Lecture 11 Mundo

Vehicle concept modeling:
methodologies and representative case-studies

Domenico Mundo, Universit della Calabria, Italy
Marie Curie Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics
Leuven, 7 February 2013
Any public or commercial use requires the agreement of the author.
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
University of Calabria
1.2
Dept. of Mechanical, Energy and Management Eng.
Concept design and vehicle development cycle
An overview of vehicle body concept modeling
Concept modeling for vehicle NVH
Concept modeling for vehicle crashworthiness
MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 2
14 Departments:
42 Undergraduate degrees
34 Postgraduate degrees
PhD programmes
39000 students
900 teaching staff
21 spin-off companies
Rende

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 3
Department of Mechanical, Energy and Management

Engineering (DIMEG)
Buildings
44C-D, 45C-D, 46 C
51 Professors
30 PhD students
15 Post-doc and collaborators
22 Admistrative Staff

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 4
Department of Mechanical, Energy and Management

Engineering (DIMEG)
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
Main research areas:

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
business organization
production plant
management
logistics system
planning
system optimisation
Page 5
Dynamics of Mechanical Systems (DSM) group
R&D topics
People
-
Domenico Mundo, PhD
Vehicle dynamics
Gianluca Gatti, PhD
Mechanism and machine theory
Antonio Palermo, PhD
Mechanical transmissions
Carlos Garre, MC ER
Active/passive vibration control
Mariano Carpinelli, PhD candidate
Non-linear dynamics
Giovanni De Gaetano, PhD candidate
Biomechanics
Alessandra Treviso, PhD candidate
Robotics

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 6
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
1.2

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 7
Preliminary steps in vehicle design

1. Vehicle/External entities interactions
2. Vehicle as a system
Functional
analysis
System-level
requirements
Target
cascading

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 8
Vehicle design: attribute domains

Performance
domains
Ride and
handling
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
Appealing interior space

Attractive exterior look
Price
Cost to own (maintenance, fuel
consumption, taxes)
Acceleration and velocity
Fuel economy
Aerodynamic drag
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

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Vehicle body
Tire
Vehicle body
Page 9
Refinement engineering
Industrial vehicle development cycle
Concept design
Detailed engineering

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 10
Concept Models
INTERACTIVE: R&D area

- Fast: computational time as short as possible
- Robust: low sensitivity to model uncertainties and variability
- 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
- Early identification of weakness spots

- What-if cases executable before detailed CAD models are available
- Early exercises of balancing multiple and conflicting performances
- Fast multi-attribute optmization
Improved initial CAD design
Shorter development cycle

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
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.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 12
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
1.2

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 13
Vehicle Concept Modeling: State of the Art
Methods based on predecessor

- Mesh morphing
- Concept modification approaches
Incremental improvement of an
existing vehicle model
Methods from scratch

- Topology design optimization
Shape and size optimization by eliminating

material from the admissible design space
- Functional layout design
Simple geometric description of functional

elements (beams, joints and panels)
Methods concurrent with CAD

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 14
Method 1: Mesh Morphing
Shape modifications implemented through a meshbased parameterization of the model:

-
Any existing (and possibly validated) FE

mesh may be used;
Mesh topology unchanged during

modifications;
Nodes subject to active boundary or loading

conditions fixed;
Possible implementation into a simulation

workflow effective optimization technique

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 15
Mesh Morphing Approaches

DIRECT or FREEDOM MORPHING
Displacements directly applied on the

mesh.
Smooth movement of interface nodes.
Implementation of in plane or out of plane

movements.
INDIRECT or BOX MORPHING
Mesh loaded into morphing boxes.
Box corners as control points.
Each node is displaced according to its

geometric position in the morphing box.
More complex morphing parameters

enabled.
Large changes in shape possible violation of mesh quality criteria;
Optimization results must be checked against element quality failure;
Mesh reconstruction on critical components recommended.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 16
Example: crash optimization of a vehicle front part

Existing FE model
Optimized FE model
Objective:
Max. OLC
Morphing control boxes
Front wall Engine
Engine Cooler

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Cooler Bumper
Page 17
Method 2: SFE CONCEPT technology

Shape modifications implemented through direct application of changes to the geometry of the
model (Concept modification approach):
-
Fully parametric vehicle model;
Topological connections encapsulated into model part;
Automatic link between changes in geometry to changes in mesh;
Useful for crash and NVH analyses.
AUTOMESHER

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 18
SFE CONCEPT: Optimization and modular construction
SFE CONCEPT
OPTIMIZATION
Shape optimization
Topography optimization
Topology optimization
MODULAR CONSTRUCTION
Sub-assembly library
Assembly library

