Brake caliper adapter calculus

Heiko Schr oter

January 16, 2013
Contents
1 Dynamical and statical load 2
2 Force, moment equations 3
3 Theoretical maximum deceleration 4
4 Technically maximum braking acceleration 5
5 Limiting case of the theoretically and technically possible deceleration a
max
6
5.1 Coecient of adhesion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
6 Maximum front braking force 7
7 Maximum braking force on the brake discs 8
8 Minimum thickness of a theoretical caliper adapter 9
8.1 Thickness of rectangular bar (principal) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.2 Thickness of a theoretical adapter (tension calculus according to Mises) . . . . . . . . . . 9
8.3 FEM simulation of the theoretical adapter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
9 Calculation of the adapter for the GS850 12
9.1 FEM Simulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
10 Forces at the hand brake lever and brake pistons 14
10.1 Brake piston forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10.2 Hand lever forces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
10.3 Stroke of the master cylinder s
hbz
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
10.4 Example . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
11 FEM simulation of the nal draft adapter for Suzuki GS850 16
11.1 Matrial stress in N/mm
2
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
11.2 Shifts in mm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
12 Various adapters forms 20
13 Examples of adapters on motorcycles 21
14 Material values for aluminium materials. 22
15 Addendum (Grip strength) 24
1
1 Dynamical and statical load
Figure 1: Forces, Dimensions
S = Center of gravity
l = Wheelbase
m = Vehicle mass
g = Acceleration of gravity = 9,81
_
m
s
2
_
a = Deceleration
F
g
= m*g
F
N1
= Normal force front
F
N2
= Normal force rear
F
dyn
= m*a
2
2 Force, moment equations
according to [2] and [1, S.41].
0 = F
Br
F
dyn
(1)
0 = F
N1
+ F
N2
F
g
= F
N1
+ F
N2
m g (2)
0 = l F
N1
+ l
2
F
g
+ h
s
F
dyn
, moments around B (3)
=> F
N1
= F
g

l
2
l
+ F
dyn

h
s
l
F
N1
= m g
l
2
l
. .
statical
+m a
h
s
l
. .
dynamical
, force on front axle (4)
insert (4) in (1)
0 =
(F
g
l
2
+ F
Dyn
h
s
)
l
+ F
N2
F
g
=> F
N2
= F
g

(F
g
l
2
+ F
Dyn
h
s
)
l
= F
g
(1
l
2
l
)
. .
l1
l

h
s
l
F
Dyn
= F
g

l
1
l
F
Dyn

h
s
l
F
N2
= m g
l
1
l
m a
h
s
l
(5)
During braking, the front axle is additionally loaded with the dynamic component m a
h
s
l
and the
rear unloaded by the same amount.
3
3 Theoretical maximum deceleration
The front axial force F
N1
is maximum when the rear axle force F
N2
0 (incipient rollover).
F
N2
= 0 = m g
l
1
l
m a
h
s
l
a = a
maxTheor
= g
l
1
h
s
(6)
and (6) inserted in (4)
F
N1
= m g (7)
i.e. at maximum decelaration a
maxTheor
the total vehicle mass lasts on the front wheel.
4
4 Technically maximum braking acceleration
Figure 2: Stiction, = Coecient of adhesion
F
N2
= 0 and (7) results in the braking acceleration:
F
Br
= (F
N1
+ F
N2
)
m a = m g
a = g
a = a
maxTech
= g (8)
i.e. the deceleration is determined by the adhesion of the road.
5
5 Limiting case of the theoretically and technically possible
deceleration a
max
a
maxTech
= a
maxTheor
g = g
l
1
h
s
=
l
1
h
s
(9)
i.e. if
l
1
h
s
the maximum usable adhesion is limited by the geometry of the bike. For example a dry
race track with Mu = 1.3 could only be exploited if h
s

