Metamodel-based lightweight design of an automotive front-body structure using robust optimization

Abstract

Both conventional automobiles and new energy cars require urgently lightweight design to realize energy economy and environmental protection in a long run. The weight reduction of the body structure plays a rather important role in decreasing the weight of the full vehicle. In real engineering problems, the variation in sheet gauge, geometrical size, and material parameters caused by environmental factors and other uncertainties may affect the structural performances of body components. Therefore, a lightweight design without considering this kind of tolerance may result in the loss of feasibility and reliability in engineering application. From the viewpoint of crashworthiness performance, this paper presents a study on the lightweight design of the automotive front-body structure based on robust optimization, considering the variation in design variables including sheet gauge and yield limit of materials. Coupled with the design and analysis of a computer experiment, four metamodelling techniques, namely support vector regression, kriging, radial basis functions, and artificial neural networks, are employed to build the metamodels of structural crashworthiness performance indicators for comparison of approximation accuracy. An adaptive deterministic optimization process is used to upgrade further the approximation accuracy of metamodels for the following robust optimization. A double-loop strategy is chosen when solving the robust optimization formulation and the basic Monte Carlo simulation method is applied to perform a reliability analysis. A genetic algorithm solver is used to obtain both the deterministic and the robust optimum results for comparison. The reduced weight obtained by using robust optimization is 7.8003kgf (19.45 per cent) and the result achieved from robust optimization is more conservative than that obtained through deterministic optimization as expected. However, the robust optimum design is ensured to be feasible and reliable when the variation in design variables works in a real engineering application.

Keywords

lightweight design front-body structure structural crashworthiness performance robust optimization design and analysis of a computer experiment support vector regression Monte Carlo simulation

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Osuga

‘Fuel economy and weight reduction of motor vehicles.’

J. Soc. Automot. Engrs Japan 55 (4) (2001): 4–8.

Koehr

‘ULSAC – lightweight steel automotive closures.’ SAE paper 2001-01-0076, 2001.

Lanzerath

Schilling

‘Crash simulation of structural foam.’ SAE paper 2003-01-0328, 2003.

Zhu

Zhang

Lin

Z.-Q.

‘Research on lightweight auto-body material based on crashworthiness simulation.’

Chin. J. Mech. Engng 41 (9) (2005): 207–211.

Zhang

Zhu

Chen

G.-L.

Lin

Z.-Q.

‘Lightweight design of bonnet in auto-body based on finite element method.’

J. Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ. 40 (1) (2006): 163–166.

Vanderplaats

G. N.

‘Saving energy through design optimization.’ SAE paper 2003-01-1331, 2003.

Zhang

Zhu

Chen

G.-L.

Lin

Z.-Q.

‘Study on structural lightweight design of automotive front side rail based on response surface method.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 129 (2007): 553–557.

Marklund

P. O.

Nilsson

‘Optimization of a car body component subjected to side impact.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 21 (2001): 383–392.

Sobieszczanski-Sobieski

Kodiyalam

Yang

R. Y.

‘Optimization of car body under constraints of noise, vibration, and harshness (NVH), and crash.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 22 (2001): 295–306.

10.

Redhe

Forsberg

Jansson

Marklund

P. O.

Nilsson

‘Using the response surface methodology and the D-optimality criterion in crashworthiness related problems.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 24 (2002): 185–194.

11.

Youn

B. D.

Choi

K. K.

Yang

R.-J.

‘Reliability-based design optimization for crashworthiness of vehicle side impact.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 26 (2004): 272–283.

12.

Zhang

Zhu

Chen

G. L.

‘Lightweight design of automotive front side rail based on robust optimization.’

Thin-walled Struct. 45 (7–8) (2007): 670–676.

13.

Parkinson

Sorensen

Pourhassan

‘A general approach for robust optimal design.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 115 (1) (1993): 74–79.

14.

Parkinson

‘Robust mechanical design using engineering models.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 117 (1995): 48–54.

15.

Chen

L. Z.

Robust design (China Machine Press 2000).

16.

Chen

L. Z.

Optimization design method for engineering stochastic variables (Science Press 1997).

17.

Kim

H. S.

Wierzbicki

‘Effect of the cross-sectional shape on crash behavior of a 3-D space frame.’ Report 34, Impact and Crashworthiness Laboratory, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Massachusetts, May 2000.

