Reviewing Sheet Metal Solution

 

Logistics Information

Conducted By

Tommy Tran

Date

2021-07-16

Quick Links

Chassis Reinforcement Attempt 1 meeting - Mechanical - Confluence (atlassian.net)

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1B2brtRLK9Q83bQ87CmbALqR1k8uJYuV-0p5O8A_-x6Q/edit

https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1QQaFrP_eXH-VLmBz8twwj8uvzSL7mxke4xi0hvFKOWw/edit#slide=id.ge4b8a20e23_0_27

Working Session Goals

  1. Review sheet metal solution FEA that was completed by Min

  2. Review previous Chassis simulations completed by Jason (MS14) and Matt, Shalin (MS12)

  3. Try to insert current sheet metal model into old simulation setups to see if results will change

  4. Investigate sheet metal solution by using a single sheet metal that is similar to BP (bonded to all tubes), but make it out of steel instead of composites

  5. Reinforcement Rev 2.0

 

1. Reviewing Sheet Metal Solution FEA

Simulation File Details

Simulation File Details

Folder Path

D:\Users\Roo\Documents\GrabCAD\MSXIV sims\MS-CHASSIS\Spring 2021 Reinforcement Sims

File Name

July1_TommyRev.wbpj

 

Section Reviewed

Notes

Section Reviewed

Notes

ACP (Pre)

Engineering Data

  • Material data seems ordinary

  • 4130 Chromoly - Yield Strength - 435 MPa

  • Structural Steel - Yield Strength - 250 MPa

Geometry

  • Note: When Kimberly was working on collision setup, she found that the tube elements weren’t all properly connected

  • Using the Prepare > Beams > Connect feature, it is shown that not all beam elements are connected properly. This may have been fixed when contacts were later applied under ACP (Pre) Model Setup, but efforts will be placed to correct these errors right now.

Figure 1. Maximum Distance set to 20 mm show these gaps
  • After modifying the beam elements, number of gaps have greatly reduced

Figure 2. After Modification. Maximum Distance Set to 20 mm

Model

  • Contacts have been automatically generated for all bodies

    • Contacts are all bonded

    • This can cause error or inaccuracy because this results in contacts being formed between objects that are actually not in contact.

    • FIX: Create automatic connections with specific bodies in mind. Use manual contact regions if necessary.

      • E.g. A separate connection group for gussets, bulkheads

    • Note: I still feel some uncertainty regarding how to fully check that all the correct contacts have been made in a time efficient manner (as opposed to checking every single contact).

      • Soln: check every suspicious tube

      • Double Soln: Run the simulation and check if tubes deform weirdly. If they do, it’s probably because it has been unreasonably contacted.

  • Mesh size: 15 mm

Setup

  • This is the standard stackup for A, B, C bulkheads

  • The fibres in the ModelingGroup.Ply are showing up correctly

Collision Scenario

FEA Meeting (Max S. - MPa)
Link

New Result (Max S. - MPa)

August 21, 2021

2 Passenger (Max S. - MPa)

August 21, 2021

Collision Scenario

FEA Meeting (Max S. - MPa)
Link

New Result (Max S. - MPa)

August 21, 2021

2 Passenger (Max S. - MPa)

August 21, 2021

B Pillar

509

407

351

Side 60

1231

829

648

Top 30

1595

1700

1374

2. Review Previous Chassis Simulations

I don’t think this is worth the time.

Better to focus on current solution

MS14

MS12

3. Inserting Current Solution into Old FEA Setups

I don’t think this is worth the time.

Better to focus on current solution

4. Sheet Metal Inquiry

I don’t think this is worth the time.

Better to focus on current solution

5. Rev 2.0

Collision Scenario

Stress Results (Max S. - MPa)
Rev 2.0

2 Passenger

Collision Scenario

Stress Results (Max S. - MPa)
Rev 2.0

2 Passenger

B Pillar

478

Side 60

650

Top 30

1667

I added a reinforcement in the middle to see if it lowers stresses because it would distribute forces more.

It was found that stresses were the same or increased.

It was also found that some scenarios had the reinforcements suppressed for some reason.

 

Reconsidering how the fixed boundaries and accelerations are done.

 

I also played around with the masses. Observations based on Top 30. One of our worst cases.

With all masses suppressed, stresses are below 415 MPa (max 350 ish)

If only front 2 passengers is enabled, it reaches like 1000 MPa.

With only battery box enabled, it reaches like 700 MPa.

I believe how we assign the mass is greatly influencing the stresses.
The current geometry assignments for mass are very concentrated.

When we had the bottom panel, the faces on its surface could be used as geometry assignment which distributed the mass vastly.

6. Rev 3.0 - Surfaces for distributed masses

Collision Scenario

Stress Results (Max S. - MPa)
Rev 3.0

All loads

Collision Scenario

Stress Results (Max S. - MPa)
Rev 3.0

All loads

B Pillar

638

Side 60

946

Top 30

2021

All these stresses are higher than the 1.0 setup mentioned in step 1.

It is worth noting that the surface used was 1 inch thickness using foam density meaning there is extra mass.

Although it does seem to prove that surfaces do not have a major effect in reducing stresses.

 

7. Notes for Later

Stackup of A, B, C Bulkheads for Min’s sheet metal solution FEA
Purpose: Put really thin layers in the explorative FEA (step 4)