The 6th International Conference on
Computer Science & Education (ICCSE 2011)
August 3-5, 2011. SuperStar Virgo, Singapore
Finite Element Analysis of
Composite Leaf Spring
Zheng Yinhuan, Xue Ka
School of Mechanical and Electronic Engineering,
Wuhan University of Technology,
Wuhan, China
e-mail: douzyh@163.com
Abstract—This paper analyses the mechanics characteristic of
a composite leaf spring made from glass fiber reinforced plastics
using the ANSYS software. Considering interleaf contact, the
stress distribution and deformation are obtained. Taking the
single spring as an example, comparison between the
performance of the GFRP and the steel spring is presented. The
comparison results show that the composite spring has lower
stresses and much lower weight. Then the automotive dead
weight is reduced observably.
Index Terms—composite, leaf spring, GFRP, finite element
analysis
I. INTRODUCTION
Safety, energy saving and environmental protection will be
the trend of world car. Lightweight has become an important
goal of vehicle development. The leaf spring is about 5% to
10% of the total mass of vehicles as the vehicle suspension
elastic element. So leaf spring is one of the important
components to achieve vehicle lightweight. In order to save
energy and reduce consumption of vehicle, lots of researches
have been done about leaf spring of the car at home and abroad
[1-9].
In recent years, with the development of new materials and
new technology, foreign auto companies begin to introduce
composite leaf spring. Many scholars of various countries
begin to research on composite leaf spring. There are much
more studies in the area at abroad. A.E.Baumal and I.
Rajendran made an optimal design of composite leaf spring by
using genetic algorithms [3,4]. H. A. Al-Qreshi researched on
composite leaf spring in analysis, design and processing [5].
Mahmood M. Shokrieh made an analysis and optimal design to
composite leaf spring which is used in rear suspension system
of light car based on ANSYS software [6].
But the domestic studies are relatively small. Wang Jicheng
studied the calculation of composite leaf springs with equal
strength [7].Bian Wenfeng made an optimal design and
analysis for composite leaf spring using Matlab software [8].
__________________________
Supported by“the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities”(2010-la-
063).
978-1-4244-9718-8/11/$26.00 ©2011 IEEE
ThC 2.3
Huang Zhigao
Department of Locomotive and Vehicle Engineering,
Wuhan Railway Vocational College Of Technology,
Wuhan, China
Xu Changsheng made an optimal design for single composite
leaf spring [9].
This paper researches the variable cross-section leaf spring
used in a cab model, which is made from composite materials
instead of steel. The paper build the mechanical model of
composite leaf spring and make finite element analysis in the
use of ANSYS software. Taking the single spring as an
example, it compares the two materials leaf spring.
II. Mechanical Model Building
The composite leaf spring analysed consists of three
components. The first leaf is cross section and the other
two are variable cross-section. When the leaf spring
works, only the main spring leaf composed of the first
leaf and the second leaf works in the case suffered a
smaller load. When the load is large, then the third
deputy leaf begins to work. The spring geometric model
is created by Solidworks software, shown in figure 1.
Figure 1.Geometric model of composite leaf spring
The Glass fiber reinforced plastics (GFRP) can do better to
meet the requirement the mechanical properties of automobile
spring. Its production cost is not high and production
technology is more mature. It can effectively reduce the quality
of springs relative to the steel spring. So the paper used GFRP
composite material as the material of leaf spring. The tensile
strength (Xt) is 900MPa. The compressive strength (Xc) is
450MPa. The density of material is 2e-9 t/mm3.
After leading the geometric model of spring created in
Solidworks into ANSYS software, the paper selects the
appropriate element type and defines the corresponding
parameters of the model material. GFRP materials are
316
 ThC 2.3

orthotropic materials, so that SOLID 46 laminated Element

can be selected, which is commonly used in the analysis of
composite materials. SOLID 46 element allows for up to 250
layers of different thickness and different orientation of the
material layers. When defining the material properties,
material’s Young's modulus, Poisson ratio, density in all
directions should be defined.
The finite element model obtained after meshed is shown
in figure 2. The total number of elements is 10693.


 Figure 3 The deformation of composite leaf spring
Figure 2.Finite element model of composite leaf spring

Each leaf of the spring in two outside parts of U-

bolts can still be contacted or separated. Considering
interleaf contact is the contact between two flexible
faces, it can be defined using TARGE170 and
CONTAC174. These two are three-dimensional contact
elements. The related real count and material keywords
can be set.
III. MODEL CONSTRAINT, LOADING AND SOLUTION
The main leaf of the spring adopts lug connection
mode when connected with frame at both ends. One end
is fixed, the other one is activities lug terminal. When
applying constraints to leaf spring, it can be consulted
actual installation and the test method of leaf spring 
characteristics. The paper chooses both ends of the first Figure 4 The Von Mises equivalent stress contour
leaf, exerts all constraints at one end and imposes Y
directions of displacement constraints at another end From the deformation figure, the maximum strain is
that the displacement is zero. The force of 2000N on the occured in the roots. Its value is 35.615mm. The
node of middle part of the last leaf is loaded. stiffness of this spring is 57.78N/mm.