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 19
Method 3: Topology optimization

Basic principle: homogeneous stress distribution optimal structure
Optimization achieved by incremental (stepwise) removing of material from an admissible region;
Technological and manufacturing constraints taken into account;
Useful also for linear dynamic (modal) and non-linear analyses;
Low number of iterations required.
Original structure
Optimal structure

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 20
Example 1: automotive rear axle knuckle optimization

Original structure
Optimal structure
Results:
- 10% mass reduction;
- static stiffness increased;
- uniform stress distribution.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 21
Example 2: Beam optimization for crashworthiness

Original topology
Optimal topology
Results:
- same penetration displacement;
-Same total energy absorptions;
- 80% mass reduction.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 22
Main structural elements of vehicle body

Beams and joints:
Static and dynamic behaviors of the full vehicle mainly influenced by the beams and joints stiffness
and mass properties;
Joints governing up to 60 % of the global stiffness in self-supporting car bodies.
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
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 23
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
1.2

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 24
Vehicle body concept modeling: workflow

1. Concept Beams:
Identify beam-members;
Estimate cross-section properties;
Create equivalent concept beams.
2. Joints definition:
Define joint end-sections;
Isolate joints model and estimate stiffness

and inertia properties;
Create equivalent joint models
DMIG
3. Panels definition:
Make a coarse mesh of the panel;
Define Panel-to-Beams connections.
4. Reduce the remainder:
Define beam-to- remainder connections;
Apply dynamic reduction.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 25
Beam concept modeling

Concept (1D) FE model
Detailed (3D) FE model
Equivalent beam
properties:
A, I1, I2, I12, It
Geometric approach
Static FE approach
Analyze mass distribution;

Calculate individual
contributions and sum up;
Correction factors.
Apply static loads;

Estimate deformation;
Apply the linear elastic
model.
TL
L
GI t
Dynamic FE approach
Apply modal analysis;

Estimate frequencies;
Apply modal model of
Timoshenko beam model.
d 4
d 2
EI w 4 GI t 2 t2 J t0 0
dx
dx

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 26
Joint concept modeling

Detailed 3D FE model
T-joint :
- cut-out with 3 sections
- add 3 center nodes at end-sections
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):
- 3D motion at center nodes as weighted average of end-section deformation

- Proper definition of interpolation coefficients (e.g., based on load continuity at interface)
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 27
Method 1: Superelement elastic joint representation

B-pillar to rocker joint
Rigid connection
Distributed compliance connection
No joint compliance allowed:

-Easy representation;
-Low accuracy.
Finite-length beams (legs) joined

to a small, rigid framework.
Superelement model of one leg

-
Legs modeled as pin connected beams,

with bending and translational springs
Joint parameters (lengths and stiffness)
determined through an optimization
procedure
Prater et al. (2005)

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 28
Method 2: Tri-spring joint representation

- Joints modeled with 3 rotational springs representing
the 3 main stiffness parameters of the structure;
- Extra DOFs constrained by rigid elements DOF
compatibility with adjacent beams.
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.
2. Experiment-based estimation of spring parameters allowed as well.
A.M. Shahhosseini, G. Prater, G.M. Osborne, E.Y. Kuo, P.R. Mehta (2010)
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 29
Method 3: equivalent mass and stiffness matrices

Why:
- an equivalent joint stiffness enough for accurate static predictions only;
- strong influence of joints on BIW dynamic behavior.
How:
[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).
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 30
Panel concept modeling

Flat panel
Geometric
definition of the
panel edges
RBE3
+
Celas
Superposition of
the original mesh
Concept beams
Concept panel
Panel morphing
(Stretching + Curving)

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 31
An industrial application case

Beams & Joints
Guyan
reduction
Original Model
Geometric
Equivalence
Concept model
Panels
Coarsening
Remainder
McNeal
reduction

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 32
Static load cases

Bending
Torsion
Clamped
Clamped
KB
2F L
B
dz1 dz2
2 L
B arctan
KT
F W
T
dz1 dz2
T arctan

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 33
Static validation of the full concept model

Original Model
F
Concept Model
Static Bending Stiffness
F
F
Clamped
Clamped
F
StaticTorsion Stiffness
F
F
Clamped
Clamped
Stiffness difference (%)

Torsion
Bending
FEA
computational
time [s]
Original Model
~ 6000 s
Concept Model
2.0 %
0.4 %
~5s
Model

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 34
Dynamic comparison: MAC values

Original
Model
MAC matrix between the original and

the Concept Model
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

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 35
Concept modeling for NVH: concluding remarks

