Telechargé par ah med

Lightweight & Smart McPherson Suspension for NEVs

publicité
TYPE Mini Review
PUBLISHED 27 February 2026
DOI 10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
OPEN ACCESS
EDITED BY
X. J. Jing,
City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong
SAR, China
REVIEWED BY
Vidyasagar S.,
SRM Institute of Science and Technology
Research Kattankulathur, India
A review of the lightweight and
smart McPherson suspension for
new-energy vehicles
Yingshuai Liu 1, Shufang Wang 1 and Jianwei Tan 2*
1
Shandong Huayu University of Technology, Dezhou, China, 2National Lab of Auto Performance and
Emission Test, School of Mechanical and Vehicular Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing,
China
*CORRESPONDENCE
Jianwei Tan,
[email protected]
RECEIVED 14 January 2026
REVISED 16 February 2026
ACCEPTED 16 February 2026
PUBLISHED 27 February 2026
CITATION
Liu Y, Wang S and Tan J (2026) A review of
the lightweight and smart McPherson
suspension for new-energy vehicles.
Front. Mech. Eng. 12:1787696.
doi: 10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
COPYRIGHT
© 2026 Liu, Wang and Tan. This is an
open-access article distributed under the
terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CC BY). The use,
distribution or reproduction in other
forums is permitted, provided the original
author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are
credited and that the original publication
in this journal is cited, in accordance with
accepted academic practice. No use,
distribution or reproduction is permitted
which does not comply with these terms.
The rapid proliferation of new energy vehicles (NEVs), including battery electric
vehicles (BEVs) and hybrid electric vehicles (HEVs), has fundamentally transformed
automotive chassis design paradigms. The McPherson strut suspension,
renowned for its compact architecture and cost-effectiveness, has emerged as
a predominant configuration for NEV front axles. This review systematically
examines the adaptation, optimization, and challenges of McPherson
suspension systems in the context of electrified powertrains. We analyze the
unique requirements imposed by NEV weight distributions, battery integration,
and noise vibration harshness (NVH) characteristics, synthesizing recent advances
in lightweight design, multi objective optimization algorithms, and active control
integration. Key discussion areas include kinematic performance optimization
through genetic algorithms and AI-driven methods, material innovations enabling
mass reduction, NVH mitigation strategies, and the evolution toward semi active
and energy-regenerative variants. Through critical analysis of over
30 representative studies and industrial applications, this review identifies that
while McPherson suspension remains viable for NEVs, its successful
implementation necessitates sophisticated parameter optimization, advanced
materials, and intelligent control systems to address inherent limitations in roll
stiffness and camber control. Future trajectories emphasize synergy with
autonomous driving architectures and electromagnetic energy-harvesting
technologies, positioning McPherson-derived systems as foundational
components of next-generation intelligent electric chassis.
KEYWORDS
active control, lightweighting, MacPherson
optimization, new energy vehicles
strut
suspension,
multi-objective
1 Introduction
The global automotive industry is undergoing an unprecedented electrification
transformation, with new energy vehicle (NEV) sales exceeding 20 million units in
2025, representing a 25% year-over-year increase (Lu et al., 2012). This paradigm shift
extends beyond power train replacement, fundamentally altering vehicle architecture,
weight distribution, and performance requirements. The suspension system, as the
critical interface between vehicle and road, experiences compounded challenges in NEV
applications due to increased curb weights (typically 15%–30% heavier than conventional
counterparts), altered mass distribution, and heightened sensitivity to energy consumption
and NVH characteristics (Christ, 2015).
The McPherson strut suspension, invented in the 1940s by Earle S. MacPherson (Gooch,
2011), has dominated front-axle applications in compact and mid-size vehicles for decades.
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
01
frontiersin.org
Liu et al.
10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
FIGURE 1
McPherson suspension NEV adaptation research methodology.
Its architectural simplicity—integrating a shock absorber, coil
spring, and steering pivot into a single compact unit—offers
exceptional packaging efficiency, manufacturing cost advantages,
and proven reliability (Min et al., 2024).