l
1
1,3
.
5.1 Coecient of adhesion
Table 1: Coecient of adhesion for dry road surfaces:
Type Value Source
country road / highway 0,8 1.
Racetracks 1,0 bis 1,4 1.
Concrete, stone, granite 0,7 2.
Asphalt 0,6 2.
Blue basalt 0,55 2.
Concrete 0,6 bis 0,9 3.
Aspahlt 0,6 bis 0,8 3.
Concrete bis 1,0 4.
Source:
1. Institute for Motorcycle Safety Association, Dr.-Ing.Achim Kuschewski
2. WABCO GmbH, 31028 Gronau
3. Schulz,H. (10%Schlupf)
4. Kirnich,G. (20% Schlupf)
6
6 Maximum front braking force
with (9) two cases for the maximum possible braking force can be derived: F
Brv
= Braking force front
Limited by geometry (rollover)
F
Brvmax
=
max
F
N1max
= m g
l
1
h
s
(10)
Limited by adhesion (slipping of the front wheel)
F
Brv
= F
N1
=
_
m g
l
2
l
+ m a
h
s
l
_
with (4) and (8)
F
Brv
= m g
_
l
2
l
+

2
h
s
l
_
(11)
Example with m = 500kg:
Bike l l
1
l
2
h
s
usable
max
M1 1.5m 0,75m 0,75m 0,85m 0,88
M2 1,5m 0,85m 0,65m 0.65m 1,3
Table 2: Comparison of possible brake forces
Figure 3: F
Brs
per Rotor
x=adhesion coecient, y=braking force
The brake performance of the machine M1 is higher up to = 1.01 , although the center of mass of
M2 lies lower and back. i.e., the geometric possibility of the higher braking power of the lower and
further back center of mass can only be used at extremely handy dry road surfaces, such as concrete
or race tracks.
7
7 Maximum braking force on the brake discs
Figure 4: Force on the brake disk
F
Br
R = F
Brs
r R = radius wheel, r=radius brake rotor (B
rs
)
Braking forces at the front:
F
Brsvmax
= m g
l
1
hs

R
v
r
v
, for
_

l
1
h
s
_
with (10) (12)
F
Brsv
= m g
_
l
2
l
+

2
h
s
l
_

R
v
r
v
, for
_
<
l
1
h
s
_
with (11) (13)
R
v
=front wheel,r
v
=front rotor
Figure 5: eective rotor diamter
The eective rotor diameter r
veff
goes from the axle to approximatly the center of the pad. This
value has to be used instead of r
v
in (12) and (13). To determine the braking force per disc, F
Brsv
has to be divided by the number of discs.
8
8 Minimum thickness of a theoretical caliper adapter
Derivation and approximate calculation of the thickness of the caliper adapter and bending tension in
the adapter neglecting I
z
Moments:
8.1 Thickness of rectangular bar (principal)
Figure 6: Strength calculation

(b)
=
M
y
I
y
z
M
y
= Bending moment, I
y
= Section modulus, z = distance of the plate boundary to the center of
gravity. For a rectangular plate z = h/2 (center of gravity in the middle) results in I
y
=
bh
2
12
.
=>
(b)
=
6 M
y
b h
2
Example:
F
Brsv
= 9392N, l
a
= 50mm, h
a
= 75mm,
zul(Al6082Rp0.2)
= 250
N
mm
2
=> b
amin
=
6 M
y

(zul)
h
2
=
6 F
Brsv
l
a

(zul)
h
2
a
= 2mm
8.2 Thickness of a theoretical adapter (tension calculus according to Mises)
Now the braking force is not directly applied on the adapter, but at the caliper (Fig. 7). The allowable
tension in the adapter plate is derived from equivalent stress according to Mises [8] (only rough calculation,
because the adapter is a parallelogram and not a rectangular plate.)

(v)
=
_

2
s
+ 3
2
b

s
= shear stress,
b
= bending stress , y-component = 0 (14)
9
Figure 7: Caliper adapter
The brake system is loaded with impulses. Existing microscopic cracks shall not expand. Therefore
the equivalent stress shall not exceed the alternate bending strength of the material. The pulsed load
requires a material which is not too brittle. Requested is a strong and ductile material.

