hexagon logo
Register Sign in
  • State Not Answered
  • Replies 11 replies
  • Subscribers 11 subscribers
  • Views 118 views
  • Users 0 members are here
Options
Related

How to define BUSHING element in Adams correctly?

viktor.kulagin
Hello, colleagues.
 
I have a question about proper bushing definition in Adams (especially in Car). Probably this issue have already solved many times, but it is still essential for modelling.
 
The question is: what is the right way to define active and reactive bodies in bushing? Some say that one should use the mechanism (say, vehicle suspension) topology and follow through it from part that give an excitation (a wheel, for example) to parts which react on this excitation. Also, there is an idea to consider I/J parts for bushing as inner/outer rings.
 
There is an issue when it comes to bushings with different radial stiffness. When you model such a bushing with different I/J parts order, you receive different results of bushing reaction. This difference may lead to different behaviour of related elements. I suppose it's related with bushing formulation described in the KB8013987 tech article.
 
For instance, there is a toelink, which has a bushing with different radial stiffnesses and a spherical joint. In this case different I/J parts order lead to different rotation of toelink around its axis and to different values of spherical joint working angle.
 
Thanks a lot for the explanation in advance
Parents
  • 0
    I always go form in to out. So start with the chassis then subframe to control arms then to knuckle. If we assume that they all where connected with bushings, I would have:
    Chassis (j) to subframe (i)
    Subframe (j) to control arms (i)
    Control arms (j) to knuckle (i)
     
    But it does not really matter. You just find a convention that you like. But remember that in general Adams terms, you should think about the i-marker (action) moving relative to the j-marker (reaction). That is how forces and measure functions typically work.
     
Reply
  • 0
    I always go form in to out. So start with the chassis then subframe to control arms then to knuckle. If we assume that they all where connected with bushings, I would have:
    Chassis (j) to subframe (i)
    Subframe (j) to control arms (i)
    Control arms (j) to knuckle (i)
     
    But it does not really matter. You just find a convention that you like. But remember that in general Adams terms, you should think about the i-marker (action) moving relative to the j-marker (reaction). That is how forces and measure functions typically work.
     
Children
No Data
© 2025 Hexagon AB and/or its subsidiaries. Privacy Policy | Cloud Services Agreement