UltraLight Steel Auto Body - Final Report - American Iron & Steel ...

More documents

Recommendations

Info

4.3 Physical testing ULSAB Final Report 4.3.1 Static torsion test 4.3.2 Static bending test Analysis showed that 22.25 kN was reached within 30 mm of crush. The structure resisted the applied load all the way up its peak of 36 kN and continued to maintained it quite well even after peak, when it dropped to about 28 kN at 127 mm. The load was well distributed through the ‘A,’ ‘B’ and ‘C’ pillars and down into the rear rail. Physical tests were used to validate static torsion, static bending and normal modes. Normal mode testing was performed by suspending the body structure on a test rack with rubber straps while exciting it at all four corners using electrodynamic shakers. To validate mass, the ULSAB structure was weighed. The static torsion test yielded a stiffness of 20,800 Nm/deg. The displacement along the length of the body structure can be seen in the graph below. The plot shows excellent structural continuity with a local increase in stiffness between x=3800 and 4200 due to the member pass through. Displacement Torsion The bending test yielded a stiffness of 18,100 N/mm. The displacement along the length of the body structure can be seen in the graph below. The plot shows excellent continuity with a local increase in stiffness between x=3500 and 4200. This result indicates a stiff joint between rocker and rear rails. 39
40 4.3.3 Modal test Displacement Bending The first three major body structure modes with glass are shown in the bar chart below. The ULSAB body structure shows good dynamic rigidity, as indicated previously by the static test. The following graph shows the natural frequencies of the body structure. ULSAB Final Report
Page 2 and 3: UltraLight Steel Auto Body Final Re
Page 4 and 5: Contents Preface v Introduction vii
Page 6: Preface One of the challenges in re
Page 9 and 10: viii Validation Results During the
Page 12 and 13: 1.1 Benchmarking ULSAB Final Report
Page 14 and 15: 1.2 Design philosophy and architect
Page 16 and 17: ULSAB package drawing front view UL
Page 18 and 19: 1.5 Material selection The selectio
Page 20 and 21: Steel sandwich material was chose f
Page 22 and 23: ULSAB parts list Material Material
Page 24 and 25: ULSAB parts list (cont.) Material M
Page 26 and 27: 280 MPa 2.1 Materials 210 MPa ULSAB
Page 28 and 29: Tailored blank usage Tailored blank
Page 30 and 31: 2.2 Processes 2.1.3 Steel sandwich
Page 32 and 33: 2.2.2 Assembly laser welding Sheet
Page 34 and 35: 3.1 Early involvement 3.2 Tooling 3
Page 36 and 37: Floor complete assembly: the rear r
Page 38 and 39: ULSAB Final Report 3.5.2 Adhesive b
Page 40 and 41: 4.1 Validation 4.2 CAE Analysis 4.
Page 42 and 43: ULSAB Final Report All simulations
Page 44 and 45: ULSAB Final Report The offset barri
Page 46 and 47: ULSAB Final Report Analysis was set
Page 48 and 49: ULSAB Final Report Side impact set
Page 52 and 53: Frequency Hz Model Analysis ULSAB S
Page 54 and 55: 5. Economic Analysis Although light
Page 56 and 57: 5.3 Model scope 5.4 ULSAB results U
Page 58 and 59: 5.4.3 Investments 5.5 Sensitivity a
Page 60 and 61: Comparison of ULSAB with Year 2000

UltraLight Steel Auto Body - Final Report - American Iron & Steel ...

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?