400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15096-0001 U.S.A. Tel: (724) 776-4841 Fax: (724) 776-5760 Web: www.sae.

org
SAE TECHNICAL
PAPER SERIES
2006-01-0533
Development of a Method to Predict the Rupture
of Spot Welds in Vehicle Crash Analysis
Shinichiro Yoda, Koushi Kumagai and Masayuki Yoshikawa
Toyota Motor Corporation
Masahiro Tsuji
Toyota Communication Systems Co., Ltd.
Reprinted From: Welding & Joining & Fastening & Friction Stir Welding
(SP-2034)
2006 SAE World Congress
Detroit, Michigan
April 3-6, 2006
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed
SAE's peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. This process requires a
minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or
transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise,
without the prior written permission of SAE.
For permission and licensing requests contact:
SAE Permissions
400 Commonwealth Drive
Warrendale, PA 15096-0001-USA
Email: permissions@sae.org
Tel: 724-772-4028
Fax: 724-776-3036
For multiple print copies contact:
SAE Customer Service
Tel: 877-606-7323 (inside USA and Canada)
Tel: 724-776-4970 (outside USA)
Fax: 724-776-0790
Email: CustomerService@sae.org
ISSN 0148-7191
Copyright 2006 SAE International
Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE.
The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper. A process is available by which discussions
will be printed with the paper if it is published in SAE Transactions.
Persons wishing to submit papers to be considered for presentation or publication by SAE should send the
manuscript or a 300 word abstract to Secretary, Engineering Meetings Board, SAE.
Printed in USA
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
ABSTRACT
This paper describes a new method to predict the
rupture of spot welds, suitable for vehicle crash
simulation. In a crash simulation used for vehicle
development process, the calculation is performed
assuming that the spot welds in the vehicle do not
rupture. However, if some spot welds rupture in test of a
prototype vehicle, the simulated deformation and test
deformation may not match, resulting in inaccurate
estimation of deformation from simulation. Therefore
accuracy of predicting the rupture of spot welds is
crucial in accurately estimating the deformation and
improving reliability of vehicle crash simulation results.
The new method to predict the rupture of spot welds
which relates axial and shear forces and bending
moment of spot weld to stress around nugget has been
developed by authors. Based on developed method, the
rupture risk of spot welds has been estimated. The new
method was applied to estimate the spot weld rupture
using three types of specimens. Results of new method
were compared with that of "detailed model" which
matches closely with test results. Results of new method
showed similar deformations observed in "detailed
model". The discrepancy of the rupture force between
the new method and "detailed model" was less than
10%. The new method was then applied to a full vehicle
frontal offset deformable barrier simulation. The results
predicted precise locations of spot weld rupture.
Moreover, since this new method uses force and
moment data of spot welds obtained from a crash
simulation, it does not require any additional modeling
or computational time. Therefore the new method is
suitable for crash simulation in vehicle development.
