Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Page 2
University of Calabria
14 Departments:
42 Undergraduate degrees
34 Postgraduate degrees
PhD programmes
39000 students
900 teaching staff
21 spin-off companies
Rende
Page 3
51 Professors
30 PhD students
15 Post-doc and collaborators
22 Admistrative Staff
Page 4
technical physics
electrical systems
fluid dynamics
power plants
energy system
thermotecnical plants
environmental and
applied physics
Management
manufacturing
machine design
industrial design
biomechanics
measurement devices
vehicle dynamics
mechanical vibrations
theory of mechanisms
Energy
Energy
Mechanical
business organization
production plant
management
logistics system
planning
system optimisation
Page 5
R&D topics
People
-
Vehicle dynamics
Mechanical transmissions
Carlos Garre, MC ER
Non-linear dynamics
Biomechanics
Robotics
Page 6
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Page 7
2. Vehicle as a system
Functional
analysis
System-level
requirements
Target
cascading
Page 8
Performance Attributes
External entities
Subsystems
Ride isolation
Drivability: Steering and Cornering
Braking
Customer/passenger
Road/Environment
Tire
Suspensions
Noise and
vibration
Quietness
Sound quality
Squeaks and rattle noise
Customer/passenger
Road/Environment
Regulatory bodies
Suspensions
Vehicle body
Tire
Safety and
security
Crash avoidance/Crashworthiness
Durability
Pedestrian safety
Vehicle visibility
Customer/passenger
Road/Environment
Regulatory bodies
Suspensions
Vehicle body
Tire
Styling
Customer/passenger
Market/dealer
Customer/passenger
Market/dealer
Manufacturing/shipping
Customer/passenger
Road/Environment
Regulatory bodies
Vehicle body
Passenger comfort
Ease of entrance/egress
Accessibility of commands
Customer/passenger
Market/dealer
Vehicle body
Economic value
Energy use
Human
satisfaction
Vehicle body
Tire
Vehicle body
Page 9
Refinement engineering
Concept design
Detailed engineering
Page 10
Concept Models
- With affordable development time: model built in no more than a few weeks
- Accurate: Make it as simple as possible, but not simpler (Albert Einstein)
Advantages
Page 11
Vehicle Body
- Vehicle Body as the main structural part of a vehicle;
- Built up from sheet metal stampings spot-welded together to create a shell structure.
Main functions:
- bearing structure for the engine, suspension, sub-frames, powertrain, seats,
- being the largest visible surface of the car.
Main global mechanical requirements:
- static stiffness, crashworthiness, noise, vibration and harshness (NVH);
Main design goal: fulfill requirements at minimum cost and weight.
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 12
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Page 13
Incremental improvement of an
existing vehicle model
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Optimized FE model
Objective:
Max. OLC
Engine Cooler
Cooler Bumper
Page 17
AUTOMESHER
Page 18
SFE CONCEPT
OPTIMIZATION
Shape optimization
Topography optimization
Topology optimization
MODULAR CONSTRUCTION
Sub-assembly library
Assembly library
Page 19
Original structure
Optimal structure
Page 20
Optimal structure
Results:
- 10% mass reduction;
- static stiffness increased;
- uniform stress distribution.
Page 21
Optimal topology
Results:
- same penetration displacement;
-Same total energy absorptions;
- 80% mass reduction.
Page 22
A-Upper
B-Upper C-Upper
C-Pillar
A-Pillar
B-Pillar
C-Lower
Panels
A-Lower
B-Lower
Beam & joint concept modeling tools essential for front-loading engineering of the full vehicle
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 23
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Page 24
Identify beam-members;
2. Joints definition:
DMIG
3. Panels definition:
Page 25
Equivalent beam
properties:
Geometric approach
Static FE approach
TL
L
GI t
Dynamic FE approach
d 4
d 2
EI w 4 GI t 2 t2 J t0 0
dx
dx
Page 26
1. Beam/joint interface
2. Joint concept model
Beam/joint interface:
Why:
Load transmission between the center node and the
detailed mesh of the joint
How:
1. Rigid spiders (RBE2): joint end-sections rigid overestimation of joint stiffness
2. Interpolation elements (RBE3 or MPC):
Page 27
Page 28
Model calibration:
1. CAE based estimation of spring parameters (Autojoint tool at Ford Motor Company):
Isolation of the FE model of each joint from the detailed body CAE model;
Constraints (rigid legs) and loads (flexible leg) applied at each joint to determine the three
rotational stiffness of the joint.
A.M. Shahhosseini, G. Prater, G.M. Osborne, E.Y. Kuo, P.R. Mehta (2010)
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 29
[KAAX]
Static/dynamic
condensation
[MAAX]
Nastran
DMIG
Advantages:
Straightforward CMS approaches and available as commercial software solution;
Appropriate for structural dynamics;
Easy to couple with concept beam modeling.
