You are on page 1of 12

Lightweight Design (Leichtbau)

Prof. Dr.-Ing. Matthias Kröger


Institut für Maschinenelemente, Konstruktion und Fertigung
Technische Universität Bergakademie Freiberg

5. Examples of lightweight design (Beispiele für den Leichtbau)


5.2 Crash structures (Crashstrukturen)

Elementary plasticity theory (Elementare Plastizitätstheorie)


The main design parameters for crash absorbers are the maximum force, which is the
necessary trigger force to start or trigger the deformation, and the dissipated energy, which
results from the mean force and the deformation distance. In this chapter, the maximum force
or trigger force (Triggerkraft) and the mean force (Mittlere Kraft) are to be estimated for
dimensioning of various crash absorbers on the basis of analytical investigations.
The elementary plasticity theory (Elementare Plastizitätstheorie) allows an analytical
description of forming and deformation processes by two load-bounding methods
(Schrankenverfahren).
• One method estimates a consistent stress distribution using equilibrium of loads
(Gleichgewicht). With a deformation rate known locally at the application point of the
external force, the method leads to a lower bound (Untere Schranke) of the deformation
force.
• The second method estimates a consistent distribution of flow velocities (Verteilung
Fließgeschwindigkeit) and then determines the stresses in the material so that the flow
condition is fulfilled. This kinematic approach (Kinematischer Ansatz) of elementary
plasticity theory leads to an upper bound (Obere Schranke) of the deformation force.
Both approaches can lead to the same results in some cases and correspond to the
exact solution.
The procedure of the analytical description of crash absorbers will be demonstrated by a
practical example, the free inversion, see Fig. 5.2-17 (middle). Further it will be used for
prediction of the tapering of tubes and the progressive buckling, see Fig. 5.2-17 (right, left).

Free inversion (Freie Inversion, Umstülpen)


The model of Guist and Marble, see Fig. 5.2-19, make the following assumptions for the free
inversion:
• The material is rigid/ideal plastic neglecting the small elastic deformation and the
influence of the biaxial stress state on the yield stress is negligible.
• The energy is dissipated only in the plastic work at the expansion (Aufweitung) from
𝐷𝑚0 to 𝐷𝑚1 and the two bends (Biegungen) at point A and B.
• The changes in wall thickness and tube length are negligible. This is a simplification
but not consistent, due to an increase of volume. A consistent but more complicated
model can be found in [Kröger].
• The inversion is independent of the axial displacement 𝑠. The final diameter 𝐷𝑚1 resp.
the bending radius 𝑟𝑚 has a constant level. The bending radius 𝑟𝑚 is defined in terms
of a minimum upper bound (Kleinste obere Schranke) by a minimum of the dissipated
energy.
• The inversion has a constant force level, the mean force 𝐹𝑚 .

1
Material parameter: F
• Mean plastic flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚 ,
Geometrical parameters: s
• Original mean diameter 𝐷𝑚0 Dm0
𝐷𝑚0 = 𝐷0 −𝑡0 t0
• Original thickness 𝑡0
Dm1
Unknown parameter:
• Bending radius 𝑟𝑚
• Inverted mean diameter 𝐷𝑚1
𝐷𝑚1 = 𝐷𝑚0 + 4𝑟𝑚
B A
(5.2-3)
rm

Fig. 5.2-19: Kinematic model of inversion


[Kröger]

The energies for bending in A and B are assumed to be equal. With the mean strains 𝜀𝐵 of
bending and 𝜀𝐸 of expansion, the dissipated energy is given by the product of the plastic stress
𝑠 𝑠
𝜎𝑝𝑚 , sum of strains (𝜀𝐸 + 2𝜀𝐵 ) and deformed volume 𝑉 = 𝐴0 2 = 𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 2:
𝑠
𝑊 = 𝑊𝐸 + 𝑊𝐵 = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 (𝜀𝐸 + 2𝜀𝐵 )𝐴0 . (5.2-4)
2
Please note that a movement of the force application point by 𝑠 only causes an inversion of
𝑠
the tube by the length 2, because the inverted side of the tube is extended by the same amount.

