reading

Cover
Dedication
Series Preface
Acknowledgements
Introduction
Chapter 1: Tracked Vehicle Running Gear and Suspension Systems
1. 1.1 General Arrangement
2. 1.2 Transverse Torsion Bars
3. 1.3 Coil Springs
4. 1.4 Hydrogas Suspensions
5. 1.5 Dampers
6. References
Chapter 2: Vehicle Track Systems
1. 2.1 Link Tracks
2. 2.2 Flexible Tracks
3. References
Chapter 3: Tracked Vehicle Suspension Performance: Modelling and Testing
1. 3.1 Human Response to Whole‐Body Vibration (WBV) and Shock
2. 3.2 Terrain Profiles
3. References
Chapter 4: Controllable Suspensions
1. 4.1 Height and Attitude Control
2. 4.2 Actively Controlled Damping (Semi‐Active Suspensions)
3. 4.3 Active Suspension Systems
4. 4.4 DERA Active Suspension Test Vehicles
5. 4.5 Conclusions
6. References
Chapter 5: Wheeled Vehicle Drivelines and Suspensions
1. 5.1 Unarmoured Vehicles
2. 5.2 Armoured Vehicles
3. 5.3 Interconnected Suspensions
4. References
Chapter 6: Wheeled Vehicle Suspension Performance
1. 6.1 Quarter‐Car Model
2. 6.2 Wheelbase Filter
3. 6.3 DROPS Truck Ride Measurements
4. Reference
Chapter 7: Steering Performance of Tracked and Wheeled Vehicles
1. 7.1 Tracked Vehicles
2. 7.2 Comparing Skid and Ackermann Steered Wheeled Vehicles
3. Appendix A: Equations of Motion
4. Appendix B: Power Flow Equations
5. References
Chapter 8: Soft‐Soil Performance of Wheeled and Tracked Vehicles
1. 8.1 Basic Requirements
2. 8.2 Models for Soft Cohesive Soils
3. 8.3 Models for Dry Frictional Soils
4. 8.4 Space Efficiency of Running Gear Systems for Armoured Vehicles
5. 8.5 Tractive Force–Slip Relationship for Tyres in Soft Cohesive Soils
6. References
Chapter 9: Effect of Free, Locked and Limited‐Slip Differentials on Traction and Steering Performance
1. 9.1 Types of Lockable and Limited‐Slip Differentials
2. 9.2 Relationships for Frictional Limited‐Slip Differentials
3. 9.3 Traction Performance
4. 9.4 Steering Performance on a Road Surface
5. Reference
Chapter 10: Articulated Vehicles
1. 10.1 Articulated Tracked Vehicles
2. 10.2 Articulated Wheeled Vehicles
3. References
Chapter 11: Vehicle Rollover Behaviour
1. 11.1 Basic Considerations
2. 11.2 Methods to Reduce the Likelihood of Rollover
3. 11.3 Truck Rollover: A Case Study
4. References
Notation
Abbreviations
Bibliography
Index
End User License Agreement

List of Illustrations

Chapter 1
1. Figure 1.1 Warrior running gear layout. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
2. Figure 1.2 Leopard 2 running gear layout. Source: Courtesy of ATZ.
3. Figure 1.3 The principle of presetting a torsion bar.
4. Figure 1.4 Panther torsion bar arrangement.
5. Figure 1.5 Torsion tube over bar arrangement. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
6. Figure 1.6 Cromwell MBT suspension unit. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
7. Figure 1.7 Chieftain bogie suspension unit. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
8. Figure 1.8 Merkava 4 suspension unit. Source: Courtesy of MANTAK.
9. Figure 1.9 Challenger hydrogas suspension unit. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
10. Figure 1.10 Challenger suspension characteristics at 0.8 Hz as measured, a fitted curve and a typical design curve.
11. Figure 1.11 Ratio of specific heats for nitrogen at different pressures. Source: Din, 1961 [1.3]. Reproduced with permission of Butterworths.
