Testing of Trailer Coupling Devices Considering

Multiaxial Trailer Loads

LMS Conference
April 18
th
, 2007
Institute
Structural Durability
and System Reliability
S. Weiland
Institute
Structural Durability
and System Reliability
Page 2
Contents
Introduction
Guideline ECE R 55.01 in Comparison with Customer Usage
Standardized Load Sequence CARLOS TC
Usage of CARLOS TC at Fraunhofer LBF
Control and Monitoring of test
Summary and Perspective
Page 3
CARLOS TC (CAR LOading Standard, Trailer Coupling)
Consortium Participants
Car OEMs:
Adam Opel AG
Audi AG
BMW Group
DaimlerChrysler AG
Ford-Werke AG
Porsche AG
Skoda AG
Volkswagen AG
Volvo Car
Technical Control Boards:
RWTV Fahrzeug GmbH, Essen
TV Automotive, Mnchen
Suppliers:
AL-KO GmbH
Bosal Research
Karmann GmbH
MVG mbH
Oris Fahrzeugteile Hans Riehle GmbH
PD&E Automotive Solutions
Magna Steyr Fahrzeugtechnik
AG & Co KG
Westfalia Automotive GmbH & Co KG
Research Institutes:
Fraunhofer Institute for Structural Durability
LBF (project manager)
KATECH
(Korea Automotive Technology Institute)
Page 4
Introduction
Trailer coupling devices (TCD) are safety-critical components
Test for homologation of TCDs according to ECE R 55.01
Car manufacturers are testing with service loads similar to customer usage
Challenges:
- New testing procedure which is accepted by OEMs and suppliers
- Implementation of new testing procedure in the guideline ECE R 55.01
Page 5
Comparison of Guideline ECE R 55.01 and Customer Usage
Tests for the homologation of TCDs according to ECE R 55.01 are performed with
- sinusoidal loading
!1-dimensional loading (1-D)
!constant amplitudes (CA)
!no mean load (R = -1)
!without car-body
F
Fatigue relevant local stresses and strains on TCDs are depending on
- service loads
!3-dimensional loading (3-D)
!variable amplitudes (VA)
!variable mean loads (R ! -1)
!with car-body
Page 6
Uni- & Multiaxial Load Cycles to Failure
Uni- & Multiaxial Load:
- different cycles to failure with the same force amplitudes
Cycles to Failure N
M
a
x
i
m
u
m

F
o
r
c
e

F
m
a
x
uniaxial load
fatigue life curve uniaxial load
fatigue life curve multiaxial load;
partly correlated phase
multiaxial load;
partly correlated phase
Page 7
Load Cycles to Failure
Points of Crack Initiation
T
o
r
s
i
o
n
a
l
M
o
m
e
n
t
Constant Amplitude Testing Type of Failure
CA-Testing:
- type of failure depends
on load amplitude
Page 8
Mean Load - Cycles to Failure
Cycles to Failure N
S
t
r
e
s
s

A
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e

"
a
axial loading
Strain Amplitude "
a
time
R = "
u
/ "
o
400 N/mm
2
Mean Load:
- different cycles to failure with same load amplitude
R = # R = -1
Page 9
Currently used guideline ECE R 55.01
The ECE R 55.01 guideline:
- sinusoidal loading
!1-dimensional loading (1-D)
!constant amplitudes (CA)
!no mean load (R = -1)
!Durability assessment is critical with respect to:
- type of failure
- cycles to failure
F
Improvement:
Testing procedure oriented on 3-D service loads captures
failure types and life time typical in service.
Page 10
Derivation of a Testing Procedure based on Service Loads
Input:
42 verification tests / measurements from OEMs
Signal analysis:
verifications, normalizations, correlations, load spectra
Derivation of 3 Modules:
based on representative 22 load segments
Testing Procedure:
damage sums, duration (< 150 h), frequencies, max. amplitudes
CARLOS TC:
duration: ~ 92 h, module mix: 10*[5*(10*M1+M2)+M3]
Page 11
CARLOS TC Distributions of Test-Modules M1, M2, M3
and whole Test-Procedure: 10*(5*(10*M1+M2)+M3)
1 10 100 1000 10000 100000 1E+06 1E+07
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
Longitudinal Force F
x
Number of Level Crossings
M1, 12% omission
M2, 12% omission
M3, 12% omission
CARLOS TC
Test modules 1, 2 and 3
derived from 22 load segments.
Module 1:
incl. moderate service loads
Module 2:
incl. severe service loads
Module 3:
incl. exceptional loads
F
o
r
c
e

F
x
/

D
Page 12
Current EC Homologation Test ECE R 55.01 (1-D, CA) and
CARLOS Trailer Coupling (Realistic loading: 3-D, VA)
[kN]
) m m (
m m
g D
T V
T V
$
%
% & m
V
= vehicle mass
m
T
= trailer mass
ECE R 55.01
ECE R 55.01
ECE R 55.01
F
x
ECE R 55.01
F
z
Number of load cycles
F
o
r
c
e

