CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

The automobile engine connecting rod is a high volume production, critical

component. It connects reciprocating piston to rotating crankshaft, transmitting the thrust
of the piston to the crankshaft. Every vehicle that use an internal combustion engine
requires at least one connecting rod depending upon the number of cylinders in the
engine.

Connecting rods for automotive applications are typically manufactured by

forging from either wrought steel or powdered metal. They could also be cast.
However,castings could have blow-holes which are detrimental from durability and
fatigue points of view. The fact that forgings produce blow-hole-free and better rods
gives them an advantage over cast rods (Gupta, 1993). Between the forging processes,
powder forged or drop forged, each process has its own pros and cons. Powder metal
manufactured blanks have the advantage of being near net shape, reducing material
waste. However, the cost of the blank is high due to the high material cost and
sophisticated manufacturing techniques (Repgen, 1998). With steel forging, the material
is inexpensive and the rough part manufacturing process is cost effective. Bringing the
part to final dimensions under tight tolerance results in high expenditure for machining,
as the blank usually contains more excess material (Repgen, 1998). A sizeable portion of
the US market for connecting rods is currently consumed by the powder metal forging
industry. A comparison of the European and North American connecting rod markets
indicates that according to an unpublished market analysis for the year 2000 (Ludenbach,
2002), 78% of the connecting rods in Europe (total annual production: 80 million
approximately) are steel forged as opposed to 43% in North America (total annual
production: 100 million approximately), as shown in Figure 1.1. In order to recapture the
US market, the steel industry has focused on development of production technology and
new steels. AISI (American Iron and Steel Institute) funded a research program that had
two aspects to address. The first aspect was to investigate and compare fatigue strength of

1
steel forged connecting rods with that of the powder forged connecting rods. The second
aspect was to optimize the weight and manufacturing cost of the steel forged connecting
rod. The first aspect of this research program has been dealt with in a master’s thesis
entitled “Fatigue Behavior and Life predictions of Forged Steel and PM Connecting
Rods” (Afzal A., 2004). This current thesis deals with the second aspect of the study, the
optimization part.

Due to its large volume production,it is only logical that optimization of the
connecting rod for weight or volume will result in large-scale savings. It can also achieve
the objective of reducing the weight of the engine component, thus reducing inertia loads,
reducing engine weight and improving engine performance and fuel economy.

2
1.1 OBJECTIVE AND OUTLINE

The objective of this work was to optimize the forged steel connecting rod for its
weight and cost. The optimized forged steel connecting rod is intended to be a more
attractive option for auto manufacturers to consider, as compared with its powder-forged
counterpart.

Optimization begins with identifying the correct load conditions and

magnitudes.Overestimating the loads will simply raise the safety factors. The idea behind
optimizing is to retain just as much strength as is needed. Commercial softwares such as
PRO-E and ANSYS-View can be used to obtain the variation of quantities such as
angular velocity,angular acceleration, and load However, usually the worst case load is
considered in the design process. Literature review suggests that investigators use
maximum inertia load,inertia load, or inertia load of the piston assembly mass as one
extreme load corresponding to the tensile load, and firing load or compressive gas load
corresponding to maximum torque as the other extreme design load corresponding to the
compressive load. Inertia load is a time varying quantity and can refer to the inertia load
of the piston, or of the connecting rod. In most cases, in the literature the investigators
have not clarified the definition of inertia load - whether it means only the inertia of the
piston, or whether it includes the inertia of the connecting rod as well. Questions are
naturally
raised in light of such complex structural behavior, such as: Does the peak load at the
ends of the connecting rod represent the worst case loading? Under the effect of bending
and axial loads, can one expect higher stresses than that experienced under axial load
alone? Moreover, very little information is available in the literature on the bending
stiffness requirements, or on the agnitude of bending stress. From the study of Ishida et
al. (1995) reviewed in Section 1.2, it is clear that the maximum stress at the connecting
rod column bottom does not occur at the TDC, and the maximum bending stress at the
column center is about 25% of the maximum stress at that location. However, to obtain

3
the bending stress variation over the connecting rod length, or to know the stress at
critical locations such as the transition regions of the connecting rod, a detailed analysis
is needed. As a result, for the forged steel connecting rod investigated, a detailed load
analysis under service operating conditions was performed, followed by a quasi-dynamic
FEA to capture the stress variation over the cycle of operation.

Logically, any optimization should be preceded by stress analysis of the existing

component, which should be performed at the correct operating loads. Discusses such
issues as mesh convergence, details of how loads and restraints have been applied, and
validation of the FE model for three cases - static FEA, quasi-dynamic FEA, and test
assembly FEA. Chapter 4 discusses the stress-time history, R ratio and multiaxiality of
stresses for various locations on the connecting rod under service operating
conditions.This indicates the extent of weight reduction to expect through optimization,
identifies the regions from which material can be removed, or regions that need to be
redesigned.This chapter also discusses the static FEA results and makes a comparison
between the static FEA, quasi-dynamic FEA, and results from test assembly FEA.
Optimization of the connecting rod is addressed in Chapter 5. Optimization was
performed to reduce the mass and manufacturing cost of the connecting rod, subject to
fatigue life and yielding constraints. The material was changed to C-70 fracture splitable
steel to reduce manufacturing cost by elimination of machining of mating surfaces of the
connecting rod and it’s cap. S-N approach was used for the fatigue model during the
optimization, as the connecting rod operates in the elastic range (i.e. high cycle fatigue
life region). A comparison between the various manufacturing processes and their costs is
also presented.

4
 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW

The connecting rod is subjected to a complex state of loading. It undergoes high

cyclic loads of the order of 108 to 109 cycles, which range from high compressive loads
due to combustion, to high tensile loads due to inertia. Therefore, durability of this
component is of critical importance. Due to these factors, the connecting rod has been the
topic of research for different aspects such as production technology,
materials,performance simulation, fatigue, etc. For the current study, it was necessary to
investigate finite element modeling techniques, optimization techniques, developments in
production technology, new materials, fatigue modeling, and manufacturing cost
analysis. This brief literature survey reviews some of these aspects.

Webster et al. (1983) performed three dimensional finite element analysis of a

high-speed diesel engine connecting rod. For this analysis they used the maximum
compressive load which was measured experimentally, and the maximum tensile load
which is essentially the inertia load of the piston assembly mass. The load distributions
on the piston pin end and crank end were determined experimentally. They modeled the
connecting rod cap separately, and also modeled the bolt pretension using beam elements
and multi point constraint equations.