(v)

bW
,
bW
= alternate bending strength in N/mm
2
Because the adapter plate is not rectangular the following value is apllied for z:
z
Parallelogram
0, 7 h
a
F
s
= F
Brsv
sin() (shear stress)
F
m
= F
Brsv
cos() (bending stress)
b
a
s
=
F
s
h
a

bW
=
F
Brsv
sin()
h
a

bW
(req thickness by F
s
)
b
a
m
=
12 0, 7 F
m
(l
a
+ l
z
)

bW
h
2
a
=
8, 4 F
Brsv
cos() (l
a
+ l
zange
cos())

bW
h
2
a
(req thickness by F
m
)
b
a
tot
=
_
b
2
a
s
+ 3 b
2
a
m
(15)
Example:
l
a
= 40mm, h
a
= 75mm, l
zange
= 44mm, = 66

, = 11

, F
Brsv
= 10000N,
d(Al6082)
= 95
N
mm
2
b
a
tot
=
__
10000N sin(66)
75mm 95
N
mm
2
_
2
+ . . .
3
_
8, 4 10000N cos(66)
(40mm + 44mm cos(11))
95
N
mm
2
75
2
mm
2
_
2
_1
2
=
_
1, 64mm
2
+ 84, 9mm
2
b
a
tot
= 9, 3mm
b
a
tot
is the minimum thickness of the material which can stand all stresses and stays below
bW
. With
N disks or adapters the thickness per adapter is: b
a
Adapter
= b
a
tot
/N
10
8.3 FEM simulation of the theoretical adapter
Figure 8: FEM Simulation b
a
= 9,3mm
The braking force F
Br
is applied perpendicular to the right eye. The xed bearing of the adapter
is the entire left edge. In the local lower region of the xed bearing, the allowed tension value of

2
bW
= 95N/mm is exceeded. The rest of the area stays below
bW
.
11
9 Calculation of the adapter for the GS850
TOKICO Two-piston calipers shall be used.
Type HP weight top speed rotor
GS850 80 500kg 203km/h 275mm
DL1000 98 470kg 208km/h 310mm
Table 3: technical data GS850,DL1000
Figure 9: Tokico Bremszange / Adapter Entwurf
Technical data Suzuki GS850:
m
max
= 478kg (calc value = 500kg), l = 1,5m, l
1
= 0,75m, h
s
= 0,85m, R
v
= 0,24m(19), r
v
=
137,5mm (275mm) => r
veff
= (275/2 20) = 117, 5mm, h
a
= 73mm, l
a
= 41,3mm, l
caliper
=
44,9mm, = 9

, = 70

,
l
1
h
s
= 0, 88.
Material chosen: Aluminium AL6082 =
(d)
= 95
N
mm
2
F
Brsvmax
= m g
R
v
r
veff
= 0, 88 500kg 9, 81
N
mm
2

0, 24m
0, 1175m
= 8888N
The braking force
1
is distributed on to two rotors 8888N/2 = 4444N and with (15) the minimum
thickness of a single adapter is:
b
a
Adapter
=
__
4444N sin(70)
73mm 95
N
mm
2
_
2
+ . . .
3
_
8, 4 4444N cos(70)
(41, 3mm + 44, 9mm cos(9))
95
N
mm
2
73
2
mm
2
_
2
_1
2
=
_
0, 6
2
mm
2
+ 3 2, 16
2
mm
2
b
a
Adapter
= 3, 79mm (16)
9.1 FEM Simulation
The FEM simulation (Fig. 10,11) of the adapters with a thickness according to (16) shows local
areas where the stress value is a little bit higher than the maximum of 95N/mm
2
. The leverage
eect of the caliper causes additional tension and bending moments in the Z-direction which are
not considered in the idealized estimate.
1
For comparison. The braking force of the DL1000 is F
Brsvmax
DL1000
= 0, 9470kg 9, 81
N
mm
2