INTRODUCTION
Spot welds usually rupture in two modes. One is "plug
rupture", in which sheet metal around nugget ruptures as
shown in Fig. 1 and Fig. 2. The other one is "nugget
rupture", in which section of nugget itself ruptures. We
[1] have conducted a detailed investigation on tested
vehicles to find out the rupture mode of spot welds
joining thin mild steel parts of thickness mainly 0.8mm
to 1.6mm, which are frequently used in passenger cars.
It was found that the mode of rupture in all these spot
welds was "plug rupture". Therefore, "plug rupture" has
been considered as main rupture mode in this paper.
Fig. 1 Rupture mode "plug rupture"
Fig. 2 Magnification of Fig.1
Conventionally, two modeling methods are used to
predict the rupture of spot welds in vehicle crash
analysis. One is "detailed model"[1], in which the nugget
and the sheet metal around nugget are divided in the
shape of spider web using shell elements. The minimum
size of these elements are very fine. Strain of shell
elements around nugget is estimated. Shell elements
around nugget are eliminated when element strain
reaches a limiting value. Thus, "detailed model" can
simulate the rupture itself. Hayashi[1] reported that the
discrepancy in the rupture load between test and
"detailed model" was less than 10%. However, "detailed
model" requires extensive effort of finite element
meshing and computational time, making it unsuitable
for full vehicle crash simulation.
The other one is "spot beam model", in which the nugget
is modeled using beam element. In the "spot beam
2006-01-0533
Development of a Method to Predict the Rupture of Spot
Welds in Vehicle Crash Analysis
Shinichiro Yoda, Koushi Kumagai and Masayuki Yoshikawa
Toyota Motor Corporation
Masahiro Tsuji
Toyota Communication Systems Co., Ltd.
Copyright 2006 SAE International
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
model", a method has been proposed, in which the
rupture of spot weld is predicted by the following
equations.
Where F is a function of axial and shear forces of the
beam element. However, this method is less accurate
when it is applied to specimens other than the one used
in deriving the formula. For example, it is known from
experiment that the rupture load of U-type (Fig. 11)
tension specimen is two times as large as that of L-type
tension-bending specimen. However, the force in the
spot beam elements of these two specimens is mainly
axial. Therefore, the rupture load predicted by a method,
which considers only axial and shear forces of beam
elements become equal in both cases. This shows that
accuracy of predicting the rupture loads using such
method sometimes becomes worse depending on type
of specimen.
Similarly, stress-based failure equations, which is
already available in MAT_100 of LS-DYNA for beam
elements, are reported in [2]. However, it has been
reported that this equation cannot recognize the spot
weld rupture due to bending moment, it is a function of
only normal and shear stresses [2].
DEVELOPMENT OF A METHOD TO PREDICT
THE RUPTURE OF SPOT WELD
MECHANISM OF "PLUG RUPTURE"
In spot welding, two sheet metals are joined by a nugget,
which is formed by resistance welding process as shown
in Fig. 3. Let us consider mechanism of "plug rupture" in
detail as shown in Fig. 4. An external pull force Fa acts
along nugget axis. This force causes shear stresses
1
,

