2006:257 CIV

M A S T ER’S T H E SI S

Prestudy of a Steering System

for Heavy-Duty Trucks

ALFRED JOHANSSON
ROBIN NILSSON

MASTER OF SCIENCE PROGRAMME

Mechanical Engineering

Luleå University of Technology

Department of Applied Physics and Mechanical Engineering
Division of Computer Aided Design

2006:257 CIV • ISSN: 1402 - 1617 • ISRN: LTU - EX - - 06/257 - - SE

Abstract
This thesis work was carried out at Volvo 3P, 26200 Advanced Engineering, Gothenburg
during the time November 2005 – May 2006. It was a part of the Master of Science in
Mechanical Engineering degree at Luleå University of Technology.

The thesis work focused on implementation of the frame-steering concept to an otherwise

regular Volvo FM truck. The frame-steering concept was considered interesting in
applications where low ground pressure or good off-road performance is important. The
performance of the frame-steering concept, mainly in terms of steering capabilities, vehicle
stability and off-road performance was to be predicted. Other areas such as transmission
layout and axle configuration were also to be considered.

Basic rules and restrictions concerning the design of frame-steered vehicles were set by
information given from Volvo Articulated Haulers. These rules and restrictions mainly
described the allowed steering angle with maintained vehicle stability. With these restrictions,
a mathematical model was constructed. With this model the steering performance could be
predicted for any frame-steered vehicle, regardless of its dimensions. During the time of this
thesis work, the idea to combine the frame-steering concept with the ordinary wheel-steering
Ackerman concept arose. With this “dual steering” concept, high total steering angle could be
obtained while maintaining good vehicle stability.

It was found that the steering performance and stability of a frame-steered vehicle is very
dependent on the distance between the front axle and the steering joint. To obtain maximum
steering angle with maintained stability, this distance should be minimized. On a Volvo FM
this distance is dependent on the transmission layout. Two concept vehicles, one 6x6 and one
8x6, were designed in ProEngineer and their performance was studied in detail.

The need of front-wheel drive could not be fully determined and therefore the optimal
transmission configuration could not be defined. The idea of utilizing low-speed hydraulic
front-wheel drive was presented, but it was often argued that an articulated steered vehicle
should always have the front-wheel drive engaged. Otherwise the vehicle could very easy go
into an oversteering situation when driving in slippery conditions, something that is very
difficult to control with this kind of vehicle. Discussions were held whether this could be
solved by an onboard electronic stability system, which could control this behaviour.
However, no conclusion could be made on this subject.

Since the 8x6 vehicle where designed with a steered rear axle, the turning ability of this
vehicle is slightly superior to the turning ability of the 6x6 vehicle. With a distance between
the front axle and the steering joint of 1.6 meters, a turning radius of 7.7 meters could be
achieved with the 8x6 and the 6x6 would need a radius of 8.1 meters. If the “dual steering”
concept is utilized, the turning radius could be reduced to somewhere between 5.8-7.2 and
6.2-7.5 meters respectively, depending on the wheel steering angle.

The dual steering concept was considered as the most interesting alternative and future work
should preferably be focused on this concept. The transmission layout and front axle
configuration should be examined with dynamic analysis to fully understand the tractive
requirements of the front axle in a frame-steered vehicle.

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson
Acknowledgements
The authors of this report would like to thank the following persons:

Our examiner at LTU, for giving us the freedom to work confidentially in an authentic project
in the commercial vehicle industry:
Peter Åström

For support and guidance throughout the project:

Roger Andreasson
Niklas Börjesson

Our sources at VAH in Braås, for providing experience and highly appreciated information
from the world of articulated vehicles:
Jörgen Ahlberg
Thomas Davidsson
Heikki Illerhag

For guidance and companionship during the instructive and inspiring visit to the Volvo Truck
customer show in Brno, The Czech Republic:
Pavel Prochazka
Bartosz Bien

Our technical mentor and supervisor regarding transmission components:

Jan Öberg

And finally, for providing the possibility to work with this project, our supervisor and endless
source of positive energy and inspiring ideas:
Lena Larsson

We would also like to thank everyone else at Volvo 3P who have helped us by providing
valuable information about the vehicles and the commercial vehicle industry.

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson
Glossary

Ackerman steering Propeller shaft

Wheel steering principle. Longitudinal drive shaft

Articulated steering PTO

Wheel alignment controlled by frame Abbreviation of Power Take Off. Power
articulation. output in the powertrain, often used to
power hydraulic components.
Bogie axle
A two axles arrangement mounted on a Pusher axle
single revolving axle. Individual suspended axle located in front
of the rear driven axle.
Construction truck
Truck equipped with tipper body. Rotation joint
Designed for heavy-duty operation. See Hitch.

Drop box Steering joint

See Transfer case. Joint used by the articulated steering
system.
Dump truck
See Construction truck. Tag axle
Individual suspended axle located behind
Hitch the rear driven axle.
Rotational bearing enabling rotational
freedom between front and rear frame. Transfer case
Gearbox distributing the power from one
Off-On input axle to multiple output axles. Used
Prototype vehicle from the TWINS- on a trucks with both front and rear-wheel
project. Designed mainly for off-road drive.
operation.
Tridem axle configuration
On-Off A rear axle arrangement including two
Prototype vehicle from the TWINS- bogie suspended axles and a tag or pusher
project. Designed mainly for on-road axle.
operation.
VAH
Payload Abbreviation of Volvo Articulated
Weight of transported material. Haulers.

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson
Table of Contents
1. Introduction .................................................................................................... 1
1.1 Background...................................................................................................... 1
1.1.1 Problem definition......................................................................................... 1
1.2 Objectives ........................................................................................................ 1
1.3 Benchmark of the market................................................................................. 2
1.3.1 Articulated haulers........................................................................................ 2
1.3.2 Construction trucks....................................................................................... 2
1.3.3 Performance................................................................................................. 2
1.4 Potential customer sectors............................................................................... 3
1.4.1 Urban areas.................................................................................................. 3
1.4.2 Off-road construction sites ........................................................................... 3
1.4.3 Russian tundra ............................................................................................. 3
1.4.4 Agricultural sector......................................................................................... 4

2. Project description ........................................................................................ 5

2.1 Frame-steering................................................................................................. 5
2.1.1 History .......................................................................................................... 5
2.1.2 Applications .................................................................................................. 6
2.1.3 Configurations .............................................................................................. 6
2.2 TWINS-project ................................................................................................. 8
2.2.1 General information...................................................................................... 8
2.2.2 Results ......................................................................................................... 8
2.3 The Volvo FM-FS Concept ............................................................................ 10
2.3.1 Volvo’s requirements.................................................................................. 10
2.3.2 Customer requirements.............................................................................. 10
2.3.3 Expected market share .............................................................................. 10

3. Steering geometry and theory .....................................................................11

3.1 Theory for frame-steered vehicles ................................................................. 11
3.1.1 Principle of function .................................................................................... 11
3.1.2 Restrictions considering frame-steered vehicles ........................................ 12
3.1.3 Comparison to products available on the market ....................................... 13
3.2 Ackerman steered vehicles............................................................................ 14
3.2.1 Principle of function .................................................................................... 14
3.2.2 Multiple steered axles................................................................................. 14
3.2.3 Restrictions of Ackerman steering.............................................................. 15
3.3 Combination of Ackerman and frame-steering............................................... 16
3.4 Mathematical model....................................................................................... 16
3.4.1 Definitions .................................................................................................. 16
3.4.2 Results ....................................................................................................... 18

4. Regulations and legal restrictions ..............................................................25

4.1 Steering ......................................................................................................... 25
4.1.1 Frame-steering ........................................................................................... 25
4.1.2 General steering requirements ................................................................... 26
4.1.3 Drive-by-wire .............................................................................................. 26

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

 4.2 Masses and dimensions ................................................................................ 27

5. Powertrain and related components ...........................................................29

5.1 Packaging analysis of the Powertrain ............................................................ 29
5.1.1 Components ............................................................................................... 29
5.1.2 Results ....................................................................................................... 31
5.2 Transmission layouts ..................................................................................... 31
5.2.1 Differential solutions ................................................................................... 31
5.2.2 Transmission layouts.................................................................................. 32
5.3 Active components......................................................................................... 34
5.3.1 Existing electronic systems ........................................................................ 34
5.3.2 Brake control .............................................................................................. 34
5.3.3 Torque control ............................................................................................ 34
5.3.4 Progressive Steering .................................................................................. 34
5.3.5 Automatic locking and releasing of differentials.......................................... 34
5.4 The need of front-wheel drive ........................................................................ 34
5.5 Tyres for the FM-FS truck .............................................................................. 35
5.5.1 Tyres for the FM-FS 6x6 construction truck ............................................... 35
5.5.2 Tyres for the FM-FS 8x6 “Salix II” agricultural truck ................................... 35

6. The FM-FS 6x6 Concept ...............................................................................37

6.1 Drivetrain layout ............................................................................................. 37
6.2 Tipp behaviour ............................................................................................... 38
6.3 Gross weight and payload ............................................................................. 38
6.4 Potential costumers ....................................................................................... 39

7. FM-FS 8x6 ......................................................................................................41

7.1 Articulated vehicles with four axles ................................................................ 41
7.1.1 Steering Forces .......................................................................................... 41
7.1.2 Position of load........................................................................................... 41
7.1.3 Improvement of steering angle ................................................................... 42
7.1.4 Articulated haulers in Svalbard................................................................... 42
7.2 Axle Installation.............................................................................................. 43
7.2.1 Steering angles .......................................................................................... 43
7.3 Volvo FM-FS Salix II ...................................................................................... 44

8. Results...........................................................................................................47
8.1 Specifications................................................................................................. 47
8.1.1 FM-FS 6x6 ................................................................................................. 47
8.1.2 FM-FS 8x6 ................................................................................................. 47
8.2 Steering performance .................................................................................... 48
8.3 Payload.......................................................................................................... 49
8.4 Off-road Performance .................................................................................... 49
8.4.1 Ground clearance....................................................................................... 49
8.4.2 Approach angle .......................................................................................... 50

9. Conclusion ....................................................................................................51

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

10. Discussion and proposals for future work .................................................53

11. References ....................................................................................................55

Appendix A. Steering geometry

Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Appendix C. Pump-drive-PTO by STIEBEL

Appendix D. Hitch Solutions

Appendix E. Full vehicle test with Off-On truck

Appendix F. Steering Forces on 8x6

Appendix G. Transmission concepts

Appendix H. Michelin XZL 16.00R20

Appendix I. Alliance tyre spec

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson Robin Nilsson
 1. Introduction

1. Introduction
This chapter will describe the background of this report and the targets of the project. A
benchmark of competitors will be presented, as well as a description of problems and
potential customers.

1.1 Background
This report is the result of a master thesis project carried out at Volvo 3P, Gothenburg at
department 26200 - Advanced Engineering & Concepts. The project started in November
2005 and the results were presented in May 2006.

It was the final academic assignment for the authors in their Master of Science degrees in
Mechanical Engineering at Luleå University of Technology. The supervisor at Volvo 3P was
Lena Larsson and examiner at LTU was Peter Åström.

1.1.1 Problem definition

The basis of this thesis work was the problem with soil destruction, which occurs when heavy
vehicles are used in soft or sensitive terrain. This problem can be experienced in urban areas,
where a heavy construction truck can cause soil damage if used in sensitive areas like parks or
gardens. The problem is not only a cosmetic issue, since the natural breathing of the soil is
destroyed by compaction due to high ground pressures and hence causing long term problems
to the environment. In rural areas the problem might transpire as damage to dirt roads or deep
wheel tracks when the vehicle is used in soft soil.

Construction trucks are often used in off-road situations, for example during road
constructions, where passing abilities and manoeuvrability becomes an important factor.
Since numerous transports take place at the same passageway, road conditions get worse and
worse and may finally be impassable if the construction site is located in soft or muddy
terrain. This is also an economical issue, since the construction company is often responsible
to restore the terrain when the work is finished.

The solution to these problems is to use larger and low-pressure tyres, which reduces the
ground pressure and hence reducing the ground damage. The downside of using larger wheels
is that the manoeuvrability of the truck decreases, since lack of space in the wheelhouse
causes a reduction of maximal steering angles to the front wheels.

1.2 Objectives
The intention of this master thesis project was to examine the possibilities to design and
produce a frame-steered truck, as the steering of this vehicle would be independent of tyre
sizes. The trucks performance in terms of manoeuvrability, payload and handling was to be
predicted, particularly the turning radius that was considered to be especially important. The
truck was to be based on the Volvo FM and the amount of necessary modifications has been
examined, as well as how much these modifications improve the performance of the vehicle.
In this work, the need and demands from the future costumer were also to be considered.

Alfred Johansson 1 Robin Nilsson

 1. Introduction

1.3 Benchmark of the market

At the beginning of the project a thorough benchmark of available products, which would
compete with a frame-steered truck, was made to get an idea of the performance needed with
the new concept. Since the new vehicle would operate on soft and slippery surfaces, mostly
all-wheel driven vehicles have been studied.

1.3.1 Articulated haulers

The vehicle that resembles the current concept mostly is by no doubts the articulated haulers,
or dump trucks. Articulated haulers are frame-steered construction trucks specially designed
to work in off-road environment. These articulated dump trucks are robustly built to work in
tough environment and are therefore heavier than regular trucks. Thus, due to limitations to
the gross weight, the payload when driving on public roads becomes smaller for articulated
than for regular construction trucks. Another disadvantage for articulated hauler is that their
maximum speeds are limited to around 60 km/h and hence make them uneconomic for longer
operational distances. However, when operating in off-road conditions, they have superior
performance.

