Vehicle dynamics simulation using bond graphs
Germán Filippini, Norberto Nigro and Sergio Junco
Facultad de Ciencias Exactas, Ingeniería y Agrimensura
Universidad Nacional de Rosario. Av. Pellegrini 250, S2000EKE Rosario, Argentina.
Abstract—This work addresses the construction of a four-
wheel, nonlinear vehicle dynamic bond graph model and its
implementation in the 20sim modeling and simulation
environment. Nonlinear effects arising from the coupling of
vertical, longitudinal and lateral vehicle dynamics, as well as
geometric nonlinearities coming from the suspension system
are taken into account. Transmission and (a simplified) engine
models are also included. The modeling task is supported by a
multibody representation where the parts are handled as rigid
bodies linked by joints. The first step is the 3D-modeling of
each, chassis, suspension units, tires and joints, as bond graph
elements equipped with power ports for physical
interconnection. This is done with the help of vector or
multibond graphs in order to exploit their compactness and
simplicity of representation. These 3D-units are later
programmed as 20sim bond graph subsystems whose
assembling through the power ports allows for an automated,
modular approach to the construction of the overall vehicle
model. Simulation experiments corresponding to standard
vehicle dynamics tests are presented in order to show the
performance of the model.
Index Terms — Bond Graphs, Multibody systems, Vehicle
dynamics.
I. INTRODUCTION
M odeling and simulation has an increasing importance in
the development of complex, large mechanical systems.
In areas like road vehicles [1, 12, 15], rail vehicles [9], high
speed mechanisms, industrial robots and machine tools [10,
11, 6], simulation is an inexpensive way to experiment with
the system and to design an appropriate control system.
The above indicated kind of mechanical systems belong for
a major part to the class of systems of rigid bodies or
multibody systems. Such systems consist of a finite number of
rigid bodies, interconnected by arbitrary joints. The latter may
exhibit properties of rotational or translational freedom,
Norberto Nigro whish to thanks CONICET for its support to this research.
N. Nigro is with CIMEC-INTEC-CONICET and with the School of
Mechanical Engineering, Facultad de Ingeniería (FCEIA), Universidad
Nacional de Rosario (UNR), Argentina. (Corresponding author. Phone: 54-
342-4511594; fax: 54-342-4550944; e-mail: nnigro@intec.unl.edu.ar) .
Germán Filippini, is fellow at CIMEC-INTEC and teaching assistant at the
School of Mechanical Engineering, FCEIA-UNR (gfilippini@ceride.gov.ar ).
Sergio J. Junco is with the Department of Electronics, FCEIA-UNR,
Argentina (sjunco@fceia.unr.edu.ar).
damping and compliance, and are the place of the attachment
of drives or external forces.
In classical mechanics several procedures exist through
which differential equations can be derived for a system of
rigid bodies. In the case of large systems these procedures are
labor-intensive and consequently error-prone, unless they are
computerized [4].
This work applies the multibody theory through the
multibond or vector bond graph technique [2, 3, 5, 6, 7] to the
modeling of a complex four-wheel vehicle system. Primarily,
bond graphs (BG) represent elementary energy-related
phenomena (generation, storage, dissipation, power exchange)
using a small set of ideal elements that can be coupled together
through external ports representing power flow. Thus, they are
well-suited for a modular modeling approach based on
physical principles. Hierarchical modeling becomes possible
through coupling of component or subsystems models through
their connecting ports. Besides these physical features
capturing energy exchange phenomena, it is also possible to
code on the graph the mathematical structure of the physical
system, in the sense of showing the causal relationships (in a
computational sense) among its signals [2]. On the one side,
this allows connecting BG-models to signal flow graphs or
block diagrams, and -on the other side- it turns the algorithmic
derivation of mathematical and computational models from
BG into a highly formalized task [2]. The conjunction of all
these features make of BG a physically based, object-oriented
graphical language most suitable for dynamic modeling,
analysis and simulation of complex engineering systems
involving mixed physical and technical domains in their
constitution [7].
The vehicle model developed in this paper considers the
vertical, longitudinal and lateral vehicle dynamics, takes into
account the geometrical non-linearities associated to the
suspension system, and includes Pacejka models [14] for the
behavior of the pneumatic tires. Simple, adequate models for
the engine and the transmission are also included to take into
account the vehicle traction.
The rest of the paper is organized as follows. Section II
presents a brief general description of a four-wheel vehicle and
of its constituents seen as rigid bodies, and discusses the
modeling assumptions. Section III first deals with the standard
mathematical modeling of these components and then with
their bond graph modeling and discusses the construction of
