Search Results

Connectivity and artificial intelligence will be major features of many upcoming products. The need for accurate estimation of the state of these products and their operational environments, and, the intricacy of their decision, planning, and control algorithms, will cause unprecedented growth in their design complexity as well as their software content. The failures of complex software-intensive electronically controlled products of today can often be traced to the interfaces between different subsystems and to the intersection between different engineering disciplines, i.e., mechanical, electrical, and software. Experts who possess intuition regarding the failure modes and robust design of complex electronically controlled products are few and consequently, information management solutions that can help capture and reuse the product failure modes are crucial for delivering dependable, software-intensive products.

System dynamics modeling of complex processes such as product development, manufacturing, and service, is an efficient approach for assessing value potential of different business transformation alternatives at small and large enterprises. Process elements such as generation of concepts, detailed designs, pilot level plant trials, etc. can be modeled including first-pass work, testing and review, rework identification and defect fixing, along with release readiness, staffing, schedule pressures, overtime and many other business metrics. Enterprise level processes, with their complex logic loops, can be represented as a system of coupled nonlinear differential equations, whose solutions can reveal the intricate underlying dynamics. Design of experiments, performed on the system dynamics models representing the business processes, are an inexpensive way of gaining insights into the impact of interactions between the numerous process control variables.

Cars and trucks today are getting fitted with a large number of sensors in an effort to improve safety, comfort, fuel economy and emissions. The revenue from the automotive sensors market, driven by intense global competition and regulation, is expected to double over the next decade, while the size of the automotive sensors market, over the same period, is expected to triple. The field of sensor-fusion is highly multi-disciplinary, making use of technics from artificial intelligence, pattern recognition, digital signal processing, control theory, and statistical estimation. Sensor-fusion strategies based on probability theory, evidence theory, fuzzy theory, and possibility theory are being explored in different industries, e.g., defense, robotics, automotive, etc. The majority of sensor-fusion operators are based on optimistic assumptions about reliability of the information generated by the sensors.

A 2D model for vehicle-to-vehicle impact analysis that was presented in an earlier paper [1], has been used to study several two-vehicle frontal impacts with different incidence angles, frontal overlap offsets, and mass ratios. The impacts have been evaluated in terms of energy and momentum change in the bullet vehicle and the target vehicle. Based on comparisons between pre- and post-impact longitudinal, lateral, and angular components of kinetic energy, and linear and angular momenta, the impacts experienced by the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle have been classified as collinear or oblique. These results have been used to propose a definition of frontal impact based on vehicle kinematics during a crash.

The responses of the THOR and the Hybrid-III ATDs to head and neck loading due to a deploying air bag were investigated. Matched pair tests were conducted to compare the responses of the two ATDs under similar loading conditions. The two 50th percentile male ATDs, in the driver as well as the passenger positions, were placed close to the air bag systems, in order to enhance the interaction between the deploying air bag and the chin-neck-jaw regions of the ATDs. Although both ATDs nominally meet the same calibration corridors, they differ significantly in their kinematic and dynamic responses to interaction with a deploying air bag. The difference between the structural designs of the Hybrid-III's and the THOR's neck appears to result in significant differences in the manner in which the loads applied on the head are resisted.

Barrier impacts are routinely used to estimate the impact response of vehicles in vehicle-to-vehicle crashes. One area of investigation is the detection of the secondary energy absorbing structures provided for under-/over-ride mitigation as a result of increased structural engagement -- improved geometric compatibility. The flat rigid barrier and the Transportation Research Laboratory’s (TRL) full width honeycomb barrier are commonly considered. In the present study, a vehicle-to-vehicle impact that exhibited no under-/over-ride condition was compared to finite element analysis of vehicle impacts to the two different barriers in order to evaluate their ability to detect the secondary energy absorbing structure. This study demonstrates that the rigid barrier and the TRL barrier yield similar quantitative information with regard to vehicle-to-vehicle crashes.

A finite element model of the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL) honeycomb barrier, which is being proposed for use in vehicle compatibility studies, has been developed for use in LSDYNA. The model employs penalty parameters to enforce continuity between adjacent finite elements of the honeycomb barrier. Results of impact tests with indentors of various shapes and sizes were used to verify the performance of the computational model. Numerical simulations show reasonably good agreement with the test results.