0,24m
0,135m
= 7377N. Wheel
diameter and wheelbase are identical. The height of the center of gravity assumed to be equal.
12
Figure 10: Front-, Rearside
Figure 11: bolt xing level, color table
13
10 Forces at the hand brake lever and brake pistons
10.1 Brake piston forces
Figure 12: Master brake cylinder (HBZ), brake piston Scheme
F
Brs
= F
k
2
B
(*2, because of 2 pads)
P =
F
A
=
F
hbz
A
hbz
=
F
k
A
k
n
(n = no of pistons per caliper)
F
hbz
=
F
Brs
A
hbz
N
2
B
A
k
n
=
F
Brs
d
2
hbz
N
2
B
d
2
k
n
(N = no of rotors)
adhesion coecient
B
for brake pads according to ATE ca. 0,3-0,5. F
Brs
= braking force per rotor,
see (13) and (12). d
k
= of brake piston, d
hbz
= of main braking cylinder.
10.2 Hand lever forces
Figure 13: Forces at the hand lever
F
hbz
l
hbz
= F
Hand
l
h
F
Hand
=
l
hbz
l
h

d
2
hbz
d
2
k

F
Brs
N
2
B
n
(17)
14
10.3 Stroke of the master cylinder s
hbz
With
F
k
F
hbz
=
A
k
Nn
A
hbz
=
s
hbz
s
k
(Hydraulic Press)
and an estimated air gap of s
k
= 0.1 mm between rotor and the brake pads the hub of the master cylinder
is:
s
hbz
=
d
2
k
N n s
k
d
2
hbz
(18)
10.4 Example
Suzuki GS850
m=500kg, N=2, F
Brs
= 4444N (Force per disk) , l
hbz
= 20mm, l
h
= 100mm,
B
= 0.4, d
hbz
= 16mm,
P = brake tube pressure(bar).
GS850 n d
k
s
hbz
F
Hand
F
Hand
kg
F
HBZ
P
Original 1 38mm 1,13mm 394N 40kg 1970N 15,7bar
Tokico 2 30mm 1,41mm 316N 32kg 1580N 9,8bar
Table 4: Hand force and hub of the master cylinder
15
11 FEM simulation of the nal draft adapter for Suzuki GS850
F
Brsvmax
= 4509N, Material Al6082 (
bW
= 95
N
mm
2
). The anges are 10mm thick with 3,79mm needed
according to eq (16). The allowed stress level is adhered to. At the top xing bolt a stress level of 136
N
mm
2
can be observed. The other areas stay below
v
< 45, 5
N
mm
2
.
Figure 14: 3D-CAD Draft
Figure 15: Meshed adpater prepared for FEM
16
11.1 Matrial stress in N/mm
2
Figure 16: Front-, Rearview
17
Figure 17: Stud level, color table
11.2 Shifts in mm
Figure 18: X-direction
18
Figure 19: Y-direction
Figure 20: Z-direction
19
12 Various adapters forms
20
13 Examples of adapters on motorcycles
21
14 Material values for aluminium materials.
Selected data for some aluminium.
Material Rp
0,2