However, the direct transplantation of conventional
McPherson designs into NEVs proves inadequate. The
substantial mass of battery packs (often exceeding 500 kg in
long-range BEVs) elevates sprung mass, modifies roll
characteristics, and intensifies tire loads, necessitating
comprehensive redesign and optimization (Wang et al., 2024).
Furthermore, the absence of internal combustion engine masking
effects elevates suspension-induced NVH to prominence,
demanding refined electrokinetic tuning and advanced
damping technologies (Lin et al., 2025). The integration of
electrified powertrains also enables novel active suspension
concepts, transforming the traditional passive McPherson
architecture into semi-active or fully active systems with
energy-regenerative capabilities (Dung et al., 2024).
This review systematically synthesizes contemporary research
and industrial practices addressing these challenges. We examine
kinematic optimization methodologies employing genetic
algorithms (Kulkarni et al., 2024) and artificial intelligence,
lightweight material strategies utilizing aluminum alloys and
fiber-reinforced composites (Simon et al., 2023), and advanced
simulation techniques through ADAMS/Car multi-body
dynamics analysis (Stańko-Pająk et al., 2025). Particular emphasis
is placed on NEV-specific innovations, including electromagnetic
active dampers, topology-optimized control arms, and intelligent
control systems integrated with vehicle dynamics controllers. By
consolidating these advancements, this review provides a
comprehensive roadmap for researchers and engineers
developing next-generation McPherson suspension systems
tailored to the unique demands of electric mobility. Figure 1
presents an overview of the “McPherson Suspension NEV
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
Adaptation Research Methodology,” systematically outlining the
boundary conditions, key technical pathways, and future
development directions for McPherson suspensions in the
context of new energy vehicles.
2 Fundamentals and structural
characteristics of McPherson
suspension
2.1 Historical development and core
architecture
The McPherson suspension represents a landmark in
automotive engineering, pioneered by Earle S. MacPherson
during his tenure at General Motors in the 1930s (Evangelisti,
2025). Originally conceived for compact cars targeting sub-oneton curb weights, the design consolidated the shock absorber and
steering pivot into a unified strut assembly, eliminating the need for
separate upper control arms. This innovation achieved remarkable
space efficiency, reduced component count by approximately 30%
compared to double-wishbone architectures, and delivered
satisfactory ride comfort and handling characteristics for
mainstream applications (Hu et al., 2025).
The fundamental configuration comprises three primary
components: a telescopic shock absorber housing that doubles as
the steering kingpin, a coaxial coil spring, and an A-shaped lower
control arm (LCA) connecting the knuckle to the subframe (Lanni
et al., 2024). Most variants incorporate a stabilizer bar linking the
LCAs to mitigate body roll. The mechanism’s kinematic behavior is
characterized by wheel alignment parameters—camber, toe, caster,
and kingpin inclination—that vary nonlinearly with wheel travel,
fundamentally influencing tire wear, steering feel, and lateral
stability (Hamza et al., 2024).
02
frontiersin.org
Liu et al.
10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
2.2 Kinematic principles and performance
trade-offs
reduction compared to conventional implementations (Simon
et al., 2010). Furthermore, electric motor torque ripple and gear
whine introduce new vibration sources within the 200–2000 Hz
range, demanding redesigned subframe isolation strategies.
Hyundai’s INSTER employs reinforced body sealing and
thickened door glass, complementing the McPherson
suspension’s inherent NVH characteristics to deliver premiumsegment quietness (Meek et al., 2013). Active noise cancellation
systems integrated with suspension controllers can further mitigate
tonal disturbances by phase-inverting strut-transmitted vibrations
(Wang and Kennedy, 2025). The key parameters of suspension
design between internal combustion engine vehicles and new energy
vehicles are shown in Table 1.
The McPherson suspension operates as a spatial mechanism
where the strut’s sliding motion combined with LCA rotation guides
vertical wheel movement. The instantaneous center of rotation is
determined by the LCA pivot geometry and strut inclination,
directly affecting the roll center height and camber gain
characteristics. Unlike double-wishbone designs offering
independent control of camber and kingpin geometry,
McPherson’s integrated structure imposes inherent coupling
constraints, resulting in compromised camber control during
cornering and accelerated tire wear under aggressive driving.