2 in sheet metal around nugget. These shear stresses

create bending moments M1, M2 . Due to these bending
moments, plastic deformation occurs around nugget.
When stress in the sheet metal around nugget reaches a
limiting value, material around nugget starts cracking.
This results in rupture of spot weld. It is assumed that
the stress in the sheet metal around nugget is directly
related to cracking of material around nugget.
Fig. 3 Cross section of spot weld
Fig. 4 Plug rupture mechanism
COURSE OF DEVELOPMENT
There are many types of spot weld joint configurations in
a vehicle structure. Therefore, accuracy of a new
method to predict the rupture of spot weld must be
independent of joint configuration.
In this paper, a new method to accurately predict the
rupture of spot weld by estimating stresses in sheet
metal around nugget based on mechanism of "plug
rupture" has been proposed. This method is
independent of joint configuration.
In a beam element spot weld model, only axial force,
shear force and bending moment of beam element are
available. Therefore, an expression, which initially
relates the maximum stress in the sheet metal around
nugget to axial force, shear force and bending moment
of the beam elements, is derived. Then, a rupture
equation composed of the maximum stress of sheet
metal around nugget is developed.
RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN STRESS AROUND
NUGGET AND SPOT BEAM ELEMENT FORCE
Relationship between maximum shear stress of sheet
metal around nugget and axial force of beam element
A simplified distribution shown in Fig. 5 is assumed for
shear stress around nugget under pure axial loading.
Equilibrium condition requires that the nugget axial force
must be equal to circular integral of maximum shear
stress around nugget along nugget circumference as
shown in Eq.(4).
where ranges from 0 to 2radian,
max is maximum
shear stress around nugget, t is thickness of base sheet
1
M
1
t
a
F
1
M
2
M
2
M
1
t
2
t
2
t
a
F
a
F
a
F
1
M
1
t
a
F
1
M
2
M
2
M
1
t
2
t
2
t
a
F
a
F
a
F
) 4 (
max