the 20sim library [18]. Section IV presents the full vehicle
model obtained by assembling the library components. Section
V presents the simulation results and, finally, Section VI
brings the conclusions.
II. GENERALITIES AND MODELING ASSUMPTIONS
A. Vehicle Chassis
The vehicle chassis is modeled as a rigid body with a local
coordinate reference frame (x, y, z) attached to the center of
mass and aligned with the inertia principal axes as is shown in
figure 1. It has mass m, and the following principal inertia
moments: roll (Jr) respect to the body x-axis, pitch (Jp) respect
to the body y-axis and yaw (Jy) respect to the body z-axis.
z (Mx), rolling resistance (My) and aligning (Mz) torques along
yaw
roll
(2)
Bs
x
Ks r1
(1)
ω Ks
Bs
Kt h1
Kt
Fy
δ
Fx
Figure 1: Full car model.
As also the four suspension subsystems are modeled as
spatial multibody systems, joint models are necessary to link
them to the chassis. The joints are represented as flexible
instead of rigid using a pseudo spring-damper system with
elastic and damping constants. The flow and efforts actuating
on the joints depend on the relative position and the relative
orientation among the bodies.
In order to link two rigid bodies at a given joint it is
necessary to do some transformations (translations and
rotations) between the reference frames associated to each
body. In this way, the state variables expressed at the center of
mass of each body are transformed to a local reference frame
attached to the joint.
B. Engine and Transmission
Most vehicles are propulsed by internal (spark or
compression ignited) combustion engines which -for our
modeling purposes- may be modeled through a given static
curve relating the engine speed and the load with its torque
and its power. Usually, these curves are obtained through
testing the engine at partial and full load.
The transmission is composed by the mechanical members
connecting the engine crankshaft with the traction wheels, the
gearbox and the planetary gear train including the differential
[8]. The main phenomena taken into account are the speed and
effort transformation among them.
C. Pneumatic tires
Aside from aerodynamic and gravitational forces, all other
major forces and moments affecting the motion of a ground
vehicle are applied through the running gear-ground contact.
An understanding of the basic characteristics of the interaction
between the running gear and the ground is, therefore,
essential to the study of performance characteristics, ride
quality, and handling behavior of ground vehicles. However, a
detailed explanation about pneumatic tires is out of the scope
of this paper. The following figure shows a summary of the
main forces, moments and angles that play a major role on the
modeling of the pneumatic tire. Each one is associated with a
corresponding local axis located at the center of the contact
patch of the wheel. Traction (Fx), lateral (Fy) and normal (Fz)
forces along X, Y and Z local axis respectively and overturning
(4)
Ks Bs
the same axis respectively are modeled in terms of the slip and
(3) the camber angles and the pneumatic characteristics.
Kt
Ks Bs For more details about the fundamentals and the modeling of
pneumatic tires see [14, 1, 12].
y
pitch Kt
Figure 2: Tire axis reference system
D. Suspensions
Suspension is the term given to the system of springs, shock
absorbers and linkages that connects a vehicle to its wheels.
This assembly is used to support weight, absorb and dampen
road shock, and help maintain tire contact as well as proper
wheel-to-chassis relationship. Without being a restriction for
future extensions of the overall vehicle model, only static
suspension systems are considered in this work.
E. Aerodynamic forces
The aerodynamic forces were very simplified in this
analysis through the usage of empirical aerodynamic
coefficients [1, 16, 17]. In this work only the drag force was
included, being the lift and the pitching effects very similar in
terms of their mathematical expressions. In the future not only
the coefficients, also their sensitivity may be included.
III. MATHEMATICAL AND BG MODELING
This section presents the subsystem modeling according to
the hypothesis of Section II. Previously, the essential issues
concerning the bond graph modeling of multibody systems as
used in this paper are addressed. to the system attached to the center of mass of the rigid body.
To determine the spatial motion of the rigid body the well Referring these port variables to the coordinates of
known Euler equations are used [2], which appear in (1) and interconnection to other bodies is a must in order to be able to
(2) in both, their intrinsic way of representation and their couple the corresponding models.
tensorial counterparts. Figure 4 shows the bond graph implementation of the
The first one represents the conservation of linear equation system representing how the port variables of two
momentum, written as: arbitrary points 'A' and 'B' of a given spatial body transform
dp dp each other. The equations relating the linear and rotational
∑ F = dt = dt + ω × p (1) efforts are the following:
rel
M = F ×r (3)
dpi dpi
Fi = = + ε ijk ω j p k M i = ε ijk F j rk
dt dt rel

