Session07 ECS Werkhausen PDF

Copyright 2008 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved.
Optimization in Consideration of Fatigue Results

Shown by the Example of an Aircraft Landing Gear
System
MAGNAs Presence Worldwide *
Canada
56
USA
50
17
Mexico
23
S. America
W. Europe 74
24
E. Europe 11
S. Africa
238 Production
*As at March 2008
Asia Pacific 19
60 Engineering, R&D
Employees 83,000
Magna Powertrain Locations

Great Dunmow / GB
St Valentin / A
Head Office
Engineering Centers (9) Roitzsch / D
Production sites (38)
Sales Office
Biveres (Paris) / F
Joint Venture (Prod.)
Oberwaltersdorf / A
Albersdorf / A
Ilz/ A
Lannach / A
Benevento / I
North Sydney / CAN
Moscow / RUS
3x 2x Concord / CAN
Unionville / CAN
Woodbridge / CAN
Sterling Heights / USA
Lansing / USA
Muncie / USA
Howe / USA
Aurora / CAN
Seoul / ROK
Brampton / CAN
Asan / ROK
Rexdale / CAN
Cheonan / ROK
3x Mississauga / CAN
Tokyo / J
Syracuse / USA
2x New Delhi / IND
Detroit (Troy) / USA
Monterrey / MEX
2x Saltillo / MEX
Pune / IND
Shanghai / RC
Changzhou / RC
History
FEMFAT
Engineering Center STEYR Range of Services

System Integration
Product
Product Definition
Definition
Drivetrain
& Axle
Optimization
Optimization
Validation
Validation
Engineering
Functional
Functional Development
Development
Gearboxes,
Acoustics
Acoustics CVTs
Gearboxes,
CVTs
Manual
Product
Cost
Optimization
Product
Cost
Optimization
Commercial
Truck
Manual and
and automated
automated
transaxles
Production
Integration
Production Integration
transaxles
Engineering
Transfer
Transfer Cases
Cases
Axle
Drives
AxleDevelopment
Drives
Cab
Cab
Development
Chassis
Planetary
Wheel
Planetary
Wheel Hubs
Hubs
Development
Chassis
Development
Engineering
Engine
Beam
Axles
Beam Axles
Build
Prototype
Prototype
Build
Vehicle
Vehicle Testing
Testing
Engine
Engine Development
Development
& Testing
Simulation
Engine
Engine Components
Components
Development
Development
Services
Electronics
Electronics
Injection
Injection Systems
Systems
Structural
Analysis
Structural
Analysis
Vehicle
Engine
Integration
Engine
Integration
& Support
Software
Vehicle Simulation
Simulation
Strength
Marine
Engines
Marine
Engines
// Fatigue
StrengthFEMFAT
Fatigue Test
Test Lab
Lab
Measurement
Measurement Engineering
Engineering
Acoustics
Acoustics and
and Vibration
Vibration
CAD/CAM/PDM/PLM
Technology
CAD/CAM/PDM/PLM
Technology
Diagnostics
Diagnostics
Production
In
Low
Electrics
Electrics
Electronics
Electronics
Volumes
ECS
ECS Software
Software Products
Products
FEMFAT Local Stress Concept Crack Initiation

Stress Tensors
Material Properties
Stress Gradient
Mean Stress Influence
MultiAXial Load
Technological Influences
Size Influence
Temperature Influence
PLASTic Deformations
SPOT Joints s
Stress Amplitude
Application of specimen data to components

S/N1 modified
by FEMFAT
S/N material
from specimen tests
Load Cycles
Anisotropical Behaviour
of Arc WELDs
etc.
Finally : Component S/N curve including all influences
FEMFAT - Influence Factors

Mean Stress
Notch Influence
(Stress Gradient)
Thermo Mechanical
Temperature
Isothermal
Temperature
Surface Treatment
Surface Roughness
Plastic Fiber
Orientation
Statistic
Boundary Layer
Tempering
(for Tempering
Steel only)
Cast Micro
Structure
Effective
Plastic Strain
Technological
Size
Enhanced Optimization by using Fatigue Results
Classic Stress / Strain based

Optimization
FEM
Fatigue Based Optimization
Gray Cast Iron

Steel
optimal topology using only 30%

of the design spaces volume
FLP Based
Optimization
Optimization regarding fatigue
Start
FE-Model
Optistruct
Material
Life Solver
Damage,
Safety Factor
Adapted
FE-Model
Hyperstudy
Yes
New Design
Stop condition
fulfilled?
No
Process
controlled by the
optimzation tool
Multi axial fatigue analysis based on

modal approach
FE-Model
time
domain
frequency
domain
Dynamic Loads
Optistruct
Static Behavior
(Mean Stress)
Optistruct
(linear)
Mode Stresses
(real)
Mode Participation
Factors (complex)
Inverse Fourier
Transformation
FEMFATMAX
Endurance
Safety Factors
Optimization regarding fatigue Landing Gear
FEA Model
Design Variables (Shape Optimization)

Stress Based Optimization
Fatigue Based Optimization
Conclusion
FEA Model
FEA Model
Design Variables
Baseline
Design / Shape Variable
Enhanced Optimization Loop By

Using HyperStudy (Stress Based)
Hyper Study
FEM
Hyper Mesh / Optistruct
Shape optimization
Minimize maximum stress value in critical area
Optimization Study
(Stress Results)
Enhanced Optimization By
Objective definition:
Minimize stress values

