DESIGN FOR CRASHWORTHINESS

Similar documents
Lighter and Safer Cars by Design

VOLKSWAGEN. Volkswagen Safety Features

EVALUATION OF MOVING PROGRESSIVE DEFORMABLE BARRIER TEST METHOD BY COMPARING CAR TO CAR CRASH TEST

Full Width Test ECE-R 94 Evaluation of test data Proposal for injury criteria Way forward

Statement before Massachusetts Auto Damage Appraiser Licensing Board. Institute Research on Cosmetic Crash Parts. Stephen L. Oesch.

RCAR Bumper Test. Issue 2.1. February 2018

STUDY ON CAR-TO-CAR FRONTAL OFFSET IMPACT WITH VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY

FINITE ELEMENT METHOD IN CAR COMPATIBILITY PHENOMENA

VULCAN BARRIER TL-3 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

Improvement Design of Vehicle s Front Rails for Dynamic Impact

Crashworthiness Evaluation of an Impact Energy Absorber in a Car Bumper for Frontal Crash Event - A FEA Approach

ROBUST PROJECT Norwegian Public Roads Administration / Force Technology Norway AS

Design Evaluation of Fuel Tank & Chassis Frame for Rear Impact of Toyota Yaris

Correlation of Occupant Evaluation Index on Vehicle-occupant-guardrail Impact System Guo-sheng ZHANG, Hong-li LIU and Zhi-sheng DONG

White Paper. Compartmentalization and the Motorcoach

Methodologies and Examples for Efficient Short and Long Duration Integrated Occupant-Vehicle Crash Simulation

ADAPTIVE FRONTAL STRUCTURE DESIGN TO ACHIEVE OPTIMAL DECELERATION PULSES

WP5 - Computational Mechanics B5 - Temporary Vertical Concrete Safety Barrier MAIN REPORT Volume 1 of 1

THE NON-LINEAR STRENGTH-WORK OF ALL BODY CONSTRUCTIONS THE HELICOPTER IS - 2 DURING FAILURE LANDING

Design Optimization of Crush Beams of SUV Chassis for Crashworthiness

FIMCAR. Frontal Impact Assessment Approach FIMCAR. frontal impact and compatibility assessment research

Press-Hardened and Roll-Formed Lightweight Bumpers in Steels with Enhanced Strength

Petition for Rulemaking; 49 CFR Part 571 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear Impact Protection

POLICY POSITION ON THE PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION REGULATION

Vehicle Safety Research in TGGS

ROBUST PROJECT Norwegian Public Roads Administration / Force Technology Norway AS

Development and Validation of a Finite Element Model of an Energy-absorbing Guardrail End Terminal

MEASUREMENTS OF VEHICLE COMPATIBILITY IN FRONT-TO-SIDE CRASHES K.

ISSN Vol.08,Issue.22, December-2016, Pages:

VULCAN BARRIER TL-3 GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

STRESS ANALYSIS OF SEAT BACKREST OF CAR

Optimal Design Solutions for Two Side SORB using Bumper Design Space. SMDI Bumper Group - Detroit Engineered Products

Development of a 2015 Mid-Size Sedan Vehicle Model

PLASTIC HYBRID SOLUTIONS IN TRUCK BODY-IN-WHITE REINFORCEMENTS AND IN FRONT UNDERRUN PROTECTION

2013 Infiniti JX35. David Coakley / John Latimer Nissan Technical Center North America. w w w. a u t o s t e e l. o r g

BarrierGate. General Specifications. Manual Operations General Specifications

The CAE Driven Safety Development Process of the new Ford Fiesta

FIMCAR Frontal Impact and Compatibility Assessment Research

Study concerning the loads over driver's chests in car crashes with cars of the same or different generation

epsilon Structural Design of Body and Battery Housing

A Comparison of Crush Stiffness Characteristics from Partial-Overlap and Full-Overlap Frontal Crash Tests

WP5 - Computational Mechanics B1 (ESP-N2) Barrier Steel N2 MAIN REPORT Volume 2 of 2

SUMMARY CHANGES FOR NCHRP REPORT 350 GUIDELINES [NCHRP (02)] Keith A. Cota, Chairman Technical Committee on Roadside Safety June 14, 2007

Transport Canada. Child Occupant Protection Research. Considerations for Future Regulations. Suzanne Tylko Chief of Crashworthiness Research

Vibration Analysis of an All-Terrain Vehicle

NEW CRASH TESTS: SMALL CARS IMPROVE AND THE TOP PERFORMERS ALSO ARE FUEL SIPPERS

Carbon Fiber Parts Performance In Crash SITUATIONS - CAN WE PREDICT IT?

