Dynamic simulation of a full vehicle system featuring magnetorheological dampers with bypass holes
Source abstract
Abstract
This study suggests a relationship between two different types of magnetorheological dampers and the driving performance of the passenger vehicles such as ride quality and stability. One of the magnetorheological dampers has the two different bypass holes in the piston bobbin to achieve a relatively low damping force slope in the low piston velocity region. Without bypass holes, two cylindrical-type magnetorheological dampers have same dimensions (pole lengths, piston radius, and coil size). To enhance the ride quality of the passenger vehicle, the damping force slope of the magnetorheological damper with bypass holes is more gradual than that of the magnetorheological damper without bypass holes. On the basis of the damping force model, three vehicle types with two working modes (soft and hard) are formulated. Driving performance indexes, such as vertical acceleration of the sprung mass and tire deflection, are evaluated in frequency domains under two random road conditions. A comparative study is conducted to prove the effectiveness of the magnetorheological damper with bypass holes through simulation.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Vibration Control and Rheological Fluids · Vehicle Dynamics and Control Systems · Effects of Vibration on Health
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Division of Mechanical & Automotive Engineering, Kongju National University, Cheonan-Si, Korea
Faculty of Mechanical and Automotive Engineering, Keimyung University, Daegu, South Korea
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Smart Structures and Systems Laboratory, Inha University, Incheon, Korea
Funding
national research foundation of korea · ministry of science, ict and future planning
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1109/CJECE.2016.260980310.1109/CJECE.2016.2609803 ↗
2. 10.1106/MR3W-5D8W-0LPL-WGUQ10.1106/MR3W-5D8W-0LPL-WGUQ ↗
3. 10.1115/1.180500110.1115/1.1805001 ↗
4. 10.1109/TMAG.2013.224140210.1109/TMAG.2013.2241402 ↗
5. 10.2514/1.3296910.2514/1.32969 ↗
6. 10.1109/TVT.2011.210681110.1109/TVT.2011.2106811 ↗
7. 10.1504/IJVD.2003.00318410.1504/IJVD.2003.003184 ↗
8. 10.1201/b1305010.1201/b13050 ↗
9. 10.1504/IJVD.2008.01707110.1504/IJVD.2008.017071 ↗
10. 10.1088/0964-1726/18/12/12501010.1088/0964-1726/18/12/125010 ↗
11. Dyke SJ · 1996 · 886
12. 10.1016/j.jterra.2007.05.00110.1016/j.jterra.2007.05.001 ↗
13. 10.1142/9789812771209_006210.1142/9789812771209_0062 ↗
14. International Organization for Standardization (1997) Mechanical vibration and shock—evaluation of human exposure to whole-body vibration. ISO 2631-1:1997.
15. 10.7736/KSPE.2012.29.1.05610.7736/KSPE.2012.29.1.056 ↗
16. 10.1080/0042311080193920410.1080/00423110801939204 ↗
17. 10.1088/0964-1726/11/2/31210.1088/0964-1726/11/2/312 ↗
18. 10.4271/2006-01-122510.4271/2006-01-1225 ↗
19. 10.1080/0042311090340188910.1080/00423110903401889 ↗
20. Mechanical Simulation Corporation (2006). Available at: https://www.carsim.com/products/carsim/index.php (acce-ssed 16 June 2019).
21. 10.1088/0964-1726/18/1/01501310.1088/0964-1726/18/1/015013 ↗
22. 10.1088/0964-1726/18/3/03501210.1088/0964-1726/18/3/035012 ↗
23. 10.3389/fmats.2019.0000810.3389/fmats.2019.00008 ↗
24. 10.1088/1361-665X/26/1/01500910.1088/1361-665X/26/1/015009 ↗
25. 10.1088/0964-1726/24/3/03501310.1088/0964-1726/24/3/035013 ↗
26. 10.1166/asl.2012.398210.1166/asl.2012.3982 ↗
27. 10.1007/s11012-012-9588-410.1007/s11012-012-9588-4 ↗
28. 10.1109/41.8759010.1109/41.87590 ↗
29. White FM · 1994
30. 10.1016/S0957-4158(01)00032-010.1016/S0957-4158(01)00032-0 ↗