In a study reported by Repgen (1998), based on fatigue tests carried out on

identical components made of powder metal and C-70 steel (fracture splitting steel), he
notes that the fatigue strength of the forged steel part is 21% higher than that of the
powder metal component. He also notes that using the fracture splitting technology
results in a 25% cost reduction over the conventional steel forging process. These factors
suggest that a fracture splitting material would be the material of choice for steel forged
connecting rods. He also mentions two other steels that are being tested, a modified
micro-alloyed steel and a modified carbon steel. Other issues discussed by Repgen are the

5
necessity to avoid jig spots along the parting line of the rod and the cap, need of
consistency in the chemical composition and manufacturing process to reduce variance in
microstructure and production of near net shape rough part.

Park et al. (2003) investigated microstructural behavior at various forging

conditions and recommend fast cooling for finer grain size and lower network ferrite
content. From their research they concluded that laser notching exhibited best fracture
splitting results, when compared with broached and wire cut notches. They optimized the
fracture splitting parameters such as, applied hydraulic pressure, jig set up and geometry
of cracking cylinder based on delay time, difference in cracking forces and
roundness.They compared fracture splitting high carbon micro-alloyed steel (0.7% C)
with carbon steel (0.48% C) using rotary bending fatigue test and concluded that the
former has the same or better fatigue strength than the later. From a comparison of the
fracture splitting high carbon micro-alloyed steel and powder metal, based on tension-
compression fatigue test they noticed that fatigue strength of the former is 18% higher
than the later.

Sarihan and Song (1990), for the optimization of the wrist pin end, used a fatigue
load cycle consisting of compressive gas load corresponding to maximum torque and
tensile load corresponding to maximum inertia load. Evidently, they used the maximum
loads in the whole operating range of the engine. To design for fatigue, modified
Goodman equation with alternating octahedral shear stress and mean octahedral shear
stress was used. For optimization, they generated an approximate design surface, and
performed optimization of this design surface. The objective and constraint functions
were updated to obtain precise values. This process was repeated till convergence was
achieved. They also included constraints to avoid fretting fatigue. The mean and the
alternating components of the stress were calculated using maximum and minimumvalues
of octahedral shear stress. Their exercise reduced the connecting rod weight by
nearly 27%.

6
Yoo et al. (1984) used variational equations of elasticity, material derivative idea of
continuum mechanics and an adjoint variable technique to calculate shape design
sensitivities of stress. The results were used in an iterative optimization
algorithm,steepest descent algorithm, to numerically solve an optimal design problem.
The focus was on shape design sensitivity analysis with application to the example of a
connecting rod. The stress constraints were imposed on principal stresses of inertia and
firing loads.But fatigue strength was not addressed. The other constraint was the one on
thickness to bound it away from zero. They could obtain 20% weight reduction in the
neck region of the connecting rod.

Hippoliti (1993) reported design methodology in use at Piaggio for connecting

rod design, which incorporates an optimization session. However, neither the details of
optimization nor the load under which optimization was performed were discussed. Two
parametric FE procedures using 2D plane stress and 3D approach developed by the
author were compared with experimental results and shown to have good agreements.
The optimization procedure they developed was based on the 2D approach.

El-Sayed and Lund (1990) presented a method to consider fatigue life as a

constraint in optimal design of structures. They also demonstrated the concept on a SAE
key hole specimen. In this approach a routine calculates the life and in addition to the
stress limit, limits are imposed on the life of the component as calculated using FEA
results.

Pai (1996) presented an approach to optimize shape of connecting rod subjected

to a load cycle, consisting of the inertia load deducted from gas load as one extreme and
peak inertia load exerted by the piston assembly mass as the other extreme, with fatigue
life constraint. Fatigue life defined as the sum of the crack initiation and crack growth
lives, was obtained using fracture mechanics principles. The approach used finite element
routine to first calculate the displacements and stresses in the rod; these were then used in
a separate routine to calculate the total life. The stresses and the life were used in an
optimization routine to evaluate the objective function and constraints. The new search

7
direction was determined using finite difference approximation with design sensitivity
analysis. The author was able to reduce the weight by 28%, when compared with the
original component.

Sonsino and Esper (1994) have discussed the fatigue design of sintered
connecting rods. They did not perform optimization of the connecting rod. They designed
a connecting rod with a load amplitude Fa = 19.2 kN and with different regions being
designed for different load ratios (R), such as, in the stem Fm = -2.2 kN and R = -1.26, at
the piston pin end Fm = -5.5 kN and R = -1.82, at the crank end Fm = 7.8 kN and R =
-0.42. They performed preliminary FEA followed by production of a prototype. Fatigue
tests and experimental stress analysis were performed on this prototype based on the
results of which they proposed a final shape, shown in Figure 1.4. In order to verify that
the design was sufficient for fatigue, they computed the allowable stress amplitude at
critical locations, taking the R-ratio, the stress concentration, and statistical safety factors
into account, and ensured that maximum stress amplitudes were below the allowable
stress amplitude.

For their optimization study, Serag et al. (1989) developed approximate

mathematical formulae to define connecting rod weight and cost as objective functions
and also the constraints. The optimization was achieved using a Geometric Programming
technique. Constraints were imposed on the compression stress, the bearing pressure at
the crank and the piston pin ends. Fatigue was not addressed. The cost function was
expressed in some exponential form with the geometric parameters.

Folgar et al. (1987) developed a fiber FP/Metal matrix composite connecting rod
with the aid of FEA, and loads obtained from kinematic analysis. Fatigue was not
addressed at the design stage. However, prototypes were fatigue tested. The investigators
identified design loads in terms of maximum engine speed, and loads at the crank and
piston pin ends. They performed static tests in which the crank end and the piston pin end
failed at different loads. Clearly, the two ends were designed to withstand different loads.

8
Balasubramaniam et al. (1991) reported computational strategy used in Mercedes-Benz
using examples of engine components. In their opinion, 2D FE models can be used to
obtain rapid trend statements, and 3D FE models for more accurate investigation. The
various individual loads acting on the connecting rod were used for performing
simulation and actual stress distribution was obtained by superposition. The loads
included inertia load, firing load, the press fit of the bearing shell, and the bolt forces. No
discussions on the optimization or fatigue, in particular, were presented.

