Vehicle Suspension Top-Mount Assembly Static Load Mitigation

Solution Overview

Problem

Active suspension systems face challenges due to significant static forces applied to top-mount assemblies, leading to undesirable stiffness and reduced effectiveness in damping road disturbances, as the elevated operating pressures in suspension damper assemblies cause top-mounts to operate outside their desired compliance range.

Innovation Solution

The implementation of a top-mount assembly with a strike plate and two sets of spring elements, where the second set has a lower combined spring constant and greater compliance than the first, to counteract static forces and maintain optimal compliance under static conditions, ensuring effective damping of road disturbances.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Strength

If a top-mount assembly uses traditional spring elements with high spring constant to support static loads, then the structural strength is improved, but the compliance deteriorates leading to reduced effectiveness in damping road disturbances

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvestructural strengthVSAvoidcompliance

Core Design Contradiction:

StrengthVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The spring element is divided into two distinct sets: a first set with higher spring constant for supporting static loads, and a second set with lower spring constant for maintaining compliance. This segmentation allows each set to specialize in its function without compromising the other.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different regions of the spring element assembly have different mechanical properties. The first set of spring elements has high stiffness locally to handle static loads, while the second set has low stiffness locally to maintain compliance for dynamic disturbances.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

2Force

If the spring elements are designed with high spring constant to counteract static forces, then the force support capability is improved, but the damping performance deteriorates due to operation outside desired compliance range

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveforce support capabilityVSAvoiddamping performance

Core Design Contradiction:

ForceVSReliability

Solution Approach 1:

The spring element is divided into two distinct sets: a first set with higher spring constant for supporting static loads, and a second set with lower spring constant for maintaining compliance. This segmentation allows each set to specialize in its function without compromising the other.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system dynamically adapts its effective stiffness based on the type of load applied. Under static conditions, the first set dominates providing high stiffness. Under dynamic road disturbance conditions, the second set engages providing compliant behavior for effective damping.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #15Dynamics

3Device complexity

If a single set of spring elements is used in the top-mount assembly, then the device complexity is reduced, but the ability to maintain optimal compliance under static conditions deteriorates

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvespring element configurationVSAvoidcompliance maintenance

Core Design Contradiction:

Device complexityVSAdaptability or versatility

Solution Approach 1:

The spring element is divided into two distinct sets: a first set with higher spring constant for supporting static loads, and a second set with lower spring constant for maintaining compliance. This segmentation allows each set to specialize in its function without compromising the other.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

The system uses spring elements with different spring constant parameters. The first set has a higher spring constant parameter optimized for static load support, while the second set has a lower spring constant parameter optimized for compliance maintenance under static conditions.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #35Parameter changes

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This configuration allows the top-mount assembly to operate within a desirable compliance range, effectively damping road disturbances and maintaining occupant comfort by balancing static forces and maintaining compliance, thus enhancing the overall performance of the suspension system.

Implementation Method 1

a first set of one or more first spring elements in contact with the strike plate, wherein each first spring element applies a first force to the strike plate in a first direction; a second set of one or more second spring elements in contact with the strike plate, wherein each second spring element applies a second force to the strike plate in a second direction that is opposite the first direction

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectElasticity: Elasticity

Implementation Method 2

the first set of one or more first spring elements is characterized by a first combined spring constant, and the second set of one or more second spring elements is characterized by a second combined spring constant that is less than the first combined spring constant

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectSpring constant differential: Hooke's Law

Data Source

PatentUS10843521B2Method and apparatus for mitigating static loads in components connecting multiple structures

Publication Date: 2020.11.24 CLEARMOTION INC

AI summary

An apparatus and method are described where one or more pre-stressed spring elements are disposed between two structures to mitigate or cancel the effect of static loads applied to a component connecting the structures. The apparatus and methods may be used, for example, to reduce the adverse impact of static loads on the performance of top-mounts in a suspension system of a vehicle.