The strain 𝜀𝐸 due to expansion is calculated as the ratio of the change in circumference
(Umfang) to the original circumference, see Fig. 5.2-20 (left) by

𝜋𝐷𝑚1 − 𝜋𝐷𝑚0 4𝑟𝑚


𝜀𝐸 = = , (5.2-5)
𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝐷𝑚0
using Equation 5.2-3. The mean strain 𝜀𝐵 of the bends assumes a linear strain distribution over
the wall thickness. Thus, the average strain is half the maximum strain 𝜀𝐵𝑚𝑎𝑥 , see Fig. 5.2-20
(right),
𝑡0
1 1 (𝑟𝑚 + 2 )𝜑 − 𝑟𝑚 𝜑 𝑡0 (5.2-6)
𝜀𝐵 = 𝜀𝐵𝑚𝑎𝑥 = = .
2 2 𝑟𝑚 𝜑 4𝑟𝑚

The combination of Equations 5.2-4 - 5.2-6 result in

4𝑟𝑚 𝑡0 𝑠
𝑊 = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 ( +2 ) 𝐴0 . (5.2-7)
𝐷𝑚0 4𝑟𝑚 2

2
t0

Dm0/2

Dm1/2
2rm

Fig. 5.2-20: Description of the expansion (left) and of the bending (right) [Kröger]

The unknown bending radius 𝑟𝑚 is calculated by minimum upper bound (Kleinste obere
Schranke). The minimum of the dissipated energy result in

𝜕𝑊 4 𝑡0 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 (5.2-8)
=0⇒( − 2 ) = 0 ⇒ 𝑟𝑚 = √ .
𝜕𝑟𝑚 𝐷𝑚0 2𝑟𝑚 8
The use of this result in Equation 5.2-7 and the equality of internal work 𝑊 and external work
𝑊 = 𝐹𝑚 𝑠 of the mean load 𝐹𝑚 gives the solution for the mean load
𝑊 0.5 1.5
𝐹𝑚 = = √2 𝜋 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 . (5.2-9)
𝑠
This simple equation shows a linear dependency of the mean force 𝐹𝑚 on the mean plastic
flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚 , a degressive dependency on the diameter 𝐷𝑚0 and a progressive
dependency on the thickness 𝑡0 .
A comparison with measurement gives a validation of the model, see Table 5.2-2. The mean
forces are in a good correlation for the first two materials using measured material data with
𝑅𝑒 +𝑅𝑚
𝜎𝑝𝑚 ≈ 2 . The larger discrepancies of the mean force of St 52 are a result of not exact
known material properties which are only given as minimal values by the supplier. The
approximated bending radius 𝑟𝑚 is slightly larger than the measured ones. The consistent
model [Kröger] gives about 5% better results.
Tab. 5.2-2: Validation of free inversion model by measurements with 3 different tubes. The
material properties of St 52 are only given minimal values by the supplier

Parameters Measurement Calculation


Material 𝑡0 𝐷𝑚0 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑟𝑚 𝐹𝑚 𝑟𝑚 𝐹𝑚

[mm] [mm] [N/mm2] [mm] [kN] [mm] [kN]

Al 6060 1 47 200 1.75 7.5 2.4 7.1


St 35 1.5 48.5 727 2.0 43 3.0 41.3
St 52 1.8 37.7 (630) 2.3 50 2.9 41.5

3
F
D0 = 40 mm D0 = 50 mm D0 = 60 mm D0 = 70 mm

Fig. 5.2-21: Tapered tubes with different diameters [Kröger]

Tapering (Verjüngung)
The tapering, see Fig. 5.2-21, can be calculated with the kinematic approach of the
elementary plasticity theory, too. The model has some more geometrical and unknown
parameters, see Fig. 5.2-22.

