Engineering Report May, 2003 LIGHTWEIGHT SUV FRAME
岳母的幸福生活
DESIGN DEVELOPMENT Altair Engineering 1820 E. Big Beaver Road T roy, MI 48083-2031 Phone: (248) 614-2400 Fax: (248) 614-2411
Report Prepared for:
Mr. Phil Sklad, Program Manager
Subcontract Administrator
Department of Energy
皇后大道东原唱UT - Battelle, LLC
Oak Ridge National Laboratory
Bethel Valley Road
P. O. Box 2008
Oak Ridge, Tenne 37831-6192
Phone: (865) 574-5069
Fax : (865) 576-4963
Pager: (865) 417-6495
E-mail: v
Program Contacts:
James Cran
公理和定理的区别
Project Manager
Auto/Steel Partnership
2000 Town Center, Suite 300
Southfi eld, MI 48075
菜籽出油率Phone: (905) 385-8276
Fax: (905) 383-3200
www.a-sp
John Helner
Engineering Manager
Altair Engineering
1820 E. Big Beaver Road
Troy, MI 48083-2031
Phone: (248) 614-2400
Fax: (248) 614-2411
Lightweight SUV Frame Design Development i
Lightweight SUV Frame Design Development ii
Altair would like to acknowledge the A/SP Lightweight SUV Frames Project Team for their valuable assistance in spearheading this study and guiding it to a successful conclusion: Gary Banasiak General Motors Corporation
Eric Batt Bethlehem Steel Corporation
Ravir Bhatnagar Ispat Inland Inc.
John Caito The Budd Company
Derek Hunter Oxford Automotive
Jim Cran Cran Associates Inc.
儿童发热
Ted Diewald Auto/Steel Partnership
Michael Gulas Dofasco Inc.
Tom Hedderly Ford Motor Company
Ed Law DaimlerChrysler Corporation
Marek Marchwica Stelco Inc.
Jim O’Connor Vehma International of America
David Ruhno United States Steel Corporation
Michael Shih United States Steel Corporation
James Starling National Steel Corporation
Vince Stashko Tower Automotive
Tom Turner DaimlerChrysler Corporation
John Helner Altair Engineering
Tim Smith Altair Engineering
Altair would like to give special recognition to Tom Hedderly of Ford Motor Company,
who provided the baline vehicle frame and suspension CAD data that made this design optimization effort possible.
Bethlehem Steel Corporation Dofasco Inc.General Motors Corporation National Steel Corporation Stelco Inc.The Auto/Steel Partnership Member Companies ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Daimler Chrysler Corporation
Ford Motor Company
Ispat Inland Inc.
Rouge Steel Corporation
United States Steel Corporation
LIGHTWEIGHT SUV FRAME DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Table of Contents
Executive Summary (iv)
1.0 Program Introduction (1)
2.0 Technology Review (2)
2.1 Materials (2)
2.2 Manufacturing (3)
2.3 Design Architecture (3)
2.3.1 Joint Stiffness
2.3.2 Optimization
Frame (5)
3.0 Baline
4.0 Design Methodology (7)
5.0 Lightweight SUV Frame Design Development (8)
英雄联盟小鱼人
5.1 2-Dimensional Topology Optimization (8)
5.2 3-Dimensional Design Space Defi nition (8)
5.3 3-Dimensional Topology Optimization of Design Space (9)
5.4 Interpretation and Preliminary Design (10)
5.5 Shell Topology Optimization (11)
5.6 Shell Topology Design (11)
5.7 Gauge and Shape Optimization (12)
5.8 Lightweight Frame Concept (13)
5.9 Performance Evaluation (15)
5.9.1 Bending and Torsional Stiffness
Respons
Modal
5.9.2
5.9.3 Peak Stress Analysis
Selection
Material
5.9.4
5.10 Rail Crush Study (18)
5.10.1 Baline Frame Front Rail Crush Analysis
5.10.2 Lightweight Rail Development
6.0 Cost Study (22)
6.1 Background (22)
6.2 Process (22)
6.2.1 Piece Cost Analysis
6.2.2 Asmbly Cost Analysis
6.3 Cost Results (24)
7.0 Lightweight Frame Concept (26)
8.0 Future Developments (27)
References (28)
年糕怎么炒好吃
Resources (28)
Appendices
Appendix A Weight Reduction Strategies (29)
Appendix B Light Truck Frame Joint Stiffness Study (30)
Appendix C FE Analysis - Boundary Conditions (31)
Lightweight SUV Frame Design Development iii
Appendix D Material List (32)
Appendix E Components Summary (34)
Baline Frame Components - Exploded View
Baline Frame Components - Part Information
Lightweight Frame Concept Components - Exploded View
Lightweight Frame Concept Components - Part Information
Appendix F Asmbly Line Confi gurations (38)
Frame
Baline
Frame
Lightweight
Appendix G Lightweight Frame Concept (40)
Lightweight Frame Images
Packaging Comparison to Baline Frame
List of Tables
T able 1: Baline Frame Advantages and Disadvantages (6)
T able 2: Set Up Variables (20)
T able 3: Asmbly Plant Defi nition (24)
T able 4: Stamping and Hydroforming Components Costs (24)
T able 5: Asmbly Costs (24)
T able 6: Complete Frame Costs (25)
List of Figures
Figure 1: Lightweight Frame Concept (1)
Figure 2: Baline Ford Expedition/Navigator Frame (5)
Figure 3: Generic Illustration of Design Process (7)
Figure 4: Two-Dimensional Model (8)
Figure 5: Density Plot of Topology Optimization Results (8)
Figure 6: Three-Dimensional Design Space (9)
Figure 7: Topology Optimization Results: Material Distribution in Package Space (9)
Figure 8: Geometry Recovery -Topology Optimization Results: Load Paths (9)
Figure 9a: Design Interpretation 1 (10)
Figure 9b: Design Interpretation 2 (10)
Figure 10a: Shell Topology Results - Concept 1 (11)
Figure 10b: Shell Topology Results - Concept 2 (11)
Figure 11: Shell Topology Results (12)
Figure 12: Design Interpretation 3 (12)
Figure 13: Design Variables Evaluation (12)
Figure 14: Rail Material Thickness Subdivisions (13)
Figure 15: Design after Gauge and Shape Optimization (13)
Figure 16: Lightweight Frame Concept (14)
Figure 17: Bending Stiffness Results (15)
Figure 18: Torsional Stiffness Results (15)
Figure 19: Modal Respons Results (16)
Lightweight SUV Frame Design Development iv
酒店服务员培训