For the flow variables the equations are the following:

where F , ω , p represents the external forces, the angular
velocity vector and the linear momentum vector respectively; v =ω ×r
(4)
d/dt, d/dt|rel, εijk represent the derivative respect to the inertial vi = ε ijk ω j rk
frame, the derivative respect to the body (vehicle) attached
frame and the Levi-Civita tensor used to express the cross
product in tensor notation.
The second of the Euler equations sets up the conservation
of angular momentum:
dh dh
∑ M = dt = dt + ω × h (2)
rel

dhi dhi
Mi = = + ε ijk ω j hk
dt dt rel

where M , h represent the external torque and the angular

momentum vector.

Figure 4: Power variables transformation between two points

‘A’, ‘B’ belonging to a given 3-dimensional rigid body.

To transform the dynamic equations from those expressed in

the body attached frame of reference (roll, pitch and yaw axes)
to a spatially fixed frame of reference (X,Y,Z : inertial frame)
it is necessary to choose some parameterization for the
rotations. Among the multiple possibilities, Euler angles are
used in this work. To transform these rotations the following
equations are used:
ω ′′ = φ × ω (5.a); ω ′ = θ × ω ′′ (5.b); ϖ G = ψ × ω ′ (5.c)
v ′′ = φ × v (5.d); v ′ = θ × v ′′ (5.e); v G = ψ × v ′ (5.f)

where,
⎡1 0 0 ⎤ ⎡ cos θ 0 sin θ ⎤
⎢
φ = ⎢0 cos φ − sin φ ⎥⎥ θ = ⎢⎢ 0 1 0 ⎥⎥
Figure 3: BG representation of the spatial rigid body
⎢⎣0 sin φ cos φ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣− sin θ 0 cos θ ⎥⎦
dynamics.
⎡cosψ − sinψ 0⎤
The BG representation of the 3-dimensional motion of a
rigid body based on the Euler equations is shown in figure 3. ψ = ⎢⎢ sinψ cosψ 0⎥⎥
The port variables of the above model are defined with respect ⎢⎣ 0 0 1⎥⎦
 ⎡ω x ⎤ ⎡ω ′x′ ⎤ ⎡ ω ′x ⎤ ⎡ω X ⎤
ω = ⎢⎢ω y ⎥⎥ ω ′′ = ⎢⎢ω ′y′ ⎥⎥ ω ′ = ⎢⎢ ω ′y ⎥⎥ ω G = ⎢⎢ωY ⎥⎥
⎢⎣ω z ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ω z′′ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ω z′ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ω Z ⎥⎦
⎡v x ⎤ ⎡v ′x′ ⎤ ⎡v ′x ⎤ ⎡v X ⎤
v = ⎢⎢v y ⎥⎥ v ′′ = ⎢⎢v ′y′ ⎥⎥ v ′ = ⎢⎢v ′y ⎥⎥ v = ⎢⎢ vY ⎥⎥
G