(max. stress value from the critical node group)
Adaptive Response Surface method (HyperOpt)
Result design variables:
Stress Based Optimization (LC Braking)
Node 102153
Safety Factor:0.44
Baseline
Node 102153
v. Mises Stress: 762 MPA
Stress Based Optimization (LC Braking)
Node 102153
Safety Factor:0.48
Run 17
Node 102153
v. Mises Stress: 653 MPa
Using HyperStudy (Fatigue Based)
FEM
Hyper Mesh / Optistruct
Hyper Study
Optimization Study
(Fatigue Results Safety Factor)
Shape optimization
Minimize maximum stress value in critical area
Objective definition:
Maximize safety factor

(min. safety factor value from the critical node group)
Result design variables:
Fatigue Based Optimization (LC Braking)
Baseline
Safety Factor: 0.44
Fatigue Based Optimization (LC Braking)
Run 16
Safety Factor: 0.5
Summary
Baseline
Safety factor : 0.44
v. Mises stress : 762 MPa
Mass
: 133.00 kg
Stress based
Safety Factor : 0.48

+ 9%
Mass
: 133.67 kg
Fatigue based
Safety factor : 0.5

+ 13%
Mass
: 133.45 kg
Outlook
Including dynamic effects:

Basic FEM-model
Optistruct
Basic FEM-model
Optistruct
Life-Solver
Adapted
FEM-model
Motionsolve
Adapted
FEM-model
Controller
Life-Solver
New design
yes
Convergence
criteria reached
Enhanced
Optimization Loop
no
Controller
New design
yes
Convergence
criteria reached
no
Manual Approach
Attachment part
Damping 2%
Damping 6%
Eigenfrequency
Analysis
Impact Analysis
Transient Response
Frequency Response
6
5
4
acceleration [g]
3.0
2.5
2.0
1.5
acceleration [g]
acceleratio [g]
acceleration [g]
4.0
3.5
1.0
0.5
0.0
0.0
5.0
10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0
Representative
Collective
2
1
0
-1
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
-2
-3
frequency
freqency[Hz]
[Hz]
Stressdistribution
time
[s]
time [s]
(Quasi) Static Stress distribution

(Load at CG, component depending)
Fatigue
(FEMFAT)
Fatigue
(FEMFAT)
Total life time
Representative
Collective
Manual Approach: Spare wheel carrier (

=1%)
Beschl. x [g]
Beschl. y [g]
Beschll. z [g]
4,5
Acceleration [g]
4,0
3,5
3,0
2,5
2,0
1,5
1,0
0,5
350
Maximum
Stress
324
300
250
[N/mm2]
5,0
Stress component for each Eigenfrequency:
Von
Mises
Stress
Mises
Vergleichspannung
acceleration at frame: 0,18mm (harmonic, vertical)

response:
3,2g
(bracket outside)
200
150
100
50
30
27
9
0,0
0
10
15
20
Frequency [Hz]
25
30
35
21
0
1
Mode
1st Mode is dominant
Up to 2% modal damping stress combination

of different modes at the Eigenfrequencies is not necessary
Summary / Conclusion
Topology optimization leads to
global design
Shape optimization leads to
local design improvement
Integration of FEMFAT leads to improved optimization
results:
- adequate interpretation of static and dynamic loads
- consideration of load histories
- consideration of material properties
- many other influence factors can be considered
Summary / Conclusion
Last-Zeitverlauf
8000
6000
4000
Kraft [N]
+ enables consideration of
complex loads
2000
0
-2000
-4000
-6000
199
188
177
166
155
144
133
122
111
89
100
78
67
56
45
34
23
12
-8000
Zeitschritt [0,2s]
Seitenkraft F y
Aufstandskraft F z
Ult
R
=
+ enables consideration of
material properties
Lngskraft F x
+ enables proper cosideration of

static and dynamic load portion
Endu
5
4
2, 3
NEndu
+ allows consideration of durability, endurance and over loads

+ provides consideration of
many other influences e.g. welds, spot welds
- needs additional CPU-time
6, 7
Rp 0,2 Rm

Session07 ECS Werkhausen PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Session07 ECS Werkhausen PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Copyright 2008 Altair Engineering, Inc. Proprietary and Confidential. All rights reserved.

Optimization in Consideration of Fatigue Results

MAGNAs Presence Worldwide *

Magna Powertrain Locations

Engineering Center STEYR Range of Services

FEMFAT Local Stress Concept Crack Initiation

Mean Stress Influence

Application of specimen data to components

Finally : Component S/N curve including all influences

FEMFAT - Influence Factors

Enhanced Optimization by using Fatigue Results

Classic Stress / Strain based

Fatigue Based Optimization

Gray Cast Iron

optimal topology using only 30%

Optimization regarding fatigue

Multi axial fatigue analysis based on

Optimization regarding fatigue Landing Gear

Design Variables (Shape Optimization)

Design / Shape Variable

Enhanced Optimization Loop By

Minimize stress values

Adaptive Response Surface method (HyperOpt)

Adaptive Response Surface method (HyperOpt)

Stress Based Optimization (LC Braking)

Stress Based Optimization (LC Braking)

Maximize safety factor

Adaptive Response Surface method (HyperOpt)

Adaptive Response Surface method (HyperOpt)

Fatigue Based Optimization (LC Braking)

v. Mises Stress: 762 MPa

Fatigue Based Optimization (LC Braking)

v. Mises Stress: 640 MPa

Safety Factor : 0.48

Safety factor : 0.5

Including dynamic effects:

10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

(Quasi) Static Stress distribution

Total life time

Manual Approach: Spare wheel carrier (

Stress component for each Eigenfrequency:

acceleration at frame: 0,18mm (harmonic, vertical)

1st Mode is dominant

Up to 2% modal damping stress combination

+ enables proper cosideration of

+ allows consideration of durability, endurance and over loads

- needs additional CPU-time

You might also like