PRODUCT DESCRIPTION. X-Tension DS. is suitable for all road types: Motorways, country roads, city streets for speed categories up to 110 km/h.

Car-to-Truck Frontal Crash Compatibility

InCar the Modular Automotive Solution Kit

Influence of Different Platen Angles and Selected Roof Header Reinforcements on the Quasi Static Roof Strength of a 2003 Ford Explorer FE Model

ADVANCED HIGH-STRENGTH STEEL FRONT RAIL SYSTEM PHASE II

Blast protection in military land vehicle programmes: approach, methodology and testing

Light Weight Design of Al-Mg Hybrid Space Frames for Urban E-Vehicles

Finite Element Modeling and Analysis of Crash Safe Composite Lighting Columns, Contact-Impact Problem

Australian Pole Side Impact Research 2010

Axial-radial cylindrical roller bearings

Pre impact Braking Influence on the Standard Seat belted and Motorized Seat belted Occupants in Frontal Collisions based on Anthropometric Test Dummy

Abstract. Introduction

Peugeot % 86% 67% 58% SPECIFICATION SAFETY EQUIPMENT TEST RESULTS. Standard Safety Equipment. Child Occupant. Adult Occupant.

Economic and Social Council

LAND ROVER DISCOVERY. ANCAP Safety Rating. ancap.com.au. Test Results Summary. This ANCAP safety rating applies to: Adult Occupant Protection.

Case Study on Design Optimisation & Regulation Review of Vehicle Front End Structural Crashworthiness

Vehicle Dynamic Simulation Using A Non-Linear Finite Element Simulation Program (LS-DYNA)

BEIJING OPERA HOUSE - STEEL SHELL - GENERAL PRESENTATION GENERAL PAUL ANDREU ARCHITECT ADP / SETEC 06 / 01

Honda Civic (reassessment)

Chapter 2 Analysis on Lock Problem in Frontal Collision for Mini Vehicle

NUMERICAL ANALYSIS OF IMPACT BETWEEN SHUNTING LOCOMOTIVE AND SELECTED ROAD VEHICLE

Development of a Self-latching Hold-down RElease Kinematic (SHREK)

A MASH Compliant W-Beam Median Guardrail System

Ram Occupant Restraint System Information

Analysis of a Frontal Impact of a Formula SAE Vehicle David Rising Jason Kane Nick Vernon Joseph Adkins Dr. Craig Hoff Dr. Janet Brelin-Fornari

2014 UT Law Car Crash Seminar: From Sign-Up to Settlement WHEN A CAR WRECK ISN T JUST A CAR WRECK. Mike Davis Slack & Davis, L.L.P.

DIFFERENT BUSSES -COMPARISON-

Adult Occupant. Pedestrian

CRASH TESTING OF RSA/K&C ANTI-RAM FOUNDATION BOLLARD PAD IN ACCORDANCE WITH U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE DIPLOMATIC SECURITY SD-STD-02.

Abaqus Technology Brief. Automobile Roof Crush Analysis with Abaqus

Abaqus Technology Brief. Prediction of B-Pillar Failure in Automobile Bodies

Correct driving posture

Improvement of Crashworthiness of Bus Structure under Frontal Impact

Suzuki Swift 75% 83% 69% 25% SPECIFICATION SAFETY EQUIPMENT TEST RESULTS. Standard Safety Equipment. Child Occupant. Adult Occupant.

FIAT Tipo 60% 82% 62% 25% SPECIFICATION SAFETY EQUIPMENT TEST RESULTS. Standard Safety Equipment. Child Occupant. Adult Occupant.

Universal TAU-IIR Redirective, Non-Gating, Crash Cushion

The Automotive Body Parts Association. The Truth About Aftermarket Parts: A Scientific Assessment

Adult Occupant. Pedestrian. Toyota Hilux Double-Cab, 2.4 diesel 4x4, mid grade, LHD. Belt pretensioner. Side head airbag.

Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware

- New Superpave Performance Graded Specification. Asphalt Cements

Insert the title of your presentation here. Presented by Name Here Job Title - Date

VERIFICATION & VALIDATION REPORT of MGS Barrier Impact with 1100C Vehicle Using Toyota Yaris Coarse FE Model

Product Development Strategy To Response to Global NCAP Requirements

Side Impact and Ease of Use Comparison between ISOFIX and LATCH. CLEPA Presentation to GRSP, Informal Document GRSP Geneva, May 2004

Integrated. Safety Handbook. Automotive. Ulrich Seiffert and Mark Gonter. Warrendale, Pennsylvania, USA INTERNATIONAL.