Ishida et al. (1995) measured the stress variation at the column center and column
bottom of the connecting rod, as well as the bending stress at the column center. The
plots, shown in Figures 1.5 and 1.6 indicate that at the higher engine speeds, the peak
tensile stress does not occur at 360o crank angle or top dead center. It was also observed
that the R ratio varies with location, and at a given location it also varies with the engine
speed. The maximum bending stress magnitude over the entire cycle (0o to 720o crank
angle) at 12000 rev/min, at the column center was found to be about 25% of the peak
tensile stress over the same cycle.

Athavale and Sajanpawar (1991) modeled the inertia load in their finite element
model. An interface software was developed to apply the acceleration load to elements on
the connecting rod depending upon their location, since acceleration varies in magnitude
and direction with location on the connecting rod. They fixed the ends of the connecting
rod, to determine the deflection and stresses. This, however, may not be representative of
the pin joints that exist in the connecting rod. The results of the detailed analysis were not
discussed, rather, only the modeling technique was discussed. The connecting rod was
separately analyzed for the tensile load due to the piston assembly mass (piston
inertia),and for the compressive load due to the gas pressure. The effect of inertia load
due to the connecting rod, mentioned above, was analyzed separately.

While investigating a connecting rod failure that led to a disastrous failure of an

engine, Rabb (1996) performed a detailed FEA of the connecting rod. He modeled the
threads of the connecting rod, the threads of connecting rod screws, the prestress in the

9
screws, the diametral interference between the bearing sleeve and the crank end of the
connecting rod, the diametral clearance between the crank and the crank bearing, the
inertia load acting on the connecting rod, and the combustion pressure. The analysis
clearly indicated the failure location at the thread root of the connecting rod, caused by
improper screw thread profile. The connecting rod failed at the location indicated by the
FEA. An axisymmetric model was initially used to obtain the stress concentration
factorsat the thread root. These were used to obtain nominal mean and alternating stresses
in the screw. A detailed FEA including all the factors mentioned above was performed by
also including a plasticity model and strain hardening. Based on the comparison of the
mean
stress and stress amplitude at the threads obtained from this analysis with the
endurance limits obtained from specimen fatigue tests, the adequacy of a new design was
checked.Load cycling was also used in inelastic FEA to obtain steady state situation.

In a published SAE case study (1997), a replacement connecting rod with 14%
weight savings was designed by removing material from areas that showed high factor of
safety. Factor of safety with respect to fatigue strength was obtained by performing FEA
with applied loads including bolt tightening load, piston pin interference load,
compressive gas load and tensile inertia load. The study lays down certain guidelines
regarding the use of the fatigue limit of the material and its reduction by a certain factor
to account for the as-forged surface. The study also indicates that buckling and bending
stiffness are important design factors that must be taken into account during the design
process. On the basis of the stress and strain measurements performed on the connecting
rod, close agreement was found with loads predicted by inertia theory. The study also
concludes that stresses due to bending loads are substantial and should always be taken
into account during any design exercise.

10
 CHAPTER 3
STUDY OF CONNECTING ROD
3.1 FUNCTION OF CONNECTING ROD

The main function of the connecting rod is to convert the pistons reciprocating
motion into rotary motion with the crank shaft.The connecting rod acts as the link
between the crosshead and crank shaft of the engine.

When doing a force balance of the piston motion,the mass of all the parts which are
considered to reciprocate with the piston must taken into account.These include the
piston,the piston rings,the piston pin and the equivalent mass of the upper end of the
connecting rod.

3.1.1 MECHANISM
11
 A mechanism is a constrained kinematic chain.Motion of any one link in the
kinematic chain will give a define and predicable motion relative to each of the
others.Usally one of the links of the kinematic chain is fixed in a mechanism.

A mechanism is the skelton outline of the machine to produce definite motion

between various links.The various link involving a mechanism are connected using the
different kind of connecting rods in available .

Almost all mechanism are equipped with a connecting rod.Some of the various
mechanism are ,

1. Slider crank mechanism

2. Whitworth quick return mechanism
3. Crank and slotted lever mechanism
4. Double slider crank mechanism

3.2 MOTIONS IN CONNECTING ROD

3.2.1 SLIDER CRANK MECHANISM

The slider-crank mechanism, which has a well-known application in engines, is a

special case of the crank-rocker mechanism. Notice that if rocker is very long, it can be
replaced by a block sliding in a curved slot or guide as shown. If the length of the rocker
is infinite, the guide and block are no longer curved. Rather, they are apparently straight
and the linkage takes the form of the ordinary slider-crank mechanism.

12
 The kinematic structure of a mechanism refers to the identification of the joint
connection etween its links. Just as chemical compounds can be represented by an
abstract formula and electric circuits by schematic diagrams, the kinematic structure of
mechanisms can be usefully represented by abstract diagrams. The structure of
mechanisms for which each joint connects two links can be represented by a structural
diagram, or graph, in which links are denoted by vertices, joints by edges, and in which
the edge connection of vertices corresponds to the joint connection.

3.2.2 CRANK AND SLOTTED – LEVER QUICK RETURN MOTION MECHANISM

This mechanism is mainly used in shaping and slotting machines.crank

shapers generally use a bull gear which has an offset pin which can be adjusted to vary
the radius of the throw and therefore alter the stroke. Quick-return (QR) mechanisms
feature different input durations for their working and return strokes. The time ratio (TR)
of a QR mechanism is the ratio of the change in input displacement during the working
stroke to its change during the return stroke. QR mechanisms are used in shapers, power-
driven saws, and many other applications requiring a load-intensive working stroke in
comparison to a low-load return stroke.

Mechanism analysis techniques taught in a first course on the theory of

mechanisms can be applied to evaluate the performance of QR mechanisms. Design of a
mechanism, on the other hand, requires determining a mechanism to perform a desired
task. For example, synthesis of a reciprocating QR device requires determination of a
mechanism to produce a desired TR and a necessary stroke. Note that there is not
necessarily a unique mechanism design for a particular task: many mechanism types
(e.g., offset slider-crank, Whitworth, drag-link, etc.) may be capable of performing it.