)
= u t rd t F
a
Nugget Nugget
) 1 ( 1 =
o
F
F
) 3 ( ) , ( t g F
o
| =
F
a
: axial force acting on spot beam element
Fs : shear force acting on spot beam element
F
o
: a criterion derived from experiments
: loading angle
t : thickness of base sheet metal
) 2 ( ) , (
s a
F F f F =
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
metal, r is radius of nugget. Integrating right side of
Eq.(4) gives
Rearranging Eq.(5) leads to
Fig. 5 Shear stress distribution in sheet metal around nugget
Relationship between maximum shear stress in sheet
metal around nugget and bending moment of beam
element
Simplified distributions of shear stress around nugget in
elastic and perfectly-plastic conditions under pure
bending loading of nugget are shown in Fig. 6 and Fig. 7
respectively. Equilibrium condition requires that the
bending moment about center of nugget must be equal
to the integral of area moment of shear stress around
nugget along nugget circumference as shown in Eq.(7)
Where, x is the distance from neutral axis and it can be
written as
In elastic case, the shear stress in sheet metal
around nugget can be written as
Substituting Eq.(8) and Eq.(9) into Eq.(7) results in
Simplifying Eq.(10) leads to
Similarly,
max can be derived for perfectly-plastic case
as
However, in actual case, the distribution of shear stress
in sheet metal around nugget can be reasonably
assumed to fall between elastic and perfectly-plastic
distribution. Therefore, in general
max
can be written as
where is a factor which varies from to 4 according
to distribution.
Fig. 6 Elastic distribution
Fig. 7 Perfectly -plastic distribution
Relationship between maximum shear stress in sheet
metal around nugget and axial force and bending
moment of beam element
The shear stress in sheet metal around nugget under
combined axial and bending loading of nugget can be
written by adding Eq.(6) to Eq.(13) as shown in Eq.(14).
Relationship between maximum normal stress in sheet
metal around nugget and shear force of beam element
A simplified distribution shown in Fig. 8 is assumed for
normal stress in sheet metal around nugget under pure
shear loading of nugget. The distribution of stress in
thickness direction is assumed to be constant.
Equilibrium condition requires that the shear force in
nugget must be equal to the circular integral of normal
) 5 ( 2
max
r t F
a
t t =
) 6 ( 2
max
rt F
a
t t =
u rd
Nugget
a
F
max
t
u
()Top view of nugget
()Cross section of spot weld
max
t
max
t max
t
u rd
Nugget Nugget
a
F
max
t
u
()Top view of nugget
()Cross section of spot weld
max
t
max
t max
t
) 7 ( u t rd t x M
b
=
)
) 10 (
cos cos
max
2
max
t t
u u t u
tr
rd t r M
b
=
=
)
) 11 (
2
max

tr
M
b
t
t =
) 12 (
4
2
max

tr
M
b
= t
) 9 ( cos
max
u t t =
) 8 ( cos u = r x
) 13 (
2
max

tr
M
b
o
t =
) 14 (
2
2
max

tr
M
tr
F
b a
o t
t + =

max
Mb
-
max
max
Mb
-
max
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
stress in sheet metal around nugget along nugget
circumference as shown in Eq.(15).
Simplifying Eq.(15) leads to
Fig. 8 Normal stress distribution in sheet metal around
nugget under pure shear loading
EQUATION TO PREDICT THE RUPTURE OF SPOT
WELD
An equation to predict the rupture of spot weld was
given by Lee et al [3]. According to their research, the
rupture takes place when R (
max
,
max
) becomes equal
or greater than 1 as shown in Eq.(17).
where R (
max
,
max
) is defined by Eq.(18).
where
f
is the shear rupture stress,
f
is the normal
rupture stress.
In Eq.(14),(16),(18), parameters
f
,
f
, and are
unknown. Rupture of spot weld can be predicted if these
parameters are known.
ESTIMATION OF UNKNOWN PARAMETERS
Three types of joint configurations are necessary to
estimate three unknown parameters
f
,
f
, and . In
the current study, these parameters have been
estimated by correlating "spot beam model" with
"detailed model" in three different joint configurations
namely, Lap-shear, L-type tension-bending and U-type
tension for five different thicknesses (t=0.8, 1.0, 1.2, 1.4,
1.6 mm) and two materials (270 and 440 MPa class
steel). Three joint configurations are shown in Fig. 9, 10,
11.
Fig. 9 Lap-shear specimen
Fig. 10 L-type tension-bending specimen
Fig. 11 U-type tension specimen
ACCURACY OF THE NEW METHOD
The accuracy of the new method was estimated by
comparing it with detailed model and conventional
method. Fig. 12, 13 shows load-displacement curves
for lap-shear specimen with thickness of 0.8 and 1.6. In
both graphs, newly developed method matches closely
with "detailed model". In addition, it can predict the
rupture load in "detailed model" within 10% accuracy for
all three joint configurations with five different
thicknesses for each configuration. The comparison of
rupture loads of conventional method, newly developed
method and "detailed model" for 270 MPa class steel
material under each joint configuration is shown in Fig.
14, 15, 16. Similar accuracy was noticed for 440 MPa
class steel material also in all three joint configurations.