FIAT % 66% 53% 27% SPECIFICATION SAFETY EQUIPMENT TEST RESULTS. Standard Safety Equipment. Child Occupant. Adult Occupant.

Potential Use of Crash Test Data for Crashworthiness Research

SPECIAL TECHNICAL PRESENTATION. Oklahoma City, Ok April 2012

CLIENT PROJECT REPORT

Simulation of Structural Latches in an Automotive Seat System Using LS-DYNA

SPCT Method. The SPCT Method - Testing of Dog Crates. Utskrivet dokument är ostyrt, dvs inte säkert gällande.

Put Your Money Where Your Mouth is

Design Simulation of Crash Box in Car

Transcription:

- The main function of the body structure is to protect occupants in a collision - There are many standard crash tests and performance levels - For the USA, these standards are contained in Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards (FMVSS) - They are FMVSS 208 (front), 214 (side), 301 (rear) and 216 (roof)

The insurance industry & consumer groups have their own test standard to evaluate vehicles beyond government standards For instance, the New Car Assessment Program (NCAP) It is based on the probability of injury; measured with a star rating where the five stars indicate lower probability of injury and vice-versa

FRONT BARRIER Is a condition of a moving vehicle crashes onto a rigid barrier at a front end Let s model the frontal impact with a point mass t = 0 t = 0, dx/dt = V0 t = 0, x = 0 dx/dt = 0 Resulting behavior of the point mass model The crush efficiency factor is used to consider non-uniform crash force properties

Example 1 Consider a vehicle of mass 1580kg impacting a rigid barrier at 55 km/h and average crush load of 300 kn. Calculate crash acceleration, deformation and time. Acceleration = -300000/1580 = 189.87 m/s^2 = -19.4g time = 1580 x 55/(3.6 x 300000) = 0.0805s Deformation = -300000 x (0.0805^2)/(2 x 1580) + (55/3.6) x 0.0805 = 0.614m

The crush efficiency factor is used to consider non-uniform crash force properties When crush factor approaching 1, it indicates the lower the head injury When designing the collapsed structure of the motor compartment, it is desirable to have a square wave shape

Procedure for establishing Front body structural requirements: 1. Maximum allowable cabin decelerations based on occupant injury 2. Consistent structural efficiency and crush space 3. Average and maximum allowable crush forces 4. Total crush forces to be used in the structural elements Crush force: 10% - hood & fender 20% - lower cradle 50% - mid-rail 20% - top of fender The front end elements are sized to ensure that the cabin zone won t be intruded

Example 2 a) Determine the required crush space. The structure will be 80% efficient and the allowable maximum deceleration is 20g. The impact speed is 48km/h. b) Compute the average total crush force with a vehicle mass of 1200kg and impact speed of 35 km/h. Solution: a) Crush space = (48/3.6)^2/(2*20*9.81*0.8) = 0.57m b) Crush force = 0.5*1200*(48/3.6)^2/0.57 = 187N

Beam sizing Beam section can be determined A thin-walled square section is subjected to an axial compressive load As the compressive load is gradually increased, the elastic buckling load is reached and the walls buckle As the load increases further and past the ultimate load, the walls section cripple and the load drops

Example 3 Each of motor compartment side rail must generate 25% of the crush force F=300kN. A 100mm square section is used. Find the required thickness for yield stress of 207 MPa. Solution: Pm = 0.25*300000 = 75000N Pm = 386*t^1.86*100^0.14*207^0.57 = 75000 t^1.86 = 4.88 t = 2.34mm

Motor compartment packaging typically require flange location & section shapes

Limit load analysis Is the ultimate load-carrying ability for the structure Is used to determine the failure load that cause to initiation of permanent deformation Plastic hinge model

Model with small deflection

Vehicle pitch during impact - Some vehicles rotate/pitch upon crash with a fixed barrier - It can increase the possibility of neck injuries - To reduce pitching, crushable beam is introduced

Example 4 Fup = 100000* 100/(400) = 25kN

Side impact - Plays an important role in sizing vehicle structure - FMVSS requires a minimum injury performance while NCAP uses star scale - The injury criterion is TTI index where the larger values indicate a more severe injury - TTI < 57 in desirable

Kinematic and load path analysis Final velocity Acceleration & time Distance traveled

Side impact model Time at which the occupant hit the door

Rear impact - To minimize fuel system from leakage Final speed Work of deformation Equivalent impact velocity Average rear crush force