13
Even within one mechanism type, many different link-length combinations may perform
the required task.

3.2.3WHITWORTH QUICK RETURN MECHANISM

The whitworth quick return mechanism converts rotary motion into reciprocating
motion,but unlike the crank and slider ,the forward reciprocating motion is at a different
rate than the backward stroke.At the bottom of the drive arm,the pin only has to move
through a few degrees to sweep the arm left to right,but it takes the remainder of the
revolution to bring the arm back.the mechanism is most commonly seen as the drive for a
shaping machine.

Any body (normally rigid)which has motion relative to another is called link or
element.

1. Binary link
2. Ternary link
3. Quaternary link

14
 3.3 LOADING OF CONNECTING ROD

There are different types of loads acting on the connecting which virtually lead
to its failure.

Connecting rods are subjected to

1. Inertia forces due to mass

2. Forces generated from the combustion process
3. Forces due to wearing of forging flashes

These forces produce

1. Cyclic axial forces and stress

2. Cyclic bending moment and stress (perpendicular to the crankshaft axis)
3. Cyclic bending moment and stress (parallel to the crankshaft axis)

3.4 PROPERTIES CONCERNING THE CONNECTING ROD

3.4.1 MODULUS OF ELASTICITY

An elastic modulus, or modulus of elasticity, is the mathematical

description of an object or substance's tendency to be deformed elastically (i.e., non-

permanently) when a force is applied to it. The elastic modulus of an object is defined as

the slope of its stress-strain curve in the elastic deformation region.

3.4.2 HARDNESS

Hardness is the measure of how resistant solid matter is to various kinds of

permanent shape change when a force is applied. Macroscopic hardness is generally

characterized by trong intermolecular bonds, however the behavior of solid materials

15
under force is complex, therefore there are different measurements of hardness: scratch

hardness, indentation hardness, and rebound hardness.

3.4.3 DEFORMATION

Deformation is a change in the shape or size of an object due to an applied force.

3.4.4 YOUNG’S MODULUS (E)

Young’s modulus (E) is a measure of the stifness of a given material.

E = STRESS / STRAIN

3.4.5 STIFFNESS (K)

Stiffness is the resistance offered by an elastic body to deflection or

deformation by an applied force.It is an extensive material property.

3.4.6 THERMAL EXPANSION COEFFICIENT

Thermal expansion is the tendency of matter to change in volume in response

to a change in temperature. Materials which contract with increasing temperature are
rare; this effect is limited in size, and only occurs within limited temperature ranges. The
degree of expansion divided by the change in temperature is called the
material's coefficient of thermal expansion.

1
Thermal expansion α =
V
3.4.5 MELTING TEMPERATURE

Melting temperature is the temperature at which a sibstance changes from

solid to liquid state.

16
 3.4.6 BOLING POINT

The boiling point of an element or a substance is the temperature at which

the vapor pressure of the liquid equals the environmental pressure surrounding the liquid.

A liquid in a vacuum environment has a lower boiling point than when the liquid is

at atmospheric pressure. A liquid in a high pressureenvironment has a higher boiling

point than when the liquid is at atmospheric pressure. In other words, the boiling point of

a liquid varies dependent upon the surrounding environmental pressure (which tends to

vary with elevation). Different liquids (at a given pressure) boil at different temperatures.

3.4.7 CRITICAL TEMPERATURE

The critical temperature of a substance is the temperature at and above

which vapor of the substance cannot be liquefied, no matter how much pressure is

applied.As the critical temperature is approached,the properties of the gas and liquid

phases become the same resulting in only one phase the supercritical fluid.

3.4.8 DENSITY

Density is mass (M) per unit volume (V)

3.4.9 THERMAL CONDUCTIVITY

Thermal conductivity, k, is the property of a material's ability to conduct heat.

It appears primarily in Fourier's Law for heat conduction.Heat transfer across materials of

17
high thermal conductivity occurs at a faster rate than across materials of low thermal

conductivity. Co

3.4.10 SPECIFIC HEAT

The specific heat is the amount of heat per unit mass required to raise
thetemperature by one degree Celsius. The relationship between heat and temperature
change is usually expressed in the form shown below where c is the specific heat.

3.5 TYPES OF CONNECTING ROD

Fig 3.1
Connecting Rod

1. I – BEAM RODS
2. H- BEAM RODS

18
 3. ALUMINUM RODS
4. POWERED METAL RODS
5. TITANIUM RODS

3.5.1 I-BEAM RODS

I-beams are commonly made of structural steel but may also be formed

fromaluminium or other materials. A common type of I-beam is the rolled steel
joist (RSJ) - sometimes incorrectly rendered as reinforced steel
joist. British and European standards also specify Universal Beams (UBs) and Universal
Columns (UCs). These sections have parallel flanges, as opposed to the varying thickness
of RSJ flanges. UCs have equal or near-equal width and depth, while UBs are
significantly deeper than they are wide.

I-beams engineered from wood with fiberboard and or laminated veneer

lumber are also becoming increasingly popular in construction, especially residential, as
they are both lighter and less prone to warping than solid wooden joists. However there
has been some concern as to their rapid loss of strength in a fire if unprotected.

3.5.2 H-BEAM RODS

H-beam connecting rods comes up every once in awhile, and it’s a fun topic for
bench racing. But one thing I’ve noticed is that many enthusiasts have the mistaken
impression that cylinder pressure loads, such as from superchargers or turbochargers, is
what fails connecting rods. This tends to be reinforced by many connecting rod
companies that rate connecting rods by horsepower. All connecting rods are designed to
withstand incredibly high compressive loads. This is not what typically will cause a rod
to fail. What tends to damage or fail a connecting rod is the change in direction,
especially at bottom dead center (BDC) when the rod is subjected to tension and the rod
bolts are strained to prevent the cap from pulling apart from the rod. This makes engine
speed, rpm, the real connecting rod killer. Weight is another big factor, which is usually a
bedfellow to strength. But the reality is that a lighter rod is most often better in an rpm
application since the lighter rod presents less of a g-force load on the cap and rod bolts.

19
This also makes the selection of a connecting rod bolt as important as the rod itself.
Another point worth considering is that the big end of an H-beam rod tends to take up
more space than an I-beam, which makes clearance an issue when it comes to stroker
cranks. All this places the selection of I-beam versus H-beam far down on the list of
important selection criteria.