⎢⎣v z ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ v ′z′ ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣v ′z ⎥⎦ ⎢⎣ v Z ⎥⎦

Its bond graphs representation is observed in figure 5, where

the power variables are transformed from (x,y,z) axes to the
rotated ones (X,Y,Z) according to the angles φ, θ, ψ respect to
each axis. It may be observed that while the flow variables are
rotated from (xyz) to (XYZ), the effort variables are
transformed back from (XYZ) to (xyz).
Next, the models used for the different subsystems
belonging to the whole vehicle model are presented [2, 12]. Figure 5: 3D-rotation equations expressed in terms of power
variables.

Figure 6: BG modeling of Vehicle Chassis

modeled as an effort source (the engine output torque) variable

A. Vehicle Chassis
Figure 6 shows the vehicle chassis model composed by a
rigid body model, a coordinate system transformation to the
global system where the vehicle weight is imposed and four
translational transformations ( ri ) to the pivots of the
suspension at each wheel, each one with their corresponding
model Engine and Transmission
B. Engine and Transmission
Engine. In bond graphs representation the engine is
with the engine velocity normally expressed in rpm
(revolutions per minute) and the position of the butterfly valve
(accelerator command) as written by equation (6).
T (T p , Tr , A p ) = A p T p (ω ) + (1 − A p ) Tr (ω ) (6)
where Ap is the accelerator position (0 ≤ A p ≤ 1) , Tp and Tr
are the engine output torque and the resistant torque
respectively for a given engine speed (ω ) .
 While the engine curve, the accelerator position and the
resistant torque are data for the model, the engine speed is
computed by the whole model. In the ‘Engine Torque’ model
show in figure 7 the output torque is computed by equation (6)
and its result T is used to modulate the source ‘MSe’.
Figure 7: BG modeling of Engine
Figure 8: BG modeling of Transmission
Transmission. Figure 8 shows the main components of the
transmission and its structure. The gearbox (figure 9) is
modeled using a modulated transformer (MTF) that relates the
input and output effort variables through a variable
transformation factor that depends on the gearbox ratios
supplied to the model in advance.
Figure 9: BG modeling of Gearbox
The differential (figure 10) is modeled by a transformer
(TF) modulated by the planetary drive train (differential) ratio.
The ‘0’ junction imposes the same torque to both traction
wheels.
Figure 10:BG modeling of Differential
C. Pneumatic Tires
For all forces and moments acting on the tire the Pacejka
model [14], inspired by a lot of experiments carried out using
different types of pneumatic tires is used.
(
⎣ )
µ x = sign(σ ) ⋅ ⎡ A ⋅ 1 − e− b σ + c ⋅ σ 2 − D ⋅ σ ⎤
⎦
B = (K / d )
1/ n
A = 1.12 ; C= 0.625 ; D = 1
K = 46 ; d = 5 ; n = 0.6 (7)
 This model is briefly described with the expressions (7),
with -1< σ <1, µx being the adherence coefficient, and σ the
longitudinal slip. From these expressions certain lateral
stiffness function may be derived:
Fy = D ⋅ sin ⎡⎣C ⋅ arctan ⎡⎣ B ⋅ (1 − E ) ⋅ α + E ⋅ arctan( B ⋅ α ) ⎤⎦ ⎤⎦
⎡ ⎛ Fz ⎞ ⎤
a3 ⋅ sin ⎢ 2 ⋅ arctan ⎜ ⎟ ⎥
⎣ ⎝ a4 ⎠ ⎦
B=
C⋅D
c = a0 ; µ y = a1 ⋅ Fz + a2 ; D = µ y ⋅ Fz
E = a6 ⋅ Fz + a7 ; a0 = 1.3 ; a1 = −53.31
a2 = 1190 ; a3 = 588.6 ; a4 = 2.5212
a5 = 0 ; a6 = −0.5178 ; a7 = 1.0
where α is the slip angle. Equation (8) represents the relation
among the lateral forces (Fy), the slip angle and the vertical
forces (Fz).
Figure 11: Bond graphs modeling of Pneumatic Tire
D. Suspensions
The model adopted here assumes an independent
suspension in each of the four wheels, each one composed by
a spring with stiffness "ks" and a damper with damping
coefficient "bs", considering the unsprung mass as a 3-
dimensional rigid body.
Figure 12 shows the BGs model of each suspension
connecting the pneumatic tire model with the chassis one. The
translation hi is used to take into account the suspension height
(see figure 1). Two transformations are employed, one for the
Figure 11 shows the pneumatic tire model, composed by a
translational transformation of the local coordinate system
( Ti ) of its rigid body to the tire axis using the pneumatic
radius as its module. In this coordinate system the axial (Fx)
and lateral (Fy) rolling resistance forces are applied through
two ‘R’ bond graph components. Fx takes the signal
wTi coming from the ‘1’ joint to compute the longitudinal
sliding and both Fx and Fy take the signal coming from the ‘0’
joint to sense the vertical force acting on the pneumatic tire
needed to compute the friction forces.
Another local system to global system transformation is
used to apply the pneumatic weight by a source ‘Se’.
Using a ‘C’ component is possible to take into account the
(8) vertical stiffness of the pneumatic tire.
chasis coordinate system and the other for the pneumatic tire
coordinate system to be joined at a common global system
(vsG , ω sG ) . In this way it is possible to link the 6 degrees of
freedom.
The revolution joint allows the rotation of the pneumatic
wheel. Its model is shown in figure 13 where it may be
observed how 5 of the 6 degrees of freedoms are constrained
using a pseudo spring-damper system allowing only a rotation
around y axis.
 Figure 12: Bond graphs modeling of Suspension

