14 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Internal Combustion Engines / Alcohol Blending View project

Damping from dry friction contact View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Haval Kamal Asker on 14 August 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

STRESS ANALYSIS OF STANDARD TRUCK CHASSIS DURING

RAMPING ON BLOCK USING FINITE ELEMENT METHOD

Haval Kamal Asker1, Thaker Salih Dawood1 and Arkan Fawzi Said2
1
Mechanical Engineering, University of Duhok, Faculty of Agriculture and Forestry, Iraq
2
Mechanical Engineering, University of Duhok, Faculty of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Iraq
E-Mail: [email protected]

ABSTRACT
The frame of the standard dump truck supports all types of complicated loads coming from the road and freight
being loaded. So, the intensity and the strength of the frame play a big role in the truck's design. A frame of 6 wheels,
standard dump truck has been studied and analyzed using ANSYS package software. The static intensity of the frame has
been analyzed when exposed to pure bending and torsion stress, within two cases. First case is when the rear wheels zigzag
gets over block (only one side of the chassis steps the block), and the second case is when both wheels gets over the block.
Finite element model of a stress analysis of the vehicle chassis has been built using three dimension hyper elastic elements
for the modeling. The results show important differences between the two case studies, especially in the torsion and
deformations results obtained from the chassis model. Also, vibration modes have been analyzed during the loading
conditions. The more damping ratio used, the more stabilizing of the stresses with respect to time.

Keywords: truck frame design, stress analysis, truck chassis, ramping, torsion, numerical.

INTRODUCTION The results show important differences between

Now days, the increased demands on trucks have the two case studies especially in the torsion and
been increased not only on cost and weight, but also on deformations results obtained from the chassis model.
improved complete vehicle features. This result in Also, vibration modes have been analyzed during the
increasing focus on optimization and modularization loading conditions. The effect of changing the stepping
which together with the large number of vehicle variants conditions on the resulted stresses and deformations on the
makes it necessary to use efficient analysis methods. chassis of the truck to find the best stepping condition
Finite Element-based vehicle analysis has have been investigate precisely.
become an important part of the development process for
many of vehicle features. A standard dump truck is a truck Finite element analysis of chassis
chassis with a dump body mounted to the frame. The bed For the FE Analysis, it is necessary to create a
is raised by a hydraulic ram mounted under the front of the solid model of chassis in order to create a FE model. In
dumper body between the frames, and the back of the bed present work, generally, truck is any of various heavy
is hinged at the back to the truck. The tailgate can be motor vehicle designed for carrying or pulling loads. Other
configured to swing on hinges or it can be configured in definition of the truck is an automotive vehicle suitable for
the "High Lift Tailgate" format wherein pneumatic rams hauling. Some other definition are vary depend on the type
lift the gate open and up above the dump body. of truck, such as Dump Truck is a truck whose contents
Kim H. et al. proposed the hybrid superposition can be emptied without handling; the front end of the
method that combined finite element static and Eigen platform can be pneumatically raised so that the load is
value analysis with flexible multi body dynamic analysis discharged by gravity.
[1]. Johansson et al. presented a method for complete
vehicle analysis based on FE-technique used for analysis Model of truck chassis
of complete vehicle features such as vehicle dynamics and The truck chassis model used is the Scania
durability [2]. C. Karaoglu et al. introduced an improved model. The model is depicted in Figure-1. The model has
procedure which is based on the modal stresses of FE- length of 6.350 m and width of 2.85 m. The material of
MBS hybrid structures [3]. chassis is Steel with 552 MPa of yield strength and 620
In present work a finite element model has been MPa of tensile strength [4]. The other properties of chassis
build up to a 6 wheel standard dump truck chassis in order material are listed in Table-1.
to simulate the effect of stepping a block in case of (a)
when stepping the block zigzag i.e., with one rear wheel Table-1. Properties of truck chassis material.
side (The right side). (b) When stepping the block with
both rear wheels. A dynamic stress analysis with the Modulus elasticity E (Pa) 207 * 109
necessary boundary and loading condition have been Density ρ (kg/m3) 7800
applied on the model using ANSYS software and many
evaluating points have been distributed along the chassis Poisson ratio 0.3
to evaluate the induced stresses and deformations on the Yield strength (MPa) 550
chassis during the two case studies. Tensile strength (MPa) 620