max

r
max

r
) 16 (
max

tr
F
s
t
o =
) 15 ( cos cos
max

)
= u u u o d r t F
s
) 18 ( ) , (
2
max
2
max
max max

|
|
.
|

\
|
+
|
|
.
|

\
|

f f
R
o
o
t
t
o t
) 17 ( 1 ) , (
max max
= o t R
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
Thus, it has been confirmed that prediction of spot weld
rupture by estimating the stress in sheet metal around
nugget is effective.
Fig. 12 Load ratio-displacement curves of lap-shear
specimen for 270 MPa class steel material
(thickness: 0.8 [mm])
Fig. 13 Load ratio-displacement curves of lap-shear
specimen for 270 MPa class steel material
(thickness: 1.6 [mm])
Fig. 14 Rupture load of lap shear specimen for
270 MPa class steel material
Fig. 15 Rupture load of L-type tension-bending specimen for
270 MPa class steel material
Fig. 16 Rupture load of U-type tension specimen for
270 MPa class steel material
0
5
10
15
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Thickness [mm]
R
u
p
t
u
r
e
l
o
a
d
[
k
N
]
Conventional method
Developed method
"Detailed model"
0
5
10
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Thickness [mm]
R
u
p
t
u
r
e
l
o
a
d
[
k
N
]
Conventional method
Developed method
"Detailed model"
0
5
10
15
0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4 1.6
Thickness [mm]
R
u
p
t
u
r
e
l
o
a
d
[
k
N
]
Conventional method
Developed method
"Detailed model"
0
1
0 1 2 3 4 5
L
o
a
d
r
a
t
i
o
Rupture load ratio of
detailed model
Displacement [mm]
Spot beam model
Detailed model
Rupture load ratio of developed method
Rupture load ratio of conventional method
0
1
0 1 2 3 4 5
L
o
a
d
r
a
t
i
o
Displacement [mm]
Rupture load ratio of
detailed model
Spot beam model
Detailed model
Rupture load ratio of developed method
Rupture load ratio of conventional method
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
DEVELOPMENT OF A RUPTURE SCREENING
SYSTEM
NEED FOR DEVELOPMENT
It is known that the load-carrying ability of spot welds
varies due to variation in nugget diameter caused by
manufacturing tolerance. However, it is difficult to
control vehicle deformation in crash and to improve
crash performance by allowing some spot welds to
rupture during crash. Therefore, it is desirable to
develop a vehicle, which does not have any spot weld
ruptures during crash. It is necessary to detect not only
rupturing spot welds but also those spot welds whose
risk of rupture is high. Therefore, we have developed a
rupture screening system to identify rupturing spot welds
and to estimate the rupture risk of remaining spot welds.
DEVELOPMENT OF THE SYSTEM
A step-by-step system shown below was developed:
- Inputting spot weld beam element force time history
data and vehicle model input data.
- Calculating rupture risk R
r
of all spot welds in full
vehicle by using developed equation; rupture risk R
r
is defined by Eq.(19).
- Outputting the rupture risk ranking table as shown in
Fig. 17, the graphic display of the rupture risk as
shown in Fig. 18, and the graph of axial and shear
forces and bending moment of spot beam element
as shown in Fig. 19.
Fig. 17 Rupture risk ranking-table
Fig. 18 Locations of spot welds whose rupture risk is from
100% to 140%
Fig. 19 Locations of spot welds whose rupture risk is from
100% to 140%
BENEFITS OF THE SYSTEM
The developed system provides the following benefits to
its users in analyzing simulation results.
- Rupture risks of all spot welds in full vehicle are
ranked starting from the one with highest risk. Users
can identify the high risk spot welds without
checking the rupture risk of all spot welds in full
vehicle.
- Locations of spot welds falling in particular risk
range can be graphically displayed. User can
conveniently visualize locations of high or low
rupture risk spot welds.
- Force data of spot beam elements with high rupture
risk are plotted on graphs. User can quickly analyze
the timing and possibly cause of rupture and
consider the countermeasure to avoid the rupture.
VEHICLE TEST EXAMPLE
The rupture screening system was applied on a trial
basis to a full vehicle frontal offset deformable barrier
simulation. Fig. 20 and Fig. 21 compare deformations of
body panels between the test and simulation results.
The locations and numbers of ruptured spot welds in the
areas surrounded by solid lines were almost identical
between them. As per the areas surrounded by dotted
lines, only two spot welds (weld-A and weld-B) were
found to be ruptured in the simulation while seven spot
welds at the joint between two panels in the cabin were
ruptured in the actual test. The reason for the
discrepancy in test and simulation results can be found
by looking at the risk levels of those two ruptured spot
welds in simulation. The maximum risks of weld-A and
weld-B are 150% and 170% respectively as shown in
Fig. 22. Therefore, it is concluded that enough force is
acting on weld-A and weld-B to cause rupture at the
adjacent five spot welds. It is estimated that when weld-
0
5
10
0 0.05 0.1
Time [s]
E
l
e
m
e
n
t
F
o
r
c
e
[
k
N
,
k
N
m
m
]
0
100
200
R
u
p
t
u
r
e
R
i
s
k
[
%
]
Axial force
Shear force
Bending moment
Rupture risk
: Spot weld
) 19 ( 100 ) , (
max max
= o t R R
r





