Akram Abu-Odeh Texas A&M Transportation Institute 3 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
akram abu odeh
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

Akram Abu-Odeh Texas A&M Transportation Institute 3 - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Dec 04, 2023 1.33k likes •1.83k views

Using Machine Learning Based Surrogate Models, Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis and Optimization Techniques to Design Road Safety Hardware Akram Abu-Odeh Texas A&M Transportation Institute 3 ACKNOWLEDGMENT Texas A&M Transportation

slide-1
SLIDE 1
slide-2
SLIDE 2

Using Machine Learning Based Surrogate Models, Nonlinear Finite Element Analysis and Optimization Techniques to Design Road Safety Hardware

Akram Abu-Odeh

Texas A&M Transportation Institute

slide-3
SLIDE 3

Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI) National Highway Traffic Safety Administration(NHTSA) LSTC TAMU HPRC 3

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Roger Bligh Nauman Sheikh Jim Kovar Chiara Silvestri-Dobrovolny

slide-4
SLIDE 4

OUTLINE

  • Background
  • Objective
  • Design Space
  • Optimization: Topology
  • Optimization: Meta-Modeling
  • Simulation verification
  • Conclusion
slide-5
SLIDE 5

BACKGROUND

  • “In 2015, 301 of the 1,542 passenger vehicle occupants killed in

two-vehicle crashes with a tractor- trailer died when their vehicles struck the side of a tractor-trailer, IIHS said, citing its own data. This total compares with 292 people who died when their passenger vehicles struck the rear of a tractor-trailer, according to the institute.”

IIHS : Insurance Institute for Highway Safety

  • Source: Transportation Topics (online edition), May 15, 2017
slide-6
SLIDE 6

BACKGROUND

  • The disparity in the height between passenger cars and trailers edges puts the

passenger cars at a serious disadvantage in the event of a crash with these heavier trailer

“Computer modeling and evaluation of side underride protective device designs (Report No. DOT HS 812 522). Washington, DC: National Highway Traffic Safety Administration”, April, 2018.

slide-7
SLIDE 7

BACKGROUND

  • Angular impacts represent the majority of side impacts with heavy

truck.

Heavy-Vehicle Crash Data Collection and Analysis to Characterize Rear and Side Underride and Front Override in Fatal Truck Crashes, DOT HS 811 725, March 2013 https://www.nhtsa.gov/crashworthiness/truck-underride

slide-8
SLIDE 8

OBJECTIVE

  • Design a concept Side Underride Protective Device (SUPD) to

redirect a passenger vehicle impacting at a speed of 50 mph and angle of 30 degrees while reducing the mass of the SUPD.

slide-9
SLIDE 9

Design Space & Load Requirements

  • Design Impact Conditions
  • Impact Speed
  • 50 mph
  • Impact Angles
  • 15, 22.5, and 30 degrees
  • Vehicle
  • Recent model passenger car
  • 2012 Toyota Camry
  • Curb Weight = 3,215 lbs.
  • 2 million elements

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

Design Space & Load Requirements

  • Ground clearance of SUPD rail
  • 16-20 inches per FMVSS 581 Test Zone
  • 18 inches selected to provide good vehicle coverage
  • Length of SUPD
  • Controlled by functional requirements of trailer
  • Movement of rear bogie, turning radius of rear tractor

tandem, access to landing gear

  • 20 ft. length selected
  • Traffic face of SUPD aligned with trailer edge
  • Behind aerodynamic side skirt

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

Design Space & Load Requirements

Simulation with Rigidized SUPD

  • Evaluation of ground clearance & rail interface

area

slide-12
SLIDE 12

Design Space & Load Requirements

slide-13
SLIDE 13

Design Space & Load Requirements

Initial Design Space/Constraints

DESIGN SPACE

18 inches 20 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft. 5 ft.

