automotive safety.ppt

7/27/2019 Automotive safety.ppt

1/50

1.

2.

3.

4.

AUTOMOTIVE SAFETY

ACTIVE SAFETY

PASSIVE SAFETY


2/50


3/50


4/50

.

..

.

.

.

.


5/50

1.

2.

3.

4.

5.

6.

7.

8.

9.


6/50

1.

2.3.


7/50


8/50


9/50


10/50


11/50


12/50


13/50


14/50

AUTOMOBILE PARTS


15/50

AUTOMOBILE PARTS


16/50

CRUMPLE ZONE


17/50


18/50

DECELERATION CURVES


19/50

SAFETY CAGE


20/50


21/50


22/50


23/50

FRONT and REAR IMPACT


24/50

FRONT OFFSET IMPACT


25/50


26/50


27/50

ROLL OVER


28/50

ROLL OVER

Optimal crash pulses


29/50

Optimal crash pulses

The stiffness of the available front structure determines the deceleration pulse during a crash.

This pulse should have a certain shape, ensuring minimal risk for the occupant. During a heavy

collision, there are three important phases:

1. Crash initiation phase.

above the trigger value of about 6 km/h.

2. Airbag deployment phase.

This relative velocity should be sufficiently low,The deceleration of the car should be sufficiently low in this phase.

3. Occupant contact phase.

High decelerations may occur .

The frontal car structure should be stiff enough to decelerate.

Research has shown that for optimal occupant safety in a collision with 48 km/h impact velocity,


30/50

Research has shown that for optimal occupant safety in a collision with 48 km/h impact velocity,

the first phase lasts between 10 and 30 ms,

the second phase lasts 35 ms and

the last phase fills up the remaining time to a total of maximal 90 ms.

In the first and second phase, the optimal relative velocity values are 8 km/h each. Figure showsa crash pulse as a function of time against a rigid wall with full overlap optimized for low injury

values (HIC and Chest-G). This curve is achievable for a large number of current cars.

Figure shows the three phases of a collision with impact velocity of 56 km/h in a velocity-


31/50

Figure shows the three phases of a collision with impact velocity of 56 km/h in a velocity

deformation graph, calculated with the preceding graph (already optimized crash) but adjusted

for the higher velocity. Because higher velocities do not significantly change the time duration,

the same crash initiation time of 15 ms and an airbag deployment time of 35 ms are assumed.

The crash duration is 90 ms with a total deformation length of 78 cm.

Figure 2.6 shows two additional characteristics on both sides of the graph of Figure 2.5.


32/50

Figure 2.6 shows two additional characteristics on both sides of the graph of Figure 2.5.

The upper graph is an example of an offset (40 per cent overlap) crash and the lower

graph is an example of a full overlap crash with the same vehicle. The two extreme

characteristics are positioned as close as possible around the graph of the optimal

(lowest injury values) crash situation. In this case the vehicle has a weighted design, the

average deceleration of two extreme crash situations is optimal.


33/50

The material selected for the five mentioned profiles was FeP03 (Euro), a commonly

used steel (for specifications see Table 3.11). Over the length of the longitudinal

member, the profile thickness was kept constant at 2.0 mm. This value is realistic and

generally gives a stable folding pattern. The dimensions of the profiles were chosen to

have the same perimeter resulting in a constant mass per unit of length, see Table 3.1.The undeformed length of each profile is 350 mm.


34/50

The results of the simulations , which concern a collision with a 56 km/h impact speed, a

mass of 1100 kg, and a normal angle of incidence are shown in Figure 3.1.


35/50


36/50


37/50


38/50


39/50


40/50


41/50

To put these conclusions into the practice of designing a car that has to sustain

a wide range of frontal collisions, it is advocated to use a rectangular profile in a lyingorientation instead of the profiles which are expected to absorb significantly more

energy. The reason is that it is more important to give adequate protection for the whole

range of load directions rather than to optimize the longitudinal member for minimal

mass only. This rectangular profile, which must be constructed heavier to match the

energy absorption of the well absorbing profiles with a load direction of zero degrees,

will offer a much better energy absorption at oblique load angles in return. For the same

amount of energy absorption as the circular profile, the thickness of the rectangular

profile must increase with about 2 times.

Results


42/50


43/50


44/50


45/50


46/50

Design paradox , four d esign requirements result ing in d if ferent

per imeter / wal l thickness ch oices.


47/50


48/50


49/50


50/50

automotive safety.ppt

Documents