3.5.3 ALUMIUM RODS

Aluminium rods are popular among high rpm race engines. They are very light
and strong, but they a short fatigue lift. In a limitied use situation, they can last a long
time and usually those types of engines see frequent tear downs anyway. They do not last
many miles in a street car. They are not out of the question for a street car, is rpm is kept
down to about 7000 rpm or under and doesn’t see that rpm often, they can last quite a
while. Even then, 15-20,000 miles will be about maximum.

They also need more piston to head clearence due to more rod stretch, a typical
aluminuim rod in a high rpm aplication. Since aluminium atrengths more than steel,
bearing retention is also a problem. The usual tangs are not enogh to be reliable.
Aluminium rods must use a dowel pin to keep the bearings from spinning.

3.5.5 POWDERED METAL RODS

Metaldyne offers the latest technology in connecting rods, supplying finished,

machined and assembled fracture-split powder metal connecting rods. This eliminates
significant investment costs for the OEM while delivering a lighter, stronger, superior
quality forging. Metaldyne provides powder metal connecting rods for more programs
worldwide than any other supplier.

 Gasoline and diesel engine applications available

 Beam geometry designed to maximize stiffness and bending ratio,
optimizing strength-to-weight ratio

20
  Reduced reciprocating and rotating mass, improving engine fuel efficiency
 Net shape forming improves material utilization by 40% vs. conventional
forged steel
 Up to 4:1 increase in machining tool life

3.5.6 TIATNIUM RODS

Titanium connecting rods are one of the automotive components that were
designed and created specifically for the high stress factors and the need of maximum
performance that is encountered in the automotive racing industry. They haven’t left the
racing arena insofar, with the possible exception of the perfectionist amateurs and of
some high-profile, high-priced, high-speed street cars such as the Acura NSX, Corvette
or Porsche GT3 that were reported of using titanium connecting rods.

21
 CHAPTER 4

OPTIMIZATION OF CONNECTING ROD

4.1 MATERIALS USED FOR CONNECTING ROD PTIMIZATION

 STEELS

 CARBON STEEL

 FORGED STEEL

 ALLOY STEEL

 STAINLESS STEEL

 TOOL STEEL

 ALUMINUM

 ALUMINUM NITRIDE

 ALUMINUM

 COPPER

4.1.1 STEEL

Steel is an alloy that consists mostly of iron and has a carbon content

between 0.2% and 2.1% by weight, depending on the grade. Carbon is the most common
alloying material for iron, but various other alloying elements are used, such
as manganese, chromium, vanadium, andtungsten. Carbon and other elements act as a
hardening agent, preventing dislocations in the iron atom crystal lattice from sliding past
one another. Varying the amount of alloying elements and the form of their presence in

22
the steel (solute elements, precipitated phase) controls qualities such as
the hardness, ductility, and tensile strength of the resulting steel. Steel with increased
carbon content can be made harder and stronger than iron, but such steel is also
less ductile than iron.

Alloys with a higher than 2.1% carbon content are known as cast iron because of their
lowermelting point and castability. Steel is also distinguishable from wrought iron, which
can contain a small amount of carbon, but it is included in the form of slag inclusions.
Two distinguishing factors are steel's increased rust resistance and better weldability.

4.1.2 CARBON STEEL

Carbon steel, also called plain-carbon steel, is steel where the

main alloying constituent iscarbon. The American Iron and Steel Institute (AISI) defines
carbon steel as: "Steel is considered to be carbon steel when no minimum content is
specified or required
chromium,cobalt, columbium, molybdenum, nickel, titanium, tungsten, vanadium or zirc
onium, or any other element to be added to obtain a desired alloying effect; when the
specified minimum for copper does not exceed 0.40 percent; or when the maximum
content specified for any of the following elements does not exceed the percentages
noted: manganese 1.65, silicon 0.60,copper 0.60."

The term "carbon steel" may also be used in reference to steel which is not stainless steel;
in this use carbon steel may include alloy steels.

As the carbon content rises, steel has the ability to

become harder and stronger through heat treating, but this also makes it less ductile.
Regardless of the heat treatment, a higher carbon content reduces weldability. In carbon
steels, the higher carbon content lowers the melting point.

4.1.3 ALLOY STEEL

Alloy steel is steel alloyed with a variety of elements in total amounts of

between 1.0% and 50% by weight to improve its mechanical properties. Alloy steels are
broken down into two groups: low alloy steels and high alloy steels. The difference

23
between the two is somewhat arbitrary: Smith and Hashemi define the difference at 4.0%,
while Degarmo, et al., define it at 8.0 %. Most commonly, the phrase "alloy steel" refers
to "low alloy" steels.

4.1.4 STAINLESS STEEL

stainless steel, is defined as a steel alloy with a minimum of 10.5or

11% chromium content by mass. Stainless steel does not stain, corrode, or rust as easily
as ordinary steel, but it is not stain-proof. It is also called corrosion-resistant
steel or CRES when the alloy type and grade are not detailed, particularly in the aviation
industry. There are different grades and surface finishes of stainless steel to suit the
environment the alloy must endure. Stainless steel is used where both the properties of
steel and resistance to corrosion are required.

Stainless steel differs from carbon steel by the amount of chromium present. Unprotected
carbon steel rusts readily when exposed to air and moisture. This iron oxide film (the
rust) is active and accelerates corrosion by forming more iron oxide. Stainless steels
contain sufficient chromium to form a passive film of chromium oxide, which prevents
further surface corrosion and blocks corrosion from spreading into the metal's internal
structure.

4.1.5 TOOL STEEL

Tool steel refers to a variety of carbon and alloy steels that are particularly
well-suited to be made into tools. Their suitability comes from their distinctive hardness,
resistance to abrasion, their ability to hold a cutting edge, and/or their resistance to
deformation at elevated temperatures (red-hardness). Tool steel is generally used in
a heat-treated state.With a carbon content between 0.7% and 1.5%, tool steels are
manufactured under carefully controlled conditions to produce the required quality.
The manganese content is often kept low to minimize the possibility of cracking during
water quenching. However, proper heat treatingof these steels is important for adequate
performance, and there are many suppliers who provide tooling blanks intended for oil
quenching.