1.3.2 Construction trucks

The new concept will primarily focus on the construction market where the need for better
manoeuvrability is high, especially when operating in slippery, loose or sensitive terrain
where larger tyres must be used. On the market there are a number of different manufacturers
competing in the construction sector. Examples of major producers are Volvo, MAN, Scania
and Mercedes but also smaller brands as Terberg and Ginaf have very competitive products
for certain applications and markets.

Actually, it seems as the main contenders for the concept are the smaller Dutch manufacturers
Terberg and Ginaf. The unique Dutch legislation permits a very high vehicle weight of 50
tonnes but a maximum of 10 tonnes per axle. This calls for unusual multiple-axle
configurations, which makes the country less interesting for the major manufacturers despite a
large demand of construction trucks.

Instead smaller domestic companies as Terberg and Ginaf have specialized on this market and
by collaborating with the larger manufacturers they can supply high quality vehicles. An
example is Terberg, who is basing most of their construction trucks on the Volvo FM. The
multiple-axle configurations demand more advanced steering systems, which have resulted in
an all-wheel driven truck with steered rear axle and superior mobility.

1.3.3 Performance
From fact sheets published by the manufacturers, some important performance parameters
have been collected and can be seen in Table 1.1. Generally, the dumpers have smaller
turning radii than the trucks, but the Terberg 6x6 is impressive with its high manoeuvrability.
Unfortunately the turning radii will increase significantly for the trucks when larger wheels
are mounted. According to sources at Volvo, the steering angle is reduced to 38° (from
original 50°) for the FM12 6x6 when 12.00.24 tyres are mounted [1]. This will result in a
turning radius above 11 meters, according to equations presented in Appendix A.

Alfred Johansson 2 Robin Nilsson

 1. Introduction

Table 1.1 * = restricted by road legislation, ** = total weight restricted to 26 tonnes.

Vehicle Wheel base Turning Top speed Payload
(mm) radius (mm) (km/h)
Bell B18/B20D 5165 6900 65 18
Cat 725 5519 7605 57 22
Articulated Komatsu HM300 5810 7960 58 27
Haulers Volvo A25D 5845 7980 53 24
Moxy MT26 5909 8970 51 23
Volvo FM 6x6 5670 9100 >90* 13**
Construction

MAN 6x6 5600 9700 >90* n/a**

Terberg FM 6x6 5400 7950 >90* n/a**
Trucks

Mercedes Actors 6x6 5250 9150 >90* n/a**

Renault Kerax 6x6 5200 9600 >90* n/a**

As a conclusion it can be established that articulated haulers have greater mobility than
ordinary trucks, especially when considering that the steering performance is practically
independent of the tyres mounted to the vehicle. Thus these steering performances will stay
unaffected even if the largest wheels that can be fitted are used. So when comparing with
regular trucks, it is clear who has the upper hand when the terrain gets tougher.

1.4 Potential customer sectors

There are a number of applications where a frame-steered truck would be suitable, a few of
those will be presented in this report.

1.4.1 Urban areas

As mentioned earlier in this chapter, ground pressure must be kept at a minimum when
driving in sensitive terrain to minimize damage to the soil. Truck transports sometimes occur
in such areas due to building constructions, services or other operations. In such applications a
frame-steered truck might be suitable, especially if high manoeuvrability can be achieved
since operating space often is limited.

1.4.2 Off-road construction sites

During construction work in difficult terrain articulated haulers is often used. But since they
are restricted to about 50-60 km/h they become inefficient if longer transport distances are
needed. This sector, where the off-road ability and articulated hauler is needed combined with
the high top speed of an ordinary construction truck, would be filled with the frame-steered
Volvo FM concept. The payload and productivity are also important parameters in order to
give the concept an economic benefit to the buyer. The transmission layout is also an
important feature, as the drivers on many markets are used to all-wheel driven trucks and tend
to buy this vehicles even if the real need for all-wheel drive can be questioned [2].

1.4.3 Russian tundra

In the north of Russia, large amounts of natural resources in form of oil and gas has led to
major construction taking place in this vast and remote area of the world. Material and
supplies need to be transported over very long distances and in areas where roads hardly

Alfred Johansson 3 Robin Nilsson

 1. Introduction

exists. During the winter the ground is frozen and the trucks can travel without any major
problems, although the truck must be capable of still being functional at 30-40°C below zero.
During spring and autumn the soil level above the permafrost is melted and soaked, this make
the road conditions almost impassable. In the summer the road are often dry, dusty and the
soft sand can some times cause problems, since the average day temperature in summer is
around 20-30°C [3]. A truck customized for these working conditions can be seen in Figure
1.1.

With enormous distances between construction sites it might be fatal for the driver to get
stucked with the truck. So in this application, soil compaction is not really of interest, instead
reliability and off-road performance is of highest importance. The long distances also exclude
the use of traditional articulated dump trucks like the Volvo A25D due to their lack of top
speed.

Figure 1.1 A Volvo FM truck built for Siberian conditions equipped with lager tyre
to increase the performance on soft soil

1.4.4 Agricultural sector

The problem with soil compaction caused by heavy machinery is even more important in the
agricultural industry since it reduces growth of crops and hence also the economic revenue
from the fields. In some agricultural logistic systems trucks are transporting the harvest from
the field and must when be able to travel on-field without causing too much soil damage.
This sector is of major interest in this thesis work and a frame-steered truck for the
agricultural sector is further investigated in chapter 7.

Alfred Johansson 4 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

2. Project description
This chapter will define the project more thoroughly and give a short history in the
development of frame-steered machines. It will also describe the chronological position of
this master thesis in Volvo Truck Company recent research in articulated steering concepts.

2.1 Frame-steering
This steering concept has been used for a long time in several different applications. Due to
these numerous applications the frame-steering concept has evolved into different
configurations and these will be discussed later in this chapter.

2.1.1 History
In the agricultural sector articulated steering has been employed since the beginning of the
20th century, when John Deere introduced a frame-steered one-row cultivator machine in 1916
[4], see Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1 A John Deere machine from 1916 [4]

In the construction equipment industry the development took longer time, as the worlds first
articulated hauler was presented to the world in 1966 when Volvo launched the BM-Volvo
DR 631 [5]. Until then, earthmoving applications were often carried out by a wagon pulled by
a farm tractor. Early concept vehicles were built, as the Bolinder-Munktell Livab “Moon
Rocket” in 1955 which was basically an articulated farm tractor which had the front axle
removed, see Figure 2.2. Since then, numerous of other construction vehicles have been
developed that also utilize articulated steering.

Figure 2.2 Bolinder-Munktell Livab “Moon Rocket” [5]

Alfred Johansson 5 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

2.1.2 Applications
Articulated steered vehicles can be found in many low-speed applications. As mentioned
earlier in this chapter, the concept of articulated steering started in the agricultural sector and
it is still used on heavy tractors. It is also very common in the forest industry, as frame-
steering almost always is utilized in forest harvesting equipment. Frame-steered products like
articulated haulers and wheel loaders are also widely used in the construction industry.

2.1.3 Configurations
Different configurations of the articulated steering systems have been developed throughout
the years. The configuration used by Volvo CE on their articulated haulers can be seen in
Figure 2.3. Two joints are utilised, a steering joint and a rotational joint. The disadvantage of
this configuration is the uneven load on the front wheels.

Figure 2.3 The rotational joint is located behind the steering joint

Norwegian dump truck manufacturer Moxy Engineering AS have modified the steering
arrangement and are offering a solution that can be seen in Figure 2.4. By locating the
rotational joint in front of the steering joint a few benefits are obtained. According to the
manufacturer this modification ensures equal weight distribution to the front wheels in all
situations [6]. Due to the equal weight distribution the same tractive force can be obtained,
which reduces the need to engage the differential lock. However, this concept often
deteriorates the weight distribution of the rear frame [7].

Figure 2.4 The rotational joint is positioned in front of the steering joint

Alfred Johansson 6 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

Not all applications require a fully rotating joint between front and rear frame. Danish
company A/S Hydrema is producing dump trucks with a restricted rotation, as shown in
Figure 2.5. The rotational degree of freedom is acquired by a linkage of rods connected by
spherical bearings. This system may reduce cost and weight since no large rotational bearing
is required. But as mentioned before, the rotational degree of freedom is restricted, and the
trucks offered by Hydrema have a rotational freedom of ± 15 degrees. A disadvantage of this
linkage system is that bump steer can occur during rotational movement [8].

Figure 2.5 A linkage assembly enables a certain degree of rotation

Some vehicles are designed without any rotational freedom at all. This is the case for
machines like wheel loaders and agricultural tractors, see Figure 2.6. The frame only
incorporates the steering joint and movement in all other directions is restricted. Instead, one
of the axles is pivot mounted and neutralizes any vertical differences between the wheels.

Figure 2.6 Rotation is achieved by mounting one of the axles to an oscillating joint

Alfred Johansson 7 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

2.2 TWINS-project
An articulated steered truck with a top speed of 90-100 km/h and good on-road behaviour has
during a long time been a dream for engineers at Volvo Articulated Haulers and its market
position is illustrated in Figure 2.8. In 1996 Volvo Truck Company were invited to cooperate
in a prestudy to make an articulated high-speed hauler and on the 11th of August 1997 the
project got a GO-decision for a “common concept study”. The reason for the project was that
Volvo Truck Company had an interest in increasing their market share in the construction
segment and Volvo Articulated Haulers had to find a replacement truck for the A20C that was
put out of production in 2001.

During 1998 to 2001 the concept was further developed and at several occasions during 2001
and 2002 two prototypes were tested and presented to potential costumers. The project was
however put to a halt in 2002 due to a number of reasons.

Archived documents from the project have been a starting ground for this master thesis as the
same issues regarding articulated steering were dealt with during this project. In this chapter
the TWINS-project will be examined further.

2.2.1 General information

The “TWINS” project name was inspired by the two concept vehicles, which both were
equipped with a rotational hitch as traditionally used in frame-steered dumpers trucks. One of
the vehicles was manoeuvred by the traditional Ackerman wheel-steering principle and was
designed for mainly on-road operation and given the name “On-Off”. The second vehicle was
an articulated hydraulic frame-steered vehicle designed for a higher amount of off-road
operation and hence called “Off-On”.

Figure 2.7 The prototypes Off-On (left) and On-Off (right) together for a photo shoot

2.2.2 Results
Even if the TWINS-project was called off, it still brought some good results to the companies
involved. For instance modifications to the B-ride rear suspension were developed within the
TWINS-project, and are today implemented into the standard component. Volvo Articulated
Haulers and Volvo Truck Company also gained good experiences of collaboration and
working together within the Volvo Group. They shared much information about rigid trucks
and articulated haulers and if a new project about building an articulated high-speed off-on
hauler would start, much information can be retrieved from the TWINS-project.

In this thesis work the assignment is to make a deeper study of the articulated truck concept
and therefore the ideas concerning the On-Off truck will not be mentioned in this report.

Alfred Johansson 8 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

Figure 2.8 Definition of product need from the TWINS-project

As a result of the TWINS-project some of the costumer needs and demands were defined. To
allow potential costumers to test the equipment proved to be a superior way to obtain
costumer and user requirements.

After testing the costumer agreed that the Off-On would fit “the gap” as defined in Figure 2.8.
It would find itself useful, not mainly because of high productivity but rather as a flexible
complement to pure articulated haulers like Volvo A25D and on-road rigid trucks. The Off-
On would reduce the need of expensive reloading and the total investment per working hour
would be less.

According to the costumers some market segments might be:

3-axle: a flexible vehicle, various applications and small contractors

a compliment vehicle for large contractors
a back-up vehicle partly for articulated dump trucks but mostly to rigid trucks
4-axle: a replacement for 8x8 “off-road” trucks like MB, MAN.

When a new vehicle concept enters the market the costumers and users often find new
application areas that the product developer never thought of. The Off-On truck should
therefore be possible to equip with for example a towing hitch, hook lift or front attachment
plate to fit for example a slow plough. The Off-On truck would be suitable for both small and
larger operators. The smaller operators need a flexible truck that allows them to take many
different kind of jobs, and larger operators need at truck that can act as a compliment to other
equipment on large construction sites.

At the customer clinics concerns about driving license and need for improvement in driver
education were raised. Many truck drivers might be a little bit scared and uneasy with the
articulated steering and the steering sensitivity might need to be changed. During testing, the
truck drivers felt that the steering system were too sensitive around zero. It would be preferred
to have some kind of self-centring system so it would behave more like a regular truck.

Alfred Johansson 9 Robin Nilsson

 2. Project description

If the Off-On truck is supposed to be a flexible truck and support vehicle the price tag should
not be higher than 10-15 % above the price for a comparable rigid truck. To summarize the
opinions retrieved from the customers it can be stated that “The interesting thing with the Off-
On prototype is not the cost savings, it is the flexibility”.

2.3 The Volvo FM-FS Concept

The frame-steered concept truck that this thesis work is based around was throughout the
project given the name FM-FS where FS is an abbreviation of “Frame-Steered”. This term
will be used in this report frequently when discussing the concept vehicle. FM is the common
name for the Volvo’s heavy trucks equipped with cabs of medium height.

The Volvo FM-FS concept is much based on the experience gained by the TWINS-
prototypes. One of the main problems with the Off-On prototype was the fact that it had too
little in common with the regular product range of Volvo Trucks. Hence, it would have been
difficult to fit the frame-steered Off-On into Volvo Truck product family. Although, the idea
of a frame-steered Volvo truck is still interesting and this master thesis has examined the
possibilities of building a frame-steered vehicle based on the FM chassis.

2.3.1 Volvo’s requirements

To minimize the product costs the requirement from Volvo Trucks was that the new concept
had to be based on an ordinary Volvo FM truck. Changes to the truck will be made, but the
changes must be as few as possible and every modification should be closely examined.

2.3.2 Customer requirements

The customer requirements used in this project were adopted from the needs that were defined
during the TWINS-project, as discussed previously in this chapter. It was specified based on
old experience, visits to potential costumers and, of course, the costumer clinics with the
TWINS-prototypes.