12. Figure 1.12 Measured ratio of specific heats at different frequencies.
13. Figure 1.13 Challenger suspension unit damper characteristics from differential pressure across damper valve.
14. Figure 1.14 Challenger suspension unit damper characteristics from flow rig.
15. Figure 1.15 Diagram of interaction between hydrogas suspension and track tension.
16. Figure 1.16 Effect of temperature on hydrogas suspension ride height.
17. Figure 1.17 Diagram of two‐stage hydrogas suspension unit.
18. Figure 1.18 Two‐stage hydrogas suspension load/deflection characteristic.
19. Figure 1.19 Diagram of hydrogas suspension with counter‐spring.
20. Figure 1.20 Load–deflection characteristic of hydrogas suspension with counter‐spring.
21. Figure 1.21 Leclerc MBT opposed piston suspension unit. Source: Courtesy of Nexter Systems.
22. Figure 1.22 Diagram of In‐arm suspension unit.
23. Figure 1.23 Suspension with an external hydrogas or liquid spring strut.
24. Figure 1.24 Warrior rotary damper cross–section. Source: Courtesy of Horstman Defence Systems.
25. Figure 1.25 Leopard 2 suspension. Source: Courtesy of ATZ.
26. Figure 1.26 Leopard 2 suspension characteristics. Source: Courtesy of ATZ.
Chapter 2
1. Figure 2.1 Dry single‐pin track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
2. Figure 2.2 Single‐pin rubber‐bush track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
3. Figure 2.3 Double‐pin, three‐connector, single‐body rubber‐bushed track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
4. Figure 2.4 The relationship between nominal ground contact area and vehicle mass.
5. Figure 2.5 Three‐quarter‐track multi‐role 7 tonne carrier type ZgKW.
6. Figure 2.6 Track of the multi‐role carrier type ZgKW.
7. Figure 2.7 Two‐connector double‐pin track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
8. Figure 2.8 Double‐pin double‐body three‐connector track (Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Centre).
9. Figure 2.9 Cross‐bend loading on track link/pins.
10. Figure 2.10 Double‐pin track with in‐body drive (left) and the ‘bayonet’ method of replaceable track pad insertion (right). Source: Courtesy of DST Defence.
11. Figure 2.11 Comparing different track pad conditions: (a) new pad; (b) abrasive wear; (c) ‘cutting and chunking’; and (d) thermal blow‐out (Tank Automotive Research, Development and Engineering Centre).
12. Figure 2.12 Track tensile force duty cycle for 1000 km on road and 1000 km on cross‐country.
13. Figure 2.14 FV 432 rolling resistance: dry‐pin and rubber‐bushed tracks (RB). MWP: metal wheel path; RWP: rubber wheel path.
14. Figure 2.15 Scorpion towed rolling resistance with track system in different configurations.
15. Figure 2.13 Chieftain rolling resistance: dry‐pin and double‐pin rubber‐bushed track.
16. Figure 2.17 Effect of isolating components of the running gear on sound pressure levels.
17. Figure 2.18 Flexible trailing link sprocket drive. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
18. Figure 2.16 Chordal action of the track impacting on the idler wheel.
19. Figure 2.19 Resilient idler mounting. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
20. Figure 2.20 Sound pressure levels with the compliant mountings fitted.
21. Figure 2.21 Average vibration levels with the compliant mountings fitted.
22. Figure 2.22 Diagram of idler carried on a four‐bar linkage with resilient mounts.
23. Figure 2.23 Citroen–Kegresse half‐track truck as used in desert conditions. Source: Audouin‐Dubreuil A, 2006 [2.8]. Reproduced with permission of Dalton Watson Fine Books 2006.
24. Figure 2.24 M3 track system.
25. Figure 2.25 A jointed track on an oversnow vehicle.
26. Figure 2.26 Caterpillar high speed earth‐mover with flexible track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
27. Figure 2.27 Segmented track system showing the connectors used for joining adjacent segments. Source: Courtesy of DST Defence.
28. Figure 2.28 Cross‐section of segmented flexible track showing the steel‐wire longitudinal reinforcement, composite transverse stiffeners and steel‐plate reinforced guide horn. Source: Courtesy of DST Defence.