24
 TABLE 4.1 PROPERTIES OF STEELS

Properties Carbon Alloy Stainless Tool

Steels Steels Steels Steels

Density (1000 kg/m3) 7.85 7.85 7.75-8.1 7.72-8.0

Elastic Modulus (GPa) 190-210 190-210 190-210 190-210

Poisson's Ratio 0.27-0.3 0.27-0.3 0.27-0.3 0.27-0.3

Thermal Expansion (10-6/K) 11-16.6 9.0-15 9.0-20.7 9.4-15.1

Melting Point (°C)     1371-1454  

Thermal Conductivity (W/m- 24.3-65.2 26-48.6 11.2-36.7 19.9-48.3

K)

Specific Heat (J/kg-K) 450-2081 452-1499 420-500  

Tensile Strength (MPa) 276-1882 758-1882 515-827 640-2000

Yield Strength (MPa) 186-758 366-1793 207-552 380-440

Percent Elongation (%) 10-32 4-31 12-40 5-25

Hardness (Brinell 3000kg) 86-388 149-627 137-595 210-620

25
4.1.7 ALUMINIUM

Aluminium silvery white member of the boron group ofchemical elements. It

has the symbol Al and its atomic number is 13. It is not soluble in water under normal
circumstances. Aluminium is the most abundant metal in the Earth's crust, and the third
most abundant element, after oxygen and silicon. It makes up about 8% by weight of the
Earth's solid surface. Aluminium is too reactive chemically to occur in nature as a free
metal. Instead, it is found combined in over 270 different minerals. The chief source of
aluminium is bauxite ore.

Aluminium is remarkable for the metal's low density and for its ability to

resist corrosion due to the phenomenon of passivation. Structural components made from
aluminium and its alloys are vital to the aerospace industry and are very important in
other areas of transportation and building. Its reactive nature makes it useful as
a catalyst or additive in chemical mixtures, including ammonium nitrate explosives, to
enhance blast power.

4.1.8 ALUMINIUM NITRIDE

Aluminium nitride (AlN) is a nitride of aluminium. Its wurtzite phase (w-AlN)

is a wide band gap (6.2 eV) semiconductor material, giving it potential application
for deep ultravioletoptoelectronics. Aluminium nitride is stable at high temperatures in
inert atmospheres and melts at 2800 °C. In a vacuum, AlN decomposes at ~1800 °C. In
the air, surface oxidation occurs above 700°C, and even at room temperature, surface
oxide layers of 5-10 nm have been detected. This oxide layer protects the material up to
1370°C. Above this temperature bulk oxidation occurs. Aluminium nitride is stable in
hydrogen and carbon dioxide atmospheres up to 980°C.

Applications of AlN are

 opto-electronics,
 dielectric layers in optical storage media,

26
 electronic substrates, chip carriers where high thermal conductivity is essential,

 military applications,

TABLE 4.2 PROPERTIES OF ALUMONUM

Mechanical Units of Measure SI/Metric (Imperial)

gm/cc (lb/ft3) 3.26 (203.5)

Density
% (%) 0 (0)
Porosity
— gray —
Color
MPa (lb/in2x103) 320 (46.4)
Flexural Strength
GPa (lb/in2x106) 330 (47.8)
Elastic Modulus
GPa (lb/in2x106) — —
Shear Modulus
GPa (lb/in2x106) — —
Bulk Modulus
— 0.24 (0.24)
Poisson’s Ratio
MPa (lb/in2x103) 2100 (304.5)
Compressive Strength
Kg/mm2 1100 —
Hardness
MPa•m1/2 2.6 —
Fracture Toughness KIC
°C (°F) — —
Maximum Use Temperature 

Thermal
W/m•°K (BTU•in/ft2•hr•°F) 140–180 (970–1250)
Thermal Conductivity
10–6/°C (10–6/°F) 4.5 (2.5)
Coefficient of Thermal
Expansion
J/Kg•°K (Btu/lb•°F) 740 (0.18)
Specific Heat

27
4.1.9 COPPER
Copper is a chemical element with the symbol Cu and atomic number 29.
It is a ductile metal, with very high thermal and electrical conductivity. Pure copper is
rather soft and malleable, and a freshly exposed surface has a reddish-orange color. It is
used as a thermal conductor, an electrical conductor, a building material, and a
constituent of various metal alloys

TABLE 4.3 PROPERTIES OF COPPER

Specific Properties of Copper: 

• Chemical Symbol: Cu 

• Atomic Number: 29 

• Atomic Weight: 63.54 

• Density: 8960 kg m(-3) 

• Melting Point: 1356K

• Specific Heat at 293K: 0.383kJkg(-1)K(-1)

• Thermal Conductivity: 394W m(-1) K(-1) 

• Electrical Conductivity (%International Annealed Copper Standard): 100% 

• Electrical Resistivity: 1.673x10(-8) ohm-m 

• Crystal Structure: Face Centered Cubic 

28
4.2 DIMENSION OF CONNECTING ROD

29
4.2.1 SPECIFICATIONS
TABLE 4.4 SPECIFICATION OF CONNECTING ROD

S.NO. PARAMETERS DIMENSIONS

1. LENGTH 258MM
2. WIDTH 20mm
3. Crank radius 25mm
4. Piston radius 18mm
5. Length of mind section 168mm

6. Thisckness of Mid section 24mm

7. Weight (Forged steel) 580gm

4.3 COMPUTER-AIDED DESIGN 

Computer-aided design (CAD), also known as computer-aided design and

drafting (CADD) , is the use of computer technology for the process of design and
design-documentation. Computer Aided Drafting describes the process of drafting with a
computer. CADD software, or environments, provides the user with input-tools for the
purpose of streamlining design processes; drafting, documentation, and manufacturing
processes. CADD output is often in the form of electronic files for print or machining
operations. The development of CADD-based software is in direct correlation with the
processes it seeks to economize; industry-based software (construction, manufacturing,
etc.) typically uses vector-based (linear) environments whereas graphic-based software
utilizes raster-based (pixelated) environments.

30
 CADD environments often involve more than just shapes. As in the
manual drafting of technical andengineering drawings, the output of CAD must convey
information, such as materials, processes,dimensions, and tolerances, according to
application-specific conventions.

CAD may be used to design curves and figures in two-dimensional (2D) space; or

curves, surfaces, and solids in three-dimensional (3D) objects.

CAD is an important industrial art extensively used in many applications,

including automotive, shipbuilding, and aerospace industries, industrial and architectural
design, prosthetics, and many more. CAD is also widely used to produce computer
animation for special effects in movies,advertising and technical manuals. The modern
ubiquity and power of computers means that even perfume bottles and shampoo
dispensers are designed using techniques unheard of by engineers of the 1960s. Because
of its enormous economic importance, CAD has been a major driving force for research
in computational geometry, computer graphics (both hardware and software), and
discrete differential geometry.

