Download - Searching for the optimum between practical project expertise and process competence – optimized component design in the development process by using HyperWorks

Searching for the optimum between

practical project expertise and process

competence – optimized component

design in the development process by

using HyperWorks

A. Falkner, G. Kepplinger, F. Schmalhofer

MAGNA STEYR Engineering, Austria

June 2014 Falkner, Kepplinger, Schmalhofer MSE_AUT Disclosure or duplication without consent is prohibited 2

Outline

• Validated virtual development

Overview simulation methods

General remarks to the CAE-process

Structure & Durability: Technical & process tasks

• Application examples

Stiffness based multi-objective optimization of a car body section

Strength based design of a composite high pressure tank

Damage based shape optimization of a threaded tank valve component

under pulsating pressure

• Summary / Outlook


Validated Virtual Development / Overview Simulation

Methods

E CC PTO SOP

Virtual development based on a

validated platform vehicle

No prototype vehicles!

Validation of all targets

and homologation with

PTO & PP vehicles

Production at

MAGNA STEYR

since 2010

Multi Body Simulation

Finite Element Method

Statistical Energy Analysis

Computational Aero Acoustics

Computational Fluid Dynamics

Simulation methods



Multi Body Simulation Finite Element Method Statistical Energy

Analysis



Interaction of the methods

to describe the NVH

frequency range up to

~ 8 kHz



Multi Body Simulation Finite Element Method Statistical Energy Analysis



Top five:

• Common model / data strategy: MBS, one CBIW for SD, NVH and Crash, CFD

• Optimization strategy: One optimization-tool for all methods

• Correlation between simulation and measurement

• Link to the CAD-World via TeamCenter

• Software tools-environment: As simple as possible, as complex as necessary.



Development, optimization and

validation of the durability function

on complete vehicle level

technic

al ta

sks

Pro

cess /

Structural durability

function & load spectra Simulation body

Simulation & methods

complete vehicle

• Load data analysis

• Generation of test-rig

programs

• Target settings &

validation

• Integration team

management

• CAE-body-management

• Support quotation process

• CAD2CAE regarding FEM

• CBIW model build-up for

Crash, NVH & SD

• ODC-coordination

• Product development

FEMSITE

• R&D-tasks

• Simulation & optimization

of the closed body in white

regarding

stiffness

strength

fatigue

• Simulation & optimization

of the complete vehicle

regarding misuse tests,

vibrational fatigue

• Modules: Suspension,

powertrain, battery

system, fuel-system,…

Complete vehicle

System

Component


Outline












Example 1: Stiffness based multi-objective optimization

of a car body section

Global stiffness,

static & dynamic BIW

Local stiffness,

static BIW

Strength: Body

Fatigue-life

Central questions in every body-in-white development:

• Where is the actual design?

• Balancing between targets cT, cB,…. and BIW-mass

• List of wall-thickness of each BIW-part

Hierarchical approach

body development




• Task / Boundaries

BIW fulfills / exceeds the stiffness targets

The mass of the BIW should be minimized and still fulfill the stiffness targets

Design variables: All wall thicknesses of BIW upper body (approx. 50kg),

65 discrete design variables

Show the trade-off between benefit (stiffness) and effort (mass) Pareto

• Approach

DOE (FE-runs)

Approximations / fit

Multi-objective optimization

Minimize mass

Maximize torsional stiffness

Maximize bending stiffness

Converged solution

Initial

design

mass

sta

tic b

endin

g s

tiffness




• Results

9.75 kg mass reduction eq.

to 65% of the mass potential

Stiffness targets still fulfilled

• Advantages of this approach

Fast results after changing boundaries (no rerun of FE-simulation)

Easy to understand results

Global optimization methods applicable

Mass potential Mass reduction


• Task

Minimization of composite mass of type IV pressure vessels (plastic liner with wounded

composite shell) for fuel systems

Load case: Burst pressure

Parameterized fast 3d section model for optimization

Automatic generation FEM model according liner

geometry & parameter setting of design variables

→ layer thickness, winding angle end of layer

Thickness increase dome area considered

Winding angle change in dome area

Contact FRP-layup / boss

• Approach

DOE: Search design space:

> 4000 FE runs, starting point for local optimization

Gradient based optimization for layup

Design verification with detailed simulation: Interaction FRP-layup and boss

Example 2: Strength based design of a composite

high pressure tank

burs

t pre

ssure

mass

Target

starting point for local optimization


Example 2: Strength based design of a composite

high pressure tank

fib

er

str

ain

bu

rst p

ressu

re

Benchmark Optimized

• Results:

Compared to benchmark vessel

15% composite mass reduction

Same burst pressure performance

Same tank volume

Hardware validation Composite tank

Simulation

Testing

cylindrical part dome area boss area


Example 3: Damage based shape optimization of a

threaded tank valve component under pulsating pressure

• Task: Increase the lifetime of Shut Off Valve (SOV) in pressure cycle test

• Simulation tools:

Abaqus non-linear simulation (contact, material)

FEMSITE nonlinear lifetime estimation

• Questions:

How much tightening torque?

Is re-tightening useful / necessary?

Optimal radius? Notch effect vs. thickness

Test scenario:

1. Pretension

2. End-of-line Test (105 MPa)

3. Unload pressure (0 MPa)

4. Re-tightening only if necessary (cost)

5. Pressure cycle test: 30.000 cycles 2 – 87,5 MPa

plastification

t

R

R


Example 3: Damage based shape optimization of a

threaded tank valve component under pulsating pressure

• Results: Parameter study A bigger radius is better, but at about 2mm

no significant recognizable improvement

Re-tightening is recommended at low tightening

torques (<100Nm)

A low damage value can be found

without re-tightening, but requires higher

tightening torques

Find optimum tightening torque at a

radius of 2mm and without re-tightening

• Optimization

Optimum including re-tightening

Optimum without re-tightening

Radius: 1 – 2.2mm

Hexa

go

n h

ea

d fa

ils


Outline












Success-story – Validated virtual development

time

com

ple

xity

Pushing the limits

-6 Months*

* faster time to market

-4 Months*

-6 Months*

-5 Months*

-4 Months*

Download - Searching for the optimum between practical project expertise and process competence – optimized component design in the development process by using HyperWorks

Top Related