Although the electric vehicles (EVs) have become the main development of the automotive industry, there is still very limited knowledge about the design method of EVs’ body structure. This paper substantially increases this limited knowledge by developing an EV’s aluminum alloy body frame structure design (EVFD) method based on battery arrangements. The main concept of the EVFD approach is the development of the parametric knowledge base to facilitate performance driven design of body structure in concept design stage, including the battery sub-libraries designed by vehicle power performances and the modular body frame structure sub-libraries and cross section of profile sub-libraries designed by structure performances. The layout of vehicle is firstly determined based on battery volume which calculated on the basis of power performance of EVs. And then, the body frame structures are designed by multi-load topology optimization and multi-objective parametric optimization based on the body structure performance, considering the battery layout and its mass distribution. The developed body structure knowledge base is screened through comparing their structural mechanical properties. The feasibility and accuracy of selected EV’s aluminum alloy body frame structure is verified by experiment. In this paper, the case study demonstrates that the proposed EVFD method based on battery arrangement can be effectively used to design aluminum alloy body frame structure of EVs, which provides a reference to other EV’s body structure design. Due to the performance driven design concept employed, the designed body structure for EV meets the requirements of lightweight, dynamic performance, and structural mechanical properties.
KumarMSRevankarST. Development scheme and key technology of an electric vehicle: an overview. Renew Sustain Energ Rev2017; 70: 1266–1285.
2.
XiongHTanZZhangR, et al. Numerical calculation model performance analysis for aluminum alloy mortise-and-tenon structural joints used in electric vehicles. Compos Part B Eng2019; 161: 77–86.
3.
GaoFLinCWangW, et al. Multi-objective optimization design for a battery pack of electric vehicle with surrogate models. J Vibroeng2016; 18: 2343–2358.
4.
FriedrichLSchröderKU. Discrepancy between boundary conditions and load introduction of full-scale built-in and sub-scale experimental shell structures of space launcher vehicles. Thin-Walled Struct2016; 98: 403–415.
5.
TangYYuanWPanM, et al. Experimental investigation on the dynamic performance of a hybrid PEM fuel cell/battery system for lightweight electric vehicle application. Appl Energy2011; 88: 68–76.
6.
LiuHLeiYFuY, et al. Parameter matching and optimization for power system of range-extended electric vehicle based on requirements. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020; 234: 3316–3328.
7.
RocheMSabriàDMammettiM. An accessible pre-design calculation tool to support the definition of EV components. World Electr Veh J2015; 7: 101–113.
8.
MammettiMRocheA. The development of the online tool for the definition of the powertrain’s components requirements for electric vehicles within the ELVA project. SAE technical paper 2014-36-0233, 2014.
9.
DavilaARemeroERocheM, et al. The ELVA project’s EV design support tool. SAE technical paper 2014-01-1967, 2014.
10.
ZhangLLiLQiB, et al. Parameters optimum matching of pure electric vehicle dual-mode coupling drive system. Sci China Technol Sci2014; 57: 2265–2277.
11.
RedelbachMKlötzkeMFriedrichHE. Impact of lightweight design on energy consumption and cost effectiveness of alternative powertrain concepts. In: European electric vehicle congress (EEVC), Brussel, 2012, pp.19-22.
12.
ChristensenJBastienCBlundellM, et al. Lightweight hybrid electrical vehicle structural topology optimisation investigation focusing on crashworthiness. Int J Veh Struct Syst2011; 3: 113–122.
13.
ZhangJNingLHaoY, et al. Topology optimization for crashworthiness and structural design of a battery electric vehicle. Int J Crashworthiness2021; 26: 651–660.
14.
MünsterMSchäfferMKoppG, et al. Modular body construction for an electric city vehicle. ATZ Worldwide2017; 119: 16–21.
15.
BenedykJC. Aluminum alloys for lightweight automotive structures. In: MallicPK (ed.) Materials, design and manufacturing for lightweight vehicles. Cambridge: Woodhead Publishing Limited, 2010, pp.79–113.
16.
HwangHChenYKuoKA. A space frame structure design for an electric vehicle. In: 25th world battery, hybrid and fuel cell electric vehicle symposium and exhibition, Shenzhen, China, 5–9 November2010.
17.
LiuQLinYZongZ, et al. Lightweight design of carbon twill weave fabric composite body structure for electric vehicle. Compos Struct2013; 97: 231–238.
18.
LiZDuanLBChengAG, et al. Lightweight and crashworthiness design of an electric vehicle using a six-sigma robust design optimization method. Eng. Optim2019; 51: 1393–1411.
19.
DeloguMZanchiLDattiloCA, et al. Innovative composites and hybrid materials for electric vehicles lightweight design in a sustainability perspective. Mater Today Commun2017; 13: 192–209.
20.
DuanLLiGChengA, et al. Multi-objective system reliability-based optimization method for design of a fully parametric concept car body. Eng Optim2017; 49: 1247–1263.
21.
EwertA. Small electric vehicles: an international view on light three-and four-wheelers. Switzerland: Springer Nature, 2021.