4.4 ANSYS
ANSYS is a general purpose finite element modeling package for numerically solving a
wide variety of mechanical problems. These problems include: static/dynamic structural
analysis (both linear and non-linear), heat transfer and fluid problems, as well as acoustic
and electro-magnetic problems.

In general, a finite element solution may be broken into the following three stages. This is
a general guideline that can be used for setting up any finite element analysis.

1. Preprocessing: defining the problem; the major steps in preprocessing are given
below:
o Define keypoints/lines/areas/volumes

31
 o Define element type and material/geometric properties

o Mesh lines/areas/volumes as required

The amount of detail required will depend on the dimensionality of the analysis
(i.e. 1D, 2D, axi-symmetric, 3D).

PREPROCESSING: DEFINING THE PROBLEM

1. Give example a Title

Utility Menu > File > Change Title ...

/title, Design Optimization

2. Enter initial estimates for variables

To solve an optimization problem in ANSYS, parameters need to be defined for

all design variables.

o Select: Utility Menu > Parameters > Scalar Parameters...

o In the window that appears (shown below), type W=20 in the ‘Selection’
section

o Click ‘Accept’. The 'Scalar Parameters' window will stay open.

o Now type H=20 in the ‘Selection’ section

o Click ‘Accept'

o Click ‘Close’ in the ‘Scalar Parameters’ window.

NOTE: None of the variables defined in ANSYS are allowed to have negative

values.

3. Define Keypoints

32
 Preprocessor > Modeling > Create > Keypoints > In Active CS...
K,#,x,y

We are going to define 2 Keypoints for this beam as given in the following table:

Keypoints Coordinates (x,y)

1 (0,0)
2 (1000,0)

4. Create Lines

Preprocessor > Modeling > Create > Lines > Lines > In Active Coord
L,1,2

Create a line joining Keypoints 1 and 2

5. Create Hard Keypoints

Hardpoints are often used when you need to apply a constraint or load at a
location where a keypoint does not exist. For this case, we want to apply a force
3/4 of the way down the beam. Since there are not any keypoints here and we
can't be certain that one of the nodes will be here we will need to specify a
hardpoint

o Select Preprocessor > Modeling > Create > Keypoints > Hard PT on line >
Hard PT by ratio. This will allow us to create a hardpoint on the line by
defining the ratio of the location of the point to the size of the line
o Select the line when prompted

o Enter a ratio of 0.75 in the 'Create HardPT by Ratio window which

appears.

You have now created a keypoint labelled 'Keypoint 3' 3/4 of the way down the
beam.

33
6. Define Element Types

Preprocessor > Element Type > Add/Edit/Delete...

For this problem we will use the BEAM3 (Beam 2D elastic) element. This
element has 3 degrees of freedom (translation along the X and Y axes, and
rotation about the Z axis).

7. Define Real Constants

Preprocessor > Real Constants... > Add...

In the 'Real Constants for BEAM3' window, enter the following geometric
properties: (Note that '**' is used instead '^' for exponents)

i. Cross-sectional area AREA: W*H

ii. Area moment of inertia IZZ: (W*H**3)/12

iii. Thickness along Y axis: H

NOTE: It is important to use independent variables to define dependent

variables such as the moment of inertia. During the optimization, the
width and height will change for each iteration. As a result, the other
variables must be defined in relation to the width and height.

2. Define Element Material Properties

Preprocessor > Material Props > Material Models > Structural > Linear >
Elastic > Isotropic

In the window that appears, enter the following geometric properties for
steel:

34
 i. Young's modulus EX: 200000
ii. Poisson's Ratio PRXY: 0.3

3. Define Mesh Size

Preprocessor > Meshing > Size Cntrls > ManualSize > Lines > All Lines...

For this example we will specify an element edge length of 100 mm (10
element divisions along the line).

4. Mesh the frame

Preprocessor > Meshing > Mesh > Lines > click 'Pick All'
LMESH,ALL

Solution Phase: Assigning Loads and Solving

1. Define Analysis Type

Solution > Analysis Type > New Analysis > Static

ANTYPE,0
2. Apply Constraints

Solution > Define Loads > Apply > Structural > Displacement > On
Keypoints

Pin Keypoint 1 (ie UX, UY constrained) and constrain Keypoint 2 in the Y

direction.

3. Apply Loads

Solution > Define Loads > Apply > Structural > Force/Moment > On
Keypoints

35
 Apply a vertical (FY) point load of -2000N at Keypoint 3

The applied loads and constraints should now appear as shown in the figure
below.

4. Solve the System

Solution > Solve > Current LS

SOLVE

Postprocessing: Viewing the Results

Extracting Information as Parameters:

To perform an optimization, we must extract the required information.

In this problem, we would like to find the maximum stress in the beam and the volume as
a result of the width and height variables.

1. Define the volume

o Select General Postproc > Element Table > Define Table... > Add...

o The following window will appear. Fill it in as shown to obtain the

volume of the beam.

Note that this is the volume of each element. If you were to list the
element table you would get a volume for each element. Therefore, you
have to sum the element values together to obtain the total volume of the
beam. Follow the instructions below to do this.

o Select General Postproc > Element Table > Sum of Each Item...

o A little window will appear notifying you that the tabular sum of each
element table will be calculated. Click 'OK'

36
 You will obtain a window notifying you that the EVolume is now 400000
mm2

2. Store the data (Volume) as a parameter

o Select Utility Menu > Parameters > Get Scalar Data...

o In the window which appears select 'Results Data' and 'Elem table sums'

o the following window will appear. Select the items shown to store the
Volume as a parameter.

Now if you view the parameters (Utility Menu > Parameters > Scalar
Parameters...) you will see that Volume has been added.

3. Define the maximum stress at the i node of each element in the beam
o Select General Postproc > Element Table > Define Table... > Add...

o The following window will appear. Fill it in as shown to obtain the

maximum stress at the i node of each element and store it as 'SMAX_I'.

