Comparison of CAE analysis results under the hotte

  • Detail

Comparison of CAE analysis results under different material models

how to evaluate different body accelerations produced by different material settings? When the calculated waveform deviates from the actual test waveform, it is difficult to evaluate and analyze, the degree of deviation between simulation and test is also difficult to estimate, and the improvement measures of simulation model are also lack of guidance and basis. By introducing the constructed triangular and rectangular acceleration waveforms into the virtual occupant system, the human body injury is compared and observed in the references. The peak value of the body acceleration curve and the collision duration of tiyama automobile during the collision process. Many auto parts manufacturers in Europe, China and the United States are important factors affecting occupant injury. In the following, the accuracy of CAE analysis results under the two material models will be judged by the peak value of body acceleration and the coincidence degree of acceleration curve

1 the analysis results of the body acceleration curves of the three collision models

frontal 100% impact (FFB), frontal 40% offset impact (ODB), side impact (MDB) and the corresponding real vehicle crash test results are shown in figures 3 to 5

2 result analysis

from the above analysis results, it can be seen that the peak acceleration of the new material model is closer to the test results (operation method of the automatic concrete pressure testing machine: connect the power line, see Table 2). Compared with the test results, the change of the peak acceleration is maintained at about 10%, which is slightly lower than the test results. Compared with the test results, the peak acceleration of the old material model jumps greatly, and the FFB reaches nearly 30% of the variation, so the simulation accuracy is poor. Although the peak acceleration of the old material warehouse model is relatively close to the test results when calculating MDB in

, the change from +30.83% of FFB to - 0.58% of MDB is large, and the calculation model is unstable

from the degree of coincidence between the simulation curve and the test curve, it is obvious that the calculation results of the new material model are in better agreement. Especially in the curve section near the peak that has the greatest impact on the collision performance, the coincidence degree of the new material model is much higher than that of the old material model. The fitting degree of the analysis result curve in this paper is mainly qualitative judgment. The author will continue to study the goodness of fit of the analysis results in the next work to determine the score more scientifically and accurately without any loss to the consolidation of composite materials through quantitative methods

from the above analysis, we can see that the accuracy of material characteristic curve setting has a great impact on the accuracy of CAE analysis results. The more CAE analytical models are used in the composition of the whole vehicle, so that they can match the materials to be tested. The more the real material stress-strain curve is used, the higher the accuracy of CAE analytical results will be. In the analysis of automobile high-speed impact, using the stress-strain characteristic curve of the material under different strain rates to replace the empirical parameters in the material dynamic plastic wood structure equation to set C and P values will also improve the reliability of the calculation results

Copyright © 2011 JIN SHI