Title: Major compliance joint modelling survey for automotive body structures

Authors: Ali M. Shahhosseini, Glen Prater, Gary M. Osborne, Everett Y. Kuo, P. Rajendra Mehta

Addresses: Department of Electronics, Computer, and Mechanical Engineering Technology, Indiana State University, Terre Haute, IN 47809, USA. ' Department Mechanical Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292, USA. ' Department Mechanical Engineering, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY 40292, USA. ' Laboratory of Research and Advanced Engineering, Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI 40292, USA. ' Laboratory of Research and Advanced Engineering, Ford Motor Company, Dearborn, MI 40292, USA

Abstract: There are two distinct classes of vehicle body CAE abstractions that can be used to support vehicle body design and development, detailed models and concept models. A detailed finite element model achieves computational accuracy by precisely simulating component geometries and assembly interfaces. On the other hand, a concept model simulates stiffness behaviour of joints and major load-carrying members (e.g. pillars, rails, rockers, etc.) in a body structure. The main difference between various kinds of concept models is the representation of body joints. Joints are important components of the auto body because they affect significantly, and in some cases, they even dominate, the static and dynamic behaviour of a model. This paper reviews generic characteristics of two typical joint representation methods: a superelement elastic representation and tri-spring representation. The benefits of using a tri-spring representation over a superelement elastic representation are discussed.

Keywords: automotive joint modelling; major body joints; vehicle architecture; computer aided design; CAD; structural modelling; finite element method; FEM; simulation; automobile industry; concept modelling; vehicle design; vehicle systems modelling; superelement elastic representation; tri-spring representation.

DOI: 10.1504/IJVSMT.2010.033728

International Journal of Vehicle Systems Modelling and Testing, 2010 Vol.5 No.1, pp.1 - 17

Received: 04 Oct 2007
Accepted: 14 Jun 2008
Published online: 29 Jun 2010 *

Full-text access for editors Full-text access for subscribers Purchase this article Comment on this article