When defining the solving option, the definition of
automatic time step is opened. The Newton—Raphson
option is set to the FULL. The large deformation switch
is opened. The linear search option is used to make
calculation stabilizing. Finally, the paper sets up
reasonably the sub-steps of force and the iterations
number of balance.
IV. THE FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS RESULTS
Applying load to the model and solving in nonlinear
method, the deformation of composite leaf spring under
the stress is shown in figure 3. The Von Mises
equivalent stress contour is shown in figure 4.
From the Von Mises stress diagram, the first and the
second leaves occur larger stress value of the regional
distribution near the U-bolts between the first leaf and
the second leaf. The length of maximum stress area
accounts for about one-third of the leaf. The maximum
stress is 364MPa.The stress decreases progressively
from the center to both sides, but it occurs the maximum
value at the lug of leaf spring. The maximum stress area
of the third leaf also appears in U-bolts nearby and the
both ends have a small stress distribution.
V. COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF SINGLE LEAF SPRING
In order to compare composite leaf spring with steel
spring, the paper takes the single spring as an example. In
the circumstance of same size, it chooses GFRP composite
materials and 60Si 2 Mn steel materials for finite element
analysis. The processing methods of GFRP leaf spring,
included meshing, model constraint force and loading, are the
same as above. For comparison, the loading is 2000N which is
the same with foregoing three leaves spring. The selection of
material element is SOLID 45 element for the leaf spring
made from 60Si 2 Mn steel. Its elastic modulus (EX) is
2.1e11. Its poisson ratio (PRXY) is 0.3. Applying the same

317

restraint and load for comparative analysis, then the results are
got. The analysis results of these Two materials leaf spring are
shown in figure 5, figure 6, figure 7 and figure 8. The
deformations are shown in figure 5 and figure 6. The Von
Mises equivalent stress contours are shown in figure 7
and figure 8.
Figure 5 The deformation of GFRP leaf spring
Figure 6 The deformation of 60Si2Mn steel spring
Figure 7 The Von Mises equivalent stress contour of GFRP leaf spring
318
ThC 2.3
Figure 8 The Von Mises equivalent stress contour of 60Si2Mn steel spring
From the deformation, in the circumstance of same stress,
the maximum deformation in the middle of GFRP leaf spring
is 176.398 mm. But the maximum deformation of 60Si2Mn
steel spring is only 26.611 mm. The reason is that the elastic
modulus of this composite material is only one-seventh to one-
tenth of the steel. Hence its deformation will be much larger.
The density of composite material is only about one-fourth of
the steel. When the sizes are same, it can drastically reduce the
weight of the spring.
From the Von Mises stress contours, the trends of the
stress distribution are similar, whether the material is
steel or composite. They both have the maximum stress
area in the U-bolts nearby. The stress reduces gradually
and then increases gradually from center to both sides.
The larger value of stress can appear at the place of lug.
This is in accordance with the foregoing three leaves
spring. When choosing 60Si2Mn steel material, its
maximum stress value is 914Mpa, which is higher than
the value of 804MPa for GFRP composite material. The
strength of composite material is stronger than the steel.
The above analysis results are the same as the reality.
The stress at plug place is larger. In the practical
application, the composite leaf spring is also prone to
failure at plug place. So it usually needs strengthen
treatment for lug place.
The theoretical studies and practice on composite leaf
spring overseas have proved that the car using composite
leaf spring can significantly reduce the deadweight of
automobile. It can reduce consumption of oil, improve
driving smooth and comfort.
VI. CONCLUSION
This paper analyses the mechanics characteristic of a
composite leaf spring. Taking the single spring as an example,
comparison between the performance of the GFRP and the
steel spring is presented. The calculation results show that it
can get the deformation of composite leaf spring and stress
distribution of each leaf precisely through the finite element
analysis. The results show that the stress of composite leaf
spring is lower than steel spring and its resistance to fatigue
ability is much stronger. In the case of meeting the strength
requirements, it can greatly reduce the weight of leaf spring so
 ThC 2.3

that it will reduce the deadweight of vehicle. It meets the

requirements of lightweight, comfort, stability and durability.
REFERENCES
[1] Zheng Yinhuan, and Zhang Zhongfu, “Optimum Analysis for Taper-leaf
Spring Using ANSYS”, Modern Machinery, vol.2, 2005, pp. 30–31.
[2] Zheng Yinhuan, and Zhang Zhongfu, “Nonlinear Finite Element
Analysis of the Mechanics Characteristic of a Leaf Spring”, Mechanical
Science and Technology for Aerospace Engineering, vol.7, 2008, pp.
914–916.
[3] A.E.Baumal, J.J.McPhee, and P.H.Calamai, “Application of genetic
algorithms to the design optimization of an active vehicle suspension
system”, Computer methods in applied mechanics and engineering,
vol.163, 1998, pp. 87–94.
[4] I.Rajendran, and S.Vijayarangan, “Optimal design of a composite leaf
spring using genetic algorithms”, Computers and Structures, vol.79,
2001, pp. 1121–1129.
[5] H.A.Al-Qureshi, “Automobile leaf springs from composite materials”,
Journal of Materials Processing Technology, vol.118, 2001, pp. 58–61.
[6] Mahmood M.Shokrieh, and Davood Rezaei, “Analysis and optimization
of a composite leaf spring”, Composite Structures, vol.60, 2003, pp.
317–325.
[7] Wang Jicheng, “Calculation of strength composite leaf spring”,
Machinery, vol.5, 1990, pp. 10–14.
[8] Bian Wenfeng, and Li Wei, “Optimum design for the vice-spring of
Composite material leaf spring”, Machinery Design & Manufacture,
vol.9, 2006, pp. 29–31.
[9] Xu Changsheng, and Gao Chenghui, “Optimization and Analysis of a
Composite Leaf Spring ”, Agricultural Equipment & Vehicle
Engineering, vol.12, 2007, pp. 22–24.

319