Advantages: Good accuracy and computational efficiency.
Main limitation: need for correction factors.
Next steps:
Improve concept models of beams (no correction factors) and joints

(accurate modeling of beam/joint interface)
Implementation of a multi-attribute optimization strategy

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 36
Concept modeling for NVH: some references

S.B. Lee, J.R. Park and H.J. Yim (2002), Numerical approximation of the vehicle joint stiffness by using surface
response method, International Journal of Automotive Technology, Vol.3, No.3, pp. 117-122.
Jin Hong Kim, Hyeon Seok Kim, Dae Woon Kim, Yoon Young Kim (2002), New accurate efficient modeling techniques
for the vibration anlysis of T-joint thin-walled box structures, International Journal of Solids and Structures, Vol. 39,
pp.2893-2909.
N. Bylund, O. Isaksson, V. Kalhori and T. Larsson (2004), Using knowledge enabled engineering with simulation
methods, International Designe Conference Design 2004, Dubrovnik, May 18-21, 2004.
N. Bylund (2004), Fast and Economic Stiffness Evaluation of Automotive Joints, SAE paper 20037025, in the
proceeding of the International Body Engineering Conference, IBEC 2003, 27-29 October 2003, Shiba, Japan.
G. Prater, A.M. Shahhosseini, E.Y. Kuo, P.R. Metha, V.T. Furman (2005), Finite Element Concept Models for Vehicles
Architecture Assessment and Optimization, SAE International, Paper Number 05M-435.
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 FEDESIGN GmbH at ANSA eta Conference.
A.M. Shahhosseini, G. Prater, G.M. Osborne, E.Y. Kuo, P.R. Mehta (2010), Major compliance joint modelling survey for
automotive body structures, Int. J. Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, Vol.5, No. 1, 2010.
P. Mihaylova, N. Baldanzini, A. Pratellesi, M. Pierini (2010), On the improvement of concept modeling of joints within
simplified finite element models with application to structural dynamics, Proceedings of ISMA 2010 including USD 2010.
Mundo, D.; Donders, S.; Stigliano, G.; Van der Auweraer, H.: Concept design of vehicle bodies using reduced models of
beams, joints and panels, International Journal of Vehicle Design (IJVD), 2011, In press

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 37
Outline
1
Introduction
1.1
1.2

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 38
Crashworthiness and passive safety

Crashworthiness in fifties: measure of the ability of a structure and any of its components to
protect occupant in survivable crashes (aerospace industry)
Control crush Maintain

survival space
Vehicle body
optimization for
crash
Restrain
occupants
Prevent ejection
Control energy /
Transfer energy
Prevent fire

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 39
Crashworthiness: goals and requirements

Goals:
-First wooden cars: keep structure deformation as low as possible;
-Modern passenger cars:
- control structure deformation integrity of passenger compartment guaranteed;
- control crash deceleration pulse under the threshold of human resistance;
- proper time-history of deceleration pulse (initial peak followed by gradual decay.
Progressive crush (or collapse) zones that absorb kinematic energy by plastic deformation
Difficulties:
Wide range of Crash Tests

Frontal Impact
-Collisions as unique dynamic events (nature of obstacle, multiple crash,..);

-Different impact speeds different levels of kinetic energy;
-Different duration of the event more or less time for the structure to
absorb impact energy.
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
FULL SCALE TESTS
-Collapse modes
-Energy absorption
-Full passenger compartment

-Dummies
-Crash against barriers at controlled

speed;
-Instrumented vehicle and dummies
(load cells, accelerometers, ..)
Main Motivation: vehicle certification

Main limitations:
- Time consuming;
- Very expensive: > 100 prototype vehicles, with unit
cost of up 750.000 US$
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Need for predictive tools
Page 41
Detailed crashworthiness simulation
FE methods for non-linear dynamic analysis:
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.
Most used by FE codes in crash simulations

(LS-Dyna, PAM-CRASH, )
Typical Output: Deceleration time history at the rocker, near the B-pillar
Main limitation: computational time (512 CPU in parallel for 72 h for two iterations, Yang, 2001)
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 42
Concept crashworthiness simulation

CONCEPT MODELS FOR CRASH OPTIMIZATION
MODE MATCH ADJUSTMENT
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

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
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:
two or more intermediate masses;

springs with different (non-linear) stiffness to mimic
the crash behaviour at different impact speeds.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 44
Characterization of non-linear springs

Detailed non-linear FE
simulation
Reaction Force/Moment versus

Axial Displacement / Rotation
Zone 1 linear (elastic)
Zone 2 quadratic (peak)

Zone 3 exponential (postbuckling)
Zone 4 linear (solid)

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 45
LMS AMESim Implementation
A new category is created with few components from Planar Mechanical

library to simply assembly a structure:
Beams
Joints
Boundary
conditions
Define impact region

and clamped region
Deforming parts
Driven joints defined as to mimic the behavior of the

detailed model (Reaction force/Axial Displacement)

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 46
AMESim Implementation of concept models for crash

Driven prismatic joint
Control box 1
Used to reproduce the crush behaviour.