The customers really liked the concept with oscillating joint and articulated steering, because
the possibilities of high ground clearance and good pass ability. Also, since the rotational joint
reduces torsional forces in the frame, the operation cost for repairs of frames and suspension
would decrease with this concept. The customers also pointed on the need for payload and
price equal to regular rigid truck.

2.3.3 Expected market share

The market share for a new vehicle concept is really hard to predict but before and during the
development of the TWINS-prototypes Volvo Truck Company and Volvo Articulated Haulers
did a deeper international investigation. In the end of 2001 sales volume were predicted to
5000 units (1600 off-on and 3400 on-off). The minimum profitable sales volume where
calculated to 2500 units per year. In the long run including additional markets like mining,
waste, forestry, military support etc. the sale could be as good as 7500 units a year [9].

Alfred Johansson 10 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3. Steering geometry and theory

To be able to estimate the performance of the concept, some theoretical rules and principles
have been used and these will be covered in this chapter. A mathematical model of the
steering performance for a frame-steered vehicle is presented in chapter 3.4.

3.1 Theory for frame-steered vehicles

Frame-steered vehicles are designed with other principles than ordinary wheel-steered
machines. The principles for frame-steering will be discussed here and are more thoroughly
examined in Appendix A.

3.1.1 Principle of function

As visualised in Figure 3.1, frame-steered dump trucks have two joints that the vehicle rotates
around, the articulated steering joint (A) and the rotation hitch joint (B). The rotational hitch
can be locked in certain situations, such as unloading or when travelling at high speeds. Other
type of vehicles sometimes utilizes only a single steering joint (see chapter 2.1.3), but for
medium-sized off-road trucks the hitch joint have a number of advantages.

The oscillating joint makes the vehicle more flexible and improves the off-road performance.
The front and rear frame can independently tilt when crossing an obstacle and when combined
with a rear bogie axle all wheels are ensured to be in contact with the ground. This reduces
temporary high-stress situations in the frame, hence makes a weight reduction possible.

The front frame can be suspended by a simple parallel suspension, since all transverse
unevenness in the road, or terrain, will be absorbed by the front frame rotational degree of
freedom.

Figure 3.1 The articulated steering joint (A) and the oscillating hitch joint (B)

Alfred Johansson 11 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3.1.2 Restrictions considering frame-steered vehicles

Steering angle
According to a Volvo Articulated Haulers in-house rule of thumb, the outer front wheel
cannot be allowed to pass the centreline of the rear frame, see Figure 3.2. This is supposed to
cause instability and jeopardise the safety. This is discussed further in Appendix A and in
Chapter 7.1.2.

Figure 3.2. This vehicle has reached its maximum steering angle, as the outer front wheel
is about to pass the centreline of the rear frame.

If this rule is to be obeyed, the steering performance can be predicted by studying the vehicles
track width, wheelbase and the location of the steering linkage. How the equations describing
the steering performance were derived can be seen in Appendix A.

Payload position
In a frame-steered vehicle with three axles the payload centre of gravity should always be
located as close to the bogie axis as possible, see Figure 3.3. This is to minimise load transfer
to the front axle, as a major momentum otherwise would be acting on the steering assembly.
This is not a problem due to mechanical stress, but the stability of the vehicle is reduced. This
problem is explained further in Appendix A.

Figure 3.3 Correct position of payload.

Alfred Johansson 12 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3.1.3 Comparison to products available on the market

Since the steering rule of thumb only is a guideline for how Volvos dump trucks are designed,
it is interesting to compare this to the steering geometry of articulated haulers made by other
manufacturers.

Equations derived in Appendix A have been used, together with data from specification sheets
published by the manufacturers. These data are a bit questionable though, as everyone states
that their machines are capable of turning 45°. When comparing the turning radius from the
specification sheets and those calculated with equations from Appendix A (for example the
Bell B18/B20D), one might think that the data provided by the manufacturer has been slightly
“polished”.

Table 3.1 Data provided by specification sheets are listed in the two columns on the left. In the
columns on the right results from calculations according to the Volvo rule are listed.
Steering Turning radius Max. steering angle Turning radius
angle [°] [mm] (Volvo rule) [°] (Volvo rule) [mm]
Bell B18/B20D 45 6900 43,8 6888
Cat 725 45 7605 45,4 7218
Komatsu HM300 45 7960 50,4 6998
Volvo A25D 45 7980 49,7 7114
Terex TA25 45 Not available 49,1 7299
Moxy MT26 45 8970 55 7228
Case 325 45 Not available 46,5 7706

The conclusion will be that every manufacturer seems to be fulfilling the Volvo rule that not
let the outer front wheel to pass the rear frame centreline, even if someone’s are right on the
limit.

An interesting point is that many models seem to be able to accomplish greater steering
angles than 45° while maintaining their stability. The reason for restricting the steering angle
to 45° might be other aspects, such as drive shafts, hoses etc.

Alfred Johansson 13 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3.2 Ackerman steered vehicles

Normal wheel steered vehicles are almost always said to be using steering geometry
according to something called the Ackerman principle. In this report, the term “Ackerman
steering” could be replaced with just “wheel steering”, even though there are a few other
principles of aligning the wheels in a wheel steered vehicle.

It should be mentioned that the Ackerman principle is actually more of a theoretical, or

mathematical, construction and is rarely fulfilled to perfection in practise, especially not in the
trucking industry. It is fairly convenient though, when making theoretical calculations for
vehicles turning abilities, as it eliminates tyre slip and the steering performance can be carried
out by simple geometric relations between track width, wheelbase and turning angle.

3.2.1 Principle of function

The principle of Ackerman steering is visualised in Figure 3.4 (A). In order to turn the vehicle
without tyre slip, all wheels must be aligned to the same turning centre. The turning centre is
always located in-line with the non-steered axle. In a four-wheeled vehicle, this is fulfilled by
using a steering geometry that turns the inner wheel at a greater angle than the outer wheel.
Equations for these steering angles can been seen in Appendix A.

When a bogie or multiple non-steered axles are utilized the vehicle cannot turn without tyre
slip. The turning centre will now be located in-line with a theoretical “turning axis” located
somewhere between the non-steered axles, as can be seen in Figure 3.4 (B)

The lengthwise position of this turning axis may change due to different load distribution, tyre
pressure etc between the bogie axles. In this report however, the turning axis is always
assumed to be located right in the middle of the two axles.

Assumed turning
axis

(A) (B)

Figure 3.4 The basic principle of Ackerman steering on a truck with three axles.

3.2.2 Multiple steered axles

As mentioned earlier, if a bogie is used, the rear wheels will experience unhealthy slip and
wear when the vehicle is turning. The four aligned wheels unwillingness to turn will also
cause higher forces in the front wheels, resulting in a certain slip, leading to higher wear and a
minor reduction in manoeuvrability.

Alfred Johansson 14 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

To eliminate these problems, a second steered axle can replace one of the fixed axles. It is
common practice to replace the rear axle, as it will improve the vehicles manoeuvrability. As
can be seen in Figure 3.5 (A), the turning centre translated forward and is now located in-line
with the non-steered axle and hence reduces the turning radius. The tyre wear will also
decrease since no unnecessary slip will take place while cornering.

On Volvo FM trucks these axles are often self-steered or self-aligning and are pneumatically
locked at high speeds and during reverse. These can be said to always follow the Ackerman
principle. But they can also be hydraulically steered, which gives them the possibility to
“oversteer” and improve the turning capability slightly. However, in this report all axles will
be assumed to follow the Ackerman principle. Mathematical equations for the steering angles
have been constructed and are presented in Appendix A.

If a vehicle is designed for high payloads, a fourth axle might be required. The need for a
steerable axle is then considerably increased. Three fixed axles would result in a high amount
of tyre slip when turning, leading to increased tyre wear, shearing of the ground surface, and
reduced manoeuvrability.

In this case, both front and rear locations of the steerable axle are commonly used. The rear
position gives favourable turning abilities [Figure 3.5 (B)], but some applications can lead to
very high intermittent loads on the rear-most axle, which makes it more logical to place the
more robust bogie at the rear [Figure 3.5 (C)].

(A) (B) (C)

Figure 3.5 Different configurations of the axles can produce significant changes to the turning radius.

3.2.3 Restrictions of Ackerman steering

As mentioned before, the major disadvantage for Ackerman steering (or any other type of
wheel steering) is that the wheels need space to turn, as opposed to frame-steering.

Alfred Johansson 15 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3.3 Combination of Ackerman and frame-steering

It was discussed how the steering performance would be improved if the two principles of
steering was combined in a dual-steering system. The vehicle will then behave according to
Figure 3.6. As can be seen in the figure, the turning radius can be reduced by a considerable
amount with this arrangement.

Figure 3.6 The turning radius is significantly decreased when

using a combination of the steering principles.

3.4 Mathematical model

By using the equations derived in Appendix A, a mathematical model was created in
MATLAB. This is presented here in a comprehensive way by a number of charts by which
the steering performance can be predicted for virtually every frame-steered truck within the
wheelbase span.

As can be seen in Figure 3.7, the model also takes into consideration the possibility to use a
self-aligning auxiliary axle and hence charts to predict the angles “c” and “d” are available.

3.4.1 Definitions
To be able to calculate the maximum allowed steering angle “a” according to Volvo, the
distance F between the front axle and the steering joint must be known. The theoretical
wheelbase (T.W.B.) refers to the distance between the front axle and the rear “turning axis”
(se chapter 2.2.1 for definition). All calculations has been carried out with the track width T =
2.495 meters.

Alfred Johansson 16 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.7 Geometry definitions for the mathematical model

Alfred Johansson 17 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

3.4.2 Results

Figure 3.8 Maximum allowed steering angle according to Volvo rule.

Alfred Johansson 18 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.9 Turning radii with different turning angles.

Note: This graph is only valid if steering angles from Figure 3.8 is used.

Alfred Johansson 19 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.10 The inner turning radius at the rear frame.

Alfred Johansson 20 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.11 Steering angles for the inner wheel on the auxiliary axle with altered distance B. Despite the title of
the chart the axle can be located both in front and behind the bogie.

Alfred Johansson 21 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.12 Steering angles for the outer wheel on the auxiliary axle with altered distance B. Despite the title of
the chart the axle can be located both in front and behind the bogie.

Alfred Johansson 22 Robin Nilsson

 3. Steering geometry and theory

Figure 3.13 Example of how wheel steering will reduce the turning radius. This example is using parameter
values of F=1.6 and T.W.B.= 5 meters.

Alfred Johansson 23 Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson 24 Robin Nilsson
 4. Regulations and legal restrictions

4. Regulations and legal restrictions

The transportation industry is restricted by numerous regulations. This chapter will only
briefly discuss those of significant importance for the project.

Laws and legislations are unique for every country, but due to the cross-national nature of the
transport sector, some instruments are in use to increase the uniformity of regulations
concerning this area.

In Europe the European Union, and in particular the European Council, can declare certain
directives how the member states should write their legislations. The directives given by the
council can often be put in an economic perspective. They are often intended to equalise the
situation for the transport industry so the companies can compete on equal conditions,
regardless of their nationality.

Uniformed regulations concerning the safety of wheeled vehicles and their equipment are in
Europe managed by the Transport Division of the United Nations Economic Commission for
Europe (ECE). The ECE is one out of five regional organs connected to the ECOSOC, the
Economic and Social Council of the UN.

4.1 Steering
In this chapter, legislations concerning the steering system and assisting systems in
automotive vehicles are discussed.

4.1.1 Frame-steering
As frame-steering is mainly a steering system used for construction and agricultural vehicles
and is unproven in on-road high speed applications, a brief examination concerning the legal
aspect have been made.

According to sources at Volvo, there are no specific restrictions to frame-steering on motor

vehicles [10]. In UN/ECE/R79 this is described as “Buckle steering”.

Quotation from UN/ECE/R79:

2.5.3.3.2
"Buckle steering equipment" in which the movement of chassis parts relative to each
other is directly produced by the steering forces.

Hence no specific restrictions against frame-steering exist, although there are a number of
demands on a vehicles steering equipment in general.

Alfred Johansson 25 Robin Nilsson

 4. Regulations and legal restrictions

4.1.2 General steering requirements

Even if articulated steering is accepted in a high-speed truck, several demands must be
fulfilled in order for the vehicle to be approved by the national transportation government
body. Some important requirements according to R79 are listed below.

5.1.1
The steering equipment shall ensure easy and safe handling of the vehicle up to its maximum design speed.

5.3.3.4
In event of a failure within the energy transmission there shall not be any immediate changes in steering angle.

6.2.2
When the vehicle is driven in a circle with its steered wheels at approximately half lock and at a constant speed of
at least 10 km/h, the turning circle must remain the same or become larger if the steering control is released.

These requirements must be considered when designing the steering system.

4.1.3 Drive-by-wire
Regulations concerning the steering equipment have traditionally required a mechanical link
between the steering control and the wheels. A properly dimensioned mechanical link has
been regarded as “not being liable to failure”.

Advancement in electronic and data technology, together with the increase in occupant safety
by eliminating the steering column have lead to the wish to control the wheels mainly by
digital transfer of data. An agreement has been underway since late 90’s and was finally
presented in April 2005. In UN/ECE/R79 the agreement is described and where drive-by-wire
finally is officially recognized.

The R79 regulation permits fully electronic, but also fully hydraulic, transmission of the
steering input from the driver. Hence, the mechanical link is no longer necessary.

Since the signal between the steering input and the wheel now can be digitally transmitted, the
steering angle can be easily corrected and manipulated in a number of ways by on-board
stability systems. These systems are by R79 described as “Advanced Driver Assistance
Steering Systems” and are thoroughly regulated in the document.

