View
28
Download
1
Category
Preview:
DESCRIPTION
Cen /TC226/WG1/CME 15° meeting agenda. Chairmanship. (all) TRB Report (Marco) Validation activities: Latest development (Marco) Statistical approach (Mariano Pernetti) New proposed items (Otto) New bus model (Clement) Steel tolerances influences. (Joseph/Michael) FP7. Chairmanship. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
Citation preview
1 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
1
Cen /TC226/WG1/CME 15° meeting agenda.
• Chairmanship. (all)• TRB Report (Marco)• Validation activities:
– Latest development (Marco)– Statistical approach (Mariano Pernetti)
• New proposed items (Otto)• New bus model (Clement)• Steel tolerances influences.
(Joseph/Michael)• FP7
2 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
2
Chairmanship
• Current situation.• Proposal.• Nomination of the new chairman.• Nomination of the new secretary.
3 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
3
TRB report
• AFB20(2) Computational mechanics sub group.– 350 vehicle revision– New hardware already certified using only
simulations.– NCHRP 22_24 project– Summer meeting July 8-11 Rapid City
4 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
4
Validation. Last meeting result
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8
tempo (s)
vel
oci
tà (
m/s
)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 0,05 0,1 0,15 0,2 0,25 0,3 0,35 0,4 0,45 0,5
tempo (s)
ve
loc
ità
(m
/s)
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9
tempo (s)
vel
oci
tà (
m/s
)
LIER
GEO-METRO
banda superiore
banda inferiore
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6
tempo (s)
velo
cità
(m
/s)
HUT
GEO-METRO
banda superiore
banda inferiore
5 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
5
Velocity comparison.
• Local reference frame velocity comparison.– Accelerometer reference frame is not frame indifferent.– Accelerations are measured on the local system that rotates
during the impact.– Their integrals are velocities (m/s) but without physical
significance.– We should use the relative mechanics to compare motions.
• Global reference frame velocity comparison.– Rotations of accelerations (unfiltered). – Evaluation of global reference frame velocities.– If needed recalculations of local reference frame
velocities.
6 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
6
Vehicle rotation
Vy GlobalVy Local
x
yx
y
X
Y
αx
y
α
X X
αx
y
X
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
0 0,1 0,2 0,3 0,4 0,5 0,6 0,7 0,8 0,9
tempo (s)
vel
oci
tà (
m/s
)
LIER
GEO-METRO
banda superiore
banda inferiore
7 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
7
Round Robin application.
• Rigid barrier h=800 mm.• Tb11
– 900 kg– 20°
8 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
8
Round Robin 1.
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Vy global Unfiltered
AutostradeHut Cidaut Lier TRL
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.816
18
20
22
24
26
28Vx global Unfiltered
AutostradeHut Cidaut Lier TRL
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8-2.5
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2Vz global Unfiltered
AutostradeHut Cidaut Lier TRL
Same new vehicles.
9 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
9
Round Robin 2
• Different vehicles
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Vy global Unfiltered
-0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4Vz global Unfiltered
-0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.614
16
18
20
22
24
26
28Vx global Unfiltered
10 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
10
Robust 4.3
– RR1 repetition
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2-2
0
2
4
6
8
10Vy global Unfiltered
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.219
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28Vx global Unfiltered
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1Vz global Unfiltered
11 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
11
All RR tests.
• Same rigid barrier.• Different vehicles.• 12 tests
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Vy global Unfiltered
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.214
16
18
20
22
24
26
28Vx global Unfiltered
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4Vz global Unfiltered
12 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
12
Round Robin. Test and simulation
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Vy global Unfiltered
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.214
16
18
20
22
24
26
28Vx global Unfiltered
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4Vz global Unfiltered
– Not bad even if this simulation would not be validated.
– Friction influence?
13 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
13
Round robin.
• ASI e THIV are before 0.06 seconds after impact.