29. Figure 2.29 Spartan fitted Soucy Mark 1 flexible tracks. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
30. Figure 2.30 Spartan fitted with Soucy Mark 2 flexible tracks showing ‘back‐driving’ on the sprocket. Applied torque is anti‐clockwise. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
31. Figure 2.31 Spartan fitted with Mark 3 Soucy tracks and UHMW plastic sprocket. There is no sign of back‐driving. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
32. Figure 2.32 ASCOD fitted with Soucy flexible tracks. Source: Courtesy of General Dynamics European Land Systems ASCOD.
Chapter 3
1. Figure 3.1 HRV BS6841 and ISO2731 weighting filters in linearised format for vertical vibration on seat base.
2. Figure 3.2 NATO Reference Mobility Model (NRMM): general layout (US Army Engineer Research and Development Centre).
3. Figure 3.3 HRV weighting functions for vertical vibration on seat base, including absorbed power.
4. Figure 3.4 Comparing the absorbed power and ISO 2631 weighting filters on vehicle ride values (US Army Engineer Research and Development Centre).
5. Figure 3.5 Heave wheelbase filter for a six‐axle vehicle.
6. Figure 3.6 Heave response filter for a six‐axle 4.8 m wheelbase vehicle at 10 m s^–1.
7. Figure 3.7 Heave response to different wavelengths for different wheelbase six‐axle vehicles.
8. Figure 3.8 Pitch input at different wavelengths of constant amplitude for vehicles of different wheelbase.
9. Figure 3.9 Quarter‐car model
10. Figure 3.10 Comparing the ride response of single‐ and six‐axle vehicles on a random terrain at different speeds. Also shown are the effects of the ISO 6841 and ISO 2631 weighting filters.
11. Figure 3.11 The weighted PSD accelerations on a random terrain for the single axle at 5 m s^–1 and the six‐axle vehicle at 10 m s^–1. Also shown are the effects of the ISO 6841 and ISO 2631 weighting filters.
12. Figure 3.12 Tracked vehicle computer model. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
13. Figure 3.13 Damper characteristics of the Warrior suspension computer model and the trials vehicle.
14. Figure 3.14 Comparing the computer modelled and trials results of a Warrior suspension test vehicle.
15. Figure 3.15 Scorpion damper characteristics.
16. Fig 3.16 Scorpion computer modelling results.
17. Figure 3.17 Challenger suspension test vehicle on the random course at 8.5 m s^–1. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
18. Figure 3.18 Pitch response on the 7 m sinewave course of the Challenger suspension test vehicle.
19. Figure 3.19 Weighted RMS acceleration on the random course of the Challenger suspension test vehicle.
20. Figure 3.20 Front‐wheel displacement on the random course of a Challenger suspension test vehicle at 8 m s^–1.
21. Figure 3.21 Relative pitch stiffness of vehicles with different numbers of axles but the same wheelbase and heave stiffness.
22. Figure 3.22 Forces acting on a tracked vehicle body when braking.
23. Figure 3.23 Predicted pitch angles for Scorpion when braking.
24. Figure 3.24 Scorpion braking at 0.5 g deceleration. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
25. Figure 3.25 Scorpion track tension either side of sprocket when braking.
26. Figure 3.26 Challenger pitch angles when braking for single‐stage and two‐stage suspension units, and with and without track.
27. Figure 3.27 Forces acting on a compensating idler when braking.
28. Figure 3.28 General arrangement of the sprung idler test vehicle (SITV). Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