rank SPOT ID A end B end Pos X Pos Y Pos Z A prt A t A mlt B prt B t B mlt
1 10597372 14.93 12.81 3192 248 1143 58211 0.65 0 58282 0.7 0
2 10596438 10.9 2.71 795 - 751 1559 53712 0.8 0 53734 1.2 0
3 10597061 9.77 0.32 597 - 524 1324 53712 0.8 0 57116 5.6 10597062
4 10595795 2.78 8.45 930 - 599 1540 53726 1.2 0 53722 0.8 0
5 10595629 0.65 7.62 885 - 600 1490 53726 2 10595628 53722 0.8 0
6 10597373 6.5 6.12 3192 222 1143 58211 0.65 0 58282 0.7 0
7 10594099 0.35 5.99 890 - 513 1394 53712 3.1 10594098 53722 0.8 0
8 10596965 0.32 5.86 1307 - 757 1463 55714 1.6 0 61112 0.7 0
9 10597374 5.41 5.85 3192 197 1142 58282 0.7 0 58211 0.65 0
10 10597072 5.06 5.06 889 - 530 1437 53712 0.8 0 53722 0.8 0
11 10595351 4.98 0.33 1276 - 510 1321 55111 0.9 0 55135 2 0
996 10593751 0.18 0.23 1020 - 466 1422 57189 2 0 53724 1.8 0
997 10595899 0.08 0.23 486 522 1066 57163 2.6 0 57167 1.4 0
998 10597704 0.23 0.05 1940 165 997 58161 1 0 58113 1.2 0
999 10594899 0.03 0.23 3073 - 708 1201 61421 1.4 0 61674 1 0
1000 10594334 0.02 0.23 2468 - 201 961 58113 5.4 10594333 58112 0.6 0
rank SPOT ID A end B end Pos X Pos Y Pos Z A prt A t A mlt B prt B t B mlt
1 10597372 14.93 12.81 3192 248 1143 58211 0.65 0 58282 0.7 0
2 10596438 10.9 2.71 795 - 751 1559 53712 0.8 0 53734 1.2 0
3 10597061 9.77 0.32 597 - 524 1324 53712 0.8 0 57116 5.6 10597062
4 10595795 2.78 8.45 930 - 599 1540 53726 1.2 0 53722 0.8 0
5 10595629 0.65 7.62 885 - 600 1490 53726 2 10595628 53722 0.8 0
6 10597373 6.5 6.12 3192 222 1143 58211 0.65 0 58282 0.7 0
7 10594099 0.35 5.99 890 - 513 1394 53712 3.1 10594098 53722 0.8 0
8 10596965 0.32 5.86 1307 - 757 1463 55714 1.6 0 61112 0.7 0
9 10597374 5.41 5.85 3192 197 1142 58282 0.7 0 58211 0.65 0
10 10597072 5.06 5.06 889 - 530 1437 53712 0.8 0 53722 0.8 0
11 10595351 4.98 0.33 1276 - 510 1321 55111 0.9 0 55135 2 0
996 10593751 0.18 0.23 1020 - 466 1422 57189 2 0 53724 1.8 0
997 10595899 0.08 0.23 486 522 1066 57163 2.6 0 57167 1.4 0
998 10597704 0.23 0.05 1940 165 997 58161 1 0 58113 1.2 0
999 10594899 0.03 0.23 3073 - 708 1201 61421 1.4 0 61674 1 0
1000 10594334 0.02 0.23 2468 - 201 961 58113 5.4 10594333 58112 0.6 0
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM
A and weld-B were ruptured, the forces which were
acting on these two spot welds were transferred to five
adjacent spot welds, and finally total of seven spot
welds were ruptured as seen in the test. As a
countermeasure, it is estimated that adding three more
spot welds in the region reduces the average rupture
risks of five spot welds to 64% which can prevent the
rupture of all spot welds in this region. Thus, we can, not
only predict the rupture of spot welds but also offer a
rational way to avoid the rupture of spot welds by using
the developed system.
Fig. 20 Locations of ruptured spot welds in the test
Fig. 21 Locations of ruptured spot welds in the simulation
Fig. 22 Rupture risks of weld-A and weld-B
CONCLUSION
- A new method to accurately predict the rupture of
spot welds independent of joint type has been
developed by estimating the stress in sheet metal
around nugget.
- A rupture screening system which detect the rupture
risk of all spot welds in full vehicle has been
developed.
- A rational way to avoid the rupture of spot welds can
be obtained by using the developed screening
system.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Help of Mr. Souta Norikane and Mr. Toru Ishimaru of
Toyota Motor Corporation is greatly appreciated.
Authors are also thankful to Mr. Wichai Cheva of Toyota
Technical Center, U.S.A., Inc. for his valuable
suggestions in writing this paper.
REFERENCE
1. Seiji Hayashi, Koushi Kumagai, "Development of a
Seat Belt Anchorage Strength Analysis Method
Using Dynamic Explicit FEM Code", The Society of
Automotive Engineers of Japan, 2000
2. F.Seeger, M.Feucht, Th.Frank, B.Keding and
A.Haufe, "An Investigation on Spot Weld Modelling
for Crash Simulation with LS-DYNA", LS-DYNA
Anwenderforum, Bamberg, 2005
3. Y.L.Lee, T.J.Wehner, M.W.Lu, T.W.Morrissett and
E.Pakalnins, ''Ultimate Strength of Resistance Spot-
welds Subjected to Combined Tension and Shear'',
p213-219, Journal of Testing and Evaluation, 1998
0
50
100
150
200
0 0.05 0.1
Time [s]
R
u
p
t
u
r
e
R
i
s
k
[
%
]
Rupture
Weld-A
Weld-B
THIS DOCUMENT IS PROTECTED BY U.S. AND INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
It may not be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, distributed or transmitted, in whole or in part, in any form or by any means.
Downloaded from SAE International by University of Ulsan, Thursday, September 13, 2012 04:11:49 AM