However, this coupling proves advantageous for NEV
applications where packaging constraints are severe. The compact
strut assembly accommodates front-drive motors and steering gear
within minimal lateral space, while the high-mounted spring
facilitates low hood lines critical for aerodynamic efficiency (Kim
et al., 2012). The system’s natural frequency, typically 1.1–1.3 Hz for
passenger cars, can be tuned through spring stiffness and motion
ratio adjustments to compensate for increased NEV mass without
substantially enlarging components.
3.2 Optimization methodologies and
simulation technologies
The complexity of NEV suspension tuning necessitates
advanced optimization beyond traditional trial-and-error
methods pioneered genetic algorithm (GA) application to electric
vehicle McPherson design, minimizing front wheel alignment
parameter variation and tire lateral slip through coordinated
hardpoint coordinate adjustments (Liu et al., 2013). Their twostage optimization reduced camber change by 42% and scrub radius
variation by 38% during 80 mm wheel travel, substantially
improving tire longevity and steering precision. Recent
developments employ improved artificial fish swarm algorithms
(IAFSA) to concurrently optimize suspension and seat
parameters, achieving 15.4% reduction in driver seat acceleration
and 11.5% improvement in body vertical dynamics for Class-B Road
profiles at 20 m/s (GonAlves and Ambrósio, 2003). AI-driven
approaches promise further enhancements; quantum-inspired
optimization algorithms demonstrate superior Pareto front
exploration efficiency compared to conventional GA, potentially
reducing computational cost by 60% for high-dimensional
design spaces.
Multi-body dynamics simulation via ADAMS/Car has become
indispensable for NEV suspension development, enabling
parametric modeling of complex interactions between battery
mass distribution and kinematic performance (Hmida et al.,
2025). Established a micro-EV McPherson model validating
against physical K&C (kinematics and compliance) test data,
achieving <10% error in camber and toe curves across full travel
range (Sun et al., 2023). Sensitivity analysis identifies critical
coordinates influencing kingpin inclination and caster, guiding
optimization focus to high-impact parameters. Topology
optimization emerges as a powerful tool for component
lightweighting. Dikmen et al. applied density-based topology
optimization to a McPherson lower wishbone converted for EV
application, achieving 22% mass reduction while satisfying
durability and stiffness constraints. Integration of finite element
analysis (FEA) with multi-body dynamics enables simultaneous
structural and kinematic optimization, streamlining development
cycles critical for fast-paced NEV product launches.
A quantitative comparison of the core optimization technologies
for NEV McPherson suspension and their key convergence
parameters can intuitively reflect the performance differences and
engineering application value of various methods, with the specific
3 Evolution and innovation of
MacPherson suspension in new
energy vehicles
3.1 NEV-specific requirements and design
implications
NEVs exhibit fundamentally different weight distributions
compared to internal combustion vehicles. Battery packs
mounted beneath the passenger compartment lower the center of
gravity (CoG) by 50–100 mm but increase sprung mass by
200–400 kg, imposing severe loads on suspension components
(Choi and Han, 2007). For McPherson systems, this translates to
heightened bending moments on the strut assembly and increased
LCA fatigue stresses. Static deflection under full battery load can
exceed 40 mm, necessitating stiffer springs that compromise ride
comfort if not properly calibrated (Uys et al., 2007). The mass
penalty directly impacts energy consumption; a 10% weight
reduction yields approximately 6%–8% improvement in driving
range (Gordienko et al., 2006). Consequently, NEV chassis design
prioritizes light weighting strategies, targeting 15%–25% mass
reduction in upsprung components. McPherson LCAs,
traditionally fabricated from stamped steel, are prime candidates
for aluminum conversion or composite reinforcement, achieving
30%–40% weight savings while maintaining structural integrity
(Krishna et al., 2005). The elimination of engine noise elevates
road-induced NVH to primary prominence in NEV passenger
experience. McPherson strut bushings and top mounts become
critical transmission paths for high-frequency vibrations
(80–300 Hz) from tire-road interaction, requiring advanced
rubber compounds and hydraulic damping elements (Sprang
et al., 1996). Audi’s Q4 e-tron implements multi-layer acoustic
glass and foam-filled tires to attenuate noise transmitted through
the McPherson front axle, achieving 3 dB(A) interior noise
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
03
frontiersin.org
Liu et al.
