Design optimization of connecting rod in heavy commercial vehicles

By R.Aravindhan M.E CAD/CAM, CIPET Chennai

Internal Guide Mr.E.Madhan Manohar, Technical officer, CIPET Chennai

External Guide Mr. Ashok kumar.B, Sr.Manager, Adv Engg, Ashok Leyland, VVC Dr. S. Sandesh. Sr.Manager, Adv Engg, Ashok Leyland, VVC

OBJECTIVE
The objective of this project is to optimize and to reduce the weight of an automotive connecting rod.

As existing connecting rod which is made of forged steel is over designed and bulky,
Austempered Ductile Iron (ADI) is chosen to replace forged steel. Forces acting on the connecting rod were studied using Analytical method and compared with ADAMS using CAD model. Static and Fatigue analysis is done and compared with existing forged steel and proposed ADI material on existing connecting rod design. The design is then optimized using OPTISTRUCT solver for several iterations until achieving

the convergence.
The optimized designs were compared with existing connecting rod and the better design is chosen based on stress, displacement.

LITERATURE REVIEW
LOADS ACTING ON CONNECTING ROD
Pravardhan Shenoy [1], a study was done to explore weight and cost reduction opportunities for a production forged steel connecting rod. Here the tensile load acting on surface area is taken

as distributed over 180 degrees and compression force over 120 degrees.

Tensile load acting over 180

Compressive load acting over 120

LITERATURE REVIEW

Three load cases were observed Vijayaraja [2] for FEA analysis of connecting rod.

1. Constrain the crank pin end for all degrees of freedom of the connecting rod and applying compressive force distributed over 120 in piton pin. 2. Constrain the piston pin end for all degrees of freedom of the connecting rod and applying load at crank pin end over 120.

3. Constrain the piston pin end for all degrees of freedom and applying tensile load at 180
at crank pin end. 4. Bolt pretension force applied on beam element to equalize the bolt tightening torque and the bush pressure is given in small end of connecting rod.

LITERATURE REVIEW
OPTIMIZATION
The basic principle of optimization is to find the best possible solution under given circumstances. Structural optimization is one application of optimization. Anton Olason[3] has done an extensive work in optimization techniques. The type of optimization is basically branched into three types - Size optimization, Shape optimization, Topology optimization.

sizing optimization

Shape optimization

Topology optimization

LITERATURE REVIEW
HEAT TREATMENT OF ADI [4] ADI is produced by an isothermal heat treatment known as Austempering. First step is heating the casting to austenitizing temperature in the range of 815-927 C Then holding the part at austenitizing

temperature to get the entire part to

temperature and to saturate the austenite with carbon Quenching the part rapidly enough to avoid formation of pearlite. Austempering the part at the desired temperature to produce a matrix of

ausferrite

LITERATURE REVIEW
MECHANICAL PROPERTIES OF ADI This table shows a clear picture of mechanical properties of ADI and compared to forged steel[4].

LITERATURE REVIEW
Relative cost of ADI per unit yield strength Relative weight per unit yield strength

LITERATURE REVIEW
ALLOYING ELEMENTS OF ADI Carbon - Carbon in the range 3 to 4% increases the tensile strength but has negligible effect on elongation and hardness. Carbon should be controlled within the range 3.6-3.8% except when deviations are required to provide a defect-free casting. Silicon - Silicon is one of the most important elements in ADI. It promotes graphite formation and decreases the solubility of carbon in austenite. Increasing the silicon content increases the

impact strength of ADI and lowers the ductile-brittle transition temperature. Silicon should be
controlled closely within the range 2.4-2.8%. Manganese It increases hardenability, but during solidification it segregates to cell boundaries where it forms carbides and retards the austempering reaction. As a result, for castings with either low nodule counts or section sizes greater than 19mm, manganese segregation at cell boundaries can be sufficiently high to produce shrinkage, carbides and unstable austenite.

Information source [4]

LITERATURE REVIEW
Copper Copper increases hardenability in ADI when added up to 0.8%. Copper has no significant effect on tensile properties but increases ductility at austempering temperatures below

350oC.
Nickel - Nickel can be added to ADI up to 2% to increase the hardenability. For austempering temperatures below 350oC nickel reduces tensile strength slightly but increases ductility and fracture toughness. Molybdenum - Molybdenum is a hardenability agent in ADI, and may be required in heavy section castings to prevent the formation of pearlite. However, both tensile strength and ductility decrease as the molybdenum content is increased beyond that required for hardenability.