29. Figure 3.29 The sprung and compensating idler linkage. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
30. Figure 3.30 SITV on the 30% ramp at 8.5 m s^–1. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
31. Figure 3.31 SITV on the random course at 8.5 m s^–1. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
Chapter 4
1. Figure 4.1 The Swedish S‐tank showing the gun in the fully depressed condition. Source: Courtesy of The Tank Museum.
2. Figure 4.2 The steering and gun azimuth control system of the S–tank. Source: Courtesy of R Ogorkiewicz.
3. Figure 4.3 Diagram of an active suspension. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
4. Figure 4.4 Dowty Rotol in‐arm liquid spring suspension unit and control actuator for FV 432. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
5. Figure 4.5 Diagram of AP active suspension system. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
6. Figure 4.6 The AP control valve. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
7. Figure 4.7 Suspension test vehicle with passive suspension. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
8. Figure 4.8 Active suspension fitted to the suspension test vehicle. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
9. Figure 4.9 Results from the single‐wheel laboratory rig with AP control valve; PSD of body acceleration with random road input and body response to step force input. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
10. Figure 4.10 Scorpion test vehicle fitted with Lotus active suspension. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
11. Figure 4.11 Lotus active suspension on Scorpion test vehicle. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
12. Figure 4.12 Comparison of the ride performance of the Lotus active suspension test vehicle with the Scorpion with uprated passive suspension.
Chapter 5
1. Figure 5.1 Diagram of I‐ and H‐driveline layouts. E, engine; GB, gearbox; TB, transfer box; D, differential..
2. Figure 5.2 DROPS general layout..
3. Figure 5.3 MAN SX truck coil spring rear suspension..
4. Figure 5.4 Pinzgauer 4×4 general layout..
5. Figure 5.5 Pinzgauer final drive and swing axle pivot..
6. Figure 5.6 Layout of Alvis Stalwart..
7. Figure 5.7 Stalwart double‐wishbone torsion bar suspension..
8. Figure 5.8 Principle of the liquid spring..
9. Figure 5.9 Comparison of the compressibility of various liquids..
10. Figure 5.10 Detail of the Dowty pressure seal..
11. Figure 5.11 Panhard AML armoured car transmission layout and limited‐slip differential..
12. Figure 5.12 Panhard EBR light tank transmission layout..
13. Figure 5.13 Piranha APC with coil spring and torsion bar suspension..
14. Figure 5.14 Piranha APC driveline and hydrogas suspension..
15. Figure 5.15 Luchs reconnaissance vehicle cross section..
16. Figure 5.16 Luchs reconnaissance vehicle steering arrangements..
17. Figure 5.17 Luchs reconnaissance vehicle coil spring suspension system..
18. Figure 5.18 Different methods of interconnection, (a‐d) in roll and pitch, (e‐g) in heave, using torsion bars, coil springs, hydrogas springs and torsion bars, and (i) in roll and pitch using torsion bars.
19. Figure 5.19 Citroen 2CV pitch interconnected suspension system..
20. Figure 5.20 Simplified Citroen 2CV pitch interconnection system.
21. Figure 5.21 Zero‐warp stiffness anti‐roll bar system using torsion bars and balance beams..
22. Figure 5.22 Hydraulically interconnected zero‐warp anti‐roll system using hydrogas springs.
23. Figure 5.23 Six‐wheeled vehicle zero‐warp arrangement.
24. Figure 5.24 Mars Curiosity rover showing rocker‐bogie linkage..
25. Figure 5.25 Effect of the position of the bogie pivot on the rearwards tilt angle.
Chapter 6
1. Figure 6.1 Quarter‐car model: the effect of undamped natural frequency and damping ratio on weighted RMS acceleration.
2. Figure 6.2 Quarter‐car model: the tradeoff between weighted RMS acceleration and RMS suspension displacement for different undamped natural frequencies and damping ratios.
3. Figure 6.3 Quarter‐car model: the effect of unsprung weight and tyre pressure on weighted RMS acceleration and RMS suspension displacement for different damping ratios.
4. Figure 6.4 Quarter‐car model: the effect of unsprung weight and tyre pressure on weighted RMS acceleration and RMS tyre loading ratio.
5. Figure 6.5 Effect on weighted RMS acceleration of the heave response of vehicles with two, three and four equi‐spaced axles compared to a single axle.
6. Figure 6.6 Effect on the heave acceleration of a four‐axle vehicle for different undamped natural frequencies and damping ratios.
7. Figure 6.7 Comparison of the effect of the BSI and ISO weighting filters on the heave RMS acceleration of a four‐axle vehicle compared to a single axle.