RenCMinHMaT, et al. Efficient structure crash topology optimization strategy using a model order reduction method combined with equivalent static loads. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020; 234: 1897–1911.
24.
LeeHAParkGJ. Topology optimization for structures with nonlinear behavior using the equivalent static loads method. J Mech Des2012; 134: 1–14.
25.
LeeHAParkGJ. Nonlinear dynamic response topology optimization using the equivalent static loads method. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2015; 283: 956–970.
26.
PardalosPŽilinskasAŽilinskasJ. Non-Convex multi-objective optimization. Berlin: Springer Nature, 2017, pp. 5–6.
27.
MaFLiangHPuY, et al. Multi-objective optimization of crash box filled with three-dimensional cellular structure under multi-angle impact loading. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2021; 235: 2397–2412.
ZimmerFDTechnischeH. New achievements on implicit parameterization techniques for combined shape and topology optimization for crashworthiness based on SFE CONCEPT. Shape Technol Optim Crashworthiness2014; 44: 456–462.
30.
WangDXieC. An efficient hybrid sequential approximate optimization method for problems with computationally expensive objective and constraints. Eng Comput2022; 38: 727–738.
31.
XieCWangD. Multi-objective cross-sectional shape and size optimization of S-rail using hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method. Struct Multidiscipl Optim2020; 62: 3477–3492.
32.
GoelTVaidyanathanRHaftkaRT, et al. Response surface approximation of Pareto optimal front in multi-objective optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2007; 196: 879–893.
33.
ParkJS. Optimal Latin-hypercube designs for computer experiments. J Stat Plan Inference1994; 39: 95–111.
WangWGaoFChengY, et al. Multidisciplinary design optimization for front structure of an electric car body-in-white based on improved collaborative optimization method. Int J Autom Technol2017; 18: 1007–1015.
36.
DebKPratapAAgarwalS, et al. A fast and elitist multiobjective genetic algorithm: NSGA-II. IEEE Trans Evol Comput2002; 6: 182–197.
37.
GuiCBaiJZuoW. Simplified crashworthiness method of automotive frame for conceptual design. Thin-Walled Struct2018; 131: 324–335.
38.
GuoKYanYShiJ, et al. An investigation into C-NCAP AEB system assessment protocol. SAE technical paper 2017-01-2009, 2017.
39.
AmbrizRRFrousteyCMesmacqueG. Determination of the tensile behavior at middle strain rate of AA6061-T6 aluminum alloy welds. Int J Impact Eng2013; 60: 107–119.
40.
HuangMZhangQQiL, et al. Effect of external magnetic field on resistance spot welding of aluminum alloy AA6061-T6. J Manuf Process2020; 50: 456–466.
41.
ECE /TRANS /WP. 29 /2009 /57 Regulation No 83:2009. Uniform provisions concerning the approval of vehicles with regard to the emission of pollutants according to engine fuel requirements.
42.
32002 L0024:2002. Directive 2002 /24 /EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 18 March 2002 relating to the type-approval of two or three-wheel motor vehicles and repealing Council Directive 92/61/EEC (Text with EEA relevance.
43.
ShiTZhaoFHaoH, et al. Costs, benefits and range: application of lightweight technology in electric vehicles. SAE technical paper 2019-01-0724, 2019.
44.
McgeeRA. Model based control system design and verification for a hybrid electric vehicle. SAE technical paper 2003-01-2308, 2003.
45.
GB/T 18386:2017. Elcctric road vehicles-energy consumption and range-test procedures.
RenCMinHMaT, et al. An effective topology optimization method for crashworthiness of thin-walled structures using the equivalent linear static loads. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020; 234: 3239–3255.
48.
FernándezEYangKKKoppenS, et al. Imposing minimum and maximum member size, minimum cavity size, and minimum separation distance between solid members in topology optimization. Comput Methods Appl Mech Eng2020; 368: 113157.
49.
MarlerRTAroraJS. Survey of multi-objective optimization methods for engineering. Struct Multidiscipl Optim2004; 26: 369–395.
50.
WangDXieC. Contribution analysis of the cab-in-white for lightweight optimization employing a hybrid multi-criteria decision-making method under static and dynamic performance. Eng Optim2020; 52: 1903–1922.
51.
WangDWangSXieC. A multi-objective optimization approach for simultaneously lightweighting and maximizing functional performance of vehicle body structure. Proc IMechE, Part D: J Automobile Engineering2020; 234: 2086–2102.
52.
WågströmLThomsonRPipkornB. Structural adaptivity for acceleration level reduction in passenger car frontal collisions. Int J Crashworthiness2004; 9: 121–127.
53.
NishimuraNSimmsCKWoodDP. Impact characteristics of a vehicle population in low speed front to rear collisions. Accid Anal Prev2015; 79: 1–12.
54.
LiSFengX. Study of structural optimization design on a certain vehicle body-in-white based on static performance and modal analysis. Mech Syst Signal Process2020; 135: 106405.
55.
KhalkhaliAMasoumiADarvizehA, et al. Experimental and numerical investigation into the quasi-static crushing behaviour of the S-shape square tubes. J. Mech2011; 27: 585–596.
