Skip to main content
Advertisement
Browse Subject Areas
?

Click through the PLOS taxonomy to find articles in your field.

For more information about PLOS Subject Areas, click here.

< Back to Article

Fig 1.

(a) Schematic representation of a lumped-mass quarter vehicle model and (b) its free-body diagram.

More »

Fig 1 Expand

Fig 2.

(a) Step road profile and (b) ramp road profile used in this study.

More »

Fig 2 Expand

Fig 3.

Front and rear profiles for (a) suspension stiffness and (b) suspension damping.

More »

Fig 3 Expand

Table 1.

Test cases and the corresponding states of modeling details.

More »

Table 1 Expand

Table 2.

Parameters relevant to quarter vehicle model.

More »

Table 2 Expand

Table 3.

Results from all test cases for front quarter vehicle model.

More »

Table 3 Expand

Table 4.

Results from all test cases for rear quarter vehicle model.

More »

Table 4 Expand

Fig 4.

Evaluation on modeling detail addition based on (a) front quarter vehicle model sprung mass response, (b) the corresponding unsprung mass response, (c) rear quarter vehicle model sprung mass response and (d) the corresponding unsprung mass response.

More »

Fig 4 Expand

Table 5.

Comparison among relevant cases considering individual modeling details.

More »

Table 5 Expand

Table 6.

Comparison among selected cases considering combined modeling details.

More »

Table 6 Expand

Fig 5.

Evaluation on modeling detail reduction based on (a) front quarter vehicle model sprung mass response, (b) the corresponding unsprung mass response, (c) rear quarter vehicle model sprung mass response and (d) the corresponding unsprung mass response.

More »

Fig 5 Expand

Table 7.

Comparison among relevant cases for evaluation on accuracy contribution.

More »

Table 7 Expand

Fig 6.

Various representations of (a) front damping profile and (b) rear damping profile used in this study.

More »

Fig 6 Expand

Fig 7.

Comparison among incremental damping details based on (a) front quarter vehicle model sprung mass response, (b) the corresponding unsprung mass response, (c) rear quarter vehicle model sprung mass response and (d) the corresponding unsprung mass response.

More »

Fig 7 Expand

Table 8.

Relative differences among cases with incremental damping details.

More »

Table 8 Expand

Fig 8.

(a) Smooth ramp road profile and (b) non-linear tire stiffness profile used in further evaluation.

More »

Fig 8 Expand

Table 9.

Comparison among selected cases involving further modeling detail refinements.

More »

Table 9 Expand

Fig 9.

Selected RMS parameter comparison between fully-featured models and the base model, concerning (a) front quarter vehicle model and (b) rear quarter vehicle model used in this study.

More »

Fig 9 Expand