8. Figure 6.8 Effects of the BSI and ISO weighting filters on the PSD acceleration of the four‐axle vehicle compared to a single axle.
9. Figure 6.9 Weighted RMS acceleration on the DROPS vehicle frame and on the cab floor under the driver's seat with standard and half‐standard tyre pressures.
10. Figure 6.10 Weighted RMS acceleration on the vehicle frame over the rear suspension at standard and half‐standard tyre pressures.
11. Figure 6.11 Weighted acceleration PSD on the vehicle frame over the front and rear suspensions at a speed of 4.4 m s^–1.
12. Figure 6.12 Friction and stiffness measurements on a DROPS rear suspension spring. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
Chapter 7
1. Figure 7.1 Simplified diagram of a double differential.
2. Figure 7.2 1899 Vedovelli Priestley electric taxi with double differential steering (Cassell & Co. Ltd).
3. Figure 7.3 A simple steering model.
4. Figure 7.4 The two basic types of double differential (diff).
5. Figure 7.5 (a) The Renk transmission (gearbox and steering) as used on Leopard 2 and (b) a simplified diagram of the steering system. Source: Courtesy of RENK AG.
6. Figure 7.6 The Merritt skid steering model.
7. Figure 7.7 The primary parameters of the Magic Formula.
8. Figure 7.8 The different curves that can be produced by altering parameter C in the Magic Formula.
9. Figure 7.9 Experimental traction force–slip curve of a Spartan vehicle compared to its Magic Formula representation. Also shown for comparison are a calculated traction force–slip curve and a calculated traction–slip stiffness.
10. Figure 7.10 The force–slip relationships at static load for new pads, worn pads and on a low‐friction surface.
11. Figure 7.11 The forces acting on the model vehicle: only those acting on the front outer and rear inner wheels are shown.
12. Figure 7.12 The relative steering wheel displacements required for two different control arrangements to cause a 0.2 g lateral acceleration at various speeds.
13. Figure 7.13 The slewing moments at slow speed for new pads, worn pads and on the low‐friction surface on turns of increasing radius.
14. Figure 7.14 The effect on slewing moment of the five different track conditions as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m radius turn.
15. Figure 7.15 The front and rear track angles as a function of lateral accelerations on a 15 m radius turn with suspension and track pretension.
16. Figure 7.16 Specific track speed difference dv/V as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m radius turn for the model with different track conditions.
17. Figure 7.17 The various power flows in the steering system as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m turn with new pads.
18. Figure 7.18 Slewing moment as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m radius turn with new pads, worn pads and on the low‐friction surface.
19. Figure 7.19 Specific track speed difference dv/V as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m turn with new pads, worn pads and on the low‐friction surface.
20. Figure 7.20 Track forces from sprocket and idler to ground as a function of lateral acceleration at 15 m s^–1 on turns of varying radii.
21. Figure 7.21 The specific track speed difference dv/V as a function of lateral acceleration at 15 m s^–1 on turns of varying radii.
22. Figure 7.22 Power flows in the steering system as a function of lateral acceleration at 15 m s^–1 on turns of varying radii.
23. Figure 7.23 Diagram of the QinetiQ electric drive system with two drive motors and a steer motor driving through a double differential. Source: Courtesy of QinetiQ.
24. Figure 7.24 The effect of centre of gravity position on specific track speed difference dv/V as a function of lateral acceleration on a 15 m radius turn.
25. Figure 7.25 The GIAT AMX10RC light tank performing a clockwise pivot or neutral turn. Source: Courtesy of Nexter Systems.
26. Figure 7.26 Basic tyre force characteristics: (a) lateral force–slip angle; and (b) braking force–slip. Source: Courtesy of Bosch Automotive Handbook.
27. Figure 7.27 The derived combined slip–force characteristics used in the simulations: (a) longitudinal force–slip at various slip angles; and (b) lateral force–slip at various slip angles.
28. Figure 7.28 Forces acting on the skid steered vehicle during a steady‐state turn. Only the tyre forces acting on the front outer and the rear inner tyres are shown.
29. Figure 7.29 Slewing moment for different radii of turn at low lateral accelerations. The slewing moments of a six‐axle tracked vehicle of similar dimensions is also shown.