Quotation from R79:

Systems whereby the driver remains in primary control of the vehicle but may be helped by the steering system
being influenced by signals initiated on-board the vehicle are defined as "Advanced Driver Assistance Steering
Systems". Such systems can incorporate an "Automatically Commanded Steering Function", for example, using
passive infrastructure features to assist the driver in keeping the vehicle on an ideal path (Lane Guidance, Lane
Keeping or Heading Control), to assist the driver in manoeuvring the vehicle at low speed in confined spaces or to
assist the driver in coming to rest at a pre-defined point (Bus Stop Guidance).

Advanced Driver Assistance Steering Systems can also incorporate a "Corrective Steering Function" that, for
example, warns the driver of any deviation from the chosen lane (Lane Departure Warning), corrects the steering
angle to prevent departure from the chosen lane (Lane Departure Avoidance) or corrects the steering angle of
one or more wheels to improve the vehicles dynamic behaviour or stability.

In the case of any Advanced Driver Assistance Steering System, the driver can, at all times, choose to override
the assistance function by deliberate action, for example, to avoid an unforeseen object in the road.

Alfred Johansson 26 Robin Nilsson

 4. Regulations and legal restrictions

According to the last paragraph, the assistance system is not allowed to ignore the driver
inputs and no restrictions in the steering are permitted. The driver shall at any time be able to
override the system.

4.2 Masses and dimensions

In compliance to the European Council Directive 96/53/EC the Swedish National Road
Administration permits a total gross weight of vehicles according to Table 4.1.

Table 4.1 Total vehicle weight

Number of axles Total laden weight
2 18 tonnes
3 25(26*) tonnes
4 31(32*) tonnes
*Where the driving axle is fitted with twin tyres
and air suspension or suspension recognized as
equivalent, or where each driving axle is fitted
with twin tyres and the maximum weight of each
axle does not exceed 9,5 tonnes (Appendix 1,
Trafikförordningen 1998:1276).

In the 96/53/EC the minimum total wheelbase for a four-axle is restricted in terms of legal
gross weight.

Quotation from 96/53/EC Annex 1, 4.3:

The maximum authorised weight in tonnes of a four-axle motor vehicle may not exceed five times the distance in
metres between the axes of the foremost and rearmost axles of the vehicle.

Swedish, Norwegian and Finnish regulations also restrict the gross weight in respect to the
total wheelbase of any vehicle. This is mainly to reduce wear on road structures such as
bridges, junctions etc. Swedish regulations can be seen in Table 4.2.

Alfred Johansson 27 Robin Nilsson

 4. Regulations and legal restrictions

Table 4.2 Demands on vehicle total wheelbase

The EC directives regulate the height of vehicles to 4.0 meters. Swedish national laws do not
contain such restrictions, although bridges, viaducts etc. are generally built for vehicles with a
maximum height of 4.5 meters.

Alfred Johansson 28 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

5. Powertrain and related components

This chapter will investigate the powertrain and other components, which affects the frame-
steering concept. The demands of front-wheel drive will be discussed and different
transmission layouts will be presented.

5.1 Packaging analysis of the Powertrain

As described in chapter 3 the main parameter when designing a frame-steered truck is the
distance “F” between the steering joint and the front axle, see Figure 5.1. As discussed in
Chapter 3, the distance F should be minimized in order to increase the steering capability of
the vehicle. As can be seen in Figure 5.1, the length of the powertrain restricts this distance. A
packaging analysis has been made to examine where the steering joint can be positioned.

Figure 5.1 The transmission components are restricting the location of the steering joint

5.1.1 Components
As mentioned before, Volvo FM standard components were to be used as much as possible,
and during the analysis the following components have been used.

Engine
In the Volvo FM truck program there are several different engine choices, both in
displacement and power. In this thesis work the FM-FS is supposed to be a heavy-duty truck
and therefore the largest and strongest 13-liter D13 engine was selected.

Gearbox
Volvo Truck Company has three different types of gearboxes. In each group there are a
handful of variants with different gear ratios and strength to suit the range of different engine
power and torque. However, in this analysis the Powertronic automatic gearbox have been
used, since it requires the longest over all length.

Alfred Johansson 29 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

Transfer case
A transfer case, or drop box as it is often called, is a gearbox that divides the engine power
between the driven front and rear axles. On Volvo FM trucks, the front-wheel drive is
engaged by a pneumatic cylinder that engages the output axle of the front-wheel drive to the
input shaft with a dog clutch. The transfer case may also be more advanced with a high and
low range gear or a central differential.

In this analysis, three concepts have been examined. In the first concept the transfer case have
been excluded. In the second concept an integrated transfer case was used. This transfer case
was not fully developed, thus preliminary dimensions given from Volvo Powertrain were used
[11]. In the last concept, a standard transfer case was used. It was assumed that it could be
mounted in-line directly on the output flange of the gearbox, as can be seen in Figure 5.2.

Figure 5.2 The transfer case is mounted directly to the output flange of the gearbox

Universal Joint
To minimize the distance F, a dual universal joint is located directly on the output shaft of the
transfer case. This dual joint must be located so that the centreline coincides with the
centreline of the steering joint. Thus, since this part is the rearmost component of the
transmission unit, the centreline of the dual joint determines the location of the steering joint.

Steering assembly
The steering assembly used in the packaging analysis has been retrieved from the TWINS-
project and should only be regarded as a visual representation of the steering system.

Front axle
Apart from the transmission design, the distance F can be reduced by moving the front axle
backwards. It is possible to translate the front axle approximately 200 mm further back before
it collides with the flywheel cover (approximately 3340 mm from global zero in Pro/E) [12].

Alfred Johansson 30 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

5.1.2 Results
With the components listed previously in this chapter, the length between the front axle and
the steering joint (distance F) was studied. The results can bee seen in Table 5.1.

Table 5.1 Distances between front axle and steering joint

Distance F Maximum Steering angle with relocated
Transfer case concept
[mm] steering angle front axle (200 mm)
Excluded 1600 38 41
Integrated 1850 34 37
Standard in-line 2000 32 35

The steering angles can be significantly improved by relocating the front axle. An additional
effect of moving the front axle closer to the steering joint is that it will come closer to the
centre of gravity of the front frame. Hence the stability of the front frame will be improved.
However, by changing front axle location, new frame brackets for the front suspension is
needed due to the change of frame width. The angles of the universal joints of the propeller
shaft must also be regarded. For a frame-steered vehicle with no front axle steering, there is
no need for steering arms and track rod. Thus, a redesign of the ZF front axle now used can be
made, and perhaps the simplest way to do this is to use the wheel hubs from the rear axle [13].
Changing the gear ratio in the transfer case can then compensate for any difference in gear
ratio between the ZF and Volvo hubs.

5.2 Transmission layouts

With the impacts of different transfer cases established, a number of transmission layouts can
be examined. During this thesis work it was often discussed how the transmission should be
designed, and most of the ideas discussed will be presented here. A comprehensive summary
of the layouts can be seen in Appendix G.

5.2.1 Differential solutions

A differential is used to split and distribute the engine power between the wheels. The
differential allows some speed difference between the wheels, but if one wheel loses traction
and starts to spin, all power will be transferred to this wheel. Therefore many differentials
have the possibility of locking and end the allowance of speed diversity between the wheels.
The need of a differential between the front axle and the rear tandem bogie on the FM-FS is
important to establish since it affects the transmission layouts. A comparison between
articulated haulers and regular trucks has been made to explain the different philosophies in
this area.

The Volvo A25D is a constant all-wheel driven articulated dump truck equipped with one
transversal differential on each axle that divides the power between the right and left wheel,
and there are also longitudinal differentials that divide the power between the axles. When
large steering angles are applied, large difference in speed between the front and rear wheels
occurs. Therefore, on a vehicle equipped with constant all-wheel drive, the first longitudinal
differential (between the first and second axle) is very important. The differential saves tyres,
fuel and reduces wear in the transmission when driving on high friction surfaces.

Alfred Johansson 31 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

However, the all-wheel driven Volvo FM 6x6 truck is not equipped with such a differential.
The truck is built around a different philosophy, as it is equipped with constant rear-wheel
tandem drive and optional front-wheel drive, which can be engaged manually by the driver.
The longitudinal differential can be abandoned, since the only time the optional front-wheel
drive is needed is when the truck lacks traction, and then the differential is not necessary
because of low friction. Indeed, if the truck had been equipped with a longitudinal differential
it may have been locked anyway in such situations.

By studying these solutions, it can be established that the need of a longitudinal differential is
dependent of how the front-wheel drive is to be applied. If a constant front-wheel drive is
needed, a longitudinal differential is also needed.

An alternative solution is to utilize a clutch on the propeller shaft, which would allow a
certain amount of slip during cornering. This would be computer controlled to avoid any
power consuming slip while driving forward.

5.2.2 Transmission layouts

This chapter will present a brief investigation of several transmission layouts for the FM-FS
truck. From the test reports with the Off-On prototype it can be stated that some form of front-
wheel drive is needed, see Appendix E. The concepts discussed here will solve this demand
with different methods.

Constant 6x6
If constant all-wheel drive is to be used, a longitudinal differential is needed between the front
and rear axles. Unfortunately, this will imply a larger and more advanced transfer case
compared to the one used in the analysis presented earlier in this chapter. It would be difficult
to find space for this in front of the steering joint, and the steering performance of such a
vehicle would be dreadful.

An alternative solution would be to position the transfer case on the rear frame. The transfer
case could then be placed anywhere between the steering joint and the rear axle.

Another possible solution is to integrate the transfer case into the first rear axle, as visualised
in Figure 5.3. This arrangement is good for a truck with short wheelbase, since no space is
required for a transfer box between the steering joint and the rear axle. With both these
options, it is possible to equip the transfer case with both low-high range gear and differential.
A problem with the rear axle installation is the long drive shaft that needs to go from the rear
axle to the front axle. This will increase the rotating mass, thus increasing fuel consumption,
and also increase the unsprung mass. However, the Dutch truck manufacturer Terberg
Benschop uses this rear axle arrangement with success on their FM1350-WDG 6x6 truck.

Unfortunately, these layouts will restrict the movement in the rotational joint since two drive
shafts need to pass through the steering assembly in the axis of the steering joint. Some kind
of transmission unit is also needed to transfer the torque to the front axle alongside the
gearbox and engine. A simple hitch linkage system with a limited degree of rotational can
therefore be used on trucks with this type of transmission layout. This is further investigated
in Appendix D.

Alfred Johansson 32 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

Figure 5.3 Principle layout of a possible driveline configuration with a rear axle mounted transfer case

Torque controlled all-wheel drive

If an unrestricted rotational joint is considered vital, the transfer case must be located in front
of the steering joint. As described in the analysis earlier in this chapter, a transfer case
integrated in the gearbox would then be the best choice in terms of steering performance,
since it has the shortest total transmission length achievable. Unfortunately, this alternative
requires unique transfer cases specially designed for each gearbox. Also, if maximum steering
performance is to be achieved, there is no space for any longitudinal differential.

However, the need for a differential may be solved by mounting a computer controlled clutch
on the rear, or front, propeller shaft. The computerised control system would then
automatically reduce the torque transmitted through the clutch when the vehicle is turning. If
such a clutch is mounted on both propeller shafts, the behaviour of the vehicle could be
controlled in a number of ways by altering the torque distribution.

Optional front-wheel drive

This concept is utilizing the concept used by Volvo on the FM 6x6 trucks. However, this
transfer case is not integrated to the gearbox and will hence require a larger amount of space.
As discussed earlier, this problem would be solved by mounting the transfer case on the rear
frame. Although, if mounting the transfer case behind the steering joint there would be no
problem to mount a more advanced alternative with differential and possibilities to obtain
constant all-wheel drive (constant 6x6).

Hydrostatic front-wheel drive

Hydrostatic front wheel drive is an optional configuration of the front axle that needs to be
considered. The main advantage with this configuration is that no transfer case or drive shaft
is needed to the front axle.

This is of major interest for frame-steered vehicles, since the length of the transmission can be
kept to a minimum and the turning performance can be optimized without reducing the degree
of freedom provided by the rotational joint. Additionally, if a front axle with hydrostatic hub
engines is to be used the possibility to relocate the front axle will increase further. The final
drive housing and drive shaft can be removed and therefore the distance to the steering joint
can be reduced even further. The hydrostatic concept is more thoroughly investigated in
Appendix B.

Alfred Johansson 33 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

5.3 Active components

It is today possible to use electronic systems to control actions like the engagement of the
front wheel drive, ABS and different vehicle stability systems. It is of high interest to improve
the dynamic stability and safety of a frame-steered vehicle using electronic control systems. A
number of applications for such systems will be presented here.

5.3.1 Existing electronic systems

The ABS brake system used by Volvo can easily be implemented in a frame-steered vehicle.
It is more difficult to implement the other control systems that are available on Volvo FM
trucks. The traction control, anti-roll and anti-slide systems use the steering angle of the front
wheels as input, and therefore these systems need to be redesigned [14].

5.3.2 Brake control

It would be possible to implement a brake control system, which brakes the wheels
independently to stabilize the truck.

5.3.3 Torque control

If using propeller shafts equipped with clutches as discussed earlier, the engine torque, as well
as the engine brake torque, could be totally variable controlled. This would improve the safety
when driving on slippery surfaces.

5.3.4 Progressive Steering

Customers who had the chance to drive the TWINS vehicle often complained about the
sensitivity of the steering system. If an electronic steering system were utilised, it would be
possible to use a nonlinear behaviour of the steering output. Since this vehicle will have much
higher top speed than regular articulated haulers, too sensitive and nervous steering could
cause problems.

