Sie sind auf Seite 1von 8
Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat: https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280625785 Simulation

Seediscussions,stats,andauthorprofilesforthispublicationat:https://www.researchgate.net/publication/280625785

ConferencePaper in SAETechnicalPapers·September2011

DOI:10.4271/2011-28-0129

CITATIONS

2

READS

371

4authors,including:

CITATIONS 2 READS 371 4authors ,including: MohammedBillalKamal

IndepthEngineeringSolutions,Troy,MI,UnitedStates

10 PUBLICATIONS 7 CITATIONS

AllcontentfollowingthispagewasuploadedbyMohammedBillalKamalon14March2017.

Theuserhasrequestedenhancementofthedownloadedfile.

M20100261

Simulation and Test Correlation of Wheel Impact Test

Mohammed Billal K, Vinothkumar S, Sabarinathan Srinivasan and AnilKumar Nesarikar

Chrysler India Automotive Pvt. Ltd, Chennai, India.

Copyright © 2011 SAE INDIA

ABSTRACT

The wheel impact test evaluates wheel structural performance for a typical lateral curb impact event occurring in passenger cars and light trucks. This test which is as per SAE J -175 standard has a striker dropped from a specified height on to a fixture mounted wheel-tire assembly. This impact test performance is critical to meeting overall structural performance for the wheel. There are many processes and methods available to simulate impact tests using FE analysis and in this study, certain existing methods are fine tuned to facilitate improved correlation with aforementioned lab test. Abaqus explicit is used in the simulation process and FE analysis-test correlation is achieved within 3% (strain gauge measurements). The improved method closely captures the behavior of the wheel during and after impact including capturing the variation of bolt pretension during the impact test. The wheel width before and after impact is another parameter used to compare analysis and test results. Further, the contribution of impact load between the wheel and tire is studied, to support the modeling strategy used in this new method.

INTRODUCTION

The cast aluminum wheel plays a key role in automotive industries. The wheel is one of the critical components of the vehicle and it has to withstand the road loads and meet the safety requirements. In order to meet structural performance, the automotive industry has defined three major tests for the wheel including Corner Fatigue Test (CFT), Radial Fatigue Test (RFT) and Impact Test. In CFT, where the wheel-disc structural characteristics are critical, the wheel is subjected to a constant rotating bending moment, while in RFT, the wheel and tire are radially loaded against the constantly rotating drum. In both cases, the wheel has to complete the minimum number of test cycles without any damage. The impact test, whereas, evaluates the impact damage on the wheel, when the wheel hits a curb.

Using CAE simulation, we can significantly reduce the test timings and cost for a wheel’s prototype development. Various methods and processes can be used for the simulation of wheel impact test [1-3]. It is typically difficult to capture the strain history during the

impact event, but in this study, the stain history curve is captured and compared to the lab test results. The ABAQUS explicit solver has been used to enhance accuracy of the impact simulation.

SAE J175 FOR WHEEL IMPACT TEST

The SAE recommended practice is to establish minimum performance requirements and test procedures for evaluating axial curb impact collision properties of all wheels intended for use on passenger cars and light trucks.

TEST SET-UP

The impact load is applied to the rim flange of a wheel- tire assembly. The wheel-tire assembly is mounted at an angle of 13º to the horizontal plane so that the striker impacts the outer bead radius of the rim near the air valve hole. The striker impact face has to be at least 125mm wide and at least 375 mm long. Fig.1 shows the Impact Loading Test Machine set-up.

mm long. Fig.1 shows the Impact Loading Test Machine set-up. Fig. 1 Impact Loading Machine –

Fig. 1 Impact Loading Machine SAE J175

The wheel and tire assembly are mounted on the wheel mount fixture and its dimensions are shown in Fig. 2

Four natural rubber mounts are used in fixture to absorb the impact load and their hardness is equal to 50 shore. The vertical deflection in the wheel mount fixture shall be 7.5mm ± 10% at the mid-span of the beam, when a vertical mass of 1000kg is applied at the center of wheel mount. All pivot joints in the fixture should be free to rotate.

All pivot joints in the fixture should be free to rotate. Fig. 2 Wheel Hub Fixture

Fig. 2 Wheel Hub Fixture SAE J175

TEST PROCEDURE

The wheel-tire assembly is mounted on the wheel hub fixture with a bolt torque of 115N-m ± 7 N-m. The tubeless tire is inflated with pressure of 35psi. The setup consists of a striker of 610Kg mass with125mm width. The striker is dropped from a height of 230mm ± 2mm above the highest part of the rim flange.

