The Role of Taxonomy and Ontology in Semantic Layers - Heather Hedden.pdf
Crash project take1
1. Group Project Presentation
Crash Analysis for 1500 Pick-up Truck
Members:
Yuyang Song ( bb0036)
Amitkumar joshi (dx7098)
Varun Kumar Karuna (dx6518)
Mohammed Fasidduin Shareef (dx6684)
Department of Mechanical Engineering
Wayne State University
Submitted to Professors Tawfik Khalil and Cliff Chou
In partial fulfillment of the requirements of:
ME 8020: Crashworthiness and Occupant Protection in Transportation Systems
2. Task
• Use FE analysis to identify the crashworthiness characteristics of vehicle
• To perform the following simulations for 80-100 ms:
a) 30 mph barrier head-on impact - FMVSS 208 simulation and compare with
any available NHTSA tests
b) 35 mph barrier head-on impact- NCAP simulation and compare with any
available NHTSA tests and with simulation (a)
c) 30 mph into 30 degree oblique barrier impact on left side - FMVSS 208
simulation and compare with results from simulation (a)
d) 30 mph impact into center frontal pole, and compare with simulation (a)
• In all cases, determine overall vehicle deformations every 15 ms, the crash pulse,
barrier force, structural deformation fore and aft engine and compare with
available crush space, and check for intrusion into occupant space
• Analyze all data and discuss its implication to occupant protection
08/04/13 KHALIL 2
4. FE Model Static Data
Total No of Nodes:72771
Total No of Element = 54800
Velocity=13.4X103
mm/s (for 30mph case)
Contact definition: Single Surface Automatic
Contact for all components.
Total Mass of model = 2089 kg
Total Energy should be:
E=1/2*M*V*V=1.80E+8
For 35mph
E=2.50E+8
5. A rigid wall is created such that there is a complete contact of the wall and the
car. Car has the initial velocity of 30mph
Single surface Contact has been defined for all the components of the car.
Pre-processor – Hyper mesh 8.0
Solver – LS-Dyna.
Post-Processor - LS-pre Post.
The basic aim of the analysis would be to see the effects of crash on the
passenger compartment.
Simulation Time = 0.1 sec.
Total Wall Clock time for run = 4Hr
Case1 30mph front barrier impact
13. A rigid wall is created such that there is a complete contact of the wall and the
car. Car has the initial velocity of 35mph
Single surface Contact has been defined for all the components of the car.
Pre-processor – Hyper mesh 8.0
Solver – LS-Dyna.
Post-Processor - LS-pre Post.
The basic aim of the analysis would be to see the effects of crash on the
passenger compartment.
Simulation Time = 0.1 sec.
Total Wall Clock time for run = 4Hr
Case2 35mph front barrier impact
21. A rigid wall is created such that there is a complete contact of the wall and the
car. Car has the initial velocity of 30mph,the wall is rotated to 30degree on the
left side of the bumper
Single surface Contact has been defined for all the components of the car.
Pre-processor – Hyper mesh 8.0
Solver – LS-Dyna.
Post-Processor - LS-pre Post.
The basic aim of the analysis would be to see the effects of crash on the
passenger compartment.
Simulation Time = 0.1 sec.
Total Wall Clock time for run = 4Hr
Case3 30mph30degree offset impact
29. A rigid wall is created such that there is a complete contact of the wall and the
car. The rigid wall has a cylinder shape, which has a radius of 350mm, length of
2000. Car has the initial velocity of 30mph,the rigid wall is put in the central
front of the bumper
Single surface Contact has been defined for all the components of the car.
Pre-processor – Hyper mesh 8.0
Solver – LS-Dyna.
Post-Processor - LS-pre Post.
The basic aim of the analysis would be to see the effects of crash on the
passenger compartment.
Simulation Time = 0.1 sec.
Total Wall Clock time for run = 4Hr
Case4 30pmh central pole impact
40. Summary of the project:
• The barrier force for the pole is the highest between these four
models, because the rigid wall is flat and the pole introduce stress
concentration
•The displacement for the 35mph is the highest, because of the
velocity, which gives more crash for the occupant
• Analysis has been completed and studied for different crash
analysis.
• Proper understanding of the crashworthiness of a vehicle and
individual components was thoroughly understood.
• FMVSS 208, NCAP, Pole were understood properly and used in
the simulations.
41. Improvements Recommended:
• For the comparison of the experiment and
simulation, physical parameter for the simulation
should be set based on the reality.
• The connection of different materials in the
model should be set correctly.
• The material properties should be properly
defined to the related components.
43. Acknowledgement
We would like to thank Dr.Khalil and Dr. Cliff Chou for their
support and guidance in making this course informative and
interactive.
Special thanks should given to T.J. Flemings for the help on
the simulation.