5.3.5 Automatic locking and releasing of differentials

Volvo Construction Equipment provides an electronic control system to lock and release the
differentials on their articulated dump trucks. The system is called ATC - Automatic Traction
Control. It locks the differentials immediately if the wheels tend to spin and releases it again
instantly. By using an electronic control system, the differential locking only will be used
when needed which will lead to reduced wear on drivetrain and tyres and it will also reduce
the fuel consumption [15].

5.4 The need of front-wheel drive

The need of front-wheel drive is not easy to define. However, it can be stated that some kind
of front-wheel drive is necessary to obtain good pass ability and off-road performance. These
requirements can be fulfilled with the optional front-wheel drive adopted on the regular Volvo
FM.

Alfred Johansson 34 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

Generally all-wheel drive is need on surfaces with low traction ice, mud, sand etc. According
to VAH a frame-steered vehicle should, from a stability and safety point of view, always be
equipped with constant front-wheel drive. Without front-wheel drive a frame-steered vehicle
could very easily go into an oversteering situation when driving on slippery surfaces. This can
happen with an ordinary truck as well, but it can easily be corrected by the driver. On a frame-
steered vehicle, this is very difficult to control because the steering motion will act mostly on
the sliding wheels and the vehicle tend to oversteer even more.

If an optional front-wheel drive is used, it must be electronically controlled to engage

instantly to avoid such situations. If this is combined with other advanced control systems, as
mentioned earlier in this chapter, this might be sufficient to obtain a safe vehicle.
Unfortunately, this could not be fully investigated in this thesis project and no complete
conclusion has been drawn on this topic.

5.5 Tyres for the FM-FS truck

Due to the articulated steering there will be greater possibilities to use larger tyre dimensions
compared to a regular truck. Two different tyres has been selected, together with Anders
Trygg at 26454 Brake, Hub & Wheel, for the two applications considered in this report, these
will be presented in Chapter 6 and 7.

5.5.1 Tyres for the FM-FS 6x6 construction truck

Wide tyres that are capable of carrying heavy loads in high speed are uncommon, but for the
dump truck application the Michelin XZL-16.00.20 has been selected. The maximum axle
load is 13.2 ton per axle if these tyres are single mounted. The overall diameter is 1343 mm
and the tyre width is 438 mm. This tyre is 7 mm thinner than the 445.80R25 used on the Off-
On TWINS prototype but the XZL tyres can be used at highway speed. The overall diameter
is equal for both tyres, and the whole Michelin XZL specification can be read in Appendix H.

5.5.2 Tyres for the FM-FS 8x6 “Salix II” agricultural truck
The FM-FS Salix II truck is further investigated in chapter 7. It is an 8x6 truck with a none-
driven steered tag axle. The vehicle is to be used on agricultural soil and the ground pressure
must therefore be minimized. Since studies have shown that wide super single tyres with low
inflation pressure are more suitable than double mounted tyres [16], the Alliance 328 MPF
22.5”series have been selected. Dimensions available can be seen in Table 5.2.

These tyres are restricted to a maximum time in high speed of one hour. This is not optimal
for all applications but for the intended work cycle of the Salix II-project it would work fine.
The maximum load per axle in high-speed mode is 9000 kg per axle and more detailed
specifications can be read in Appendix I.

Alfred Johansson 35 Robin Nilsson

 5. Powertrain and related components

Table 5.2 Dimensions for Alliance 328 MPF

Rim width
Tyre Size
(inches)
400/55-22.5 13.00
500/60-22.5 16.00
500/45-22.5 16.00
550/45-22.5 16.00
550/60-22.5 16.00
600/50-22.5 20.00

Alfred Johansson 36 Robin Nilsson

 6. The FM-FS 6x6 Concept

6. The FM-FS 6x6 Concept

The all-wheel driven 6x6 truck is thought to be a small truck with good movability. In this
thesis assignment a dump truck concept is being used to illustrate the 6x6 FM-FS truck (see
Figure 6.2), but of course it is possible to use the chassis layout for other purposes as well.
The advantage with the FM-FS concept is that high tyres, giving good ground clearance, or
wide tyres with low ground pressure, can be used on all axles because none of them is being
used to steer the truck. Therefore, the off-road capabilities will increase.

The rotational degree of freedom in the hitch combined with the large tyres makes the off-
road behaviour for this type of truck very good, see Figure 6.1. The on-road maximum legal
weight for a three-axle truck will be 26 tons in countries that follows EU agreements (national
variation exists).

Figure 6.1 The advantage in terrain pass ability for the frame-steered Off-On vs. an Ackerman steered truck.

6.1 Drivetrain layout

The front axle for the FM-FS 6x6 truck will be of a new design, see chapter 5.1.2. The rear
bogie installation will be a leaf springed RADD-TR2 tandem drive with a maximum load of
32 tons. The bogie spread needs to be increased from 1370 mm to 1450 mm to make it
possible to install tyres with a greater overall diameter. The tyres that has been chosen for the
6x6 FM-FS construction truck is the Michelin XZL 16.00 R20 (chapter 5.5.1) The 1450 mm
installation is not a standard Volvo Truck installation, but the same axle spread was used in
the TWINS-project [17].

The front axle propulsion is not yet fully determined. There are two different ideas of how the
driven front axle would be powered. Either a classic mechanical layout with a transfer case
between the gearbox and rear axle or a hydrostatic drive, see Chapter 5.2.

Alfred Johansson 37 Robin Nilsson

 6. The FM-FS 6x6 Concept

Figure 6.2 CAD-model of the FM-FS 6x6 truck with tipper body of 14 m³

6.2 Tipp behaviour

According to a Volvo Construction Equipment rule of thumb the centre of gravity for the load
when tipping is never supposed to move behind the outside of the rear wheel. With this rule
the load on the rearmost axle will not increase too much and cause stability problems on soft
ground.

Another guideline for this work is that the centre of gravity of the load is located over the
bogie joint, see Chapter 3.1.2. The location of the load centre of gravity is calculated in Pro
Engineer using a simplified dump body on FM-FS 6x6 model. Maximum tipping angle will
therefore be 59° before the centre of gravity will be located behind the rear wheel, see Figure
6.3. Bear in mind that this situation will only occur if no load has left the tipped body earlier
in the tipping sequence.

Figure 6.3 Centre of gravity for tipper body 14 m³

6.3 Gross weight and payload

The gross weight for this vehicle is hard to predict, but if this concept is to be competitive the
gross weight with the mechanical drivetrain can not be more than slightly higher than the

Alfred Johansson 38 Robin Nilsson

 6. The FM-FS 6x6 Concept

weight of a comparable Volvo FM 6x6. In countries that follow the EU directives the on road
legal gross weight with single mounted tyres is 25 tons. The chassis weight is supposed to be
9-10 tons and with a tipper body of 2 tons the on road payload would be 13 tons.

6.4 Potential costumers

Before the start of a larger development process, a need must be defined and for the FM-FS
6x6 potential costumers is specified in Chapter 1.4. As mentioned earlier, the FM-FS 6x6
truck is supposed to be a smaller truck with good movability and new vehicle concepts often
find market segments that the product developer has not thought of.

The main costumer base for the FM-FS 6x6 is similar to the one that Volvo aimed at with the
TWINS-prototypes, construction sites in west and central Europe. In the comparison with the
genuine articulated dump trucks the FM-FS lacks in terrain pass ability but has the advantage
of better on-road speed. In the costumer clinics with the Off-On prototype, the costumers
expressed a need for this type of vehicle.

Alfred Johansson 39 Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson 40 Robin Nilsson
 7. FM-FS 8x6

7. FM-FS 8x6
To meet the demands for a larger truck, a 4-axle vehicle has been designed. This vehicle is
equipped with Volvos “tridem” axle concept that utilizes two driven axles and a steerable,
non-driven tag axle at the rear. Due to this additional axle the vehicle is, according to Chapter
3, permitted to operate with a total weight of 32 tonnes.

7.1 Articulated vehicles with four axles

To use frame-steering in a 4-axle vehicle is not very common and problems that might arise
have been considered. It was also discovered that Volvo already had designed such a vehicle a
few years ago.

7.1.1 Steering Forces

When turning the steering wheel at standstill a normal articulated hauler behaves according to
Figure 7.1 (A); the midsection of the vehicle is “pushed out”[7][8]. It was however feared
that, with the 4-axled vehicle, large reaction forces would occur and that it might behave as
according to Figure 7.1 (B), where the front frame is dragged sideways. Calculations were
made and can be seen in Appendix F. According to this calculation, the vehicle will behave as
according to Figure 7.1(B) if assuming an equal load on each axle. This behaviour must be
considered when designing the front suspension.

Figure 7.1 Different movements in frame during steering

7.1.2 Position of load

Since the rear frame is located on three axles, the stability is greatly improved and hence the
payload does not always need to be positioned above the bogie, as stated in Chapter 3.1.2.
However, the total load on each axle must be regarded and hence the payload should be
positioned as close to the centre of the tridem axle configuration as possible to obtain equal
load distribution.

Alfred Johansson 41 Robin Nilsson

 7. FM-FS 8x6

7.1.3 Improvement of steering angle

Due to the improved stability of the rear frame, the restrictions of the turning angle as
presented in Chapter 3.1.2 should be discussed. Since the rear frame is a stable unit by itself,
the steering angle could perhaps be increased. However, this is a complicated issue and the
dynamic behaviour of the vehicle is difficult to predict. For example, during high-speed turn-
in with an ordinary 3-axled articulated hauler, the initial tilt angle of the front frame can reach
up to 16° [7]. How a 4-axled vehicle would behave should be analysed in dynamic simulation
software such as ADAMS where parameters such as speed, position of payload, turning
angles and vehicle geometry can be altered to simulate the truck behaviour.

7.1.4 Articulated haulers in Svalbard

In the end of the year 2000, Volvo Articulated Haulers developed and delivered three 4-axled
haulers for coal mining operation at Svalbard. The bad road conditions and a very high road
inclination made articulated dump trucks the only option. Volvo Articulated Haulers
developed an 8x6 A40 hauler as can be seen in Figure 7.2. The axle configuration on these
vehicles where very similar to the 8x6 concept presented in this chapter, as the haulers
utilized a steered and undriven rearmost axle. According to sources at Volvo Articulated
Haulers the A40 8x6 performed very well and no major problems, as those listed previous in
this chapter, where discovered with the 8x6 concept. Two of the haulers where still in
operation at the time of this report, as the third vehicle was put out of operation due to an
engine failure.

Figure 7.2 Svalbard truck in operation

Alfred Johansson 42 Robin Nilsson

 7. FM-FS 8x6

7.2 Axle Installation

As can be seen in Figure 7.3, the vehicle is equipped with a tridem configuration with a leaf
suspended tandem bogie and a steerable air suspended tag axle. However, the vehicle’s
undriven auxiliary axle could also be positioned before the bogie, called a “pusher”, if desired
by the customer [17]. The difference between “tag” and “pusher” is illustrated in Figure 3.5
(B) and (C).

For dump trucks, a pusher axle is commonly used, since positioning the dual tyres of the
bogie at the rearmost location improves the stability while tipping. But since this vehicle is
designed for super single tyres on all axles, this argument is now eliminated. Thus a tag axle
should be used since, as discussed in Chapter 3.2.2, a tag axle shortens the theoretical
wheelbase and improves the turning abilities. To use a fixed auxiliary axle have been
discussed but was dismissed due to the increased tyre slip, as discussed in Chapter 3.2.2.

As can be seen in Figure 7.3, the vehicle is also equipped with a container hook lift. The
reason for this is presented later in this chapter. For high load applications, the heavy-duty
and reinforced tag axle TAD-HD is used, as it is certified for a maximum dynamic load of 9
tons and a static load of 15 tons.

Figure 7.3 CAD-visualisation of the 8x6 rear frame

7.2.1 Steering angles

Equations for the steering angles of an auxiliary axle can be found in Chapter 3.2.2. The
steering angles are based upon the turning radius and the distance from the auxiliary axle to
the turning point of the rear frame, as defined in Appendix A. Since the steering performance
of the vehicle cannot be fully predicted, different values are presented in Table 7.1

Alfred Johansson 43 Robin Nilsson

 7. FM-FS 8x6

Table 7.1 Steering angles for an auxiliary axle with a distance of 2150 mm to rear “turning
point”.
Inner turning Steering angle, Steering angle, Mean steering
radius (m) inner wheel (°) outer wheel (°) angle (°)
5 23.5 16 19.75
6 20 14.5 17.25
7 17.5 13 15.25
8 15 11.5 13.25

When using the 600/50–22.5 tyres described in Chapter 5.5.2, the maximum angle of the tag
axle is about 17°, as can be seen in Figure 7.4. At 17° contact will occur on both the anti-roll
bar (A) and the air bellow (B). A project has been carried out where the anti-roll bar has been
relocated and hence collision (A) can be solved [18]. The air bellows are more difficult to
relocate though. It is possible, but it requires a redesign of the whole axle suspension and a
great deal of development work [19]. The air bellows will probably also need some sort of
protecting metal plate to prevent damage from the tyres, gravel or other debris.

From Table 7.1 it can then be stated that these tyres should not be used if an inner turning
radius of under 6 meters are estimated. However, it should be stated that some degree of tyre
slip could be accepted.

Figure 7.4 Collisions occur at a steering angle of 17°.

7.3 Volvo FM-FS Salix II

Even though there are many applications where this vehicle can prove to be superior, the
SALIX project was the main focus for this vehicle during the thesis work. At the time of this
report the first prototype was built and referred to as “SALIX I”. Since the concept vehicle
created in this thesis work was considered as the successor of the SALIX I prototype it was
often referred to as “SALIX II”. The SALIX vehicle will be able to harvest crops and
transport them from the field without any reloading of the cargo. This will provide a new cost
effective concept of harvesting to the agricultural industry. In the SALIX project the vehicle

Alfred Johansson 44 Robin Nilsson

 7. FM-FS 8x6

will be equipped with a container hook lift as can be seen in Figure 7.5. It will also be
equipped with a quick-lock for certain harvesting machinery in front of the cab (not included
in Figure 7.5).

