Upload
tsmanjurao
View
1.595
Download
2
Embed Size (px)
DESCRIPTION
Final Presentation of project carried out on "Study of frontal impact of passenger bus"
Citation preview
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 1
Final Project Presentation
Study of Frontal Impact of a Passenger Bus
Manjunath Rao T SBBB0906034
M. Sc. (Engg.) in Automotive Engineering
Academic Guide :Mr. Madan JProject Manager,SASTECH, Bangalore
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 2
Aim and Objectives of the Project
Aim :To study frontal impact of a passenger bus and to recommend methods to improve safety
Objectives :• To review the literature on effects of impact on passenger
buses• To study relevant analytical models that are available in
the literature• To simulate the frontal impact behavior of the passenger
bus• To analyze and interpret the results with the experimental
data available in literatures• To suggest some design changes in order to improve
structure safety
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 3
Methodology
• Literature review on Crashworthiness of bus will be carried out by referring reviewed journals, books and related documents
• Geometric modeling of bus structure will be carried out using CATIA V5 R16 / Pro-E 2001
• FE model generation for all the parts will be carried out using Hypermesh 7.0
• Input deck for simulation will be created using Hypermesh 7.0• Frontal impact simulation will be carried out using LS-DYNA
and post processing will be carried out using LS-POST• Investigation of the analysis results in order to improve the
crashworthiness
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 4
Introduction•Among all the accidents that take place, frontal impact has got a major share of 40%. Again in these conditions the injury caused to drivers or the front passenger is extremely high.
•In automotive domain more emphasis has been given to the safety of passenger cars, but seldom the importance is given to passenger bus.
•Though the damage due to frontal impact of the bus is lesser when compared to other vehicles, the consequences of such impact on drivers are fatal.
•According to the study during frontal impact of bus more than 80% of drivers die than any other members of the bus.
•In frontal impact scenario more significance should be given on structural integrity, and hence this project work is carried out in this direction.
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 5
DesignBus Specifications:
Dimension (mm) (as per IS 9435) LPO 1510/55
Wheel base 5334
Front overhang 1775
Rear overhang 3200
Overall length 10309
Max. width 2375
Track front 1930
Track rear 2050
Min. ground clearance in mm 240-275
Max. Seating capacity 53
Weights (kg.)
Bare chassis kerb weight 4010
Max. G.V.W 12500
Permissible F.A.W. 5080
Permissible R.A.W. 10160
Fuel Tank Capacity 160 litres
Engine & subsystems 500
Powertrain 400
Drivetrain 300
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 6
Construction
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 7
Design
Material : Structural steel
Std. : IS 2062
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 8
DesignGeometric Modeling:
Geometric modeling has been carried out using Pro-E 2001 software. All the geometric datas were collected from “KMS Coach Builders Pvt. Ltd.”(Official partners of KSRTC for coach building). All the structural details were as per the 2D drawings provided.
Various views of modeled bus is shown in following sections:
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 9
DesignAssumptions:
• Parts which are not directly related to the frontal impact or which have
no significant effect on the final output have not been considered.
• All the sub-systems that were discarded in design process have been
considered as lumped mass at appropriate locations.
• All structural designs are as per the documents obtained from KSRTC.
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 10
FE ModelMeshed bus with shell elements and 1-D Beam Elements
Total Elements 264139Shell Elements 2607791D Elements 2963Total Parts 105
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 11
FE ModelParts replaced with Mass Element
Mass Elements
Rigid Elements
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 12
Boundary ConditionsContact interface is done by defining the box and providing *CONTACT_AUTOMATIC_SINGLE_SURFACE
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 13
Boundary Conditions
Friction between tyres and rigid plane
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 14
Simulation Inputs
Material Properties assigned
Material DensityKg/mm3
Young’s modulusGPa
Poisson’s Ration
Yield Stress MPa
MAT_PIECEWISE_LINEAR_PLASTICITYMAT_24 7.85e-6
3.55e-6
7.85e-6
3500.3210
210 0.3
210 0.3
MAT_RIGID
MAT_ELASTICMAT_1
Simulation Inputs
Velocity 30 km/hrSimulation time 0.2 secs
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 15
Simulation & Results
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 16
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 17
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 18
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 19
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 20
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 21
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 22
Design ImprovementComparison of various crush initiators
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 23
Design Improvement
Comparison of bead type crush initiators
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 24
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 25
Simulation & Results (contd.)
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 26
Simulation & Results (contd.)
Comparison of Load pattern with both designs
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 27
Conclusion
•It has been understood that the load distribution on the structures are not uniform, which lays down the road to improvement in buckling characteristics of the structures.
•By having crush initiators, the peak load can be reduced. This has been achieved by implementing such designs to some of the structural members, which is around 4% reduction in peak load.
•The design improvement that has been achieved is just for few structural elements, if this approach is followed for many other key structural members then the design could be far superior.
•The floor deceleration is around 12g, which is well in agreement with ECE R80 regulation that specifies the floor deceleration to be around 8-12g at 30km/hr.
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 28
Future Work
•In today’s automotive body engineering advancements there are various systems that improves the crashworthiness of the vehicle significantly. Many such systems can be implemented in order improve the structural safety.
•Simulation of the frontal impact behavior of the passenger bus can be carried out by considering various subsystems of the vehicle like engines, transmission, steering system etc..
•Positioning of dummy in the driver’s seat helps in finding the injury parameters.
•Seat belt concept in passenger bus is an alien concept in India, efforts can be made in developing such a concept.
•More understanding is required in order to improve the structural behavior of chassis, which can be detrimental in overall design.
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 29
References
[1] VINCZE-PAP Sándor, CSISZÁR András, “Real and Simulated Crashworthiness Tests on Buses” ESV 19th Conference, NHTSA, Paper Number 05-023, 2005
[2] Jeffrey C. Elias, Lisa K. Sullivan, Linda B. McCray, “Large School Bus Safety Restraint Evaluation” NHTSA, Paper No. 345, 2001
[3] Yoshiriro Sukegawa, Fujio Matsukawa, Takeshi Kuboike, Motomu Oki, “Heavy Duty Vehicle Crash Test Method in Japan”, NHTSA, Paper number 98-S4-O-13, 1998
[4] Mátyás Matolcsy, “Technical Questions Of Bus Safety Bumpers”, NHTSA, Paper number 05-0161, 2005
[5] Willibrordus J. Witteman “Improved Vehicle Crashworthiness Design by Control of the Energy Absorption for Different Collision Situations”
M. S. Ramaiah School of Advanced Studies 30
Thank You