Material parameters:
• Mean plastic flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚
• Coefficient of friction 𝜇
Geometrical parameters:
• Original mean diameter 𝐷𝑚0
• Original thickness 𝑡0
• Diameter of die 𝐷𝐷 or degree of
𝐷
deformation 𝜑𝐷 = 𝑙𝑛 𝐷 0
𝐷
• Angle of die 𝛼𝐷
Unknown parameters:
• Tapered diameter 𝐷𝑚1
• Tapered thickness 𝑡1
• Radii of bending 𝑟𝐴 , 𝑟𝐵 Fig. 5.2-22: Model of the tapering [Kröger]
The energy is dissipated by reduction, bending and friction, see Fig. 5.2-17. These three
energy absorption parts are calculated by:
1. Energy dissipation due to reduction
𝑡0 + 𝑡1
𝑊1 = 𝜋𝜎𝑝𝑚 (𝐷𝑚0 − 𝐷𝑚1 ) 𝑠. (5.2-10)
2

4
2. Energy dissipation due to bending

𝜋 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡02 𝐷𝑚1 𝑡12


𝑊2 = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 ( + )𝑠 . (5.2-11)
2 𝑟𝐴 𝑟𝐵
3. Energy dissipation due to friction
𝜇
𝑊3 = 𝐹 𝑠. (5.2-12)
𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝛼𝐷 + 𝜇 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝛼𝐷 𝑚
The energy dissipated by friction depends on the mean tapering force 𝐹𝑚 , which has to be
calculated here. Further some unknown parameters of the model have to be calculated or
approximated:

• The tapered thickness 𝑡1 can be calculation by considering a constant volume and


neglecting changes of the tube length
𝐷𝑚0 𝐷0
𝑡1 = 𝑡0 ≈ 𝑡0 . (5.2-13)
𝐷𝑚1 𝐷𝐷
• The tapered diameter 𝐷𝑚1 is given by the geometry of the model
𝐷𝑚1 = 𝐷𝐷 − 𝑡1 − 2𝑟𝐵 (1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝛼𝐷 ) . (5.2-14)
• The bending radius 𝑟𝐵 is calculated using the minimum upper bound by minimising
the dissipated energy

𝜕𝑊 (𝐷𝐷 − 𝑡1 )𝑡12 (5.2-15)


= 0 ⇒ 𝑟𝐵   = √ .
𝜕𝑟𝐵 2(1 − 𝑐𝑜𝑠𝛼𝐷 ) (𝑡0 + 𝑡1 )
The radius 𝑟𝐴 at run-in is assumed to be equal to radius at run-out 𝑟𝐴 = 𝑟𝐵 .
The combination of the Equations 5.2-10 – 5.2-15 gives the analytical description of mean
tapering force
𝑊 𝜋𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡0 + 𝑡1 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡02 𝐷𝑚1 𝑡12
𝐹𝑚 = = 𝜇 [(𝐷𝑚0 − 𝐷𝑚1 ) + + ]. (5.2-16)
𝑠 1 − 𝑠𝑖𝑛 𝛼 + 𝜇 𝑐𝑜𝑠 𝛼 2 2𝑟𝐴 2𝑟𝐵
𝐷 𝐷
A validation of the calculation has been done by varying the tube diameter and thickness, see
Fig. 5.2-23, as well as by varying diameter of die (Matrize) and the angle of the die, see
Fig. 5.2-24.