Depending on the density of the crops, different container sizes will be preferred. It is clear
though that a 20 ft container will be used. Since the width of the vehicle is defined by road
legislation, the only way to alter the internal volume it to adjust the height of the container.
Two containers will be discussed in this chapter. A splinter container with the dimensions
(L*W*H) 6000x2550x3030 giving an internal volume of 40 m3 provided by GMM Container,
and a standard 20 ft ISO container with the dimensions (L*W*H) 6058x2438x2591 with a
volume of 33 m3. However, since the height of the complete vehicle is restricted, see Chapter
4.2, the 40 m3 container might be to high. As can be seen in Figure 7.6(A), the 40 m3
container make the total height of the vehicle to reach about 4.5 meters depending on tyre
pressure, payload etc. However, the lower ISO-container (B) will imply a total height below 4
meters, hence fulfilling the European directive as described in Chapter 4.2.

Figure 7.5 CAD-Visualisation of the complete FM-FS 8x6

Figure 7.6 Height difference between the 40 m3 splinter and ISO 20 ft. container

Alfred Johansson 45 Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson 46 Robin Nilsson
 8. Results

8. Results
Two concept vehicles have been presented in the previous chapters and some important
performance parameters of these will be presented in this chapter.

8.1 Specifications
Since this thesis work is only a prestudy of the possibilities of the frame-steering concept,
some parameters were difficult to predict. For instance, since the transmission design was yet
to be established, the distance referred to as “F” could not be fully determined.

8.1.1 FM-FS 6x6

The FM-FS 6x6 was designed as a dump truck equipped with a 14 m3 dump body. The
vehicle where designed according to the restrictions regarding payload position, as discussed
in Chapter 3.1.2, and the resulting dimensions can be seen in Figure 8.1. The bogie axle
spread has been increased to 1450 mm.

Figure 8.1 Key dimensions for FM-FS 6x6 with tipper body

8.1.2 FM-FS 8x6

The 8x6 vehicle was equipped with the tridem axle configuration that utilizes a steerable tag
axle at the rear. It has been designed mainly for the SALIX project where a container hook lift
is to be used. This has lead to the dimensions that can be seen in Figure 8.2.

Alfred Johansson 47 Robin Nilsson

 8. Results

Figure 8.2 Key dimension for FM-FS 8x6 with hook lift and container

8.2 Steering performance

With the given dimensions, the steering performance can be predicted with the mathematical
model presented in Chapter 3. Since the two vehicles have different wheelbases and different
axle configurations, their steering performances are presented in two separate tables.

Since the distance F is depending on the transmission layout, two values have been used
which both can be associated with certain transmission concepts.

The possibility to use a “dual” steering system including wheel steering has been discussed
throughout this thesis work. By using a certain amount of wheel steering, the frame-steering
angle could be reduced, which would improve stability. Hence, two values of the frame-
steering angle are included in the tables below and these can be combined with different
angles of wheel steering.

Table 8.1 Steering performance for 6x6 with different wheel and frame-steering angles. Resulting
turning radii are given in the two columns to the right.
Distance F (m) Frame-steering Wheel steering Outer turning Inner turning
angle (°) angle (°) radius (m) radius (m)
1.4 41.8 (max) 0 7.8 4.6
0 8.7 5.6
38.0 (max)
15 6.7 2.8
1.6
15 7.5 3.8
30
30 6.2 1.6
0 10.2 7.3
33.3 (max)
1.9 15 7.5 3.7
15 8.7 5.1
25
30 6.8 2.3

Alfred Johansson 48 Robin Nilsson

 8. Results

Table 8.2 Steering performance for 8x6 with different wheel and frame-steering angles.
Distance F Frame-steering Wheel steering Outer turning Inner turning Tag mean
(m) angle (°) angle (°) radius (m) radius (m) steering angle (°)
1.4 41.8 (max) 0 7.4 4.3 22.4
0 8.2 5.3 19.1
38.0 (max)
15 6.3 2.6 31.6
1.6
15 7.2 3.6 25.7
30
30 5.8 1.4 43.3
0 9.7 6.9 15.3
33.3 (max)
15 7.1 3.5 25.9
1.9
15 8.2 4.7 20.7
25
30 6.5 2.1 35.3

As can be seen in Table 8.2, the necessary steering angles of the tag axle almost always
exceeds the 17° which in Chapter 7.2.1 where stated as the limit with the desired tyres.

8.3 Payload
No specific study has been made on how the payload will be affected by the frame-steering
concept. A brief estimation can however be made based on earlier experience and prototypes.

During the TWINS-project, parts from the Volvo articulated haulers were used. This includes
core components as the steering joint and the hitch and the weight of these components were
about 400 kg [8]. These parts where used to keep the cost down for the prototype, it can be
argued that they are not optimal since they are designed for higher loads and therefore heavier
than necessary. However, this weight does not include all components of the steering system.
Parts such as hydraulic cylinders, connection flanges etc. must also be considered.

One of the main advantages of the frame-steering concept is the rotational degree of freedom
that eliminates the torsional forces in the chassis. This reduces the need of a sub-frame when
the vehicle is used as a construction truck or in any other application that normally requires a
sub-frame to be mounted. This will result in an increased payload, but also a lower mounting
position of the dump body or other equipment.

8.4 Off-road Performance

This topic has not been of main priority in this thesis work. But to be able to compare the FM-
FS concept with other vehicle two important parameters have been examined.

8.4.1 Ground clearance

With the frame-steering concept, wider and larger tyres can be mounted, which significantly
improves the ground clearance. With the standard ZF driven front axle and Michelin XZL
16.00R20, the ground clearance is expected to be roughly 480 mm under the front axle
housing, see Figure 8.3. This is very good, and even comparable with many articulated
haulers in the 20-25 tons payload sector. For instance Volvo A25D got a ground clearance of
456 mm, Bell B20D 440mm and Cat 745 495mm at their lowest points.

Alfred Johansson 49 Robin Nilsson

 8. Results

Figure 8.3. Ground clearance under front axle 480 mm (with XZL 16.00 R20)

8.4.2 Approach angle

The importance of the approach angle can be questioned, but generally it can be said that with
low ground clearance, the importance of good approach angle increases. Articulated haulers
have an approach angle of about 30°. A standard Volvo FM truck has an approach angle of
about 23 degrees. With the XZL 16.00.20 tyres, a modified front bumper and the standard all-
wheel drive axle position, the approach angle can reach up to 30°; as good as the articulated
haulers, see Figure 8.4. If a larger amount of approach angle is needed, the height of the frame
can be improved by mounting a thicker spacer between the leaf spring and the axle. The
spacer is today around 30 mm but it could with out any major drawbacks be changed to 90-
100 mm [12].

Figure 8.4. Theoretical angel of attack with front suspension bracket as factor of limitation

Alfred Johansson 50 Robin Nilsson

 9. Conclusion

9. Conclusion
During this thesis work, two concept vehicles have been further investigated, with both
mechanical and hydrostatic propulsion. The assignment and goal for this thesis work has been
to understand, define and provide ideas of how a frame-steered version of a Volvo FM truck
should/could be designed.

The turning radius is a very important parameter when designing a frame-steered truck and
therefore the mathematical model for turning performance is of great interest. The MATLAB
model made for the FM-FS truck has been really helpful and easy to understand. Different
design ideas can through this model straightforwardly be compared and judged on a scientific
basis.

The main questions that during the work were defined are the following:

When and under which conditions and circumstances are all-wheel drive needed;
- High speed?
- Slippery surface?
- Off-road?

What is the costumer need and demands;

- Steering ability?
- Angel of attack?
- Ground clearance?
- Hitch articulation?
- Payload?
- Extra low range gear?

The main questions that first need to be solved is the drivetrain layout and much time has
been spent trying to come up with a functional and desirable concept.

Optimal steering performance and movability is obtained when no mechanical front wheel
drive is used, since this concept do not restricts steering angle or rotational degree of freedom.
The alternative solution is hydraulic drive of the front wheels. This does not affect the
steering performance, but the maximum torque delivery to the wheels is limited. Hence, both
concepts have some customer benefits. The operation environment is important, since this
determines the demands on steering performance and amount of front-wheel drive propulsion.

Another conclusion that can be drawn is that for safety reasons trucks with only optional
front-wheel drive will need some kind of control system like anti-slide or traction control.

A combined steering concept with both Ackerman and articulated steering was briefly
investigated. The concept seems to be the most desirable solution from a Volvo Truck
Company point of view, and it would be possible to build a frame-steered all-wheel drive
truck with excellent turning ability. It also improves the vehicle stability as the steering angles
of the frame can be reduced while maintaining good steering performance.

Alfred Johansson 51 Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson 52 Robin Nilsson
 10. Discussion and proposals for future work

10. Discussion and proposals for future work

During this thesis work much knowledge has been gained, some questions have been
answered and other have been raised. The work has been more about collecting and analysing
ideas rather than defining a final design.

There has been much discussion about the need of front-wheel drive. A frame-steered vehicle
behaves different compared to an Ackerman steered. Since countersteer is very difficult with
this type of steering, it was argued by Volvo Articulated Haulers that front-wheel drive is
always necessary to avoid oversteer. In this thesis work the starting ground was a rigid Volvo
FM truck with only optional front-wheel drive and from a passability perspective all-wheel
drive is only needed in low speed where there is a risk to get stucked.

For future work, the arguments concerning constant all-wheel drive need to be investigated. It
would be a great advantage if these arguments could be supported with computer simulations
where the dynamics of such a vehicle can be tested. With software like ADAMS the
importance of parameters like front wheel drive, steering angle, payload, payload distribution
and axle configuration could be analysed. ADAMS is used within the Volvo Group and this
would probably prove to be an excellent thesis work for two ambitious students.

The dual-steer concept is highly interesting as it could introduce the frame-steering concept
into high-speed commercial vehicles. For an initial prototype, the Volvo Truck original ZF
driven front axle could be used and it would be supported by an electronic controlled frame-
steering system that only is activated at low speeds. At high speed the frame-steering system
would be turned off and the vehicle would behave as a regular Volvo FM truck. The high-
speed stability concerns on frame-steered vehicles could by this way be ignored.

Electronic stabilisation systems are today accepted within the vehicle industry and in a long
time perspective it would be possible to implement such systems to a frame-steered truck. A
pure frame-steered truck with only optional front-wheel drive would definitely need some
kind of control system from a dynamical high-speed safety point-of-view.

When continuing with this concept, the requirement from the customers needs to be specified
in a more detailed way. In this thesis work, the requirements and demands used in the
TWINS-project have been used. However, the vehicles presented in this report do not have
the same performance and hence the customer basis should be reviewed.

Alfred Johansson 53 Robin Nilsson

Alfred Johansson 54 Robin Nilsson
 11. References

11. References
[1] Sten Ragnhult, Front suspension engineer, Dept.26421, Volvo 3P

[2] Pavel Prochazka, Product planner, Dept. 23330, Volvo 3P

[3] Niklas Johansson, Product Manager Region East, Dept.22740, Volvo Trucks AB

[4] Silversides C.R, Use of articulated wheeled tractors in logging. Unasylva No. 83.

[5] http://www.volvo.com/constructionequipment/global/en-gb/AboutUs/history/

[6] http://www.moxy.no

[7] Heikki Illerhag, Dynamic simulation engineer, Dept. 53510, Volvo Articulated Haulers

[8] Jörgen Ahlberg, Senior Engineer, Dept. 53410, Volvo Articulated Haulers

[9] Ivar Aaboen, Vehicle product manager, Dept. 23340, Volvo 3P

[10] Per-Olof Rydberg, Vehicle regulations and certification adviser, Dept. 26710, Volvo 3P

[11] Robert Lundin, Technical consultant, Dept. 24350, Volvo Powertrain

[12] Lorenz Andersson, Platform geometry architecture engineer, Dept. 26940, Volvo 3P

[13] Jan Öberg, Transmission project adviser, Dept. 24350, Volvo Powertrain

[14] Jan-Inge Svensson, Vehicle control systems engineer, Dept. 26452, Volvo 3P

[15] Press release from Volvo CE – 2005-11-24

[16] Braunack M.V, A tyre option for sugarcane haulout trucks to minimise soil compaction.
Bureau of Sugar Experiment Stations, Tully Qld., Australia 2004.

[17] Johan Hederstierna, VMT leader suspension, Dept. 23073, Volvo 3P

[18] Roger Andreasson, Technical consultant, Dept. 26200, Volvo 3P

[19] Roland Svensson, Senior engineer, Dept. 26422, Volvo 3P

Alfred Johansson 55 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix A. Steering geometry

Appendix A. Steering geometry

Frame-steering
Frame-steering is a rather complex steering configuration and has distinctive dissimilarities
with conventional Ackerman steering. These will be discussed in this chapter and a useful
mathematical model for predicting the behaviour of a frame-steered vehicle is presented in
Chapter 3.

Problems and safety

According to a Volvo in-house rule of thumb the outer front wheel cannot be allowed to pass
the centreline of the rear frame, see Figure 1. Overrunning this rule is supposed to make the
vehicle unstable and affect the safety.

Figure 1. This vehicle has reached its maximum steering angle, as the outer front wheel is about to pass the
centreline of the rear frame. Notice the important parameters, the track width T and the distance F.

This is of particular importance if the payload has not been positioned correctly. If the
steering linkage is weighed down at a greater steering angle than allowed the front frame can
twist around the rotational joint (as shown in Figure 2). The inner front wheel is lifted and the
whole front frame can turn over, as seen in Figure 3.

Figure 2. Incorrect position of the payload, load transfer to the front axle will take place. Compare with Figure
2.3 in Chapter 2.1.1

Alfred Johansson A1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix A. Steering geometry

Figure 3.

