Report 106310 Concept Design of a Crash Management System for ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

3 Crash Management System 10 Crash Event Crashworthiness Targets US NCAP Front Impact Fig. 3-4: Crashworthiness targets of ULSAB [ULS98] Overall dynamic deformation ≤ 650 mm Steering column displacement ≤ 80 mm in X-direction Crash Event Crashworthiness Targets Euro NCAP A-pillar displacement < 650 mm Footwell intrusion < 80 mm Steering column displacement ≤ 80 mm in X-direction The target values for intrusion are also used in the SLC project. Furthermore, maximum accelerations are also considered. For this reason, accelerations are recorded at the lower end of both B-pillars and at the middle tunnel. The decisive value is the average of these accelerations. Fig. 3-5 shows the SLC target values. Adverse in the present case is that the simulation model and the evaluation of the simulation respectively have a high degree of complexity. To reduce this complexity, the intrusions into the car’s firewall and the accelerations at the rear seat only are used for the evaluation of the simulation results. A Euro NCAP crash is also simulated in this project as shown in Fig. 3-6. The according intrusions and accelerations can be seen in Fig. 3-7 and Fig. 3-8 respectively. Fig. 3-9 shows the energy absorption behaviour. The values are not suitable as a basis for comparison with a car to truck crash, because the energy absorption behaviour is different due to the differences in the crash scenario. However, at least the crash performance of the used car model can be evaluated this way. The car model used for the simulations is a public model of a Ford Taurus, model year 2001 [NAC10]. The results show that the crash performance of this car cannot be compared to the performance of today’s vehicles, but since a comparison between two different design stages of an accident partner (in this case the truck) is required in this study, it is sufficient to use this public model.
3 Crash Management System 11 Peak Intrusion Depth (mm) POINT TARGET SLC Footwell � < 100 53 Footwell � < 100 51 Footwell � < 100 42 Wheelhouse � < 100 43 Footrest � < 100 35 Shaft hole � < 100 49 A-plr ave < 20 19 Shocktower < 100 84 Steering < 100 16 Door gap --- 20 Pulse amax ≤ 55 g 56 g Seat torsion < 80 40 5 1 2 3 Fig. 3-5: Target values defined in SLC development [BER09] Fig. 3-6: Euro NCAP offset crash simulation Reference SLC 4 6
Page 1 and 2: Concept Design of a Crash Managemen
Page 3 and 4: Contents 3 Contents 1 Introduction
Page 5 and 6: 2 Truck Models 5 2 Truck Models The
Page 7 and 8: 2 Truck Models 7 Fig. 2-4: Advanced
Page 9: 3 Crash Management System 9 1000 mm
Page 13 and 14: 3 Crash Management System 13 Energy
Page 15 and 16: 3 Crash Management System 15 To ass
Page 17 and 18: 3 Crash Management System 17 Fig. 3
Page 19 and 20: 3 Crash Management System 19 Crash
Page 21 and 22: 3 Crash Management System 21 Volvo
Page 23 and 24: 3 Crash Management System 23 The co
Page 25 and 26: 3 Crash Management System 25 Force
Page 27 and 28: 3 Crash Management System 27 maximu
Page 29 and 30: 3 Crash Management System 29 is imp
Page 31 and 32: 3 Crash Management System 31 3.6 We
Page 33 and 34: 5 Literature 33 5 Literature [ADA95
Page 35 and 36: 5 Literature 35 [VTN09] N. N. Truck
Page 37 and 38: 6 Appendix 37 Acceleration [g] 250
Page 39 and 40: 6 Appendix 39 Energy [kJ] 225 Total
Page 41 and 42: 6 Appendix 41 Fig. 6-9: Intrusions
Page 43 and 44: 6 Appendix 43 Force [kN] 150 100 50

Report 106310 Concept Design of a Crash Management System for ...

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?