Fig. 5.2-23: Mean force of tapering in dependency of tube diameter (left) D0x2-AlMgSi0.5
with 𝜑𝐷 =0.25 and of tube thickness Ø50xt0-AlMgSi0.5 with 𝜑𝐷 =0.25 [Kröger]

5
Fig. 5.2-24: Mean force of tapering in dependency of degree of deformation for three
different tubes (left): Ø50x2-AlMgSi0.5 (red), Ø50x1.5-St35 (blue), Ø50x2.6-Ck35 (green)
with 𝛼𝐷 =15°; mean force of tapering in dependency of angle of die for two tubes Ø50x2-
AlMgSi0.5 (red), Ø50x1.5-St35 (blue) with 𝜑𝐷 =0.17 [Kröger]

One advantage of the tapering is the deformation by reduction of the tube diameter, which
results in compression stresses. The deformation by expansion of the free inversion is early
limited by cracks due to tension stresses. In most cases the material can be deformed much
more under compression stresses. The limitation of the tapering can be cracks or the mean
force reaches the trigger force of the progressive buckling. Especially for materials with
strongly limited degree of deformation it could be a possibility to dissipate more energy by
friction. This can be done by an increase of the friction coefficient, see Fig. 5.2-25 (left), or by
a small angle of the die, see Fig. 5.2-24 (right). The influence of lubrication is given in
Fig. 5.2-25 (right). Due to a formation of a fluid film for high velocities the friction is increasing
during the impact while the velocity decreases especially for oil lubrication and a little bit for
grease lubrication. Without lubrication the velocity has no influence on the tapering force.

Fig. 5.2-25: Example of the calculated parts of energy dissipation (left) and measured force
characteristic in dependency of velocity for a variation of lubrication; ø50x2-AlMgSi0.5;
𝜑𝐷 =0.15; 𝛼𝐷 =15° [Kröger]

6
t0=1,5mm t0=2mm t0=3mm t0=4mm
t0=1mm t0=5mm

200
Test
Calculation (symmetric)
Mean Force Fm [kN]

150 Calculation (two corners)

100

50

0
0 1 2 3 4 5
Thickness t0 [mm]
Fig. 5.2-26: Samples of progressive buckling (top) and mean force in dependency of the
thickness (bottom); Ø50xt0x100- AlMgSi0.5 F22 [Kröger]
Progressive Buckling (Faltung)
The progressive buckling, see Fig. 5.2-26, has been investigated analytical and experimental
by Abramowicz and Jones. For tubes they calculated the mean buckling force for different
kinds of deformation, symmetric buckling, buckling with two corners and with three corners.
The results show only small differences for typical tube geometries applied in car front
structures. As an example, the results of the progressive buckling with three corners are given:
0.5 1.5
𝐹𝑚3 = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 (7.22 𝐷𝑚 𝑡0 + 11.19 𝑡02 ) .
(5.2-17)
For rectangular tubes with width 𝐶 and 𝐷 the mean progressive buckling force is given by
Wierzbicki and Abramowicz by
𝐶 + 𝐷 0.37 1.63
𝐹𝑚 = 12.16 𝜎𝑝𝑚 ( ) 𝑡0 . (5.2-18)
2
The progressive buckling shows a significant larger trigger force 𝐹𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑟 = 𝐹𝑚𝑎𝑥 to start the
buckling, see Fig. 5.2-17 (left). A simple approximation by an upper bound is to assume the
yield stress 𝜎0 (Streckgrenze Re) on the whole area of the circular tube
𝐹𝑇𝑟𝑖𝑔𝑔𝑒𝑟 = 𝜋𝜎0 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 .
(5.2-19)
In most cases the large trigger force should be reduced for crash structures. This can be done
by so called trigger, which are imperfections at the front of the tube. A typical solution is to
bring inside the tube first small buckles (Faltungen, Sicken).