Reaction
force
depending
on
the axial displacement and spring
stiffness.
Spring stiffness defined by one constant
value (elastic region) and two look-up
tables (plastic region in compression
and in traction)
Compression traction switch control:

Velocity sign monitored to choose the
correct look-up table for plastic
behaviour
Control box 2
Elastic Plastic switch control:

Displacement magnitude monitored to
distinguish the elastic behaviour from
the plastic region

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 47
Case Study n. 1: simple structure

C-shape structure constituted by thin-walled beam with square section
two clamped ends (red and light blue)
rigid wall of 500 kg that impacts on it with a initial speed equal to 1 m/s in direction
perpendicular to the two clamped beams axis (light blue arrow)
Detailed model

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Concept model
Page 48
Case Study n. 1: results

Detailed model
Concept model
Accuracy (Concept vs Detailed):
maximum displacement of rigid wall: ~15%;

peak deceleration of rigid wall: ~10%
Computational time:
detailed simulation: 480 min;

detailed simulation: 1 min.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 49
Case Study n.2: 2D complex structure

structure constituted by thin-walled beam with square section
two clamped ends (red and light blue)
rigid wall of 2000 kg that impacts on it with a initial speed equal to 1 m/s in direction of
the two clamped beams axis (light blue arrow)
Detailed model
Concept model

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 50
Case Study n. 2: results

Detailed model
Concept model
Accuracy (Concept vs Detailed):
maximum displacement of rigid wall: ~6%;

peak deceleration of rigid wall: ~1.5%
Computational time:
detailed simulation: 72 hours;

detailed simulation: 1.5 hours.
Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 51
Concept crash: concluding remarks
Crashworthiness as a significant attribute for passive safety assessment of

vehicles;
Simulations necessary to minimize tests on physical prototypes;
Detailed FE simulations reliable but time-consuming;
Concept models necessary for early optimization of vehicle crashworthiness;
Accuracy and efficiency to be tested on real collapse structures

Public case study
Next steps:
- Method validation on real
complexity vehicle substructures;
- Optimization strategy.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 52
Concept crash: some references
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.

Leuven, 7 Feb. 2013
Page 53
Thank you for the attention!
For more info: domenico.mundo@unical.it

Lecture 11 Mundo

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Lecture 11 Mundo

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Vehicle concept modeling:

methodologies and representative case-studies

Dept. of Mechanical, Energy and Management Eng.

Concept design and vehicle development cycle

An overview of vehicle body concept modeling

Concept modeling for vehicle NVH

Concept modeling for vehicle crashworthiness

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Department of Mechanical, Energy and Management

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Department of Mechanical, Energy and Management

Main research areas:

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Dynamics of Mechanical Systems (DSM) group

Domenico Mundo, PhD

Gianluca Gatti, PhD

Mechanism and machine theory

Antonio Palermo, PhD

Active/passive vibration control

Mariano Carpinelli, PhD candidate

Giovanni De Gaetano, PhD candidate

Alessandra Treviso, PhD candidate

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Dept. of Mechanical, Energy and Management Eng.

Concept design and vehicle development cycle

An overview of vehicle body concept modeling

Concept modeling for vehicle NVH

Concept modeling for vehicle crashworthiness

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Preliminary steps in vehicle design

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Vehicle design: attribute domains

Appealing interior space

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Industrial vehicle development cycle

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

INTERACTIVE: R&D area

- Early identification of weakness spots

Improved initial CAD design

Shorter development cycle

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Dept. of Mechanical, Energy and Management Eng.

Concept design and vehicle development cycle

An overview of vehicle body concept modeling

Concept modeling for vehicle NVH

Concept modeling for vehicle crashworthiness

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Vehicle Concept Modeling: State of the Art

Methods based on predecessor

Methods from scratch

Shape and size optimization by eliminating

- Functional layout design

Simple geometric description of functional

Methods concurrent with CAD

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Method 1: Mesh Morphing

Shape modifications implemented through a meshbased parameterization of the model:

Any existing (and possibly validated) FE

Mesh topology unchanged during

Nodes subject to active boundary or loading

Possible implementation into a simulation

MC Graduate School on Vehicle Mechatronics & Dynamics

Mesh Morphing Approaches