Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

Prelim Plan

...

Results

Iteration

Mass Setup

Mass Distribution

Scenarios

Max Stress

Figure #

Notes

1

No Mass

Side 60 Wall

64.193MPa

1

2

No Mass

Top 60 Wall

23.072MPa

2

Stress distribution looks a bit funky, see figure 3

3

No Mass

4

Only B.Box

Unchanged

Side 60 Wall

151.18MPa

4

5

Only B.Box

Unchanged

Top 60 Wall

56.273MPa

5

...

6

Only B.Box

See figure 6

Side 60 Wall

150.83MPa

7

Only B. Box, Pinball Region: all

149.63MPa

7

8

Same as above, pinball 750mm

150.48MPa

same max and min points as iteration 7

9

Same, pinball 250mm

149.71MPa

10

Same as above

Front 30 Wall

84.925MPa

9

11

Same as above, pinball 500mm

85.117MPa

same max and min as iteration 9

Expand
titleFigures

Figure 1: No mass, Side 60 Wall

Image Modified

Figure 2: No mass, Top 60 Wall

Image Modified

Figure 3: Top 60 Wall, odd result

Image Modified

Figure 4: Battery box only, Side 60 Wall

Image Modified

Figure 5: Battery box only, Top 60 Wall

Image Added

Figure 6: 17 Tube configuration

Image Added

Figure 7: results from figure 6, side 60 wall

Image Added

Figure 8: Iteration 7 results

Image Added

Figure 9: Front 30 wall with 17 tube distribution with 250mm pinball radius

Expand
titleFrom Kevin's suggestion, we will be seeing if changing mass distribution wrt tube selection changes anything

All mass distributed on all tubes vs. Specific mass distributed on respective tubes

Front 30 Wall - All mass on all tubes

Max = 359.41MPa

Image Added

Corresponding Mass Setup

Image Added

Front 30 - Realistic Mass

Max: 305.73MPa

Image Added

Conclusion: not a significant effect, 50MPa by drastically altering the weight distribution; but an effect nonetheless

...

Note, not sure how Tommy got the picture below (from chassis FEA advisors meeting)

...

This is what I get from the same sim in the same project: 2021-01-06(vehicle impact).wbpj

...