The failure criteria for the impact test are,

1. Visible fracture penetrating through a section of the center member of the wheel assembly.

2. Separation of the center member from the rim.

3. Total loss of air pressure within one minute after impact.

4. Deformation of the wheel assembly, or fixtures in the area of the rim section contacted by the face plate of weight system, does not constitute a failure.

5. If it is suspected that failure results from subsequent impacts caused by the mass rebounding or the mass testing on the tire, means should be employed to capture the mass after first impact. Only one impact is intended.

LABORATORY SETUP

The Impact Loading Machine and the wheel hub mount are designed as per the SAE specifications. The wheel mount fixture is calibrated for the 7.5 mm vertical deflection. There are four strain gauges (A, B, C and D) mounted on top of the wheel spoke region and two strain gauges (E and F) are mounted on bottom of the wheel spoke region as shown in Fig. 3. These mounting regions are selected from the initial CAE simulation. The strain gauge B and C have high strain limits.

The strain gauge B and C have high strain limits. Fig. 3 Strain Gauge Locations FINITE

Fig. 3 Strain Gauge Locations

FINITE ELEMENT MODEL

The finite element model consists of the wheel-tire assembly, the wheel mount fixture and striker mass as shown in the Fig. 4

assembly, the wheel mount fixture and striker mass as shown in the Fig. 4 Fig. 4

Fig. 4 CAE Model Setup for Wheel Impact

TIRE CONSTRUCTION

The tire plays a vital role in transferring the load from the striker to wheel during impact test. The tire modeling is complex involving several components in the assembly requiring accurate material representation. The different components of tire are shown in Fig. 5. The Tire treads are in contact with the road surface and provides the traction. The side-wall of the tire is a bridge between the tread and bead. It provides lateral stability in tires, protects the body plies and also keeps air from escaping. The tire is in contact with the wheel at the bead region where the beads are reinforced with bead wire. The radial tires have steel belts, which are used to reinforce the area under the tread. They provide puncture resistance and also help the tire maintain optimum contact with the road surface. The body plies are made up of several layers of fabric using polyester cords. This cords in a radial tire run perpendicular to the tread and are coated with rubber to help them bond with the other components.

with rubber to help them bond with the other components. Fig. 5 Tire Components A 17inch

Fig. 5 Tire Components

A 17inch tubeless radial tire has been used in the current study. The FE model is constructed using hexahedral and beam elements. Hexahedral elements are used to model the tread, sidewall and bead wire (Fig. 6). The belt and carcass are modeled using beam elements. Tread and side wall use rubber properties, the bead wire and belt use steel and the carcass ply is modeled using polyester.

use steel and the carcass ply is modeled using polyester. Fig. 6 Finite Element model of

Fig. 6 Finite Element model of Tire

The tire is assumed to have linear material behavior for the current study. The tire normal force deflection is validated as per the SAE J2704 testing. The rubber material properties are fine tuned to correlate the FE model tire vertical stiffness (F-d) profile with the test profile as shown in Fig. 7.

Displacement 
Displacement 

Fig. 7 Comparison of Tire F-D Curve: FE vs. Test

WHEEL-TIRE ASSEMBLY

The wheel FE model is constructed using higher order

tetrahedral elements as shown in Fig. 8. Aluminum alloy (A356) material is used to represent the wheel and the elasto-plastic material model uses isotropic, homogeneous and temperature-independent properties. The yield stress is 232Mpa and the strain at break is

0.09.

The yield stress is 232Mpa and the strain at break is 0.09. Fig. 8 Finite Element

Fig. 8 Finite Element Model of Wheel

WHEEL MOUNTING FIXTURE

The wheel mounting fixture and rubber mounts are modeled using hexahedral elements as shown in Fig. 9. Revolute joint is used to represent the pivot joints. Hyper-elastic rubber material model is used for the rubber mounts while bolts and frames use steel. The links/interfaces within the fixture assembly and the striker- tire/wheel interface are all modeled with

appropriate

contacts

and

penalty

parameters

within

is used. The mass of the striker is 615Kg as per the

ABAQUS.

standard shown in Fig. 4.

is 615Kg as per the ABAQUS. standard shown in Fig. 4. Fig. 9 Finite Element Model