Limitations:
- Proper beam/joint interface modeling criticall;
- Concept joint modification is not straightforward (critical during optimization process).
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 30
RBE3
+
Celas
Superposition of
the original mesh
Concept beams
Concept panel
Panel morphing
(Stretching + Curving)
Page 31
Original Model
Geometric
Equivalence
Concept model
Panels
Coarsening
Remainder
McNeal
reduction
Page 32
Torsion
Clamped
Clamped
KB
2F L
B
dz1 dz2
2 L
B arctan
KT
F W
T
dz1 dz2
T arctan
Page 33
Concept Model
F
F
Clamped
Clamped
F
StaticTorsion Stiffness
F
F
Clamped
Clamped
Bending
FEA
computational
time [s]
Original Model
~ 6000 s
Concept Model
2.0 %
0.4 %
~5s
Model
Page 34
Concept
Model
Global
Mode
[Hz]
Global
Mode
[Hz]
MAC
27.3
27.3
0.0%
0.95
27.4
27.5
0.4%
0.90
30.4
30.5
0.3%
0.97
31.8
32.0
0.6%
0.91
34.9
35.9
2.9%
0.82
36.8
36.9
0.3%
0.81
37.6
39.8
5.9%
0.72
Page 35
Next steps:
Page 36
Page 37
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Page 38
Vehicle body
optimization for
crash
Restrain
occupants
Prevent ejection
Control energy /
Transfer energy
Prevent fire
Page 39
Difficulties:
-Different duration of the event more or less time for the structure to
absorb impact energy.
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Side Impact
Rear Impact
Rollover
Page 40
Experimental tests
EXPERIMENTAL TESTS
Increasing knowledge
Increasing complexity
Method classification
COMPONENT TESTS
SLED TESTS
-Collapse modes
-Energy absorption
Page 41
Implicit: -Simultaneous
solution
of
system
equations required;
-Assembly of system stiffness matrix
required;
-Step-by-step adjustment of integration
time step.
Explicit: -Time-step set at the beginning;
-No convergence criteria;
-Computational efficiency;
-Reliability.
Page 42
SURROGATE
MODELS
Component-level
detailed simulations
Sample data from
virtual tests
Fitting of numerical models
(Polynomial regression,
Neural Networks, )
PHYSICS-BASED
MODELS
-Coarse mesh FE
models;
-Multi-body
dynamics models;
-Lumped-parameter
models
Equivalent mechanisms;
Non-linear beams;
Experience driven
modification
Extra-level of
abstraction
Non-linear beams:
analytical formulation.
Page 43
Equivalent Mechanisms
The model is a super-set of lumped parameters;
Entire zones of structure are lumped into
equivalent springs and main masses
The joints have special non-linear springs
A detailed simulation of a thin-walled beam is
performed to obtain the behavior (Reaction
Force or Moment versus Axial Displacement or
Rotation) to give to the non-linear springs
Single beam:
Page 44
Page 45
Beams
Joints
Boundary
conditions
Deforming parts
Page 46
Control box 1
Control box 2
Page 47
Concept model
Page 48
Concept model
Page 49
Detailed model
Concept model
Page 50
Concept model
Page 51
Next steps:
- Method validation on real
complexity vehicle substructures;
- Optimization strategy.
Page 52
M. Kaufmann, B. Lauber, Dr. C. Katzenschwanz (2007), Optimization of a Vehicle Front Part Structure at AUDI
using ANSA MORPHING and OPTIMUS, Lecture of AUDI and FE-DESIGN GmbH at ANSA eta Conference.
H. Zimmer, M. Prabhuwaingankar (2005): Implicitly parametric CRASH and NVH analysis models in the vehicle
concept design stage, Proc. 4th LS-DYNA Anwenderforum, Bamberg, DE, 2005.
M. L. Day, C.W. Duan 2009, Beam element modelling of vehicle body-in-white applying artificial neural network,
Applied Mathematical Modelling 33 (2009) 28082817
Hidekazu, Nishigaki., Noboru, Kikuchi.: First Order Analysis for Automotive Structure Design - Prat3:
Crashworthness Analysis Using Beam Elements, SAE, 2001-01-1660(2004)
Kenji, Terada., Wlodek, Abramowicz.: Fast Crash Analysis of 3D Beam Structures Based on Object Oriented
Formulation, SAE, 2004-01-1728 (2004)
Karim, Hamza., Kazuhiro Saitou.: Design Optimization of Vehicle Structures for Crashworthiness via Equivalent
Mechanism Approximations, SAE, 2004-01-1731 (2004)
Yang, R. J., Gu, L., Tho, C. H., and Sobieski, J., 2001, Multidisciplinary Optimization of a Full Vehicle with High
Performance Computing, Proceedings of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics 2001 Conference,
pp. 688698, AIAA Paper No. AIAA-2001-1273.
Page 53