Structural optimization of an upper control arm,considering the strength

Abstract

The latest automotive components are lighter than their past counterparts, providing higher fuel efficiency and performance. Following the current trend in vehicle design, this study proposes a structural optimization method for the upper control arm of the vehicle's suspension system. The upper control arm can be designed to be lightweight with application of advanced design and material technology. In this research, the shape of the upper control arm was determined by optimization technology. The aluminium alloy Al6061M6 was developed as the steel-substitute material. Strength performance is the most important design requirement in the structural design of a control arm. In the optimization process of this study, the static strength was considered. Durability analysis was carried out to predict the fatigue life of the upper control arm. The kriging interpolation method was adopted to obtain the minimum weight that would satisfy the strength constraint. Optimum designs were obtained by ANSYS Workbench and the in-house program, EXCEL-Kriging, and the optimization results from both design programs were compared.

Keywords

control arm shape optimization structural optimization kriging

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Lee

K. H.

Kang

D. H.

‘Structural optimization of an automotive door using the kriging interpolation method.’

Proc. IMechE, Part D: J. Automobile Engineering 221 (12) (2007): 1525–1534 DOI: 10.1243/09544070JAUTO403.

Kim

Y. S.

Son

H. S.

Park

J. Y.

Choi

S. G.

Yang

S. G.

‘Finite element analysis to design and optimize forming conditions for lower control arm.’

Metall. Mater. Trans. A 37 (8) (2006): 2539–2547.

MAC.NASTRAN 2004 design sensitivity and optimization user's guide (MSC Software Corporation 2004).

GENESIS version 6.0 user manual (Vanderplaats Research & Development, Inc. 2000).

Bang

I. K.

Han

D. S.

Han

K. J.

Lee.

K. H.

‘Structural optimization for a jaw using iterative Kriging metamodels.’

J. Mech. Sci. Technol. 22 (9) (2008): 1651–1659.

ANSYS Workbench-simulation introduction release 10.0 (DNDE 2006).

MSC.Fatigue version 2007 r2 user manual (MSC Software Corporation 2008).

Bessert

Frederich

‘Nonlinear airship aeroelasticity.’

J. Fluids Structs 21 (8) (2005): 731–742.

Sacks

Welch

W. J.

Mitchell

T. J.

Wynn

H. P.

‘Design and analysis of computer experiments.’

Statist. Sci. 4 (4) (1989): 409–435.

10.

Guinta

Watson

‘A Comparison of approximation modeling techniques: polynomial versus interpolating models.’ Proceedings of the Seventh AIAA/USAF/NASA/ISSMO Symposium on

Multidisciplinary analysis and optimization, St Louis, Missouri, USA, 2–4 September 1998, vol. 2 pp. 392–440, paper AIAA-98-4758 (American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Reston, Virginia).

11.

Fang

K.-T.

Sudjianto

Design and modeling for computer experiments (Chapman & Hall/CRC 2006).