Fig. 9 Finite Element Model of Wheel Mount Fixture

The fixture is calibrated as per the SAE J175 standard. A linear static analysis is done for the vertical load of 1000Kg applied on the wheel mounting hub, and the vertical deflection is measured at the center of the steel beam (Fig.10). From the FE Analysis, the vertical deflection at the center of the beam (7.3mm) is found to be well within the range of SAE standard of 7.5 mm ± 10% as shown in Fig. 11.

range of SAE standard of 7.5 mm ± 10% as shown in Fig. 11. Fig. 10

Fig. 10 Load application on Wheel Mount Fixture

in Fig. 11. Fig. 10 Load application on Wheel Mount Fixture Fig. 11 Wheel Mount Fixture

Fig. 11 Wheel Mount Fixture - Deflection

STRIKER MODEL

The mesh model of the striker is constructed with hexahedral elements and a steel linear material property

WHEEL IMPACT FE ANALYSIS

ABAQUS-Explicit solver is used to carry out the nonlinear dynamic simulation using three sequential steps: bolt preload simulation, followed by tire inflation and finally the striker impact loading.

BOLT PRELOAD SIMULATION

Usually, the bolt preload is simulated [1] as a quasi-static process. The explicit process is based on the wave propagation theory, so the bolt preload is simulated dynamically. Contacts are defined between the bolt, wheel and the fixture hub interfaces. A connector element is used to monitor the bolt force, the relative displacement between the bolt threads and the nut threads. The bolt force in the connector element is initially treated as a negative force to pull the bolt threads toward the nut threads as shown in Fig. 12. After the bolt force reaches the magnitude of the desired bolt preload as per the tightening torque, the connector element displacement is locked and the bolt load is removed. As a result, the applied bolt load is converted from a surface force to a self-limiting body force. By using this method, it is easy to incorporate the bolt preload into the subsequent dynamic simulations of tire inflation and the wheel impact.

dynamic simulations of tire inflation and the wheel impact. Fig. 12 Bolt Preload Setup TIRE INFLATION

Fig. 12 Bolt Preload Setup

TIRE INFLATION LOAD

Fully inflated Tire pressure is applied to the tire inner wall and inner rim top as shown in the Fig. 13.

Fig. 13 Tire Inflation ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES The wheel impact sequential load of the bolt preload,

Fig. 13 Tire Inflation

ANALYTICAL PROCEDURES

The wheel impact

sequential load of the bolt preload, tire inflation and the striker impact.

simulated by applying the

is

Step I: Bolt preload: The bolt preload equivalent to the bolt tightening torque is applied for the first 10 millisecs as shown in Fig. 14and the striker impact. simulated by applying the is Step II: Tire inflation: The fully inflated

Step II: Tire inflation: The fully inflated tire pressure is applied inside the tire and wheel surface for the next 10 millisecs (Fig. 14)is applied for the first 10 millisecs as shown in Fig. 14 Step III: Wheel Impact:

Step III: Wheel Impact: As per SAE J-175 standard, the striker mass (615Kg) falls from 230mm height. In CAE, striker is kept at 54mm height. This height is calculated (from eq. 2) so that the impact loading occurs in correct timing sequence after bolt preload and tire inflation loading. The initial velocity is calculated as shown below and applied to the striker.tire and wheel surface for the next 10 millisecs (Fig. 14) The initial velocity (V o

The initial velocity (V o ) is calculated by equation,

V o =

velocity (V o ) is calculated by equation, V o = (1) Where g = Acceleration

(1)

Where g = Acceleration due to gravity and h = Impact height.

The time (t) taken for impact is calculated by equation,

T =

The time (t) taken for impact is calculated by equation, T = (2) Where g =

(2)

Where g = Acceleration due to gravity and h = Impact height.

In first step, the bolt pre-load and tire inflation will be completed within the duration of 20 millisecs. Impact will start 7.1 millisecs after first step (as per eq. 2). This allows the impact to follow immediately after the inflation. The time versus amplitude curve for explicit run is shown in the Fig. 14.

amplitude curve for explicit run is shown in the Fig. 14. Fig. 14 Amplitude Curve for

Fig. 14 Amplitude Curve for Explicit Run

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

From the laboratory impact test, the principle strains are measured at six locations A, B, C, D, E and F (Ref Fig. 3). During the impact test, the strain gauges A and E are damaged. In CAE model, the principal strains are measured in the appropriate locations in the wheel for B, C, D and F. Since locations B, C and D are in the top layer of the wheel spoke region, they go into tension during impact and experience maximum principal strain. The location E at the bottom of the wheel spoke region goes into compression and experiences minimum principal strain. From the strain curve, it is observed that the first impact happens with the compression of the rubber mount, and then load is transferred to the wheel with the second impact. This phenomenon is captured closely in CAE simulation with accurate representation of the wheel mount fixture. The principal strain value and curve trend from CAE simulation correlates very well with the laboratory test for the location B, C, D and F as shown in the Fig. 15. Test-CAE correlation of maximum principal strain is achieved within 3% (Table 1).