18.

Wang

G. G.

Shan

‘Review of metamodeling techniques in support of engineering design optimization.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 129 (4) (2007): 370–380.

19.

Simpson

T. W.

Lin

D. K. J.

Chen

‘Sampling strategies for computer experiments: design and analysis.’

Int. J. Reliability Applic. 2 (3) (2001): 209–240.

20.

Fang

K. T.

Lin

D. K. J.

Winker

Zhang

‘Uniform design: theory and application.’

Technometrics 39 (3) (2000): 237–248.

21.

Fang

K. T.

‘Experimental design by uniform distribution.’

Acta Mathematice Applicatae Sinica 3 (1980): 363–372.

22.

Jin

Chen

Simpson

T. W.

‘Comparative studies of metamodeling techniques under multiple modeling criteria.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 23 (1) (2001): 1–13.

23.

Tang

Feng

DPS data processing system – experimental design, statistical analysis and data mining (Science Press 2007).

24.

Chen

V. C. P.

Tsui

K. L.

Barton

R. R.

Meckesheimer

‘A review on design, modeling and applications of computer experiments.’

IIE Trans. 38 (2006): 273–291.

25.

Clarke

S. M.

Griebsch

J. H.

Simpson

T. W.

‘Analysis of support vector regression for approximation of complex engineering analyses.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 127 (4) (2005): 1077–1087.

26.

Yang

R. J.

Wang

Tho

C. H.

Bobineau

J. P.

Wang

B. P.

‘Metamodeling development for vehicle frontal impact simulation.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Des. 127 (3) (2005): 1014–1020.

27.

Cristianni

Shawe-Taylor

An introduction to support vector machines and other kernel-based learning methods (Cambridge University Press 2000).

28.

Schölkopf

Smola

A. J.

Learning with kernels: support vector machines, regularization, optimization, and beyond (MIT Press 2002).

29.

Van Gestel

Suykens

J. A. K.

Lanckriet

Lambrechts

De Moor

Vandewalle

‘Bayesian framework for least squares support vector machine classifiers, Gaussian processes and kernel Fisher discriminant analysis.’

Neural Comput. 15 (5) (2002): 1115–1148.

30.

Huang

T. M.

Kecman

Kopriva

‘Kernel based algorithms for mining huge data sets.’

Stud. Comput. Intell. 17 (2006): 11–60.

31.

Chen

‘Sequential optimization and reliability assessment method for efficient probabilistic design.’ In Proceedings of the 2002 ASME Design Engineering Technical Conferences and Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, September 2002, paper DETC2002/DAC-34127 (ASME, New York).

32.

Guo

Beeram

‘Sequential optimization and reliability assessment for multidisciplinary systems design.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 35 (2008): 117–130.

33.

Youn

B. D.

Choi

K. K.

‘Adaptive probability analysis using an enhanced hybrid mean value method.’

J. Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 29 (2) (2005): 134–148.

34.

Choi

K. K.

Young

H. P.

‘A new study on reliability-based design optimization.’

Trans. ASME, J. Mech. Engng 121 (1999): 557–564.

35.

Youn

B. D.

‘Reliability-based robust design optimization using the eigenvector dimension reduction (EDR) method.’

Struct. Multidisciplinary Optimization 37 (5) (2008): 475–492 DOI:10.1007/s00158-008-0239–2.

36.

Shan

Wang

G. G.

‘Reliable design space and complete single-loop reliability-based design optimization.’

Reliability Engng System Safety 93 (8) (2008): 1218–1230 DOI:10.1016/j.ress.2007.07.006.

37.

Niederreiter

Spanier

Monte Carlo and quasi-Monte Carlo methods (Springer-Verlag 2000).

38.

Sobol

I. M.

‘On quasi-Monte Carlo integrations.’

Math. Comput. Simulation 47 (1998): 103–112.

39.

Y.-T.

‘Computational methods for efficient structural reliability and reliability sensitivity analysis.’

AIAA J. 32 (8) (1994): 1717–1723.

40.

Neal

R. M.

‘Annealed importance sampling.’

Statist. Comput. 11 (2001): 125–139.

41.

S. K.

Ching

Beck

J. L.

‘Application of subset simulation methods to reliability benchmark problems.’

Struct. Safety 29 (2007): 183–193.