Figure 13: Bond graphs modeling of Revolution Joint

E. Aerodynamic Forces
Equation 9 represents the aerodynamic drag force where ρ Figure 14: Bond graphs modeling of Rigid Body with
is the air density, Cx is the (experimentally computed) drag Aerodynamics Resistance
coefficient, Af is the vehicle frontal area and V is the relative
velocity between the vehicle and the wind. IV. FULL VEHICLE VECTOR BG MODEL AND 20SIM
IMPLEMENTATION
1 (9) In figure 15 the whole system model is shown, which is
Fxaero = ⋅ ρ ⋅ Cx ⋅ Af ⋅ V 2
2 built via assembling the previous submodels, pretty much in
the same way as a real vehicle is constructed. This is the
This is represented in the Bond Graph formalism by a powerful modular or objected-oriented modeling property
resistance component applied to the coordinate system fixed of the BG technique.
to the center of mass of the rigid body that models the chassis,
as it is shown in figure 14.
 Figure 15: Bond graphs modeling of a vehicle

Tire Vertical stiffness 150 000 N/m

V. SIMULATION RESULTS Tire inertia 1.95 Kgm2
After the validation of the bond graphs multibody Damper coefficient 475 N s / m
toolbox developed in this work, a vehicle dynamics test, Suspension stiffness 14 900 N/m
extracted from the bibliography is performed [1]. Sprung mass - Yaw Inertia 2345.53Kg m2
The data, coming from a Renault Clio RL 1.1 car, are the Sprung mass - Pitch Inertia 2443.26Kg m2
following: Sprung mass - Roll Inertia 637.26 Kg m2