641
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

In elasto-static problem, each element forms a

stiffness matrix, [K], relating forces [F] and displacements
[u] at nodes. The size of the stiffness matrix is equal to the
number of nodes per element multiplies by the number of
freedom per nodes, as in the following

[F] = [K] [U]

In eigenvalue problem, the characteristic matrix is formed

as

{[K] - ω2 [M]} [U] = 0

2
Where M is the mass matrix, ω are eigenvalues, and u is
the eigenvectors. In structural dynamics, the values are the
natural frequencies and the vectors are mode shapes
Figure-2. Static load (pressure = 98100 N/m2).

Boundary condition
The boundary conditions applied to this model of
chassis can be classified into three general cases: the first
boundary condition case applied in the front of the chassis
by making the displacement and rotation not allowed in all
axes [6].
The second case of boundary condition is applied
when the rear wheels simultaneously get over the block,
this will cause the suspension on this axle to be displaced,
and the compression of the springs causes an upward force
on the suspension mounting points. i.e., the rear chassis
will be displaced by an amount in the Y direction as a
boundary condition. In the second case bending should be
observed on the chassis Figure-3.
The third case of boundary condition is applied
when only one of the rear wheels ramp the block while the
Loading other rear wheel remain on the ground, in this case the
The truck chassis model is loaded by static forces chassis will be displaced only from the side of ramped
from the truck body and cargo. For this model, the wheel. While the other side of the rear chassis will be
maximum loaded weight of truck plus cargo is 20.000 kg. fixed (displacement and rotation not allowed in all axes)
The load is assumed as a uniform pressure obtained from Figure-4. The third case of boundary condition is very
the maximum loaded weight divided by the total contact important because it will include the bending and torsion
area between cargo and upper surface of chassis. Detail cases which will occur in the chassis during this condition.
loading of model is shown in Figure-2. The magnitude of
pressure on the upper side of chassis is determined by [5]:

P = = = 98100 N/m2 (1) [for each

chassis side].

Where:
Figure-3. Condition when two wheels simultaneously get
p = pressure (N/m2), F = force (kg. m/ s2), A = total over blocks.
contact area (m2),

Figure-4. Condition when wheel zigzag gets over block.