Note that nmisc,1 is the maximum stress. For further information

type Help beam3 into the command line

Now we will need to sort the stresses in descending order to find the
maximum stress

o Select General Postproc > List Results > Sorted Listing > Sort Elems
o Complete the window as shown below to sort the data from 'SMAX_I' in
descending order

4. Store the data (Max Stress) as a parameter

o Select Utility Menu > Parameters > Get Scalar Data...

o In the window which appears select 'Results Data' and 'Other operations'

37
 o In the that appears, fill it in as shown to obtain the maximum value.

5. Define maximum stress at the j node of each element for the beam

o Select General Postproc > Element Table > Define Table... > Add...

o Fill this table as done previously, however make the following changes:

 save the data as 'SMAX_J' (instead of 'SMAX_I')

 The element table data enter NMISC,3 (instead of NMISC,1). This

will give you the max stress at the j node.

o Select General Postproc > List Results > Sorted Listing > Sort Elems to
sort the stresses in descending order.

o However, select 'SMAX_J' in the Item, Comp selection box

6. Store the data (Max Stress) as a parameter

o Select Utility Menu > Parameters > Get Scalar Data...

o In the window which appears select 'Results Data' and 'Other operations'

o In the that appears, fill it in as shown previously , however, name the

parameter 'SMaxJ'.

7. Select the largest of SMAXJ and SMAXI

o Type SMAX=SMAXI>SMAXJ into the command line

This will set the largest of the 2 values equal to SMAX. In this case the
maximum values for each are the same. However, this is not always the
case.

8. View the parametric data

Utility Menu > Parameters > Scalar Parameters Note that the maximum
stress is 281.25 which is much larger than the allowable stress of 200Mpa

38
5.1 PRO- E MODELS

39
40
41
5.3 ASSEMBLED VIEW

42
6.1 ANSYS SIMULATIONS

43
44
45
46
47
6.2 FORMULAS USED

DEFELECTION (y) = (5/384) X (WL4/EI)

I = BD 4/6

Bending Stress = (aL2W2R/(9√3gI))

A = 11t2

6.3 CALCULATIONS
Area of crank section = 3.14 R2/2

= 3.14 X 282/2

= 1231mm2

Area of piston section = 3.14 r2/2

= 3.14 X 152/2

= 353.4mm2

Area of mid section, a = 11t2

= 11 X 102

= 1100mm2

= 1231+353.4+1100

= 2684mm2

6.4 FORGED STEEL

Deflection(y) =(5/384)X(WL4/EI)

I = BD4/6

= 20X104/6

= 3333.33mm2

Deflection(y) = (5/384)X(580X184/(2X105X3333.33))

= .0012745mm
48
 Bending stress = (aL2W2R)/(9√3gI)

= 198.459N/mm2

6.5 ALUMINUM NITRIDE

Deflection (y) = (5/384) X (WL4/EI)

= 4523.33 mm

Deflection(y) = (5/384) X 580X184/(2X105X4523.33))

= 0.00087154mm

Bending Stress = (aL2W2R)/(9√3gI)

= 193.25N/mm2

49
6.6 COMPARISON OF RESULTS
Table no 4.5 (comparison of results)

PARAMETERS FORGED STEEL ALUMINUM NITRIDE

SM ANSYS SM ANSYS

LOAD(KN) 50 50 50 50

DEFLECTION
0.0012 0.0014 0.0087 0.0090
(MM)

BENDING
STRESS 198.456 196.456 193.25 194.251
(N/MM2)

WEIGHT (GM) 580 580 425 425

REDUCED
- - 15% 15%
COST

There is considerable reduction in weight, cost, stress and deflection by switching

over from forged steel to aluminum nitride (as the above table shows it in parameters)

50
 CHAPTER 7

CONCLUSION

A detailed study on the material properties of the connecting rod was done to find

the various factors affecting its life this project investigated weight and cost reduction

opportunities that connecting rods offers. The connecting rod chosen for this project

belonged to a light weight diesel engine optimization was performed to reduce weight

and manufacturing cost. Cost was reduced by changing the material of the current forged

steel connecting rod to aluminum nitride. While reducing the weight, the static account,

fatigue strength, and the basking load factor were taken into account. The connecting rod

was optimized under 4 different loading conditions. This connecting rod satisfied all the

constraints defined and was found to be satisfactory. The optimized connecting rod is

10% lighter and connecting rod, in spite of lower strength aluminum nitride compared to

the existing forged steel.

51
 CHAPTER 8

REFERENCE

 Afzal, A., 2004, “Fatigue Behavior and Life prediction of Forged Steel and PM
Connecting Rods,” Master’s Thesis, University of Toledo.
 Athavale, S. and Sajanpawar, P. R., 1991, “Studies on Some Modelling Aspects
in the Finite Element Analysis of Small Gasoline Engine Components,” Small
Engine Technology Conference Proceedings, Society of Automotive Engineers of
Japan, Tokyo, pp. 379-389.
 Balasubramaniam, B., Svoboda, M., and Bauer, W., 1991, “Structural
optimization of I.C. engines subjected to mechanical and thermal loads,”
Computer Methods in Applied Mechanics and Engineering, Vol. 89, pp. 337-360.
 Bhandari, V. B., 1994, “Design of Machine Elements,” Tata McGraw-Hill. Clark,
J. P., Field III, F. R., and Nallicheri, N. V., 1989, “Engine state-of-the-art a
competitive assessment of steel, cost estimates and performance analysis,”
research Report BR 89-1, Automotive Applications Committee, American Iron
and Steel Institute.
 El-Sayed, M. E. M., and Lund, E. H., 1990, “Structural optimization with fatigue
life constraints,” Engineering Fracture Mechanics, Vol. 37, No. 6, pp. 1149-1156.
Folgar, F., Wldrig, J. E., and Hunt, J. W., 1987, “Design, Fabrication and
performance of Fiber FP/Metal Matrix Composite Connecting Rods,” SAE
technical Paper Series 1987, Paper No. 870406.
 Ferguson, C. R., 1986, “Internal Combustion Engines, Applied Thermosciences,”
John Wiley and Sons, Inc. Goenka, P. K. and Oh, K. P., 1986, “An Optimum
Connecting Rod Design Study – A
 Lubrication Viewpoint,” Journal of Tribology, Transactions of ASME, July 1986,
Vol. 108. Gupta, R. K., 1993, “Recent Developments in Materials and Processes
for Automotive Connecting rods,” SAE Technical Paper Series, Paper No.
930491.

52