30. Figure 7.30 The steering response dv/V as a function of lateral acceleration for 15 and 30 m radii of turn.
31. Figure 7.31 The various power flows in the steering system as a function of lateral acceleration for a 15 m radius turn.
32. Figure 7.32 Forces acting on the Ackermann steered vehicle during a steady‐state turn. Only the tyre forces acting on the front outer and the rear inner tyres are shown.
33. Figure 7.33 Comparison of the steering responses of the skid and Ackermann steered vehicles for a 30 m turn at various speeds. Also shown are the responses on a low‐friction surface.
34. Figure 7.34 Comparison of the power requirements of the skid and Ackermann steered vehicles for a 30 m turn at various speeds.
35. Figure 7.35 Power required for the skid and Ackermann steered vehicles for a 0.2 g turn at various radii.
36. Figure 7.36 Controlled differential. Source: Courtesy of R Ogorkiewicz.
37. Figure 7.37 Effect on steering response of different degrees of differential torque transfer.
38. Figure 7.38 Wheel speed difference for different degrees of differential torque transfer.
39. Figure 7.39 Power requirements for different degrees of differential torque transfer.
Chapter 8
1. Figure 8.1 (a) Parameters measured during traction testing. (b) Free‐body diagram of wheel in traction condition. (c) Free‐body diagram of wheel in free‐rolling condition
2. Figure 8.2 DERA mobile tester in the field.
3. Figure 8.3 Coefficient of traction for tyres against mobility number N_M.
4. Figure 8.4 Coefficient of traction for tracks against mobility number N_T.
5. Figure 8.5 VCI and VLCI values compared for a range of wheeled and tracked vehicles.
6. Figure 8.6 Comparison of the coefficients of traction and rolling resistance with soil strength for the Warrior vehicle as given by the VCI and VLCI models.
7. Figure 8.7 DERA sand pit..
8. Figure 8.8 EXF vehicle in sand: experimental traction values compared to predicted values for different tyre deflection ratios.
9. Figure 8.9 EXF vehicle in sand: experimental rolling resistance values compared to predicted values for different tyre deflection ratios.
10. Figure 8.10 Experimental values for traction values for a range of tracked vehicles compared to the NRMM predictive relationship..
11. Figure 8.11 Experimental values of rolling resistance values for a range of tracked vehicles compared to the NRMM predictive relationship..
12. Figure 8.12 Comparative space requirements of tracked and wheeled vehicles of similar soft soil performance. The wheeled vehicle is assumed to have H‐drive, skid steering and trailing arm suspension. The dotted line shows a possible profile for a vehicle with Ackermann steering.
13. Figure 8.13 Alvis Stalwart with H‐drive, Ackerman steering and wishbone suspension..
14. Figure 8.14 Comparison of the space requirements of tracked and wheeled vehicles of similar soft performance. Here the vehicle has an I‐drive causing the floor of the vehicle to be raised.
15. Figure 8.15 Typical traction curves for a tyre in soft cohesive soil as measured with the DERA mobile tester.
16. Figure 8.16 Coefficient of rolling resistance comparing the variable slip data with the free‐rolling data.
17. Figure 8.17 Peak traction coefficient given by the experimental data (Equation (8.46)) compared to that given by the Magic Formula at 0.3 slip.
18. Figure 8.18 Triaxial cohesion compared to cone index (lb f/in²) for a lean and a heavy cohesive soil at different moisture contents. Lean clay denoted by open symbols, heavy clay by closed symbols (US Army Engineer Research and Development Centre).
Chapter 9
1. Figure 9.1 The basic control system for engagement of differential dog clutches..
2. Figure 9.2 The GKN Viscodrive..
3. Figure 9.3 A typical torque–temperature relationship at constant speed difference between inner and outer plates, showing the ‘hump’ effect.