642
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

The meshed truck chassis model has 6871 ramp is occur near node (1) [max. bending stress for both
elements and 7116 nodes. The element type is Hyper wheels get over the ramp = 1760 Mpa], while in the case
elastic 3Dimension, 8 node Figure-5. of one rear wheel get over the ramp the maximum bending
stress occur near node (16) [max. bending stress for one
wheel get over the ramp = 895 Mpa].
Figure-8 shows the displacements in the X -
direction for the two case studies. A similar behavior can
be obtained for the Ux displacement in the both two cases
[one rear wheel and both rear wheels gets over the ramp]
and the maximum displacement occur near node (9) [Ux
max. = -9.5 mm], here the minus sign indicates to the
direction of the displacement.
The displacements in Y - direction for both two
case studies are presented in Figure-9. Also the same
behavior is obtained for both two cases and the maximum
Uy occur near node (16), [max. Uy for one rear wheel get
over the ramp = 176.4 mm and Uy for both rear wheels get
over the ramp = 192.3 mm].
In Figure-10, it can be concluded that there is a
difference in the displacements in the Z - direction
Figure-5. Discretized model of chassis. between the two case studies. It seems that the Uz
displacements are approximately stable in the case of both
Dynamic analysis rear wheels gets over the ramp. While the Uz
The most direct way of theoretically assessing displacements show a different behavior and the maximum
the integrity of structures for dynamic loading, is by Uz displacement occur near node (16) [Uz max. = 38.5
dynamic finite element analysis. The objective is to solve mm].
for the stresses as time functions, when the model is The rotational displacement about X - axis has
subjected to time series of loads. been cleared in Figure-11 for the both two cases of study,
Additional to the difficulty in defining such and it indicate to higher rotational displacement in X -
loads, there are several restrictions with regard to the use direction for the case of one rear wheel get over the ramp
of dynamic finite element analyses. than the other case of study. While the behavior of the
A further differentiation may be made in terms rotational displacement is approximately is the same for
of the solving method. One group of methods uses the the both two cases of study. The maximum Rx occur
direct integration method (called ‘dynamic transient between node (14) and node (15) [Rx max. for both rear
analysis’ by Bishop), solving for the displacements after wheels over the ramp = 0.12 and Rx max. for one rear
each small time increment by direct integration. A wheel on the ramp = 0.827].
complete analysis is therefore performed at each time Figure-12 shows the difference in the rotational
step, except for the compilation of the mass, damping and displacements about the Y - axis for the two case studies.
stiffness matrices. Higher rotational displacement is obtained when of both
rear wheels gets over the ramp. The maximum Ry is occur
RESULTS AND DISCUSSIONS near node (1) for the case of both rear wheels over the
It is worth mentioning that the indicated numbers ramp, while the maximum Ry is occur near node (9) for
(1, 2, 3, 4…16) from Figures 6 to 13 are denote to the the case of one rear wheel get over the ramp [Ry max. for
nodes (3372, 3375, 3378…3447) in Figure-1. both wheels on the ramp = 0.02 and Ry max. for one
Figure-6 shows a comparison between the torsion wheel on the ramp = -0.1149].
stresses among the two case studies (one rear wheel get on The results of the rotational displacement about
a ramp and both rear wheels gets over the ramp). This the Z - axis were expressed in Figure-13. The behavior of
Figure clearly shows that the torsion stress in the case of the rotational displacement in Z - direction of the both two
one rear wheel get over the ramp is greater than the torsion case studies is similar. The maximum Rz is occur between
stress of the case when both rear wheels gets over the node (8) and node (9) [Rz max. for both wheels on the
ramp. ramp = 0.59 and Rz max. for one wheel on the ramp =
Also, it can be seen that the maximum torsion 0.554].
stress of the two case studies occur near node (12) [max. The results of the dynamic simulation are
torsion stress for one wheel get over the ramp = 485 Mpa expressed from Figure-14 to Figure-21. Figure-14 and
and max. torsion stress for both wheel get over the ramp = Figure-15 shows the dynamic behavior for the torsion
51 Mpa]. stress in the case of both rear wheels gets on the ramp
The comparison between the bending stresses is using damping ratio equal to 0.05 and 0.08 respectively.
shown in Figure-7. It has been found that the maximum While Figure-16 and Figure-17 shows the torsion stress
bending stress in the case of both rear wheels gets over the for the case of one wheel get over the ramp using two

643
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

damping ratios (0.05 and 0.08). Also Figure-18 and

Figure-19 indicates the bending stresses for the case of
both rear wheels gets over the ramp for the two damping
ratios (0.05 and 0.08). Figure-20 and Figure-21 represents
the bending stress for the case of one rear wheel get over
the ramp using damping ratio = 0.05 and 0.08 respectively.
These Figures indicate clearly the more damping ratio
used, the more stabilizing the stresses with respect to time.
The time of the dynamic simulation was 5 seconds and the
substep was equal to 10 sub steps, each substep = 0.5
second.
Figures 22 to 31 show the model under different
deformations and stresses mode.
In Figure-32 the behavior of the torsion stress in
reference can be compared with the behavior of the torsion Figure-7. Bending stresses for the two cases (right rear
stress of the present work Figure-6. The behavior shows a side and both rear sides on the block).
good compatibility with the behavior of reference [7].