Theoretical Model
From the rule discussed in the previous chapter, a theoretical model for steering performance
can be carried out by using the track width (T), wheelbase (R) and the distance between the
front axle and the steering joint.

As visualised in Figure 1, the maximum steering angle cannot be greater than

T
a = arctan (1)
2F

From Figure 4 the outer and inner turning radius can then be expressed as

Alfred Johansson A2 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix A. Steering geometry

R
F+
F+ x T cos a + T
Ro = + = (2)
tan a 2 tan a 2

R
F+
F+x T cos a − R ⋅ tan a − T
Ri = −y− = (3)
sin a 2 sin a 2

Definitions:
a = steering angle
F = Front of joint
R = Rear of joint (theoretical turning axis)
Ro = Outer radius
Ri = Inner radius
T = Track width

Figure 4.

This gives a theoretical turning radius that corresponds reasonable well to data sheets
published by the manufacturers. It should be remarked that this model does not take in
account the different loads on the rear axles, tyre slip and are assuming that the theoretical
wheelbase is located right between the rear axles.

Ackerman steering
For calculations on different steering angles on a regular truck, similar equations were
constructed for Ackerman steering principle. The basic idea with Ackerman steering can be
seen in Figure 5. As the inside front wheel must take a more narrow turn it will also turn with
a higher steering angle.

According to Figure 5 the outer turning radius ro can be expressed as

L
ro = (4)
sin a
and the inner turning radius ri

L
ri = −T (5)
tan a

Alfred Johansson A3 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix A. Steering geometry

Figure 5.

If the maximum steering angle is only given for the inner wheel (angle b) the angle a can be
calculated using the following relationship, see Figure 6.

1
a = arctan (6)
T 1
+
L tan b

Figure 6.

Alfred Johansson A4 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix A. Steering geometry

If self-aligning rear wheel steering is utilized, the steering angle for these wheels can
according to Figure 6 be expressed as

B
c = arctan (7)
ri + T
B
d = arctan (8)
ri

Notice that these two equations can be applied for both rear- and front steered auxiliary axles.

Dual Steering
During the work with this master thesis it was found out that a combined steering system with
both Ackerman and frame-steering would be really competitive and therefore a mathematical
model for the dual-steering concept were examined.

In (2) the equation for outer front wheel turning radius on a frame-steered truck is expressed
as:
R
F+
F+ x T cos a + T
Ro = + =
tan a 2 tan a 2

If the frame-steering is combined with the Ackerman steering, the equation for the outer
turning radius expressed as shown in (9). The relationship is identified by using Figure 7.

T sin a
+ F ⋅ cos a + R
R1 = 2 (9)
sin (θ + a )

Figure 7.

Alfred Johansson A5 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

During the time of this report, frequent discussions if to use hydrostatic drive in the FM-FS
took place and hence a deeper investigation was made. The investigation will be presented
here, as well as suggestions for future development.

High speed assisting hydrostatic drive

Due to the restricted distance F referred to in Chapter 5, a hydrostatically driven front axle
would save valuable space since the transfer case would be eliminated. This would be very
useful in the FM-FS concept, as it would improve the steering performance.

The hydraulic system would be possible to implement in virtually any truck, regardless of it
application, since it has a number of advantages. Studies have shown that the all-wheel drive
is rarely used in most applications.1 The driver may switch to all-wheel drive when
approaching rough terrain or very steep hills but during a normal work cycle the front-wheel
drive is often not engaged. Due to the number of rotating transmission parts and added
weight, the mechanical all-wheel drive transmission is constantly consuming extra fuel and
also reduces the payload. Hence it is not only an articulated steered truck that would benefit
from such a propulsion system.

The German competitor MAN had at the time of this report recently presented such a front-
wheel hydraulic transmission. They claim to save about 400 kg compared to a standard all-
wheel drive truck. Unfortunately no technical specification had been made available. The
system was however presented as an “assisting” hydrostatic drive which can be engaged up to
30 km/h.2 The term “assisting” could then be referring to its amount of power, i.e. it may not
deliver the same amount of torque as a mechanical all-wheel drive system.

Hydrostatic drive is very interesting for the FM-FS concept, as Volvo Articulated Haulers
states that front-wheel drive should always be engaged in an articulated steered vehicle. This
is probably a very legitimate demand for an articulated hauler, but for a truck, designed for
speeds up to about 90 km/h, this might not be required. If the assisting hydraulic drive can
operate up to speeds of about 30 km/h or even higher, this might be enough to fulfil the
demands from VAH. When operating in higher speeds the terrain will most likely be rather
smooth and hence the VAH demand might be possible to neglect.

1
Arcila M, Bien B, Application of hydraulic motors to drive truck’s steered axles. Chalmers University of
Technology, Göteborg, Sweden 2004.
2
http://mis.mn.man.de/

Alfred Johansson B1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Low speed hydrostatic drive for SALIX vehicle

For certain applications a fully hydraulic drive is preferable. This is common when very low
speeds are requested, for example when trucks are used for road sweeping. By driving the
wheels hydraulically, the speed can be continuously variable, by simply altering the
displacement of the pump, from standstill to the hydraulic system’s maximum speed without
any clutch slip or significant torque reduction. In such applications the hydraulic motor is
often mounted on the propeller shaft and the pump is mounted on an engine PTO.

Background
For the SALIX concept vehicle however, this common solution cannot be optimally
employed. The vehicle is expected to carry out the harvesting operation at speeds from 5 km/h
up to 10 km/h or even higher. At the same time the harvesting equipment is using a large
amount of hydraulic power only available when the diesel engine is running at full speed. Due
to high speed requirements and a high tractive force produced by the hydraulic propulsion
system, no properly dimensioned PTO is available. This resulted in a maximum hydraulic
speed of only 3.5 km/h for the prototype vehicle SALIX I. It would perhaps be possible to
operate with a manual gearbox, but harvesting should be able to be done at continuously
variable speed. Hence a hydrostatic system powered by the driveshaft is required.

Requirements
With current equipment, harvesting is expected to be performed at 5-10 km/h depending on
the specific crop.3 However, harvesting speeds are generally restricted to about 10 km/h since
agricultural machinery often lacks suspension. Higher speeds would result in a very
uncomfortable working environment for the driver. The SALIX concept, where the truck is
used as the harvesting vehicle, is not restricted by this problem and perhaps higher speeds are
possible. If the crop is particularly light and easy to harvest it might be possible to operate at
slightly higher speeds. Unfortunately, at the time of this report the harvesting machinery was
not tested and no exact values could be used. Hence 10 km/h was regarded as the required
speed when driving in fully hydrostatic transmission mode.

According to technicians at Volvo the vehicle should be able to climb an inclination of 25%
fully loaded4. The transmitted power can then be calculated according to equation 1.

P = F ⋅v (1)

P=Power [W]
F=Force [N]
v=Velocity [m/s]

To fulfil the demands, the hydrostatic system must then be designed to transmit the power
listed in Table 1. This amount of power cannot be transmitted trough available PTO’s and
hence the pump must be driven by the drive propeller shaft.

3
Wilstrand Mats, project manager, SALIX Maskiner AB
4
Jan Öberg, Technical Adviser, Vendor components and project support, Volvo Powertrain AB

Alfred Johansson B2 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Table 3 Power required to be transmitted trough the hydraulic system.

Vehicle gross weight Propulsion force Power
(tonnes) (kN) (kW)
26 65 181
32 80 222

Concepts
During discussions with supervisor Lena Larsson and other employees at Volvo 3P, several
concepts came up and these will be analysed in this chapter.

Scarab Sweepers
To provide a simple and cost effective solution to the problem discussed earlier, a short
benchmarking of available products was made. It was discovered, that an English company
named Scarab Sweepers had developed a concept that would suit the SALIX vehicle
perfectly. Scarab Sweepers adapts trucks for road sweeping applications, where problems
similar to the ones experienced with the SALIX vehicle. The sweeping machinery consumes a
large amount of power requiring the engine to run on high speeds. At the same time the
customers want to be able to operate the vehicle in different speeds. This has traditionally
been solved by installing a smaller, secondary engine that runs the cleaning equipment.
Unfortunately, this secondary engine occupies valuable space and reduces the vehicles
efficiency.

The concept developed by Scarab Sweepers solves this problem, the concept is very simple
and can be installed in virtually any truck if sufficient space is available. The system is
covered in one unit, including a pump, motor and a coupling which enables the drive
propeller to be divided when driving in hydrostatic mode. When driving in normal mode, the
hydraulic components are disengaged and by reconnecting the drive propeller the vehicle
operates like an ordinary truck. A graphic description of the transmission unit can be seen in
Figure 1. Another advantage of this product is the PTO used for an additional hydraulic pump
that normally drives the sweeping equipment. In the SALIX project, this could be used to
power the external harvesting machinery.

Figure 1. (1) Variable displacement pump. (2) Motor. (3) Shaft coupling. (4) Hydraulic pump for external
use.

Alfred Johansson B3 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Unfortunately, Scarab Sweepers is currently only installing this transmission unit on small
trucks like the Volvo FL and other similar trucks in the 18 tonnes range.

The maximum torque of the diesel engine is restricted to 1000 Nm.5 This is caused by the
universal joints, which are stressed when driving in “mechanical” mode. The sizes of these
joints are restricted due to space delimitations. The Scandinavian distributor has in recent
years discussed this issue with technical spokesmen of Scarab Sweepers and a more robust
transmission is under development. However, according to the distributor, it is believed that
transmission units for heavy trucks as the FM and FH with engine power of about 300-400
kW are not of interest to Scarab. This is understandable, as they are simply not suitable for
ordinary road sweeping applications. The concept is very interesting though, as the system
would be very compact and could interact with an assisting front-wheel hydraulic drive, see
Figure 2. It might also be used in other applications since it is easy to install.

Figure 2 Layout of the concept developed by Scarab Sweepers assisted by a front-wheel hydraulic system.

Driven front and tag axle

During the discussions of developing of a front-wheel hydraulic drive system, the possibility
to also mount this system at the tag axle was considered, see Figure 3. If a driven front axle is
developed this may be the most cost effective concept since it only utilize of-the-shelves
components. In the work done earlier6, a target of 22 kNm at 5 km/h for each axle was set but
was not fully accomplished. This torque would produce a total tractive force of 88 kN, which
even exceeds the requirements set in Table 1.

However, this torque was set to be produced at speeds of 5 km/h or less. The torque delivered
may then drop due to displacement reduction in the hydraulic motor.

Perhaps this is good enough for the SALIX vehicle, as harvesting will mainly be carried out
in a relatively horizontal terrain. It might be enough if the hydraulic propulsion system can
deliver the amount of torque described above in particular demanding situations, for example
to enable driving to the field or to overcome obstacles. If the problems experienced earlier can
be solved, this would be a very interesting concept.

5
Clas Andreasson, Ren Väg AB, Scandinavian distributor of Scarab Sweepers.
6
Arcila M, Bien B, Application of hydraulic motors to drive truck’s steered axles. Chalmers University of
Technology, Göteborg, Sweden 2004.

Alfred Johansson B4 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Figure 3 Two steered hydraulically driven axles

Rear-mounted motor
This is a modification of the Scarab concept, where the hydraulic motor has been positioned
behind the third axle, se Figure 4. As can be seen in Chapter 7, the Salix vehicle is planned to
be equipped with a tridem axle configuration. With this concept, the third axle would be
replaced with an axle similar to the second axle which has a connecting flange on its rear side.
Thus an input for the hydraulic power can be arranged by using standard Volvo parts.

Figure 4 Symbolic visualization of the rear-mounted motor concept layout

If the hydraulic motor can operate at the same speed as the drive shaft, no gear reductions will
be necessary and hence the system would be lighter and occupy less space. With maximum
speed of 10 km/h, an estimated final gear ratio of about 1:4,5 and a wheel radius of 0.5
meters, the motor will experience working conditions as listed in Table 2.

Table 4 Requirements for hydraulic motor

Required tractive Max torque (4,5:1) Max speed Theoretical power
force (kN) (kNm) (rpm) (kW)
65 7,2 238 181
80 8,9 238 222

Alfred Johansson B5 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

However, these values do not take in account a propulsion system at the front axle. If an
assisting front hydraulic system is employed, the requirements for the rear hydraulic system
naturally decrease.

Still, a PTO mounted on the propeller shaft will be needed. If it features the possibility to
disconnect the rear drive shaft axle, as in the Scarab transmission unit, advantages will be
gained as there will be no need for an auxiliary shaft coupling. The German transmission
manufacturer Stiebel Getriebebau GmbH & Co. KG produces three PTO units of this type
with different gear ratios, which together forms the 4496.38 series. A packaging analysis was
performed and can be seen in Figure 5 and 6. These transmission units are, according to
technicians at Stiebel 7, developed for concrete mixers and direct the torque to either the rear
wheels or the PTO. A drawing including brief technical data of these units can be seen in
Appendix C.

Figure 5 A simplified visual representation of the Stiebel transmission unit equipped with a variable
displacement 180 cc hydraulic pump.

Figure 6. The pump-drive-PTO located in front of the rear axles.

7
Stock R. Product Manager Pump Drive, Stiebel Getriebebau

Alfred Johansson B6 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

The different input/output ratios available for the Stiebel PTO are 0.659, 0.825 and 1.054. A
higher rotational speed reduces the size of the pump and hence the third ratio, 1.054, seems
favourable. Assuming an engine speed of 1500 rpm gives a rotational pump speed of 1581
rpm. According to Table 2, the pump should be able to transmit a total amount of power of
about 220 kW. Assuming a system pressure of 350 bar result in a flow of 377 litres/minute.
This requires a maximum displacement of 238 cc. In the packaging analysis a Bosch-Rexroth
A4VG 250 cc variable displacement pump was used, since this was considered suitable for
the application. A summary of the parameters is found in Table 3.

