# Airbag Particle Modeling

(Some of the intricacies discussed)

2
Introduction
This is a discussion of the Airbag Particle Model. However, it is not as detailed in its
current form as I would have liked it to be.
Let me say in short a few things about it:
a) The Mass Inflow Rate is modeled according to the “Old Style” of Airbag_Hybrid.
That means we have to define a separate Mass Flow Curve for the different Gas
Components. In order to do that, we have to convert the “Mole Fractions” to “Kg.
Fractions” (using the supplied Excel Spreadsheet) and use them as “Ordinate
Scale Factors”.
b) The Airbag Cards have “certain similarities” with the “Airbag_Hybrid” model
but the fields are still not identical. One has to read the Manual thoroughly to
understand all of it.
c) The “Fabric Porosity Venting” works through the Fabric Material Card, exactly
as in “Airbag_Hybrid”, with or without “Blockage”. The other factors also work
the same way.
d) The “Cut Hole Venting” cannot be described through Fabric Material definition
as we did in “Airbag_Hybrid”. So far, that has not been implemented in the code.
“Cut-Hole Venting” has to be defined in the “Airbag_Particle” block of cards itself.
e) “Blockage” of Cut-Hole Venting is defined in the “Airbag_Particle” block but it
does not work in Version R4.2.1 of the code. Therefore, we have to put that
flag as “0” currently. It presumably works in Version R5 of the code but I have
not tested it.
f) We have noticed that in the parameters A, B and C that define the temperature
dependent Cp, “negative values” can cause numerical problems. Apparently,
the equation Cp = A + B*T + C*T**2 should only be “increasing” in value in this
method. Negative values can cause negative slopes in certain cases and the
Particle Method cannot handle this condition yet. Therefore, the suggestion is to
use “0” in place of any “negative values” of these parameters (note that the value
of “A” cannot be negative). This is not a limitation of *Airbag_Hybrid but only one
of *Airbag_Particle. We also hope this to be resolved in the future.
With this brief introduction, let us study the deck itself.

The Airbag Particle Deck Preparation
Please refer to the Deck “dyna.ParticleWith421.HoleAndFabricVenting.k” (supplied),
for this discussion. The *Airbag_Particle Cards look like the following:

3
*DEFINE_VECTOR
\$ vid xt yt zt xh yh zh cid
1 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 100.00 0.000 0
The above Vector Card is used to define the “Jet Direction”. This shows that the Jet is in
the “Y” direction (because “yt=0.000” and “yh=100.00”)
*AIRBAG_PARTICLE
\$ sid1 stype1 sid2 stype2 block npdata fric irdp
1 1 0 0 0 0 0.000 0
\$
\$ In the following, “nvent” defines the “Cut Vent Holes”.
\$ Here “nvent=1” and therefore the “Cut Vent Hole” line is active two lines below.
\$ For two Vent Hole parts, we would have “nvent=2” and two Cut Vent Hole lines below.
\$ To eliminate Cut Vent Holes, use “nvent=0” and comment out two lines below.
\$ np unit visflg tatm patm nvent tend tsw
100000 0 1 295.00 1.0133E-4 1 0 60.0
\$ 100000 0 1 295.00 1.0133E-4 0 0 60.0
\$ In this deck, the Method switches to Airbag_Hybrid at 60-ms (because “tsw=60.0”)
\$ Number of Particles used is 100000 (because np=100000)
\$ iair ngas norif nid1 nid2 nid3 chm
1 5 1 3473 1393 0
\$
\$ Part-8 (also Material-8) consists of the Vent Holes of the Airbag. A factor of 0.63
\$ makes the Vent Holes equivalent to 2x25-dia (details given in Airbag_Hybrid)
\$ sid3 styp3 c23 lctc23 lcpc23 enh_v ppop
8 0 0.63  Comment out this line if “nvent=0” two lines above.

4
\$ The following line exists because “iair = 1” two lines above.
\$ pair tair xmair aair bair cair
1.0132E-4 295.00 0.028970 29.000 0.000 0.000
\$
\$ Define "ngas" cards below. Note that negative values of “c” are made “0”. To maintain
\$ consistency, all “c” values have been turned to “0”.
\$ N2
\$ lcidm lcidt xmi(mw) a b c infgi
\$ 1 7 0.028016 27.522 0.005530 -4.820E-7 0
1 7 0.028016 27.522 0.005530 0.000000 0
\$
\$ O2
\$ lcidm lcidt xmi(mw) a b c infgi
\$ 2 7 0.032000 25.883 0.012750 -3.692E-6 0
2 7 0.032000 25.883 0.012750 0.000000 0
\$
\$ CO2
\$ lcidm l cidt xmi(mw) a b c infgi
\$ 3 7 0.044010 25.651 0.042720 -1.372E-5 0
3 7 0.044010 25.651 0.042720 0.000000 0
\$
\$ H2
\$ lcidm l cidt xmi(mw) a b c infgi
\$ 4 7 0.002016 28.799 -0.000360 1.758E-6 0
4 7 0.002016 28.799 -0.000360 0.000000 0

5
\$ H2O
\$ lcidm l cidt xmi(mw) a b c infgi
\$ 5 7 0.018016 32.366 0.001620 0.8107E-5 0
5 7 0.018016 32.366 0.001620 0.0000000 0
\$
\$ The following card exists because "norif=1" in Card 3 above (Number of Orifices).
\$ nidi ani vdi cai infoi
3473 100.0 1 30.0 0
\$ In the above, “vdi” is the Vector-ID Number specifying the direction of the Jet.
\$
Please refer to the Manual for the rest of the entries.
Also refer to the “Fabric Card’ for the Airbag (Part-1, Mat-1) to understand Fabric
Porosity Venting. That is exactly as in *Airbag_Hybrid.

NOTE on Number of Particles
The number of Particles to be used in an Airbag is debatable and comes mainly out of
personal experience. For Driver Airbags the number starts at 100,000 while for
Passenger Airbags it starts at 200,000. However, these are not fixed numbers.
It is my experience that the ideal number of particles to be used in a given simulation
lies somewhere between “2500 to 4000 particles per Liter of Airbag”, with the latter
number being the “upper limit”.
Since most Driver Airbags are about 60-liters in volume, the range turns out to be
150000 to 240000 particles.
Since modern Passenger Airbags are about 125-liters in volume, the range turns out to
be 300000 to 500000 particles.
The higher the number of particles, the greater is the simulation time. Therefore, a
happy medium has to be sought here. I have run a Passenger Side simulation where I
got excellent results by using 500000 particles for a 125-liter bag. However, I also
realized that using more than that number would give me no added value.

6
We have supplied the following decks for added benefit of the users. The names signify
what they stand for, indicating also that they have been run with the R4.2.1 Version:
dyna.ParticleWith421.HoleVenting.k
dyna.ParticleWith421.FabricVenting.k
dyna.ParticleWith421.NoVenting.k
It is recommended that the user runs all of these and checks the “mass outflow” for
each case with that of the others. It would also be a good thing if the user makes a few
runs increasing the number of particles from the given 100000 to 150000, 200000 and
240000.

The following is a picture of my simulation, with the Particles clearly visible.

We end our discussion of the Particle Method for simulation of Airbags. I hope to further
annotate this part in the future, giving clearer explanations covering all the data fields.