10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
TABLE 1 Comparison of suspension system design parameters between traditional internal combustion engine vehicles and new energy vehicles.
Design parameters
Traditional internal combustion engine
vehicles
NEV (new energy vehicle)
Curb weight
1200–1500 kg
1500–2200 kg (+15%–30%)
Sprung mass
850–1100 kg
1100–1600 kg (+200-400 kg battery)
Height of C.G.
550–600 mm
500–550 mm
Front axle load
55%–60%
58%–65%
NVH sensitivity
Medium (engine masking effect)
Extremely high (no engine noise)
Energy efficiency effect
Secondary cause
Every 10% reduction in upsprung mass leads to a 6%–8% increase in
range
Braking energy recovery
No weakness
Maximum 0.3 g deceleration, requiring anti-nodding optimization
TABLE 2 Comparison of core optimization technologies and convergence parameters for NEV McPherson suspension.
Optimization
technology
Core performance
Key convergence
params
Application and
advantages
Limitations
GA + AI hybrid (quantuminspired, optimal)
42% camber/38% scrub radius
reduction; balanced handling/
NVH/wear
106-level; ≤10min; <8% error;
global convergence
Mid-high end NEVs (full
scenarios); multi-constraint
adaptation, high efficiency
Requires computing power/
measured data
Traditional trial-and-error
5%–10% handling improvement;
basic performance met
<102-level; 10d; 25% error;
irregular convergence
Low-end NEVs; low threshold,
intuitive physical test
Long cycle, no multi-objective
optimization
Improved IAFSA
15.4% seat acceleration/11.5%
vertical dynamics improvement
103-level; 5h; 12% error; local
convergence
NEV urban roads; targeted
vibration suppression, comfort
optimization
Local optimum, limited
handling/energy optimization
Topology optimization
22%–45% LCA mass reduction;
load/stiffness compliant
104-level; 2h; 15% error; local
convergence
Suspension lightweight;
significant mass saving, high
stiffness matching
Only component-level, no
system performance
improvement
MPC
30% impact smoothness/8%–12%
tire ground contact improvement
104-level; 1h; 10% error; realtime local convergence
High-end NEVs (intelligent
driving); active road adaptation,
energy recovery synergy
High cost, no basic suspension
parameter optimization
results summarized in Table 2. It can be seen from the table that GA
+ AI hybrid optimization (quantum-inspired) exhibits
comprehensive advantages in optimization performance,
convergence efficiency and adaptability to NEV multi-constraint
requirements, and is the most suitable core optimization technology
at this stage, while other technologies have obvious limitations in
global optimization, parameter coverage and convergence efficiency,
and are more suitable as auxiliary means for specific performance
improvement.
variants. Audi’s Q4 e-tron employs aluminum-intensive
McPherson strut components, including knuckles and LCAs,
contributing to a 15% front-axle weight reduction versus steelintensive architectures. However, aluminum’s lower fatigue
strength necessitates redesigned load paths and increased
section moduli, often validated through accelerated life testing
correlating with multi-body simulation load spectra. Fiberreinforced polymers (FRP) represent the next frontier for
McPherson lightweighting. Belin Gardi et al. developed a short
glass-fiber reinforced polyamide (PA66) LCA through integrated
product-process digitalization, achieving 45% mass savings
versus steel baseline. The hybrid metal-composite design,
featuring over-molded polymer on steel inserts, addresses
difficult-to-model constraint behaviors while providing
superior corrosion resistance critical for NEVs operating in
varied climates. Manufacturing challenges include weld line
management, creep behavior at elevated temperatures, and
dynamic strength validation. Industry 4.0 paradigms enable
real-time process monitoring to ensure consistent fiber
orientation and minimize voids, achieving production-scale
feasibility for volumes exceeding 100,000 units annually.
3.3 Lightweight design and material
innovations
The transition from steel to aluminum for McPherson LCAs
offers compelling benefits for NEVs. A comparative FEA study
on an EV McPherson arm demonstrated that aluminum (6061T6) constructions reduce mass by 34% while maintaining
comparable static strength, though requiring 2.5 mm increased
thickness to offset lower modulus. Dynamic performance
improvements include reduced upsprung mass, enhancing
road holding and enabling downsized actuators in active
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
04
frontiersin.org
Liu et al.