  • 5-ft spacing selected
  • Aligns with cross-

members of trailer model

slide-14
SLIDE 14

Design Space & Load Requirements

Deformable SUPD with Spring Braces

  • Springs used to represent braces
  • Obtain initial lateral and vertical design loads
slide-15
SLIDE 15

Brace Optimization

  • Utilized numerical optimization technologies to

develop optimized SUPD braces

Design Space Loading Requirements Optimized SUPD Design

slide-16
SLIDE 16

Design Space & Load Requirements

Deformable SUPD with Spring Braces

slide-17
SLIDE 17
  • Design Space Block

Optimization: Topology

Applied load

Constrained to the cross members

slide-18
SLIDE 18

Optimization: Topology

Topology Progression

slide-19
SLIDE 19

Optimization: Topology

Topology Evolution

  • Design space aligned with trailer cross member
  • Provides best mass distribution profile to resist applied load

subject to defined deflection constraint

slide-20
SLIDE 20

Optimization: Topology

Design space utilizing one trailer cross member

Design space utilizing two trailer cross members

slide-21
SLIDE 21

Brace Optimization

Topology Shape Extraction

  • Extraction is based on capturing general geometry and

comparable strength and stiffness based on mass distribution

  • Accounted for critical cross-section and percent-utilization of

material

slide-22
SLIDE 22
  • Given the loading history profile from simple impact with

representative spring

  • Minimize the weight of the braces extracted from topology
  • ptimization
  • Impose a maximum deflection of 100 mm at the middle brace-rail

interface section

  • Both polynomials based and RBF based meta-models were

considered.

Optimization: Meta-Model

slide-23
SLIDE 23

Optimization: Meta-Model

slide-24
SLIDE 24

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-25
SLIDE 25
  • Tubular Aluminum Brace (6061-T6)
  • 2 in by 2 back tube
  • 2 in by 2 front horizontal short tube
  • 1.5 in by 1.5 front slanted tube
  • Gusset at the joint

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-26
SLIDE 26

Slanted Back 2x2 tube (thickness variable tback) Slanted Front 1.5x1.5 tube (thickness variable tslant)

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-27
SLIDE 27

Back 2x2 tube ( tback = 4.2 mm)

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-28
SLIDE 28

Front Slanted 1.5x1.5 tube ( tslant= 3.0 mm)

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-29
SLIDE 29

Braces mass 19.2 kg

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-30
SLIDE 30
  • Braces mass = 19.2 kg
  • Aluminum tubular rail (6”x6”x3/16”) = 46.7 kg
  • SUPD mass/side (braces + rail) = 19.2 kg + 46.7 kg = 65.9 kg (146

lb.)

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-31
SLIDE 31

Tubular Aluminum Brace

slide-32
SLIDE 32

Aluminum Brace Optimum Design

slide-33
SLIDE 33

Aluminum, 30 degrees – 50 mph

  • Material: Aluminum
  • Rail Cross-section: 4x4
  • Impact speed: 50 mph
  • Impact angle: 30 degrees
  • Number of Braces: 5
  • Impact 3 ft. upstream of SUPD mid-span
  • No contact with pillar
  • Total two side SUPD: 251 lb.
slide-34
SLIDE 34

Verification, 30 degrees – 50 mph

slide-35
SLIDE 35

Verification, 30 degrees – 50 mph

slide-36
SLIDE 36

Verification, 30 degrees – 50 mph

slide-37
SLIDE 37

Verification, 30 degrees – 50 mph

slide-38
SLIDE 38

Verification, 30 degrees – 50 mph

slide-39
SLIDE 39

Summary and Conclusion

  • A Side Underride Protective Device (SUPD) was developed using

nonlinear finite elements and optimization techniques.

  • Topology and meta-modeling based optimizations techniques were used to

minimize the weight of an under-ride guard for a van trailer

  • A regression based meta-model was constructed in the optimization

process.

  • Both polynomials based and RBF based meta-models were considered.
  • Verification analyses were conducted with LS-DYNA using detailed models
  • f both a tractor van-trailer and Toyota Camry.

39

slide-40
SLIDE 40

Akram Abu-Odeh

Texas A&M Transportation Institute abu-odeh@tamu.edu +1 979-862-3379