Goal & Constraints
Light, stiff, manufacturable structures and aerobody for Stanford's solar car. • Key constraint: mass vs stiffness, built by a student team • Target: safety factor 2–4 at peak suspension load
My Role
Structural & aero design — rear suspension hardpoint, roll cage, chassis integration, composite tooling, and aerobody geometry.
Design & CAD
Rear suspension control arm hardpoint, roll cage with mounting tabs, chassis, composite mold tooling, and aerobody / canopy geometry. • Control arm — triangulated geometry driven by load paths from the hardpoints • Roll cage — tube frame with mounting tabs, integrated into the chassis • Composite mold — tooling with a defined parting line for the aerobody layup • Aerobody — streamlined body and canopy geometry
Control arm CAD — geometry driven by load paths
Roll cage with mounting tabs
Roll cage integrated with chassis
Chassis — isometric
Chassis — top view
Chassis — side view
Chassis and roll cage integration
Composite mold — isometric
Composite mold — side profile, parting line
Aerobody with canopy
Aerobody — side profile
Test & Results
Buckling FEA — compressive suspension loads
Static stress analysis — safety factor under peak load
• Static FEA: most of the arm above SF 4; peak-loaded members within target • Stiffer and stronger than the previous car's arm • Min SF 1.27 — localized peak, flagged for mesh refinement • Buckling FEA: strength-limited, not stability-limited
