Case 1: Forward Tug

Isolating the CALIPER itself (black outline in image), we can break the force application into the following nodal diagram, where:

F is the applied force from the torque of the attempted rotary motion of the wheel (which comes from the brakes calcs spreadsheet, as the car must support 10% of its weight in towing force (by regs)
- For Case 1, we will consider a front-ward pull of the car, which will result in F being as shown below
Ax and Ay are the reaction forces at the top node, and Bx is the reaction force at the top node.
- Note that there is no By, since the walls of the mount can only push on the caliper to prevent motion, not pull

The equal and opposite reaction forces on the MOUNT are then shown as follows:

Performing statics calculations from Torque = 82.17 Nm yields:

	Value [N]

	Value [N]
F	817.6
Ax	692.4
Ay	817.6
Bx	692.4

The above reaction forces are what will be used to sim the arm

Case 2: Backward Tug

There also must then be 2 CASES to sim, since the car could be pulled in the forward or rear direction during scrutineering, so for the other case, the direction of applied force F will be inverted

The value of the forces will follow the same calculation, however, Ay will be replaced with By, since the resistance to translation will then occur on the ‘bottom’ surface, as opposed to the ‘top’ in case 1. To avoid confusion, we will also replace A and B with C and D, respectively, for Case 2.

We will then define CASE 2 of loading (in the perspective of the MOUNT) as follows:

Performing the static calculations yields the same magnitudes, as expected:

	Value [N]

	Value [N]
F	817.6
Cx	692.4
Dx	692.4
Dy	817.6

Sim Setup:

Fixtures

on-face

virtual wall on hex head bolt inner circle: (13mm dia)

virtual wall on upright contact area:

Loads: Case 1

Ax and Bx: 692.4 N, applied PER ITEM for these 2 faces (since Ax = Bx = 692 N)

Ay = 817.6N: applied on bottom surface of top support

Loads: Case 2

Cx and Dx: 692.4 N, applied PER ITEM for these 2 faces (since Cx = Dx = 692 N)

Dy = 817.6 N applied on top surface of bottom support:

1) Initial Sim, [2023-12-29]

Case 1 - Front Pull

Max Stress: 491 MPa

Isoclipping to yield of aluminum = 275 MPa:

Displacement:

Case 2 - Rear Pull

Max stress: 550 MPa

Iso-clipping to 275 MPa:

Displacement:

Conclusion: re-enforce both sides around bend area

2) [2023-12-29]

Pre-test changes:

added large fillet 0.75in in the corner of highest stress
shortened slot length, moving the center of the slot 2mm closer to the bar
thickened the flange from 10mm to 12mm

Max stress: 474 MPa

iso-clipping at 375 MPa

displacement:

Max stress: 531 MPa

isoclipping at 275 MPa

3) Sim #3 [2023-12-29]

pre-test changes:

moved initial bending point much closer to the edge
Kept 0.75in fillet, but reduced the ‘height’ of the L extruded for the slot

max stress: 163 MPa !!

Iso-clipping at 100 MPa:

displacement

conclusion: almost good, just n eed to add a larger fillet for Case 2!

4) Sim #4 [2023-12-29]

pre-test changes:

added large 0.75in fillet on nthe inside-most edge, hopefully to decrase stress concentration found in Case 2 of Sim #3

Conclusion:

BOTH CASES PASSING!!!!
re-sim at 1.5mm mesh to validate design
- evaluate if singularity occurs on bolt face for Case 1
mass optimize a little bit
bing chilling

5) Sim #5 with mass optimization [2023-12-31]

Pre-test changes:

added a 1/8” filleted pocket in area with low stress concentration
inceased bolt mounting hole splitline circle to 16mm diameter(largest OD for M8 washer)

Conclusion:

everything still passes below yield stress, but, there are larger stress concentrations due to the small bottom area of the pocket
will reduce the height of the pocket as to be extra safe, since the bottom area barely shaves any mass off anyway

6) Sim #6 - smaller pocket [2023-12-31]