(
a
m
p
l
i
t
u
d
e
)

/

D
CARLOS TC
F
z
CARLOS TC
F
y
CARLOS TC
F
x
Page 13
0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 2
0.003
0.13
0.5
1
2
5
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
90
95
98
99
99.5
99.87
99.997
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y

%
Comparison of Damage-Equivalent Amplitudes
ECE R 55.01, Scatter Bands of 42 Verification Tests, CARLOS TC
Damage Equivalent Amplitude F
x
/D, F
y
/D, F
z
/D
P
r
o
b
a
b
i
l
i
t
y
,

%
Calibration for test with bodies
CARLOS TC (Fx
CARLOS TC (Fy
CARLOS TC (Fz
94/20/EC (Fx)
94/20/EC (Fz)
Fx, Verific Test
Fy, Verific Test
Fz, Verific Test
ECE R 55.01 (Fx)
ECE R 55.01 (Fz)
Page 14
CARLOS TC Rainflow Matrices for Whole Test (Car Body)
F
x
F
y
F
z
Number of
Cycles
F
r
o
m

B
i
n
,

F
o
r
c
e
/
D
To Bin, Force/D
Longitudinal Force Lateral Force Vertical Force
Page 15
CARLOS TC Display of Fictitious Damage Values Using the
Load Influence Sphere
0.1 0.5 1.0
L
a
t
e
r
a
l

F
o
r
c
e
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

F
o
r
c
e
Longitudinal Force Longitudinal Force Lateral Force
Normalized fictitious
damage value
(S-N curve: k = 5)
V
e
r
t
i
c
a
l

F
o
r
c
e
Page 16
Ratio of Fictitious Damage Values D
fict
- CARLOS TC vs. ECE R
55.01
CTC115 / ECE R 55.01
[%]
>1000
400
200
100
50
25
<10
y
z
x
z
01 . 55 _
_
' '
'
&
R ECE fict
TC CARLOS fict
rel
D
D
D
k = 5
Miner elementary
F
x
, F
z
(M
y
): ECE R 55.01 is much more
severe than CARLOS TC
F
y
(M
x
, M
z
): CARLOS TC is much more
severe than ECE R 55.01
uni-axial testing procedure
leads to unrealistic damage distribution
D
rel
Page 17
Multiaxial Test-Rig for Trailer Coupling Devices of
Passenger Cars and Light Trucks at Fraunhofer LBF (D
max
=17kN)
Page 18
Spring/Damper Replacements
Page 19
Iteration Process at Test Rig (1)
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
N
]
Time [s]
Desired Signal: Vertical Force F
z
Response Signal: Vertical Force F
z
Iteration Number
S
t
a
t
i
s
t
i
c
s
[
%
]
1-Damage_Response, 3, F
x
2-Stats_ResponseMax, 3, F
x
3-Stats_ResponseMin, 3, F
x
4-Stats_RMSError, 3, F
x
4 3 2 1 0
0 %
00 %
Page 20
Iteration Process Test Rig Using (2)
Frequency [Hz]
P
o
w
e
r
-
S
p
e
c
t
r
a
l
-
D
e
n
s
i
t
y
[
k
N
2
/
H
z
]
Desired Signal: Vertical Force F
z
Response Signal: Vertical Force F
z
F
o
r
c
e

[
k
N
]
Cycles
Desired Signal: Vertical Force F
z
Response Signal: Vertical Force F
z
Page 21
Monitoring of Tests
Results:
100 100 100
112,26
102,36
103,58
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
F
x
F
y
F
z
[
%
]
Damage of desired signal
Damage of response signal
D
a
m
a
g
e
[
%
]
Page 22
Test Results Failure at Rear Light House
Page 23
Test Results Failure at Boot Bottom
Page 24
Test Results Failure at Wheelhouse
Page 25
CARLOS TC Summary and Perspective
Development of safety-critical components requires consideration
of service loading
Legal requirement ECE R 55.01 does not take into account current
durability sign-off tests of car manufacturers (service loads)
CARLOS TC:
- considers 3-D service loads
- failures are similar to failures at proving-ground
- reduces development loops with physical prototypes
Planned: integration of CARLOS TC in ECE R 55.01
LBF provides test facility according to CARLOS TC requirements
Page 26
Used Software-Tools
LMS.Tecware:
signal processing, rainflow counting, calculation of damage impact
LMS.Tecware / RainEdit:
editing of rainflow matrices, super-positioning of rainflow matrices
LMS.Tecware / CombiTrack:
schedule of load modules (optimized histogram)
LMS.Falancs:
fatigue assessment based on FEA (stress approach)
Page 27
Thank you for your kind attention!