bW
Br Z S E Be
AW-2014 T6 380 100 7 1 5 4 4
AW-2017 T3 240 8 2 5 5 4
AW-5083 H111 120 110 10 2 2 4 4
AW-6012 T6 260 80 8 2 5 5 2
AW-6082 T6 250 95 12 2 2 3 2
AW-7022 T6 370 110 6 1 5 5 3
AW-7075 T6 480 160 5 2 5 5 3
Table 5: Material Properties (without guarantee)
Rp
0,2
= oset yield strength [
N
mm
2
],
bW
= alternate bending strength [
N
mm
2
],
Br=breaking strain [%], Z=machining, S=welding,
E=anodising, Be=coating
1 very well
2 good
3 satisfactory
4 sucient
5 not suitable
The corrosion protection is to be considered in the high-strength aluminum alloys. The alternate
bending strength can be estimated from the tensile strength (
b
, R
m
): A value of 0.2 . . . 0.25
b
is allowable with alternating forces [7, S.103]
22
References
[1] Projekt Antidive System, Markus Kriete, Max Kohler, Prof Dr.Ing. Uwe Reinert,WS07/08 , S.41,
Hochschule Bremen
[2] Vittore Cossalter, Motorcycle Dynamics, 2006, ISBN-10: 1430308613, ISBN-13: 978-1430308614
[3] Vittore Cossalter, Roberto Lot , About the motorcycle braking,
http://www.dinamoto.it/index.html
[4] z88aurora, Uni Bayreuth, Univ. Prof. Dr.-Ing. Frank Rieg,
http://www.z88.uni-bayreuth.de/z88aurora/wasistz88.htm
[5] gmsh, a three-dimensional nite element mesh generator with built-in pre- and post-processing facil-
ities, Christophe Geuzaine and Jean-Francois Remacle
http://geuz.org/gmsh
[6] FreeCAD, A parametric 3D CAD modeler,
http://sourceforge.net/apps/mediawiki/free-cad/index.php
[7] Feinwerkelemente, Horst Ringhardt,
Carl Hanser Verlag M unchen, 1974
[8] http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vergleichsspannung
23
15 Addendum (Grip strength)
Standard value for grip strength (in kg):
Age Men Female
2024 years right 4655 right 2532
Links 3847 left 2228
2529 years right 4455 right 2834
left 4350 left 2329
3034 years right 4555 right 2736
left 4050 left 2331
3539 years right 4354 right 2934
left 4151 left 2530
4044 years right 4453 right 2632
left 4351 left 2228
4549 years right 3950 right 2128
left 3546 left 2025
5054 years right 4352 right 2530
left 3946 left 2126
5559 years right 3446 right 2026
left 2738 left 1622
6064 years right 3141 right 2025
left 2635 left 1621
6569 years right 3241 right 1823
left 2635 left 1219
7074 years right 2434 right 1723
left 2129 left 1419
75 years und above right 2030 right 1419
left 1725 left 1317
Table 6: Grip strength in kg
24
MALES FEMALES
Age (years) Weak Normal Strong Weak Normal Strong
10-11 < 12.6 12.6-22.4 > 22.4 < 11.8 11.8-21.6 > 21.6
12-13 < 19.4 19.4-31.2 > 31.2 < 14.6 14.6-24.4 > 24.4
14-15 < 28.5 28.5-44.3 > 44.3 < 15.5 15.5-27.3 > 27.3
16-17 < 32.6 32.6-52.4 > 52.4 < 17.2 17.2-29.0 > 29.0
18-19 < 35.7 35.7-55.5 > 55.5 < 19.2 19.2-31.0 > 31.0
20-24 < 36.8 36.8-56.6 > 56.6 < 21.5 21.5-35.3 > 35.3
25-29 < 37.7 37.7-57.5 > 57.5 < 25.6 25.6-41.4 > 41.4
30-34 < 36.0 36.0-55.8 > 55.8 < 21.5 21.5-35.3 > 35.3
35-39 < 35.8 35.8-55.6 > 55.6 < 20.3 20.3-34.1 > 34.1
40-44 < 35.5 35.5-55.3 > 55.3 < 18.9 18.9-32.7 > 32.7
45-49 < 34.7 34.7-54.5 > 54.5 < 18.6 18.6-32.4 > 32.4
50-54 < 32.9 32.9-50.7 > 50.7 < 18.1 18.1-31.9 > 31.9
55-59 < 30.7 30.7-48.5 > 48.5 < 17.7 17.7-31.5 > 31.5
60-64 < 30.2 30.2-48.0 > 48.0 < 17.2 17.2-31.0 > 31.0
65-69 < 28.2 28.2-44.0 > 44.0 < 15.4 15.4-27.2 > 27.2
70-99 < 21.3 21.3-35.1 > 35.1 < 14.7 14.7-24.5 > 24.5
Table 7: Grip Strength Ratings for Males and Females (in kg)
source: Camry Electronic Hand Dynamometer Instruction manual
25