7
Lightweight design of crash absorber (Leichtbau Crashabsorber)
For lightweight design of crash absorbers, the specific energy absorption is of special interest:
𝐸 𝑊 𝐹𝑚 𝑠 𝐹𝑚
𝐸𝑠 = = = = , (5.2-20)
𝛥𝑚 𝜌𝐴0 𝑠 𝜌𝐴0 𝑠 𝜌𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0
with the mass 𝛥𝑚 of the deformed part of the tube. For the inversion the specific energy
absorption can be calculated using Equation 5.2-9:
0.5 1.5
√2 𝜋 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡00.5
𝐸𝑠 = = √2 (5.2-21)
𝜌𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 𝜌 0.5 .
𝐷𝑚0
The specific energy absorption 𝐸𝑠 increases with the mean plastic flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚 and a
reduction of the density 𝜌. The geometry has different influences: With increasing thickness 𝑡0
and decreasing diameter 𝐷𝑚0 the specific energy absorption 𝐸𝑠 increases. This result can be
used to develop a lightweight design. But it has to be considered that the bending strains
increases with the thickness which can result in cracks. Further a tube with small diameter is
sensitive to lateral forces which can result in global buckling, cp. Fig. 5.2-11 (bottom left).
Almost equal results can be found by analysing the progressive buckling. Therefore, an
approximation of Equation 5.2-17 can be used, neglecting the second, smaller term, which
results in:
0.5 1.5
7.22 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝐷𝑚 𝑡0 7.22 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡00.5
𝐸𝑠 ≈ = 0.5 .
(5.2-22)
𝜌𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 𝜋 𝜌 𝐷𝑚0

The results for the tapering are totally different to the previous results. We approximate the
equation 5.2-16 by neglecting the small energy dissipations by both bends and combine the
pre-factor of mean plastic flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚 and friction coefficient 𝜇 to one factor, the friction
considering flow stress 𝜎𝜇 :
𝑡0 + 𝑡1
𝜋𝜎𝜇 (𝐷𝑚0 − 𝐷𝑚1 )
𝐸𝑠 ≈ 2 = 𝜎𝜇 (𝐷𝑚0 − 𝐷𝑚1 ) 𝑡0 + 𝑡1 ≈ 𝜎𝜇 𝜀 . (5.2-23)
𝜌𝜋𝐷𝑚0 𝑡0 𝜌 𝐷𝑚0 2 𝑡0 𝜌 𝑈

The second term describes the strain 𝜀𝑈 in circumferential direction. Neglecting the small
increase in thickness the third term is approximately 1. Then, the specific energy absorption 𝐸𝑠
depends in the same way as before from the flow stress 𝜎𝜇 and the density 𝜌. Instead of a
dependency on the diameter and thickness, the specific energy absorption 𝐸𝑠 depends only
on the circumferential strain 𝜀𝑈 . Therefore, for all diameters and thicknesses the same specific
𝐷0
energy absorption 𝐸𝑠 can be reached by optimising the degree of deformation 𝜑𝐷 = 𝑙𝑛 resp.
𝐷𝐷
the diameter of the die 𝐷𝐷 , which directly defines the tapered diameter 𝐷𝑚1 and, therefore, the
circumferential strain 𝜀𝑈 . Thereby, material limits of compression strains have to be
considered. The high specific energy absorption 𝐸𝑠 of tapering, see Fig. 5.2-18, combined with
the option to use larger diameters for bending resistance show the high potential of this crash
absorber concept for the lightweight design.

8
Q F
Q Q

Dm
t   

Q Q
Mel F

Mcr= Qcr  Mcr= Qcr 


Fig. 5.2-27: Lateral loaded beam (left), plastic bending stresses (middle) and plastic
bending stresses for combined loads (right) [Kröger]

