This content is not included in
your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
Weight and Cost Effective FUPD Design for N3 Category Vehicles
Technical Paper
2016-28-0196
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Annotation ability available
Sector:
Language:
English
Abstract
Front under run protection device (FUPD) is a regulatory requirement for passive safety of N2 & N3 category vehicle. This device gives effective protection for small vehicles (M1 or N1 category) against under running of big vehicles (N2 & N3 category) in the event of a frontal collision. FUPD generally consists of the front under run protector (FUP) and its mounting structure. As the compliance load target for N3 category is high, the FUP required achieving regulation target need to have high rigidity. This increases its size and hence the weight, Increase in weight has impact on payload and cost. To curtail the weight of FUP, in general Aluminum with higher strength is in use, but use of Aluminum increases the cost. So the main challenge in FUPD design is to achieve the design with optimal system weight & cost.
This paper describes the methodology of designing cost effective FUPDs for an N3 category vehicle, without changing the current mounting structure, by using high strength steel thereby maintaining component weight at par with Aluminum FUP. This cost & weight effective FUPD design process involved preliminary design calculation, component design, digital evaluation in LS-Dyna and physical bench test. After establishing co-relation among design calculation, physical & digital validation, design was finalized and found 2% lesser in weight and 20% lesser in cost than existing design. This new design then implemented on vehicles.
Authors
Citation
John, A. and Chandrasekaran, S., "Weight and Cost Effective FUPD Design for N3 Category Vehicles," SAE Technical Paper 2016-28-0196, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-28-0196.Also In
References
- http://www.progressive-economy.org/
- ECE R93 Regulation 15 March 1994
- Text book Theory of Elasticity and Strength of Materials Timoshenko Stephen P.
- Raj , P. , Sridhar , L. , Khare , P. , and Gogate , V. Experimental Evaluation of Rear Under-Run Protection Device SAE Technical Paper 2007-01-1178 2007 10.4271/2007-01-1178
- Khore Alok Kumar , Jain Tapan Effect of change in thickness of rear under run protection device on energy absorption & crashworthiness 2347 - 2812 1 2 2013
- Balta , B. , Erk , O. , Solak , H. , and Durakbasa , N. Pareto Optimization of Heavy Duty Truck Rear Underrun Protection Design for Regulative Load Cases SAE Int. J. Commer. Veh. 7 2 726 735 2014 10.4271/2014-01-9027