CONCLUSIONS
The model analysis for vehicle that considers the
elastic characteristic of frame was applied to the rear
frame of articulated dump truck, and the result express the
behavior of the dump truck chassis during ramping block
in the two case studies (both wheels ramp the block and
zigzag wheels ramp the block). As a result, it was
confirmed that this analysis can be used to predict the
bending and torsion stresses of frames when a vehicle
ramp a block.
Numerical simulation result shows that the
critical point of stress occurred when the truck zigzag
ramp the block. The big effect was given to the case of
zigzag wheels of the dump truck ramp the block because Figure-8. Displacement in X direction for the two cases
there was great difference in the torsion stress values in (both rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block).
both two case studies.

Figure-6. Torsion stresses for the two cases (right rear Figure-9. Displacement in Y direction for the two cases
side and both rear sides on the block). (both rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block).

644
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Figure-13. Rotation in Z direction for the two cases (both

Figure-10. Displacement in Z direction for the two cases rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block).
(both rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block).

Figure-11. Rotation in X direction for the two cases (both

rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block). Figure-14. Dynamic torsion stress for both wheels when
damping coefficient = 0.05.

Figure-12. Rotation in Y direction for the two cases (both

rear wheels and one rear wheel getting on the block).
Figure-15. Dynamic torsion stress for both wheels when
damping coefficient = 0.08.

645
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Figure-16. Dynamic torsion stress for one wheel when Figure-19. Dynamic bending stress for both wheels when
damping coefficient = 0.05. damping coefficient = 0.08.

Figure-17. Dynamic torsion stress for one wheel when Figure-20. Dynamic bending stress for one wheel when
damping coefficient = 0.08. damping coefficient = 0.05.

Figure-18. Dynamic bending stress for both wheels when Figure-21. Dynamic bending stress for one wheel when
damping coefficient = 0.05. damping coefficient = 0.08.

646
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Figure-22. Bending in case of one rear side on the block. Figure-25. Torsion in case of both rear sides on the block.

Figure-23. Bending in case of both rear sides on Figure-26. Deformation in x direction in case on one
the block. rear side on the block.

Figure-24. Torsion in case of one rear side on the block. Figure-27. Deformation in x direction in case on both
rear sides on the block.

647
 VOL. 7, NO. 6, JUNE 2012 ISSN 1819-6608
ARPN Journal of Engineering and Applied Sciences
©2006-2012 Asian Research Publishing Network (ARPN). All rights reserved.

www.arpnjournals.com

Figure-31. Deformation in z direction in case on both

rear sides on the block.
Figure-28. Deformation in y direction in case on one
rear side on the block.

REFERENCES

[1] H. S. Kim et al. 2010. Dynamic Stress Analysis of a

Bus Systems, Commercial Vehicle Engineering and
Research Center, Hyundai Motor Company.

[2] Johanssan and S Eslund. 1993. Optimization of

Vehicle Dynamics in Truck by use of Full Vehicle FE
Models. I. Mech. E. - C466/016/93. pp. 181-193.

[3] C. Karaoglu and N. S. Kuralay. 2000. Stress Analysis

Figure-29. Deformation in y direction in case on both of a Truck Chassis with Riveted Joints. Elsevier
rear sides on the block. Science Publishers B. V. Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
38: 1115-1130.

[4] R. C. Juvinall and K. M. Marshek. 2006. Fundamental

Machine Component Design. John Willey and Son,
Inc., USA.

[5] N.K. Ingole, D.V. Bhope. 2011. Stress Analysis of

Tractor Trailer Chassis for Self Weight Reduction.
International Journal of Engineering Science and
Technology (IJEST).

[6] Sujatha C and V Ramamurti. 1990. Bus Vibration

Study-Experimental Response to Road Undulation.
Int. J. Vehicle Design. 11(4/5): 390-400.

[7] A. Dubey, V. Dwivedi. 2003. Vehicle Chassis

Analysis: Load Cases and Boundary Conditions for
Figure-30. Deformation in z direction in case on one Stress Analysis. 11th National Conference on
rear side on the block. Machines and Mechanisms held at the Indian Institute
of Technology Delhi, New Delhi on December 18-19,
2003. (NaCoMM 2003),
http://www.nacomm03.ammindia.org/Articles/Nav00
9.pdf.

648
View publication stats