Critical lateral and combined loads on a beam (Kritische laterale und combinierte
Belastungen eines Trägers)
The oblique crash scenarios (Schrägaufprall) in Fig. 5.2-11 result in lateral loads or
combined axial and lateral loads acting on the longitudinal beam. To calculate the maximum
of bending moment the maximum elastic bending moment (Maximales elastisches
Biegemoment) can be calculated
𝜋
𝑀𝑒𝑙 = 𝜎0 𝑊𝑏 = 𝜎 𝑡𝐷 2 . (5.2-24)
4 0 𝑚
For the elastic case the stresses and the proportional strains are linear and have the
maximum on the right resp. left side of the tube, see green line in Fig. 5.2-27 (middle).
For the plastic deformation, only the strains can be assumed to be linear. The stresses are
constant tension resp. compression stresses for ideal plastic material behaviour with a mean
plastic flow stress 𝜎𝑝𝑚 , see red lines in Fig. 5.2-27 (middle). This extreme configuration with
a neglectable linear elastic region next to the neutral axis result in the critical plastic bending
moment (Kritisches plastisches Biegemoment)
2
𝑀𝑐𝑟 = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡𝐷𝑚 .
(5.2-25)
It can be seen, that the critical plastic bending moment is about 30% larger than the maximum
elastic bending moment of Equation 5.2-24. A further increase of the moment is not possible.
Therefore, this maximum moment is the critical plastic bending moment. Considering strain
hardening a further small increase could be possible.

9
If in combination an axial load is acting, the part next to the neutral axis is the response to the
axial load and only the left and right side of the tube can carry the bending moment any more,
see Fig. 5.2-27 (right). This result in the critical plastic bending moment under axial load
(Kritisches plastisches Biegemoment unter Axiallast)
2
𝐹 𝐹 𝜋
𝑀𝑐𝑟 (𝐹) = 𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡𝐷𝑚 𝑐𝑜𝑠 for ≤ (5.2-26)
2𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡𝐷𝑚 2𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡𝐷𝑚 2
If the axial load plastifys the whole cross, 𝐹 = 𝜋𝜎𝑝𝑚 𝑡𝐷𝑚 , no bending moment can be
transferred. This describes the plastic hinges on the longitudinal beam of the simplified front
structure model, see Fig. 5.2-9. It can be used to calculate the behaviour of the front structure
for the oblique crash scenarios [Kröger].

Exercises:

a) Which two load-bounding methods are part of the elementary plasticity theory?
b) To avoid plastic deformations of a component a lower bound is on the safe side and,
therefore, is preferred. Why an upper bound of the force is useful for crash safety?
c) Which energy absorbing mechanisms are considered in the free inversion model?
d) Which idea is used to determine the unknown bending radius of free inversion?
e) Which energy absorbing mechanisms are considered in the tapering model?
f) Why the tapering can depend on the deformation velocity?
g) Which characteristic value describe the lightweight design of crash absorbers?
h) Which values of geometrical and material parameters are preferred for lightweight
design of free inversion and progressive buckling?
i) What is the advantage of tapering in respect to lightweight design?
j) Describe the plastic bending stresses of a rectangular beam!