Aerodynamics coefficient 0.33 The first test is a sudden motion starting from rest. With
Frontal area 1.86 m2 the engine butterfly valve fully opened and once the clutch
Distance between axes 2.472 m is released the vehicle response may be assessed in terms of
Vehicle weight 8100 N the vehicle acceleration in a straight road. Figures 16 to 21
Centre of mass height 0.6 m show the results for this case. Figure 16 shows the engine
Front axis weight 5100 N speed (rpm) in time where it may be noted the times at
Rear axis weight 3000 N which the gearbox is used. Figure 17 shows the longitudinal
Maximum engine torque 78.5 Nm at 2500 rpm vehicle speed in time reaching 100 km/h in less than 20
Maximum engine power 48 CV at 5250 rpm seconds. Figure 18 plots the longitudinal sliding of one of
Planetary drive train (differential) ratio 3.571 the traction wheels. The friction force may be evaluated
First gearbox ratio 3.731 from this figure and the vertical load on the tire (see figure
Second gearbox ratio 2.049 19). In figure 20 the chassis pitching angle is shown.
Third gearbox ratio 1.321 During the first 10 seconds until the fourth gear is selected
Four gearbox ratio 0.967 the pitching is oscillating reaching a negative smaller value
Five gearbox ratio 0.795 after this time when five gear is selected showing an
Reverse gearbox ratio 3.571 acceleration behavior. Figure 21 shows the rear wheel load.
Tires, type and dimensions 145 70 R13 S The time spent to reach 100 km/h was 17 seconds, agreeing
Wheelbase 1.650 m very well with the road test published by the manufacturer.
Maximum speed 146 km/h
Acceleration 0-100 km/h in 17 s
Time spent to do 1000 meters 38 s
Distance from centre of mass to front axes 0.916 m
Distance from centre of mass to rear axes 1.556 m
Pneumatic tire radius (unloaded) 0.2666 m
Air density 1.225 kg/m3
Unsprung masses (at each wheel) 38.42 kg
 Figure 16: Time evolution of the engine speed. Figure 20: Chassis pitching as a function of time.

Figure 21: Load [N] over one of the rear wheels.

Figure 17: Longitudinal vehicle velocity [m/s] in time.
In the second test the vehicle is forced to follow a curved
road. The simulation starts with the vehicle in third gear at
65 km/h; the wheel drive in turned such that the front
wheels turn 1 degree in 10 sec following a time law as
shown in figure 22.

Figure 18: Evolution of one of the traction wheels

sliding.

Figure 22: Evolution of the turning angle [rad] of the

front wheels.

Figure 19: Evolution of the load [N] over a traction

wheel.
Figure 23: Trajectory in x-y [m]
 Figure 27: Front wheels slip angle [rad] as a function of
Figure 24: Sliding angle of one of the front wheels as a
time
function of time.

Figure 28: Trajectory x-y [m]

Figure 25: Sliding angle of one of the rear wheels as a
function of time.

Figure 29: Slip angle of one of the front wheels [rad].

Figure 26: Yaw vehicle response as a function of time.

After 5 seconds the wheel drives return to the original

position (0 degree). In figure 24 the lateral slip angle of one
of the front wheels is shown and in figure 25 the same for
one of the rear wheels. Figure 13 plots the trajectory
followed by the vehicle and figure 26 the yaw response of
the vehicle.

Figure 30: Slip angle of one of the rear wheels [rad].


