Structural optimization of the automobile frontal structure for pedestrian protection and the low-speed impact test

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part D: Journal of Automobile Engineering

Volumn 222, Issue 12, 2008, Pages 2373-2387

  Shin, M K ^a   Yi, S I ^a   Kwon, O T ^a   Park, G J ^a  

^a Hanyang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

Automobile frontal structure; Low speed impact test; Pedestrian protection; Structural optimization

Indexed keywords

AUTOMOBILE BUMPERS; COST REDUCTION; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; PEDESTRIAN SAFETY; REPAIR; SHAPE OPTIMIZATION;

ENERGY ABSORBING STRUCTURE; FEDERAL MOTOR VEHICLE SAFETY STANDARD (FMVSS); FORMULATED PROBLEMS; LOW SPEED; NONLINEAR FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; OPTIMIZATION PROBLEMS; PEDESTRIAN PROTECTION; RESPONSE SURFACE APPROXIMATION;

STRUCTURAL OPTIMIZATION;

EID: 57349140386     PISSN: 09544070     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1243/09544070JAUTO788     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. UNECE/TRANS/WP.29/AC.3/7. Proposal to develop a global technical regulation concerning the protection of pedestrians and other vulnerable road user in collision with vehicles, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2004, available from http://www.unece.org/trans/main/welcwp.htm.
2. UNECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/INF-GR-PS-31, IHRA/PS-WG. Pedestrian traffic accident data, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2003, available from http://www.unece.org/trans/main/welcwp.htm.
3. Schuster, P. J. Evaluation of the real-world injury-reduction potential of the proposed European pedestrian 'leg-form' impact test using a detailed finite element model of the lower limb. Report, Michigan Technological University, Houghton, Michigan, USA, 2000.
4. Commission of the European Communities, Directive 2003/102/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 November 2003 relating to the protection of the pedestrians and other vulnerable road user in the event of a collision with a motor vehicle and Amending Council Directive 70/156/EEC, Commission of the European Communities, 2003.
5. European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee, Proposals for methods to evaluate pedestrian protection for passenger cars. EECV Working Group 10 Report, 1994.
6. European Enhanced Vehicle-Safety Committee, Improved test methods to evaluate pedestrian protection affected by passenger cars. EECV Working Group 17 Report, 1998.
7. UNECE/TRANS/WP.29/GRSP/INF-GR-PS-143. Proposal for a global technical regulation uniform provision concerning the approval of vehicle with regard to their construction in order to improve the protection and mitigate the severity of injuries to pedestrians and other vulnerable road user in the event of a collision, United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 2005.
8. UNECE, ECER42. Uniform provisions concerning the approval of bumper standard vehicles with regard to their front and rear protective devices (bumpers, etc.), United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, 1980.
9. NHTSA, Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard Part 581, Bumper standard. In Title 49 of the Code of Federal Regulations, vol.5, 2003 (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC).
10. RCAR, The procedure for conducting a low speed 15km/hr offset insurance crash test to determine the damageability and repairability features of motor vehicles, Research Council for Automobile Repairs, 2006, available from http://rcar.org/papers/rcar-test-protocol-angled-barrier.pdf.
11. Han, Y. H. and Lee, Y. W. Development of a vehicle structure with enhanced pedestrian safety. SAE paper 2003-01-1232, 2003.
12. Min, J. S. Optimization of the energy absorber in an automobile bumper using sequential algorithm with orthogonal arrays (in Korean). Master's Thesis, Hanyang University, Seoul, Republic of Korea, 2006.
13. McMahon, D., Moojiman, F., and Shuler, S. Engineering thermoplastic energy absorber solutions for pedestrian impact. SAE paper 2002-01-1225, 2002.
14. Glasson, E., Maistre, V., and Laurent, C. Car front end module structure development regarding pedestrian protection and other mechanical constraints. SAE paper 2001-01-0761, 2001.
15. Hong, U. P. and Park, G. J. Determination of the crash pulse and optimization of the crash components using the response surface approximate optimization. Proc. Instn Mech. Engrs, Part D: J. Automobile Engineering, 2003, 217, 203-213.
16. Vanderplaats, G. N. Numerical optimization techniques for engineering design, 1984 (McGraw-Hill, New York).
17. Lee, K. H. and Park, G. J. Robust optimization in discrete design space for constrained problem. AIAA J., 1996, 40(4), 774-780.
18. Park, G. J. Analytic methods for design practice, 2007 (Springer-Verlag, Berlin).
19. Keyword user's manual LS-DYNA version 970, 2003 (Livermore Software Technology Corporation, Livermore, California).
20. VisualDOC user's manual, VisualDOC version 6.0, 2006 (Vanderplaats Research & Development, Inc., Colorado Springs, Colorado).
21. Emmanuel, G., Valérie, M., and Claude, L. Car front end module structure development regarding pedestrian protection and other mechanical constraints. SAE paper 2001-01-0761, 2001.
22. International harmonized research activities. Pedestrian Safety Working Group - 2001 Report, 2001, available from www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/ihra.
23. Lee, K. H. and Joo, W. S. Optimum design of an automobile front bumper using orthogonal array (in Korean). Trans. KSAE, 2002, 10(6), 125-132.
24. Avery, M., Nolan, J. M., Brumbelow, M., and Zuby, D. S. Important considerations in the development of a test to promote stable bumper engagement in low speed crashes, Thatcham, The Motor Insurance Repair Research Centre, Thatcham, Berkshire, UK, 2002, available from http://www.thatcham.org/ safety/pdfs/bumper-test-development.pdf.
25. Yamazaki, K. and Han, J. Maximization of the crushing energy absorption of tubes. Struct. Optimization, 1998, 16, 37-46.
26. Kurtaran, H., Eskandarian, A., Marzougui, D., and Bedewi, N. E. Crashworthiness design optimization using successive response surface optimizatons. Comput Mechanics, 2002, 29, 409-421.
27. Khuri, A. I. and Cornell, J. A. Response surfaces: design and analyses, 2nd edition, 1996 (Marcel Dekker, New York).
28. Lee, K. H., Yi, J. W., Park, J. S., and Park, G. J. An optimization algorithm using orthogonal arrays in discrete design space for structure. Finite Elements Analysis Des., 2003, 40(1), 121-135.
29. Clemo, K. and Davies, R. The practicalities of pedestrian protection. In Proceedings of the 16th International Technical Conference on The enhanced safety of vehicles (ESV), Windsor, Ontario, Canada, 31 May-4 June 1998, paper 98-S10-P16 (National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, Washington, DC).
30. Kang, W. J. and Bae, H. I. Optimization of an autobody front structure for reducing the repair cost in low speed crash (in Korean). In Proceedings of the KSAE Spring Conference, Jeju, Republic of Korea, 2002, pp. 592-597 (Korean Society of Automotive Engineers, Seoul).
31. Redhe, M., Nilsson, L., Bergman, F., and Stander, N. Shape optimization of a vehicle crash-box using LS-OPT. In Proceedings of the Fifth European LSDYNA User Conference, Birmingham, UK, 25-26 May 2005.