Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Seal Eval Using WB TRW PDF
Seal Eval Using WB TRW PDF
Seal Eval Using WB TRW PDF
Hua Wang, Li Jun Zeng
TRW Automotive
Content
• Introduction
• Materials Model
– Stress / Strain nonlinearity
– Thermal expansion
• Analyses and Results
– Axial symmetric 2D O‐ring seal evaluation
– 3D seal groove evaluation
• Summary and limitation
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 2
Introduction
• TRW was first‐to‐market in 2001 with its Electric Park Brake (EPB) on a
mass production vehicle. Today, there are more than 15million TRW EPB
calipers on road worldwide.
• Comparing to traditional mechanical parking brake, EPB reduces drag and
saves weight, allows for greater freedom of vehicle interior design and
packaging, enhances vehicle safety and driver comfort.
http://trw.com/braking_systems/electric_park_brake
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 3
CAE Livonia
Introduction
• Robust sealing of electric motor case is critical for EPB application in
different environments. Improper sealing may allow moisture into the
actuator case chamber, which can cause corrosion and lead to other
function failures.
• The EPB actuator case under study is made from fiber filled plastic, which
is bolted on to a foundation housing made of aluminum. The O‐ring rubber
seal is in‐between the plastic case and aluminum base.
Plastic
Rubber
Aluminum
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 4
CAE Livonia
Introduction
• To evaluate whether the actuator case to foundation housing interface
has a robust seal, CAE analyses were conducted using ANSYS Workbench:
– Include thermal and mechanic non‐linear material properties of
rubber, plastics, and aluminum.
– 2D axial‐symmetric model for rubber seal evaluation.
– 3D model for seal groove deformation evaluation.
– Two different Electric Parking Brake (EPB) systems were evaluated
• Design A – baseline
• Design B – new design
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 5
Material Model PBT 30% GF
• Plastic (Actuator Case)
– PPS 40% GF (Baseline Design A)
– PBT 30% GF (Design B)
• Both PPS & PBT have stress strain curves
corresponding to different temperatures.
• Parallel thermal expansion:
– PPS 40% GF: Coefficient of linear thermal
expansion (Parallel): 2.6E‐05/°C
– PBT 30% GF: Coefficient of linear thermal
expansion (Parallel): 2.5E‐05/°C PPS 40% GF
• Transverse thermal expansion:
– Unknown
Notes:
PBT (Polybutylene terephthalate)
PPS (Polyphenylene Sulfide)
GF Glass Fiber
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 6
Material Model
• Cast Aluminum (Foundation)
– Nonlinear stress‐strain curve
– Coefficient of linear thermal
expansion: 2.35E‐05/°C
• Hyperelastic (O‐ring)
– Ogden 2nd order model
– Coefficient of linear thermal
expansion: 8.5E‐05/°C
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 7
2D Axial Symmetry Model
• 5‐Step Analyses:
1) O‐ring installation (stretch)
(Ref. temperature: 22°C)
2) Actuator installation (squeeze)
(Ref. temperature: 22°C)
3) Temperature drops to: ‐30°C
4) Temperature rises to: 23°C
5) Temperature rises to: 150°C
Design A Design B
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 8
2D – Axial Symmetry Model
Design A (Baseline)
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 9
2D – Axial Symmetry Model
Design B (New Design)
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 10
Design A and Design B / Contact Pressure
Outside
Inside
Bottom
150°C
‐30°C
22°C
23°C
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 11
Design A and Design B / Contact Force
Outside
Inside
Bottom
150°C
23°C
‐30°C
22°C
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 12
Effects of Friction
Friction Coefficient: 0.15 Friction Coefficient: 0.01
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 13
Summary
• The o‐ring seals three surfaces in groove: inner, outer and
bottom interface between actuator and caliper.
• The seal pressure and contact force change with
temperature; it decreases as temperature drops, and
increases as temperature rises.
• The Design B has better sealing than baseline, as it showed
higher seal pressure (bottom side) or high contact force
(inside and outside).
• The bottom interface seal pressure still holds as friction
diminishes.
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 14
3D Model ‐ Seal Groove Deformation
• 4‐Step Analyses:
1) Apply bolt pretension (Ref. temperature: 22°C)
2) Temperature drops to: ‐30°C
3) Temperature rises to: 23°C
4) Temperature rises to: 150°C
Design A Design B
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench 15
Dimension of Groove Height
• The dimension change of groove height is evaluated along two
perimeters.
• Path of actuator location
• Path of caliper location
Path location
Design A Design B in Actuator
Path location
in Actuator
Path location Path location
in Caliper 2.55 mm 2.55 mm
in Caliper
Groove Height Groove Height
Oct. 30, 2012 Seal Evaluation Using ANSYS WorkBench [16]
Change of Groove Height (µm) / Lower Temperature
0°
270° 0°
Bolt 2
Design A Design B
90°
270°
Bolt 1
180° Bolt 2 90°
Bolt 1
180°
270° 0°
Bolt 2
Design A
90°
270°
Bolt 1
180° Bolt 2 90°
position ‐ B Bolt 1
180°
position ‐ A
position ‐ B
0°
270°
Bolt 2
90°
Bolt 1
180°
Bolt 1
Bolt 2
0°
270°
Bolt 2
90°
Bolt 1
180° Bolt 2
0°
270°
90°
Bolt 2
Bolt 1
Bolt 2 Bolt 1
180°
0°
270°
90°
Bolt 2
Bolt 1
180°
Bolt 2