10
6. Conclusion and outlook (Zusammenfassung und Ausblick)
In this chapter we will conclude the main topics and give an outlook on the lightweight design.
Conclusion
In the introduction, Chapter 1, we learned from history the main aims of lightweight design: a
increase of properties, a reduction of energy and resource consumption and marketing
arguments.
The mechanical effects, Chapter 2, of a mass reduction are reduced weight forces, inertia
forces and friction losses. The characteristic values can be cost orientated, benefit
orientated, deformation orientated or material orientated. Most values relate the mass or
density to a property which is characteristic for the design.
The lightweight materials, Chapter 3, discusses new materials, like fibre reinforced
plastics, and advanced metal alloys, which can fulfil lightweight tasks, too. To compare
different materials, it is useful to relate the density by the material property needed for the
design like the yield stress or the E-modulus. For fibre reinforced plastics the material
properties, material design, production and failure modes are discussed
Chapter 4 focuses on the lightweight design principles. It is important to have the lightweight
design in mind during the whole design process from the definition of aim, the conceptual
searching, the designing up to the detail drawing. The influence on the lightweight design
is the largest at the begin of the design process.
The concept lightweight design, Chapter 4.1, motivate to consider the lightweight design in
the concept searching. Often continuous movements instead of cyclic movements give an
advantage. Modular structures fulfil only the required properties for different customers. In
mobile applications the used energy source and the power transmission are important
tasks.
The force lightweight design, Chapter 4.2, focuses on the force transfer and influences on
the maximum forces which has to be considered in the dimensioning. The force transfer
should be direct by tension or compression whereas bending should be reduced. Effort to
influence the maximum considered forces are main tasks for lightweight design by reduction
or limitation of forces or by reduction of excitations. Further a safety design can yield to a
realistic safety requirement.
The shape lightweight design, Chapter 4.3, is a classical topic of the designer. Especially
the cross section, like a T-beam or a hollow shaft, and the longitudinal design of beams
can be optimised for lightweight design. In the module design, the stiffening of sheet metal
structures, the differential resp. integral design or combination of it as well as the
composite structure design can give the designer ideas for his lightweight design. In the
system design the frame structure construction, the full wall construction and the shell
construction shows the range of design options, which should be used to optimize the mass.
Only a useful combination of material, production process and design, Chapter 4.4, results
in applicable lightweight design. Examples like tailored blank production, hydroforming,
preprag technology or additive manufacturing or joining technologies give examples of
production processes for the lightweight design.
The lightweight design is discussed in Chapter 5.1 for the chassis and tire design. The
suspension has to reduce the dynamic forces entering the car body. But the reduction of the
mass of the chassis is an important task to reduce energy consumption and increase the
properties because many suspension components are unsprung or rotating masses. Nice
lightweight designs are twist-beam axles or Mac Pherson suspensions. But the example
shows also a conflicts of lightweight design with other important tasks like handling
performance.
11
The tire transfers all forces from the car to the road and is the primary spring reducing the
excitation by the road roughness. The complexity of tire properties is discussed by the tire
friction coefficient, the slip rate and the cornering properties. A typical conflict in
lightweight design is the use of a spare wheel or alternative concepts, like tire repair kit or
runflat tires, for the case of a damaged, flat tire.
Crash structures, Chapter 5.2, are used in many applications of vehicles, machines,
packaging and hand-held equipment. In vehicle applications the requirements of passive
safety are quite complex. Examples of earth-moving machines and of cars are discussed. To
define the requirements accident statistics are of high relevance which describe the accident
scenarios. Simplified crash structure models can give first ideas to optimize the structure
design. After a first intuitive or analytical dimensioning, FE-simulations are necessary for
the optimisation due to the complexity and nonlinearity. The response surface method helps
to limit the necessary calculation effort. The crash absorber concepts have a large influence
on the specific energy absorption and has, therefore, potential for the lightweight design.
Analytic solutions for the mean force of free inversion, tapering and progressive buckling
gives the opportunity to optimize the lightweight design of those energy absorbing structures.
Outlook (Ausblick)
Due to environmental and climate problems and the limitation of resources the lightweight
design will be still a main focus in future developments.
The actual main progress (Fortschritt) bases on:
• New materials with advanced properties, especially fibre reinforced plastics and
advanced metal alloys,
• New production processes and joining processes and their automation to get higher
reliability (Zuverlässigkeit),
• Additive manufacturing, which enables new designs considering topology optimisation,
• Electrification and digitalisation of processes and components,
• Smart components which sense material failures and avoid damages,
• Adaptive solutions which solve conflicts of aims. Mechatronic solution can reduce the
complexity of previous only mechanical solutions, like active crash absorbers
combining complementary mean force requirements for pedestrian protection, car
repair cost for small velocities and occupant protection for high velocities, see Fig. 6-1.
But there are many other developments in a wide range of technical research impacting the
future lightweight design.

Fig. 6.1: Solutions for active crash structures with two different mean forces using
progressive buckling (left) or tapering (right) [Hartlieb, Nohr, Kröger, Popp]

12

You might also like