10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
3.4 Active and semi-active
suspension evolution
Quantum computing optimization promises to revolutionize
suspension design, potentially evaluating 106 parameter
combinations within hours versus weeks for conventional
methods. When coupled with digital twin technologies, this
enables continuous in-service optimization, adapting to
individual driving patterns and battery degradation-induced
weight changes.
Cell-to-chassis (C2C) architectures present both opportunities
and challenges. Integrating battery packs as structural members
could reduce overall vehicle mass by 10%, but requires McPherson
hardpoints to accommodate increased chassis stiffness
(targeting >30,000 N·m/deg torsional rigidity) and thermal
expansion mismatches. Advanced adhesives with >15 MPa bond
strength and elastomeric isolation layers will be critical for
maintaining suspension kinematic accuracy.
The electrification of powertrains facilitates integration of active
suspension technologies previously constrained by parasitic energy
consumption. Linear motor electromagnetic suspensions replace
conventional dampers, enabling millisecond-level force control
while harvesting vibration energy. Zuo et al. demonstrated a
McPherson-derived electromagnetic suspension recovering
26–33 W average power under Class-C Road excitation while
reducing body acceleration by 14.7%.
Hybrid architectures combining passive hydraulic damping with
active electromagnetic elements optimize the trade-off between
energy consumption and dynamic performance. Ding et al.’s
hybrid actuator achieves 67.8% energy reduction versus pure
active systems while maintaining comparable ride comfort
improvements, addressing critical NEV range preservation
concerns. Advanced control algorithms transform McPherson
suspension responsiveness. Model Predictive Control (MPC)
leverages preview road data from front-mounted cameras to
preemptively adjust damping, reducing impact harshness by 30%
in validation studies. Machine learning approaches enable real-time
adaptation to driver behavior and road conditions; reinforcement
learning agents trained on diverse terrain databases outperform
fixed-gain controllers in comfort-handling compromise metrics.
Integration with vehicle dynamics controllers (VDC) enhances
safety. During regenerative braking, McPherson strut
compression can be actively managed to maintain optimal tire
contact patch, preventing wheel lock-up and improving energy
recovery efficiency by 8%–12%. This synergetic control
exemplifies the holistic optimization potential in NEV architectures.
5 Conclusion
The McPherson suspension system, though conceived eight
decades ago, demonstrates remarkable adaptability to the unique
demands of new energy vehicles. Through synergistic integration of
lightweight materials, AI-driven optimization, and intelligent
control, contemporary McPherson implementations successfully
address NEV-specific challenges of increased mass, stringent
NVH requirements, and energy efficiency imperatives. Industrial
adoption across mass-market to premium platforms validates its
continued relevance.
Nevertheless, inherent kinematic limitations necessitate careful
application, particularly in high-performance NEVs where doublewishbone alternatives may offer superior dynamic envelopes. The
future trajectory unequivocally points toward active, energyregenerative variants deeply integrated with autonomous driving
and battery management systems, transforming the McPherson
strut from a passive mechanical component into an intelligent
vehicle dynamics actuator. Continued research in quantum
optimization, composite manufacturing, and electromagnetic
actuation will be pivotal in realizing this vision, ensuring
McPherson-derived architectures remain foundational to
sustainable electric mobility.
4 Challenges and future perspectives
4.1 Persistent technical limitations
Despite advancements, fundamental McPherson limitations
persist. The inherent camber loss during body roll
(typically −0.8°/g lateral acceleration) accelerates outer tire wear
and reduces cornering grip compared to double-wishbone
alternatives. For NEVs with high instantaneous torque, this
deficiency becomes pronounced during rapid lane changes,
necessitating supplementary chassis interventions. The elevated
roll center required for battery clearance can induce jacking
forces, particularly in vehicles with >300 mm ground clearance
for off-road capability. Mitigation through LCA geometry revision
often compromises anti-dive characteristics during heavy
regenerative braking.
Author contributions
YL: Data curation, Conceptualization, Writing – original
draft. SW: Methodology, Investigation, Writing – original
draft.
JT:
Funding
acquisition,
Formal
Analysis,
Writing – review and editing.
