Upright Team
Lloyd Outten
Joseph Perry
Josh Carroll
Taylor Watkins
Frame Analysis Team
Josh Carroll
Lloyd Outten
Intake & Exhaust Team
James Hogge
Rebekah McNally
Alisa Phillips
Henos Woldegiorgis
1



Design Competition for Collegiate students
Represent ODU’s Engineering Department
8 part competition (8 Events)
2
3
[Car 106 Front Upright]
[Car 106 Rear Upright]
4

Good Design, but hard to machine.
The integrated components would add
excess machining time and cost
• Retains the strength
• Separated
and low weight of
steering and
brake brackets. original design
while lowering
machining cost.
5
Brake Bracket
Upper A-Arm
Connection
Brake Caliper
Connection
Upper A-Arm
Bracket
Spec Sheet
Material: 6061 Aluminum
Total Assembly Weight.
Total Assembly Volume:
Weight by Part
Main Upright
Brake Bracket
Upper A-Arm Bracket
Spindle
Steering Bracket
2.45 lb.
25.80 in3
Main Upright
1.42 lb.
0.44 lb.
0.12 lb.
0.33 lb.
0.11 lb.
Steering Bracket
Spindle
Lower A-Arm Connection
6
Normal
Loading
Represents Weight of Car at
maximum Turning
Maximum Von Mises Stress:
46,152,184 N/m^2
Factor of Safety: 5.96
Braking Force
Represents Maximum
Braking Force
Maximum Von Mises
Stress: 46,929,128
N/m^2
Factor of Safety: 5.86
Steering Force
Represents Maximum
Steering Force
Maximum Von Mises
Stress: 117,611,216
N/m^2
Factor of Safety: 2.34
7
Original Design
• One solid piece
• Heavy (2.51 lbs)
• Requires
optimization
Midterm Final Design
•
•
•
•
One solid piece
Very light (1.64 lbs)
Difficult to machine
Sharp edges result in
multiple stress
concentrations
Final Design
• Three pieces
1. Upright
2. Two control arm
mounts
• Lighter than original (2.16
lbs)
• Fewer corners mean fewer
stress concentrations
• Easier to machine
Upright
Upright Specs
Total Weight: 2.16 lbs
Material: Al 6061-T6
Yield Strength: 31,183
psi (215 Mpa)
Weight by Part:
Upright: 2.02 lbs
Mounts: 0.07 lbs e.
Control Arm
Mounts
Load Transfer
Cornering
Full Simulation
Maximum load
transfer onto the
upright due to
acceleration.
Lateral force on
upright due to
turning.
Simulation of both the
load transfer and
lateral force applied to
upright due to turning
Max von Mises Stress:
14.3 Mpa (2059.5 psi)
Factor of Safety: 19.29
Max von Mises Stress:
56.1 Mpa (8136.6 psi)
Factor of Safety: 4.9
Max von Mises Stress:
57 Mpa (8267.2 psi)
Factor of Safety: 4.82

Current Accomplishments:
 Researched different intake styles
and chose the most efficient style
 Created and revised design in
SolidWorks
 Completed flow analysis
 Ordered materials for intake
11
 Intake




Research
 Exhaust
Research determined that a
spherical collector upright
intake was the most
efficient design
(1). The taper of the cone
collector should be
between 3-7 degrees
(2). Optimal runner length
of 250-325mm
(3). 20 mm FSAE mandated
restrictor


(2)
Research
Typical stock exhaust uses
small diameter crush bent
pipe or mandrel bent pipe.
◦ Crush bents are easier
and cheaper to make
however reduce the flow
by 50%.
◦ To produce the most
power exhaust should
have minimal restriction
on the exact flow.
Components: 4 headers and
silencer canister (muffler)
(3)
(1)
12
13

Analysis
o Bernoulli’s equation provides accurate pressure drop
calculations
o Air Flow velocites obtained by SolidWorks to check for
choked flow
o Flow rates can be calculated to compare the theoretical
volumetric efficiency
o Real world Flow Bench testing in the future to
determine actual volumetric efficiency
𝑷𝟏 𝒗𝟐𝟏 − 𝒗𝟐𝟐
𝑷𝟐 = 𝝆𝟐 ×
+
𝝆𝟏
𝟐
Choked Flow
𝒄=
𝜸𝑹∗ 𝑻
𝑅𝑎𝑖𝑟
𝑅∗ =
𝑀𝑎𝑖𝑟
𝜸=1.4 (for air)
14

Analysis
◦ FloXpress provides flow
through one intake runner
at a time
◦ Testing in SolidWorks using
the pressure drop
calculations
◦ Goal is to verify when
restriction chokes engine
air flow.
◦ Choked flow only after
11000 RPM
-Airflow through the
intake at 9500 RPM
-RPM at which max
power was previously
recorded
-Airflow through the
intake at 11000 RPM,
when choke flow begins
15
Total Estimated Cost 
$217.04
16
-Runners made of
pieced together prebent mandrel tube
-Flanges laser cut by
Bauer Compressor of
Norfolk
-Collector
rolled from flat
aluminum
sheet
-Restriction turned
from solid aluminum
round
17

Accomplishments
◦ Finite Element Analysis
 Patran and Nastran
◦ 5 loading cases
◦ CBAR (1D) Mat. Prop.
 4031 Annealed Steel
 Various Diameters
18
19
Factor of Safety: 4.17
20
21
Factor of Safety: 4.0
22
23
Factor of Safety: 17.6
24
**Forces from Statically
Loaded case also included
in this analysis**
25
Factor of Safety: .015
26
**Forces from Statically
Loaded case also included
in this analysis**
**Same Total Force Used
from Frontal Impact**
27
Factor of Safety: .016
28
29