While the Hybrid III anthropomorphic test device (ATD) family has experienced a lengthy period of development, and is an essential part of vehicle safety regulation, several issues associated with the ATD's head/neck design and the neck dynamic response due to airbag loading have been identified. As a result, the response of the Hybrid III neck under a number of airbag loading conditions could be an “artifact” of the ATD and not representative of the live human. One area of concern relates to the method of incorporating the human neck muscles into the neck response and how this affects the out-of-position (OOP) tests mandated in the new FMVSS 208. The results of a series of sled and OOP tests are presented in this paper to elaborate on the nature and the magnitude of the ATD's neck response “artifact”. In addition, the complication associated with balancing in-position and OOP requirements as a result of this “artifact” is highlighted.

This paper presents a 2D model for frontal vehicle-to-vehicle crashes that can be used for fleet modeling. It presents the derivational details and a preliminary assessment of the model. The model is based on rigid-body collision principles, enhanced adequately to represent energy dissipation and lateral engagement that plays a significant role in oblique frontal vehicle-to-vehicle crashes. The model employs the restitution and the apparent friction in order to represent dissipation and engagement respectively. It employs the impulse ellipse to identify the physical character of the crash, based on the principal directions of impulse. The enhancement of the rigid body collision model with restitution and apparent friction is based on collision simulations that use very simple finite element vehicle representations. The dependence of the restitution and the apparent friction on the incidence angle, the frontal offset, and the mass ratio, as predicted by the 2D model, has been presented.

The Hybrid III family of dummies is used to estimate the response of an occupant during a crash. One recent area of interest is the response of the neck during air bag loading. The biomechanical response of the Hybrid III dummy's neck was based on inertial loading during crash events, when the dummy is restrained by a seat belt and/or seat back. Contact loading resulting from an air bag was not considered when the Hybrid III dummy was designed. This paper considers the effect of air bag loading on the 5th percentile female Hybrid III dummies. The response of the neck is presented in comparison to currently accepted biomechanical corridors. The Hybrid III dummy neck was designed with primary emphasis on appropriate flexion and extension responses using the corridors proposed by Mertz and Patrick. They formulated the mechanical performance requirements of the neck as the relationship between the moment at the occipital condyles and the rotation of the head relative to the torso.

The paper presents a comparison between the acceleration pulses of vehicle-to-vehicle crash tests with those of different single-vehicle crash tests. The severity of the full frontal rigid barrier test is compared with that of the vehicle- to-vehicle crash test based on average acceleration and time-to-zero-velocity. Based on this a 30mph full frontal rigid barrier test is found equivalent to a 41mph vehicle-to-vehicle crash. A reduced speed of 22mph for full frontal rigid barrier test is found to represent vehicle-to- vehicle crashes with 50%-100% overlap, with each vehicle travelling at 30mph. The paper also presents a comparison of the acceleration pulses from different crash tests based on the pulse shape and the pulse phase cross-correlation. None of the single-vehicle crash tests have been found to resemble vehicle-to-vehicle crashes in terms of the pulse shape and the pulse phase.

A comparison of the NHTSA advanced dummy and the Hybrid III is presented in this paper based on their performance in repeated sled tests under 3 different restraint systems. The restraint systems considered are: the airbag alone, the 3-point belt alone, and a combined use of the airbag and the 3-point belt. Various time-histories pertaining to accelerations, angular velocities, deflections and forces have been compared between the two dummies in order to study their repeatability. The Hybrid III appears to be more repeatable than the NHTSA advanced dummy in its response in one case, that of restraint with the 3-point belt alone. The response of the NHTSA advanced dummy in other two restraint modes, the airbag alone and the combination of 3-point belt and airbag, appears to be no less repeatable than that of Hybrid III in this series of tests.

A comparison of the NHTSA advanced dummy, THOR, and the Hybrid III dummy is presented in this paper, based on their performance in four vehicle barrier tests, six HYGE sled tests and twenty two pendulum chest–impact tests. Various time–histories pertaining to accelerations, angular motions, deflections, forces and moments are compared between the two dummies in light of their design difference. In general, in the vehicle crash tests, the resultant head acceleration and chest deflection in THOR are greater than those in the HYBRID III. The shear, axial force and lateral moment in THOR's lumbar are less than those in the Hybrid III in frontal impacts. The differences in the head/chest acceleration and chest deflection could be due to the differences in the construction of the neck and the thorax of the THOR when compared to those of the Hybrid III. The THOR and the Hybrid III have the same level of repeatability in the rear impact sled tests.