4.2 Emerging development trajectories
Funding
Future McPherson evolution converges on intelligent,
integrated systems. Electromagnetic energy-regenerative dampers
are poised for commercialization, with suppliers like Monroe
delivering CVSA2 dual-valve technology enabling independent
rebound/compression control, specifically targeting EV
applications due to minimal power consumption (<10 W average).
The author(s) declared that financial support was received for
this work and/or its publication. National Natural Science
Foundation of China: 51508304. We gratefully acknowledge
financial support from the New Energy Vehicle Intelligent
Network Technology Shandong Province Higher Education
Institutions Future Industry Engineering Research Centre Project.
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
05
frontiersin.org
Liu et al.
10.3389/fmech.2026.1787696
Conflict of interest
intelligence and reasonable efforts have been made to ensure
accuracy, including review by the authors wherever possible. If
you identify any issues, please contact us.
The author(s) declared that this work was conducted in the
absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be
construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher’s note
Generative AI statement
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors
and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated
organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the
reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or
claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or
endorsed by the publisher.
The author(s) declared that generative AI was not used in the
creation of this manuscript.
Any alternative text (alt text) provided alongside figures in this
article has been generated by Frontiers with the support of artificial
References
Choi, S. B., and Han, Y. M. (2007). Vibration control of electrorheological seat
suspension with human-body model using sliding mode control. J. Sound and Vib.
303 (1-2), 391–404. doi:10.1016/j.jsv.2007.01.027
Lanni, C., Figliolini, G., and Tomassi, L. (2024). Kinematic and curvature analysis of the
McPherson eight-bar suspension system. Volume 7 48th Mech. Robotics Conf. (MR).
doi:10.1115/DETC2024-144813
Christ, F. (2015). Adaption and evaluation of transversal leaf spring suspension design
for a lightweight vehicle using Adams/Car [Master’s thesis], Stockholm, Sweden: KTH
Royal Institute of Technology. DiVA Portal. Available online at: https://urn.kb.se/
resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:kth:diva-180035.
Lin, R., Zhan, X., and Li, X. (2025). Topology optimization design of automotive
suspension control arm. Eng. Rep. 7 (5), e70188. doi:10.1002/eng2.70188
Liu, X., Luo, J., Wang, Y., Guo, H., and Wang, X. (2013). Analysis for suspension
hardpoint of formula SAE car based on correlation theory. Res. J. Appl. Sci. Eng. and
Technol. 6 (24), 4569–4574. doi:10.19026/rjaset.6.3469
Dung, N. T., Cuong, B. V., Quynh, L. V., and Hoang Anh Tan, (2024). Optimization of
electric vehicle suspension parameters using improved artificial fish swarm algorithm.
J. Mil. Sci. Technol. (FEE), 191–197. doi:10.54939/1859-1043.j.mst.fee.2024.191-197
Lu, J., Zhou, K., Guo, L., and Hou, Y. (2012). Design and parametric optimization of
McPherson front suspension of electric vehicle. J. Mech. Eng. 48 (8), 98–103. doi:10.
3901/jme.2012.08.098
Evangelisti, R. (2025). A McPherson-type suspension unit for motor vehicles:
US19900606969. US5074579A.
Meek, B., Auwear, H. V. D., and Langhe, K. D. (2013). Challenges in NVH for
electric vehicles. Lect. Notes Electr. Eng. 191, 675–685. doi:10.1007/978-94-0075178-0_60
GonAlves, J. P. C., and Ambrósio, J. A. C. (2003). Optimization of vehicle suspension
systems for improved comfort of road vehicles using flexible multibody dynamics.
Nonlinear Dyn. 34 (1-2), 113–131. doi:10.1023/B:NODY.0000014555.46533.82
Min, Y., Simos, A., and Evangelou, D. D. (2024). Advances in active suspension systems
for road vehicles. Engineering 33 (2), 176–194.
Gooch, J. W. (2011). Encyclopedic dictionary of polymers. New York: Springer.
Gordienko, V. M., Grechin, S. S., Ivanov, A. A., Podshivalov, A. A., and Rakov, E. V.