Figure 31: Yaw angle [rad] as a function of time.
In the third test a zigzag maneuver is assessed. The
vehicle start the simulation at 65 km/h in third gear the
driver turn the wheel drive following a time law as shown
in figure 27, the front wheels turn an angle of one degree in
10 seconds.
After this time the wheel drive is turned as to reach one
degree in the opposite direction in 10 seconds and then
return to the original position in the remaining 5 seconds.
Figure 29 shows the lateral slip angle of one of the front
wheels and figure 30 does the same for one of the rear
wheels.
Figure 28 shows the vehicle trajectory and figure 31
shows the vehicle yaw angle.
The behavior of this case presents some similarity with
the second one and it may be observed that in both cases the
directional stability is a priori acceptable.
However to do a more rigorous analysis we should
analyze the eigenvalues of the directional response matrix
that may be computed making a sensitivity analysis with
simulations. This task is left for future work.
For the vehicle application it is observed that for
maneuvering in straight road the response of the vehicle
with third, four and fifth gears were very smooth
concluding that the vehicle is well optimized to be used at
velocities greater than 50km/h. For curves the transient
response allows for evaluating the directional stability with
changes in the position of the wheel drive. According to the
results obtained it would be more desirable to have a less
oscillatory behavior in turns.
VI. CONCLUSIONS
One of the main goals of this paper was the extension of
this formalism to include large spatial (3-dimensional)
rotations. Several elements oriented to multibody systems
were developed allowing working with different reference
frames, operating with them through the usage of
translations and general transformations. This toolbox
works acceptable in the vehicle dynamics prediction and it
was successfully applied to another project based on vehicle
fault diagnostics [13].
REFERENCES
[1] F. Aparicio Izquierdo, C. Vera Alvarez, V. Días López, Teoría de los
vehículos automóviles. U. P. de Madrid
[2] Ronald C. Rosenberg, Donald L. Margolis, Dean C. Karnopp.
Modeling and Simulation of Mechatronic Systems, A Wiley-Interscience
Publication, New York.
[3] Albert M. Bos. Modeling Multibody Systems in terms of Multibond
Graphs, with application to a motorcycle, PhD thesis at Twente Univ. 1986
[4] Ahmed A. Shabana. Dynamics of Multibody systems. A Wiley-
Interscience Publication.
[5] Jinhee Jang, Changsoo Han. Proposition of a Modeling Method for
Constrained Mechanical Systems Based on the Vector Bond Graph.
Journal of the Franklin Institute. Vol. 335B, No 3, pp. 451 469, 1998.
[6] T. Erial, J. Stein, L. Louca. A Bond Graphs Based Modular Modeling
Approach towards an Automated Modeling Environment for
Reconfigurable Machine Tools. IMAACA 2004
[7] F. Cellier, "Hierachical non−linear bond graph: A unified methodology
for modelling complex physical systems", Simulation, Vol 58, No. 4, pp.
230-248.
[8] J. M. Mera, C. Vera, J. Félez. 2WD Power Train Modeling with Bond
Graph applied to Vehicular Dynamics . Universidad Politécnica de
Madrid, Spain.
[9] W. Kortuem , A. Urzt, Simulation of active suspensions in ground
transportation - Application to Maglev vehicles, 11th IMACS world
congress, Oslo, Norway, 5-9 Aug, 1985
[10] B. Paul, Analytical dynamics of mechanisms - a computer oriented
overview, Mechanism and Machine Theory, vol 10, pp. 481-507, 1975.
[11] B. Paul, Computer oriented analytical dynamics of machinery,
Proceedings of the NATO advanced study institute on computer aided
analysis and optimization of mechanical system dynamics, ed. E.J. Haug,
IOWA City, Aug 1983, Springer, pp. 41-87, 1984
[12] G. Filippini. Dinámica Vehicular mediante bond graphs. Proyecto
final de carrera de grado. Escuela de Ingeniería Mecánica, Universidad
Nacional de Rosario, 2004
[13] D. Delarmelina, L. Silva, S. Junco. Fault Diagnosis in Vehicle based
on its Dinamic Model. Escuela de Ingeniería Mecánica y Escuela de
Ingeniería Electronica, Universidad Nacional de Rosario, 2005.
[14] H. Pacejka. Tyre Modeling for Use in Vehicle Dynamics Studies.
SAE Paper, No. 870421.
[15] H.B. Pacejka, Principles of plane motion of automobiles, IUTAM
symposium on the dynamics of automobiles, Delft Univ. of Tech. pp. 33-
59, 1975
[16] W.H. Hucho, editor. Aerodynamics of road vehicles. SAE, (1998).
[17] R. H- Barnard, Road vehicle aerodynamic design, Second Edition,
MechAero, England, (2001)
[18] Getting Started with 20-sim 3.6, Controllab Products B.V., Enschede,
Netherlands. Internet: www.20sim.com, 2005.