As can be seen in Figure 6, the total height of the transmission unit can cause some problems
as it occupies space above the frame. In this analysis, the connection flanges of the unit are
placed in the same horizontal plane as the rear axle connection flange.

Table 5 System parameters

P ∆p Q npump Vpump
3
(kW) (bar) (l/min) (rpm) (cm /rev)
220 350 377 1581 238

From table 2 it can be established that the motor should be able to operate at about 240 rpm.
This is a rather difficult speed, as it is very high for a radial piston motor, and to low for
optimal use of an axial piston motor. After a brief benchmark of the market, including Bosch-
Rexroth, Poclain, Denison and Sampo, the Denison MRD/MRV 2800 or the MRD/MRV
1800 was found to be most suitable for this application, since the variable eccentric radial
configurations of these motors allow them to reach the speeds required. Specifications for
these motors can be seen in Table 3.

Table 6 Specifications of the variable Denison motors. (*=min. displacement)

Motor Max. torque Max. speed Power Weight
(kNm) (rpm) (kW) (kg)
Denison MRD 1800 5,8 250 (400*) 153 209
Denison MRD 2800 8,6 215 (280*) 194 325

The high-speed ability of these pumps would make hydrostatic propulsion possible up to
speeds of about 12 km/h and 17 km/h for the MRD 2800 and MRD 1800 respectively.

A packaging study was done in Pro/Engineer and the result can be seen in Figure 7. Since the
SALIX vehicle is expected to be equipped with a tridem axle configuration, collision occurs
between the hydraulic motor and the air bellow used to lift the tag axle. If the air bellow can
be located elsewhere or replaced with another lifting arrangement this concept may be
favourable due to its high performance.

Otherwise, a smaller axial piston motor could be mounted together with a gear reduction unit
to optimise the speed range of the axial motor. This concept is also very interesting.

Alfred Johansson B7 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix B. Hydrostatic Propulsion

Figure 7 The hydraulic motor is marked out as well as the problem with the bogie lift air bellow.

Conclusion
The demands on a future hydraulic front-wheel drive in an articulated truck must be
thoroughly analysed, with test drives or computer simulations. Dynamic simulations in
systems like ADAMS would probably be very helpful, where the vehicles dynamic behaviour
with different tractive forces from the hydraulic system can be tested and compared instantly.
This could very well be performed in the form of another thesis project, as it is a well defined
and certainly a very appealing project for many students.

Also, three different low-speed concepts have been briefly examined in this report. If a
hydraulic front axle is developed it will most certainly make the second concept achievable
and probably the most suitable since it would also make the vehicle all-wheel driven. Before
such an axle is available, only the first or the third concept is possible. Since the first concept,
developed by Scarab Sweepers, is a rather complicated and compact unit it might demand
extensive development resources. It is probably protected by patent on behalf of Scarab
Sweepers and this must be examined. The third concept is probably the most suitable if a
quick solution is requested for a prototype vehicle. It has high performance and most parts
already exist which should reduce the development time.

Alfred Johansson B8 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix C. Pump-drive-PTO by STIEBEL

Appendix C. Pump-drive-PTO by STIEBEL

Alfred Johansson C1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix D. Hitch Solutions

Appendix D. Hitch Solutions

On the Off-On twins prototype the Transfer case (that supplies the front axle with power) is
placed in front of the articulated steering and rotation hitch. This is similar to the layout on a
pure off-road articulated dump truck like the Volvo A25D. On these articulated dump trucks
there are only one drive shaft that need to go through the hitch and the truck can therefore be
designed to allow the load body (rear of the hitch) to turn over without the front frame to
follow in the collapse i.e. a free hitch, see figure 1.

Figure 1. Steering and hitch assembly on the Off-ON prototype.

In this thesis work a truck with the transfer case behind the hitch seems to be the best option
for a truck with mechanical front-wheel drive. Therefore the hitch oscillation needed to be
limited (figure 2), otherwise the parallel drive shafts would cross each under some
circumstances.

Figure 2. A more common hitch system with rear axle mounted transfer case. Ground Clearance 455 mm (front
axle)

Perhaps a simpler link system like the one that A/S Hydrema use on their 922C compact
dump truck (20 ton payload)8 could be used instead of the Volvo Articulated Haulers solution.
The Hydrema 922C is equipped with a simple three-point linkage system that acts both like
the hitch and steering system.

8
www.hydrema.com

Alfred Johansson D1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix D. Hitch Solutions

The downside with this system is the bumpsteer that occur when one wheel hit an obstacle. If
one front wheel hit an obstacle and lift the wheel the front frame of the truck would tend to
turn a little in that direction. Volvo Construction Equipment used a similar three-point link
system on their last generation of large backhoe loader the EL 70.

Figure 3. The linkage system on a Hydrema 922C

Figure 4. Link system hitch on forest machine with double drive shafts

A brief investigation of how a three-point hitch concept could be built in on a frame-steered

version of a Volvo FM truck was carried out during this thesis work. If the system should be
competitive against a regular VAH hitch the ground clearance need to be improved. It could
be possible to manage some improvements by lifting both the drive shafts and transfer case
higher and place the lower linkage below the drive shafts.

The hitch rotation will not be competitive when compared with a VAH hitch but it will reduce
frame twist and may be good enough for many costumers need.

Alfred Johansson D2 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix D. Hitch Solutions

Figure 5. Linkage system with Ground Clearance 373 mm

Figure 6 The hitch and steering assembly on the Huddig backhoe loaders

If a linkage system is not favoured, it may be better to use an opened hitch like the one that
Huddig AB uses on their large backhoe loaders, see figure 6. On their loaders the hitch is of
an opened type and provide space for both the drive shaft and hydraulic hoses. Volvo
articulated haulers also used to use an opened hitch design on their articulated haulers.

The work regarding the hitch solution need to be focused on making a simple solution that
matches the need of ground clearance a hitch rotation. The lowest part of the truck should
always be located under one of the axles and not anywhere between. The hitch should also be
equipped with some kind of locking or braking device that can be used to make the chassis
stiffer at highway speed.

Alfred Johansson D3 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix E. Full vehicle test with Off-On truck

Appendix E. Full vehicle test with Off-On truck

The test vehicle was the Off-On prototype and the tests were executed in Eskilstuna on
Volvo Construction Equipment test facilities on the 28th of February 2002. The comments
here below are translated into English from the original test report.

Notes from test with the off-on prototype

With All-Wheel drive on icy surface

1. No differentials locked
-

2. Central differential locked

It is possible to control the vehicle due to the possibility for the front wheels to
pull the vehicle around.

3. Central and differential between rear axles locked.

The truck behaves the same way as in case 2.

4. Front axle and central differential locked.

The front wheels are forced to turn at equal speed and the truck loses traction.

5. Front axle and differential between rear axles locked.

Front axle loses grip and the rear axles got better traction because of locked
longitudinal differential and as a consequence the truck tend to under steer.

6. Front axle differential locked

The truck still tends to under-steer due to the loss of front axle grip.

With no front-wheel drive and on icy surface

1. No differential locked
One wheel often tends to spin and all power goes to this wheel.

2. Differential between rear axles locked

The truck move forward, but this case is much worse than test number 2 with all-
wheel drive. In this mode it is impossible to control the skid.

3. All three rear differentials locked.

Serious under steering, the rear axles are pushing the front axle forward.

Alfred Johansson E1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix E. Full vehicle test with Off-On truck

Conclusion of testing of the Twins off-on prototype

In addition to show the TWINS-prototype to potential costumers at clinic tests, there were
also some full vehicle tests preformed. Due to lack of guidelines for documentation much
information is lost but some reports have been retrieved.

The main task for the test engineers were to test the importance of front-wheel drive for a
frame-steered vehicle, and to test the vehicle with and without the differentials locked.
When driving with and without the front-wheel drive, the off-on truck behaved as
expected on surface with low traction, but the truck was easier to handle when using all-
wheel drive. The engine brake was a little bit to rough and tended to lock one of the rear
wheels when driving without front-wheel drive.

After the differential tests were carried out the engineers opinion were that they would
prefer to have a driveline equipped with differentials between all axles with a differential
in the transfer case to get optimal manoeuvrability, i.e. a drive line which is similar to the
drive line that Volvo Articulated Haulers uses on their dump trucks. Volvo FM 6x6 truck
is not today equipped with such a differential in the drop box.

The test engineers opinion were that to keep good stability and handling in a frame-
steered truck which not is equipped with constant all-wheel drive, an advanced control
system is required. This would imply a system that the engage the all-wheel drive system
and control the looking of the differentials (at least the differential between the rear
axles). A frame-steered truck is more unstable than a rigid and has therefore other
demands on the driveline layout.

During off-road testing the test team also realized that all-wheel drive would increase
manoeuvrability and in bad terrain. I have the
possibility to lock the differentials. The hill-climbing characteristic also increased while
engaging the all-wheel drive system.

As a conclusion the test engineers from Volvo Articulated Haulers were concerned about
the safety (in terms of dynamic stability) for this type vehicle and pointed on the fact that
this truck has a greater top speed than regular articulated dump trucks and does not have
the same driveline layout. Therefore the comparison is quite difficult to perform and they
were also worried about the strength of some driveline components. They pointed on the
fact that this vehicle is meant to be designed to go 75% off-road, an operation cycle much
heavier than the standard components in the FM 6x6 driveline is designed for.

Alfred Johansson E2 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix F. Steering Forces on 8x6

Appendix F. Steering Forces on 8x6

The behaviour of the 8x6 when steering during standstill where discussed and thus a
quick calculation was made. Two cases where considered as can bee seen in Figure 1.
Normally, an articulated steered vehicle behaves as in Case A. It was however feared that
a 4-axled vehicle might behave as in Case B.

Figure 1

Alfred Johansson F1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix F. Steering Forces on 8x6

To establish how the vehicle will behave, a comparison between the necessary amount of
steering torque was made. Load and friction coefficients are assumed to be equal for each
axle. Thus the friction forces are all defined as “Fr”.

Case A Case B

M = Fr ⋅ 4.8 − Fr ⋅ 2 = 2.8 ⋅ Fr Nm M = 1.7 ⋅ Fr Nm

Figure 2

Conclusion
Case B occurs at a lower amount of input torque from the steering system. Hence the
vehicle will behave according to this case as long as no obstacle reduces the vehicles
rotational freedom. However, this behaviour can alter depending on the axle load. If the
vehicle is unloaded, the friction forces will be greatly reduced on the rear frame and the
vehicle will tend to behave according to Case A.

Alfred Johansson F2 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix G. Transmission Concepts

Appendix G. Transmission Concepts

TC with diff. in front of Simple TC in front of Simple TC, clutch TC with diff. behind Simple TC and clutch
steering joint steering joint behind steering joint steering joint behind steering joint

" " ( (
) $

*
%

% %
+
! ! %&
$
! # $
%&
%& '

TC = Transfer case

Alfred Johansson G1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix H. Micheln XZL 16.00R20

Appendix H. Michelin XZL 16.00R20

Technical tyre catalogue

16.00 R 20 XZL TL LRM

The actual measurements could change with the creation of new tread patterns. For design of new
vehicles, use the ETRTO "box" or consult us.

Michelin reference 123357

Ply rating
Unique point
Nominal load per axle - single fitment (kg) 13200
Nominal load per axle - twinned fitment (kg) 24000
Nominal pressure in bars (single fitment) 7.60
Nominal pressure in bars (twinned fitment) 7.60
Nominal pressure in bars (unique point)
Wheel recommended 10.00W
ETRTO section (mm)
ETRTO diameter (mm)
Free section (mm) 438
Free diameter (mm) 1343
Crushed section (mm) 488
Crushed radius (mm) 609
Rolling circumference (mm) 4060
Minimum distance between axle centres (mm) 495
Tread depth (mm) 27.0
Regrooving depth (mm) 4
Weight in kg
Tube 20 V
Flap 310-20 LB
Sealing ring
Regulation 54 0094797
ETRTO approved rims

Single fitment pressure 4.25 4.5 4.75 5.0 5.25 5.5 5.75 6.0 6.25 6.5 6.75 7.0 7.25 7.5
load per axle 8400 8800 9200 9600 10000 10400 10800 11200 11600 12000 12400 12400 12800 13200

Twinned fitment
4.25 4.5 4.75 5.0 5.25 5.5 5.75 6.0 6.25 6.5 6.75 7.0 7.25 7.5
pressure
load per axle 15270 16000 16730 17450 18180 18910 19640 20360 21090 21820 22550 22550 23270 24000
Copyright © 2003-2005 Michelin Photos Copyright : Michelin / DPPI www.michelin.com

Alfred Johansson H1 Robin Nilsson

 Appendix I. Alliance Tyre Spec.

Appendix I. Alliance Tyre Spec.

CERTIFICATE

Unloaded Loaded Recommend load, kg (lbs)

dimension Static Rolling Load Infl.
Circum Index press Speed, km/h (mph)
Size Rim SW OD Radius
mm mm mm mm Speed bar 15 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
in in in in Symbol psi 9 12 19 25 31 37 44 50 56

600 1185 532 3490

600/50-22.5 20.00DC 4 4125
23.6 46.7 20.9 137.4 157G 6810 6190 5160 4740 4620 4540 4410 4290
158F 58 15000 13630 11370 10440 10180 10000 9710 9450 9090

! " "# $
% && '(

( )*&* * + * )*&* * & *

,( *&* * * , *

& '& #* -
'#
. #* % %&

/# * **

0 #* -
+ &* + + **

1 #* + & &*

2 -
3! " 4
* -3!" /4
& -
3! " 4
5 &* -3! " /4

% 5* - 66 7

Alfred Johansson I1 Robin Nilsson