(2006). Efficient parametric oscillation in the 8—10-μm range upon pumping by a
femtosecond cr:forsterite laser. Quantum Electron. 36 (2), 114–116. doi:10.1070/
qe2006v036n02abeh013112
Simon, M., Gerhards, T., Frantzen, M., and David, W. (2010). Suspension of the ford
focus RS 500. ATZ Worldwide. doi:10.1007/BF03225151
Simon, C. G., Hardinsi, F. A., Suluh, S., Paliling, F., Sampelolo, R., and Widyianto, A.
(2023). Enhancing vehicle wheel suspension test equipment through taguchi method for
optimization. Eastern-European J. Enterp. Technol. 125 (1). doi:10.15587/1729-4061.
2023.288476
Hamza, A., Dridi, I., Bousnina, K., and Ben Yahia, N. (2024). Active suspension for allterrain vehicle with intelligent control using artificial neural networks. J. Mech. Eng. Sci.
2024, 9883–9897. doi:10.15282/jmes.18.1.2024.7.0782
Sprang, R., Vossel, A., and Meyering, F. (1996). Sleeve rubber spring for mounts in a
motor vehicle. US, US05516083A.
Hmida, F., Trabelsi, H., Djemal, F., and Omar, R. (2025). “Integration of artificial
intelligence: an innovative synergy for vibration reduction of car suspension system,” in
International workshop on modelling and simulation of complex systems for sustainable
energy efficiency (Cham: Springer).
Stańko-Pająk, K., Seńko, J., Nowak, R., Rymuszka, M., Danielewicz, D., and Jóźwik, K.
(2025). Numerical stability and handling studies of three-wheeled vehicles using
ADAMS/Car. Appl. Sci. 16 (1), 98. doi:10.3390/app16010098
Hu, S., Rui, X., Gu, J., and Zhang, X. (2025). Dynamics modeling and suspension
parameters optimization of vehicle system based on reduced multibody system transfer
matrix method. Machines 13 (2), 116. doi:10.3390/machines13020116
Sun, T., Jiang., R., Liu., Y., Liu., D., and Sun, H. (2023). Reliability-based optimization
design of carbon fiber reinforced plastics crossbeam of twist-beam suspension. J. Mech.
Sci. Technol. 37, 727–737. doi:10.1007/s12206-023-0116-3
Kim, J. H., Kim, J. H., Kim, K. Y., Yoon, J. Y., Yang, S. H., and Choi, Y. S. (2012). Highefficiency design of a tunnel ventilation jet fan through numerical optimization
techniques. J. Mech. Science&Technology. doi:10.1007/s12206-012-0420-9
Uys, P. E., Els, P. S., and Thoresson, M. (2007). Suspension settings for optimal ride
comfort of off-road vehicles travelling on roads with different roughness and speeds.
J. Terramechanics 44 (2), 163–175. doi:10.1016/j.jterra.2006.05.002
Krishna, K., Yokoyama-Martin, D. A., Caffee, A., Jones, C., Loikkanen, M., Parker, J.,
et al. (2005). A multigigabit backplane transceiver core in 0.13-/spl mu/m CMOS with a
power-efficient equalization architecture. IEEE J. Solid-State Circuits 40 (12), 2658–2666.
doi:10.1109/jssc.2005.856574
Wang, X., and Kennedy, M. P. (2025). Analysis and mitigation of excess phase noise
and spurs in digital-to-time-converter-enhanced Fractional- N frequency
synthesizers. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. I Regul. Pap. 72 (3), 1042–1055. doi:10.
1109/tcsi.2024.3501998
Kulkarni, C. D., Sail, P. P., Kalaskar, A. V., Mitra, A. C., and Gawande, S. H. (2024). Realtime road testing and analysis of adjustable passive suspension system with variable
spring stiffness. JMST Adv. 6 (3), 233–246. doi:10.1007/s42791-024-00082-0
Frontiers in Mechanical Engineering
Wang, Z., Liu, C., Zheng, X., Zhao, L., and Qiu, Y. (2024). Advancements in semi-active
automotive suspension systems with magnetorheological dampers: a review. Appl. Sci.
(2076-3417) 14 (17), 7866. doi:10.3390/app14177866
06
frontiersin.org
Téléchargement