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

More documents

Recommendations

Info

Frequency Hz Model Analysis ULSAB Structure with Screens Frequency Response Functions, measured at the Body Corner Points Power input by means of electrodynamic shakers at the Body Corner Points 4.4 Results and prediction ULSAB Final Report CAE was employed in the design and manufacture process to predict physical confirmation and ensure that the concept would meet established performance targets. Physical testing following development was used to validate results generated earlier in the process by CAE. In ULSAB’s case, CAE results were, in most cases, predictive of the physical tests, as shown below. Static analysis torsional bending 1st body Mass (kg) rigidity rigidity structure mode (Nm/deg) (N/mm) (Hz) CAE 20,347 20,543 60.3 212 Physical 20,800 18,100 60.1 203* * natural range of variation ±1 percent Measurement Points: Body Corner Points Driving Points: Body Corner Points Front Left Front Right Rear Left Rear Right Project: ulsabdh2 Test: ULSAB_DH2_ms Date: 18-12-97 Vehicle: ULSAB DH2 Body in White with The reliable correlation demonstrated (above) between CAE and physical results for static analysis indicates that a similar correlation would exist between CAE and physical crash results. The disparity in the mass numbers exists because the CAE model assumed constant thickness within each part; however, actual stamped parts - thinned in the stamping process - exhibit varying degrees of thickness throughout. Constant material thickness assumed in the CAE model yielded mass numbers that 41
42 4.5 Structural performance 4.6 Body structure Physical tests and CAE results show ULSAB to exceed all concept phase benchmarked averages. Structural performance comparison ULSAB Benchmark Future reference structure structure average structure Performance torsion (Nm/deg) 20,800 11,531 13,000 bending (N/mm) 1st body structure 18,100 11,902 12,200 mode (Hz) 60 38 40 Mass (in kg) 203* 271 250 * natural range of variation ±1 percent The body structure consists of 96 major parts plus reinforcements (not manufactured) - such as the hood hinge, steering rack assembly mounting, deck lid latch support and gearshift mounting - as well as brackets (not manufactured) - such as the battery tray and the spare tire mounting. The exploded view of the body structure shown below represents the parts that were included in the measured body. 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 50 and 51: 4.3 Physical testing ULSAB Final Re
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 ...

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

Delete template?

Save as template?