4. Figure 9.4 Load‐proportional frictional limited‐slip differential.
5. Figure 9.5 Load‐proportional limited‐slip differential showing shaft torques and speeds.
6. Figure 9.6 Effect of tyre load on gross and net traction and rolling resistance for a soil strength of 325 kPa.
7. Figure 9.7 Effect of weight transfer across an axle with free and locked differentials.
8. Figure 9.8 Gross traction–slip curves for some of the soils and surfaces considered.
9. Figure 9.9 Net traction–slip curves for some of the soils and surfaces considered.
10. Figure 9.10 Effect of soil strength on peak gross, net and rolling resistance forces for a tyre load of 30 kN.
11. Figure 9.11 Net traction on the individual wheels for different soil strengths across an axle.
12. Figure 9.12 Transfer ratio K_d required to lock the differential for the road and soil surfaces considered.
13. Figure 9.13 Transfer ratio K_d required to lock the differential for the soils and surfaces considered.
14. Figure 9.14 Effect of different differentials on front‐wheel steer angle on a 15 m radius turn at various speeds.
15. Figure 9.15 Effect of different differentials on vehicle power requirements on a 15 m radius turn at various speeds.
Chapter 10
1. Figure 10.1 Types of vehicle articulation..
2. Figure 10.2 The Tucker SNO‐CAT..
3. Figure 10.3 The COBRA test vehicle..
4. Figure 10.4 US experimental system for coupling two M113s together as an articulated vehicle..
5. Figure 10.5 US proposal for an articulated tank..
6. Figure 10.6 The Swedish UDES XX20 demonstrator vehicle..
7. Figure 10.7 The Russian Vityaz DT‐30 articulated vehicle..
8. Figure 10.8 Simple ‘bicycle’ steering model for an articulated vehicle, showing forces acting on wheels.
9. Figure 10.9 Comparing the traction forces required for a skid and an articulated vehicle on turns of various radii.
10. Figure 10.10 US 8 tonne GOER vehicle..
11. Figure 10.11 US experimental vehicle train MARV (multi‐element articulated vehicle)..
12. Figure 10.12 Lockheed Twister experimental vehicle..
13. Figure 10.13 Longitudinal forces on tyre for different slip angles with a tyre/soil mobility number N of 2.
14. Figure 10.14 The total longitudinal force on the outside wheels in soft soil at different radii of turn
Chapter 11
1. Figure 11.1 Forces and dimensions affecting vehicle rollover: rigid and with suspension deflection.
2. Figure 11.2 Vehicle on tilt platform.
3. Figure 11.3 Lateral acceleration of a DROPS truck on a rough‐terrain test track. Source: Courtesy of Ministry of Defence.
4. Figure 11.4 DROPS roll moments as functions of side force/weight ratio.
5. Figure 11.5 DROPS roll moments as functions of side force/weight ratio with increased roll stiffness on the front axles.

High Speed Off-Road Vehicles:July 2018 Suspensions,Tracks, Wheels and Dynamics	Maclaurin	July 2018
Hybrid Electric Vehicles: Principles and Applications with Practical Perspectives, 2nd Edition	Mi and Masrur	October 2017
Hybrid Electric Vehicle System Modeling and Control, 2nd Edition	Liu	April 2017
Thermal Management of Electric Vehicle Battery Systems	Dincer, Hamut and Javani	March 2017
Automotive Aerodynamics	Katz	April 2016
The Global Automotive Industry	Nieuwenhuis and Wells	September 2015
Vehicle Dynamics	Meywerk	May 2015
Vehicle Gearbox Noise and Vibration: Measurement, Signal Analysis, Signal Processing and Noise Reduction Measures	Tůma	April 2014
Modeling and Control of Engines and Drivelines	Eriksson and Nielsen	April 2014
Modelling, Simulation and Control of Two-Wheeled Vehicles	Tanelli, Corno and Savaresi	March 2014
Advanced Composite Materials for Automotive Applications: Structural Integrity and Crashworthiness	Elmarakbi	December 2013
Guide to Load Analysis for Durability in Vehicle Engineering	Johannesson and Speckert	November 2013

High Speed Off-Road Vehicles

Suspensions, Tracks, Wheels and Dynamics

Copyright

Dedication

Series Preface

Acknowledgements