correlation of maximum principal strain is achieved within 3% (Table 1). (a) Principal Strain comparison at

(a) Principal Strain comparison at Location-B

(b) Principal Strain comparison at Location-C (c) Principal Strain comparison at Location-D (d) Principal Strain

(b) Principal Strain comparison at Location-C

(b) Principal Strain comparison at Location-C (c) Principal Strain comparison at Location-D (d) Principal Strain

(c) Principal Strain comparison at Location-D

at Location-C (c) Principal Strain comparison at Location-D (d) Principal Strain comparison at Location-F Fig. 15

(d) Principal Strain comparison at Location-F

Fig. 15 Time (sec) Vs. Principal Strain comparison

Table 1 Principal Strain comparison FEA vs. Test

Strain

     

% of

Gauge

Principal Strain

Test

FEA

Dev.

B

Max. Prin. Strain

0.0177

0.018

1%

C

Max. Prin. Strain

0.0187

0.0192

3%

D

Max. Prin. Strain

0.0105

0.0104

-1%

F

Mini. Prin. Strain

-0.0107

-0.0107

0%

After the impact test, the wheel rim width is measured in the lab and found to be 203.4 mm, where the original length is 205.3 mm. From the CAE simulation, the value of the deformed rim width was found to be 203.9 mm

which is close to the lab measurement as shown in the Fig. 16.

is close to the lab measurement as shown in the Fig. 16. Fig. 16 Wheel Rim

Fig. 16 Wheel Rim Width Measurement

The impact load contribution between the wheel and tire is studied from the CAE simulation by monitoring the contact forces in the wheel and tire interface as shown in Fig. 17. The tire contribution is around 10% of the impact load, whereas the wheel contribution is 90% to the total impact load.

the wheel contribution is 90% to the total impact load. Fig. 17 Time Verses Contact Force

Fig. 17 Time Verses Contact Force

The bolt preload variations are monitored with the connector force during the impact as shown in the Fig. 18. The bolt preload decreases in the bolt 1 and 2, which experience compression during impact. The bolt preload is increases in bolt 4 and 5, which are subjected to tension. Bolt 3 experiences minor variation, since it is located in the mid-plane along the loading direction.

Fig. 18 Time Verses Blot Force CONCLUSION This study presents a FE methodology to simulate

Fig. 18 Time Verses Blot Force

CONCLUSION

This study presents a FE methodology to simulate the wheel impact which correlates well with laboratory testing as per SAE J175 standard. The process captures the dynamic behavior of the tire-wheel system during and after impact. The most critical points in the methodology are, the development of the FE models for tire & the wheel mounting fixture and the bolt preload simulation using ABAQUS explicit scheme.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We would like to acknowledge the support extended by Synergies Castings Ltd., Visakhapatnam for the laboratory testing and Mahesh Software Systems, Pune for strain gauge measurements.

REFERENCES

1. SAE J175, Wheel Impact Test procedure, Road Vehicles, SAE International, Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice, SEP2003.

2. SAE J2704, Tire Normal Force/Deflection and Gross Footprint Dimension Test, SAE International, Surface Vehicle Recommended Practice, JAN2005.

3. Chia-Lung Chang, Shao-Huei Yang, Simulation of wheel impact test using finite element method”, ELSEVIER, Engineering Failure Analysis, 2009.

4. Tsu-te Wu, “Structural Analyses of Fuel Casks Subjected to Bolt Preload, Internal Pressure and Sequential Dynamic Impacts”, 50th Annual INMM Meeting, 2009.

5. E. Duni, G. Monfrino, R. Saponaro, M. Caudano and F. Urbinati, “Numerical Simulation Of Full Vehicle Dynamic Behaviour Based On The Interaction Between Abaqus/Standard And Explicit Codes”, FIAT Auto Spa, Torino, Italy.

6. Kocabicak U, Firat M, “Numerical analysis of wheel cornering fatigue tests”, Engineering Failure Analysis, 2001.

7. ABAQUS / Explicit User’s Manual 6.10 Version,

2010.