Information source [4

PARTS OF CONNECTING ROD

Rod Bushing Rod Small End

I - Beam

Rod Cap

Rod Bolt

Engine specification

HINO BS 3 Engine
Engine type 6 cylinder Inline engine Peak pressure - 120bar Maximum speed 3250 rpm Weight of connecting rod 1.721 kg Cylinder bore 104 mm

DYNAMIC LOAD ANALYSIS

INERTIA FORCES ACTING ON CONNECTING ROD [5]

Force acting on connecting rod crank end FA = -mAaA FA = mA r 2 (cos t + sin t ) Force acting on connecting rod at piston end

FB = -mBaB
FB = mB r 2 (cos t + cos 2t)

ADAMS Simulation Model

COMPARISON OF RESULTS WITH ADAMS

Crank angle (deg) 0 30 90 143 180 225 270 360 585 700 Acceleration at B(m/sec2) 8581.68 6686.27 -2037.25 -4665.08 -4507.19 -4627.62 -2037.25 8581.69 -4627.61 7710.38 FB (manual calc) (N) 14811.095 11539.81 -3516.08 -8051.44 -7778.94 -7986.78 -3516.08 14811.10 -7986.78 13307.32 Acceleration at A (m/sec2) -6544.43 -8939.87 -6544.44 1288.08 6544.44 9255.23 6544.44 -6544.44 9255.23 -3911.43 FA (manual calc) (N) -18253.15333 -24934.27 -18253.15 3592.59 18253.15 25813.86 18253.15 -18253.15 25813.85 -10909.41 FB (ADAMS) (N) 14959.21 11655.21 -3551.24 -8131.95 -7856.73 -8066.65 -3551.24 14959.21 -8066.65 13440.39 FA (ADAMS) (N) -18435.68 -25183.61 -18435.68 3628.52 18435.68 26072.00 18435.68 -18435.68 26071.99 -11018.50

Maximum Tensile force At piston end 14631.7 N At crank end 25830 N

Maximum compressive force At piston and crank end 101938 N

Bush pressure - 8.7 Mpa Bolt pretension 25000 N

FINITE ELEMENT ANALYSIS

Loads and Boundary conditions For static analysis maximum compressive load due to gas pressure and maximum tensile load due to inertia force is taken. Bolt pretension is taken from the manufacturing manual[6]. Bush pressure due to interference is given in small end of connecting rod. The mesh convergence analysis is performed to select the best element size for the analysis.

Static linear analysis is done for connecting rod because connecting rod works under elastic
limit.

Finite Element Model of connecting rod with different load cases.

Compressive load

Tensile load

DISPLACEMENT ON EXISTING CONNECTING ROD

Displacement due to compressive load

Displacement due to Tensile load

Von mises stress distribution on existing connecting rod

Stress due to compressive load

Stress due to Tensile load

Fatigue life of existing connecting rod

Optimization
The aim of optimization was to minimize the mass of the connecting rod under the effect of a load comprising the peak compressive gas load. The scope of optimization is limited to the shank of connecting rod.

Design space

Non design space

Big end and small end of connecting rod cannot be changed, as it cannot be used with existing crankshaft and piston.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

Topology optimization approach is used for optimization of connecting rod. The optimization is carried out using OPTISTRUCT solver. Several iterations with different objectives are taken to get many design models

Best three models are taken for comparison to choose the better one by considering the stress
results, displacement, fatigue and natural frequency.

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

DESIGN I DESIGN II DESIGN III

Objective Min compliance Constraint volume fraction .7

Objective Min max stress Objective Min compliance Constraint volume fraction .7 Constraint volume fraction .7

Stress Distribution due to compressive force on optimized models

Design I

Design II

Design III

Displacement due to compressive force on optimized models

Design I

Design II

Design III

Fatigue life of optimized models

Design I

Design II

Design III

 By comparing the three designs it is understood that design II is better compared to other two. In design I though the mass reduction is 15%, stress is high and fatigue life is very less. In design III the mass reduction is 13.5% and natural frequency of 1st mode is high. But stress is high. Among the three design, Design II is having nominal stress and fatigue life is high. Thus design II is selected, which has a mass reduction of 14% Buckling factor for the Design II is 2

Buckling

Design I

Optimized connecting rod (Austempered Ductile Iron) Design II Design III

Properties

Existing conrod (forged steel)

Mass (grams) Displacement (mm) Maximum stress (Mpa) Yield Strength (Mpa) Tensile Strength (Mpa) Fatigue Life (cycles) Reduction in % Natural frequency (Hz)

1721 0.18

1468 0.22

1480 .20

1493 .23

320 600
790 108

470 830
1100 105

406.1 830
1100 107

521.2 830
1100 106

15%
562.8 455.5

14%
526.8

13.5%
535.5

CONCLUSION
Thus the Design II with 14% weight reduction is chosen. The Austempered ductile material can be used instead of Forged steel

FUTURE WORK
A prototype model is to be made and testing is done. Fatigue analysis is done

It is tested by running it in engine for 240 hrs, for endurance

test

References
1. Pravardhan S.Shenoy, 2004, Dynamic Load Analysis and Optimization of Connecting Rod. 2. Vijayaraja et al ,AVTEC Ltd, Finite Element Analysis of Critical Components of the 2.6L Gasoline Engine. 3. Anton Olason, 2010, Methodology for Topology and Shape Optimization in the Design Process. 4. Ductile Iron data for design engineer, section IV, http://www.ductile.org/, updated on 25.7.2011, revised by J. R. Keough. 5. Robert Norton, 2nd edition, Design of Machinery. 6. Ashok leyland , Manufacturing manual.