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12Vy global Unfiltered
-0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.814
16
18
20
22
24
26
28Vx global Unfiltered
-0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1-3
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4Vz global Unfiltered
-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
0
2
4
6
8
10
Vy global Unfiltered
-0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
Vx global Unfiltered
14 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
14
Rigid barrier results
• Component analysis– Vy global: very good agreement between tests– Vx global: tests are different (Exit speed is
different between tests) – Vz global: less significative.
• Seems ok.
15 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
15
Deformable barriers.
• Task 4.1 Robust.• N2 deformable barrier.• Different vehicles.• Different grounds.• More rotation of the vehicles (compared to
RR)• Yaw rate problems during tests.
16 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
16
Yaw angle meaning
x
yx
y
X
Y
αx
y
α
X X
αx
y
X
Yaw angle
17 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
17
Yaw rate problems
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3-60
-40
-20
0
20
40
60Ay
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3-100
-50
0
50
100
150
200
250Yaw rate
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3-5
0
5
10
15
20
25
30Rotation
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5-50
-40
-30
-20
-10
0
10
20
30
40rotation
Same test
Different tests
Same signal but with different zero level for
yaw rate
Acceleration Yaw rate. Yaw angle.
18 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
18
Comparison.
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Vy global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.55
10
15
20
25
30Vx global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5Vz global Unfiltered
19 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
19
Comparison 1
• Dynamic deflection (ground)– Curve 1 (bleu)=0.9m– Curve 3 (red)=0.7m– Difference 25%
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 20
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Vy global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.512
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30Vx global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.50
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5Vz global Unfiltered
20 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
20
Tests + Simulations
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.512
14
16
18
20
22
24
26
28
30Vx global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2-2
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14Vy global Unfiltered
-1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5Vz global Unfiltered
21 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
21
Current conclusion
• From RR fair good results.• From deformable barriers bad results (yaw
rate).• Problem:
– With these experimental results (deformable) validation window seems too wide.
– According to 1317 these are equivalent tests.
22 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
22
Validation.
• Use velocity approach in a global reference frame.• Define a corridor.• Define the time until the model is validated.• Different requirements in different direction
(vertical-lateral-longitudinal)• After this time the model is not wrong (also tests
are different) but is simply not corresponding to that test.
• After this time the accepting entity must know that the two phenomenon (test and simulation) are diferent also for the trajectory.
23 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
23
Future activities
• To solve the yaw rate measure problems exchange of information with some tests houses but not the tests house group.
24 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
24
Alternative statistical approach.Mariano Pernetti
25 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
25
New proposed item.Otto Kleppe
26 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
26
New bus model Clement Goubel
27 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
27
Steel tollerances influences Joseph Marra, Michael Gremling.
28 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
28
FP7SST.2007.4.1.6 Intelligent Road Restraint System (RRS)
The research objective is the integration of the roadside infrastructure restraints in the road safety system, as a component respectful of all road users' needs and with increased capacity for both primary and secondary safety. Integration of communication systems aimed at increasing tertiary safety efficiency can be considered in the novel barrier design.
Activities will address the following subjects: 1. Development of an innovative RRS, including anchorage and installation
systems, based on novel design and/or materials with enhanced performances for the safeguard of all road users, with particular attention to the protection of motorcyclists and other vulnerable road users;
2. Development of sensors and actuators that will increase the RRS's efficiency for primary, secondary and tertiary safety (advanced warning signalling, detection and communication of accidents and other safety related environmental situations);
3. Standardisation of RRS's design and optimal lay-out criteria, including related computer modelling.
Expected outcome is the design and development of an innovative road infrastructure restraint system based on new design and/or innovative materials as an integrated component of the road transport safety system.
Funding scheme: Collaborative Projects small or medium-scale focussed research
29 Bruxelles. 13/03/2007
CM
E 1
5
29
Closure
• AOB.
• Next meeting.– May 21st 2007– SIS (Swedish Standard Institute)– Stockolm Sweeden
Recommended