PowerPoint Presentation

Ford Mustang

Prof. Dr. Pim van der JagtDr. Paul ZandbergenTim DrotarNicole Zandbergen

Ford Mustang Timeline

Front suspensionRear suspension

Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014

2

MUSTANG Suspension DevelopmentFirst generation (1964 - 1973)Falcon platformBody on frame

Stabilizer barLower wishbone: tension link bolted to lateral linkFront SuspensionDouble wishboneRear SuspensionHotchkiss with leaf springs

Inclined shock absorbersVariable rate, semi-elliptic leaf springs Rubber-bushed hangersSpring & shock absorber on upper wishboneProf. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014

MUSTANG Suspension DevelopmentSixth Generation (2015-)S550 platformUnitized chassis

Stabilizer barTension linkPerimeter subframe

Front SuspensionDouble-ball-joint MacPherson strutRear SuspensionIntegral link Independent SuspensionMacPherson strutKnuckleProf. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014Lateral LinkTwo ball jointsToe LinkIsolated subframeStabilizer barIntegral linkAluminum H-armAluminum KnuckleCamber link

Wheel base and track width1st generation2743 mm

2nd generation 2443 mm

3rd generation 2550 mm

4th generation 2573 mm

5th generation2720 mm

6th generation 2712 mm

Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014Track width

PowerProf. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014

5.0L V8, >425 PS

1965 Mustang versus 2015 Mustang Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.2014

1965 Mustang versus 2015 Mustang: Vehicle specificationsProf. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen18.06.201419652015Body style2 door coupe2 door coupeEngine289 CID (4.7L V8)302 CID (5.0L V8)Transmission4 speed manual6 speed manualFront suspensionSLA with coil spring on upper armMcPherson strut with double ball joint lower armRear SuspensionSolid axle with leaf springsIntegral link independentSteering SystemRecirculating ball parallel linkage with external power cylinder. Rear steerRack and pinion electric power assisted steering. Front SteerOverall Steering Ratio19.8:116.4:1Tires6.95in -14in Bias Ply; 24 psiFront P245/40R19 Radial, Rear P275/40R19 Radial; 35psi

Kinematics and Compliance Test18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

Kinematics and Compliances Vertical Motion Test18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

Kinematics and Compliances Roll Motion Test18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

Kinematics and Compliances Lateral Force & Aligning Torque Tests18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

Vehicle Dynamics Testing Steering, Handling, Ride18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

On Center Steering 120kph

18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole ZandbergenFor on center steering, the 2015 Mustang has:Significant higher response and lower deadbandHigher torque build-upHigher and more linear yaw rate

Steady State Handling Constant Speed Understeer Test @ 75kph

18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole ZandbergenFor steady state handling, the 2015 Mustang has:More lateral acceleration / steering wheel angle response gain due to lower cornering compliances and lower overall steering ratioHigher level of steering wheel torque due to speed sensitive EPASLower total roll angle due to higher chassis roll stiffness and wider track width

Frequency Response Test 120kph18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

The 2015 Mustang has higher yaw response and lower phase lag due to lower front and rear cornering compliances, differences in vehicle mass/inertia, and overall steering ratio.

What makes the handling performance of the 65 different from the 15?18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

As shown, the lumped cornering compliances have the biggest contribution to the difference in handling performance between the 1965 and 2015 Mustang.

New Line-Lock Feature

18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

18.06.2014Prof. Dr. Pim van der Jagt, Dr. Paul Zandbergen, Tim Drotar, Nicole Zandbergen

Thank You !

Chart1

Sheet11965 Mustang with.1965 Mustang 289 HO2015 Mustang 5.0L 2015 O/(U) 1965 %chg2015 Cornering Compliances2015 Cornering Compliances and steering ratio2015 Cornering Compliances, steering ratio, and SIFront Trackmm1434.11587.510.701434.11434.11434.1Rear Trackmm1427.01657.416.151427.01427.01427.0Average Trackmm1430.61622.513.411430.61430.61430.6Roof height mm1339.91371.62.371339.91339.91339.9Wheel basemm2745.52716.0(1.07)2745.52745.52745.5Overall lengthmm4612.6(100.00)4612.64612.64612.6

LF weightkg388.4466.720.16388.4388.4388.4RF weightkg383.4437.414.08383.4383.4383.4LR weightkg303.7388.627.96303.7303.7303.7RR weightkg303.1408.034.61303.1303.1303.1Front weightkg771.8904.117.14771.8771.8771.8Rear weightkg606.8796.631.28606.8606.8606.8Total weightkg1378.61700.723.361378.61378.61378.6%Front%56.053.2(2.82)56.056.056.0

Cg vertical height to groundmm513.2510.6(0.51)513.2513.2513.2Cg lateral distance to vehicle centerlinemm-2.9-4.244.83-2.9-2.9-2.9Cg longitudinal distance to front axlemm1208.51272.15.261208.51208.51208.5

Pitch inertiakg-m^22407266110.552407.02407.02407Yaw inertiakg-m^22664301513.182664.02664.02664Roll inertiakg-m^235958863.79359.0359.0359Bundorf Handling CalculationsInputsFront cornering compliancedeg/g9.83333Rear cornering compliancedeg/g5.31.61.61.61.6Overall steer ratio:119.816.419.816.416.4vehicle speed kph120120120120120

Intermediate calcsvehicle speedm/s33.3333.3333.3333.3333.33wheelbase m 2.752.722.752.752.72Yaw radius of gyration k^2m^21.931.771.931.931.77abm^21.861.841.861.861.84SI = k^2/ab-1.040.971.041.040.97

Steady state yaw ratedeg/s/deg RWA2.96.16.06.06.1cumulative effect99%99%100%Steady state yaw ratedeg/s/100deg swa14.537.130.536.937.0cumulative effect71%99%100%Yaw velocity response timemS142.685.192.292.285.1cumulative effect88%88%100%ContributionFront and Rear Lumped Cornering CompliancesOverall Steering RatioVehicle Mass, Inertia and WheelbaseSteady state yaw rate gaindeg/s/100deg swa71%28%1%Yaw velocity response timemS88%0%12%Bundorf Understeer Budget

Sheet2

Sheet3