This content is not included in your SAE MOBILUS subscription, or you are not logged in.
A Robust Methodology to Predict the Fatigue Life of an Automotive Closures System Subjected to Hinge and Check Link Load
ISSN: 0148-7191, e-ISSN: 2688-3627
Published April 14, 2020 by SAE International in United States
This content contains downloadable datasetsAnnotation ability available
In order to provide an accurate estimation of fatigue life of automotive door hinges and check strap mounting location, it is crucial to understand the loading conditions associated with opening and closing the door. There are many random factors and uncertainties that affect the durability performance of hinge and check strap mount structures in either a direct or indirect way. Excessive loads are generated at the hinge and check arm mounting region during abuse conditions when opening the door. Repeating the abuse conditions will lead to fatigue failures in these components. Most influencing parameter affecting the fatigue performance for the door was the loads due to hinge-check arm sensitivity stoppage and the distance between hinge and check strap attachments. However, the probability of occurrences was low, but the impact is high. In this proposed investigation, Monte Carlo simulation methodology is applied on the randomly selected samples with predicted distribution of all dependent factors to know the fatigue life variations in the hinge mount structure. Weibull distribution is the most efficient way of estimating the fatigue failure or fatigue life. This can be estimated on the basis of the function of the populated size. The mean and standard deviation of the simulated fatigue life converged with a greater number of randomly varied samples. This technique defines the maximum allowable load cycles on the hinges and the check arm mount structure, and their variability. It helps in keeping the door opening efforts below the target value. The fatigue life cycle of the door is predicted closest to the experiments by applying the proposed method on more number of samples. It also keeps the probability of failure under check
CitationPuthuvayil, N., Zaman, T., and S, S., "A Robust Methodology to Predict the Fatigue Life of an Automotive Closures System Subjected to Hinge and Check Link Load," SAE Technical Paper 2020-01-0599, 2020, https://doi.org/10.4271/2020-01-0599.
Data Sets - Support Documents
|[Unnamed Dataset 1]|
|[Unnamed Dataset 2]|
- Tsianika, V., Geroulas, V., Papadimitriou, D., and Mourelatos, Z. , “A Methodology of Design for Fatigue Using an AcceleratedLife Testing Approach with Saddle Point Approximation,” SAE Technical Paper 2019-01-0159, 2019, https://doi.org/10.4271/2019-01-0159.
- Kihm, F., Halfpenny, A., and Munson, K. , “Synthesis of Accelerated and More Realistic Vibration Endurance Tests Using Kurtosis,” SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-0275, 2016, https://doi.org/10.4271/2016-01-0275.
- Munson, K., Yenal, U., and Lavelle, P. , “Durability Test Design: Linking Fatigue and Reliability,” SAE Technical Paper 2018-01-0795, 2018, https://doi.org/10.4271/2018-01-0795.
- Tufekci, M., Karpat, F., Yuce, C., Dogan, O. et al. , “Design Optimization of Aluminum Hinge Parts for Lightweight Vehicles: Performance, Durability and Manufacturability,” International Journal of Mechanical and Production Engineering 3(12), 2015.
- Wei, Z., Mandapati, R., Nayaki, R., and Hamilton, J. , “Accelerated Reliability Demonstration Methods Based on Three-Parameter Weibull Distribution,” SAE Technical Paper 2017-01-0202, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4271/2017-01-0202.
- Lee, J.O., Yang, Y.O., and Ruy, W.S. , “A Comparative Study on Reliability Index and Target Performance Based Probabilistic Structural Design Optimization,” Computers and Structures 80:257-269, 2002.
- Examination of a Failed Rolls Royce RB211-524 Turbofan Engine - Boeing Commercial aircraft Group, 747-436, G-BNLD, Australian Transport Safety Bureau, Canberra ACT 2601, Technical Analysis Report No. 20/02, Occurrence File No. Bo/200200646, March 1, 2002.
- Song, J., Mourelatos, Z.P., Gu, R.J., and Crepeau, P.N. , “Sensitivity Study of Staircase Fatigue Tests Using Monte Carlo Simulation,” SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0803, 2005, https://doi.org/10.4271/2005-01-0803.
- Blanco, C., Martín Meizoso, A. , “Sensitivity Analysis of the Staircase Method to Determine the Fatigue Limit,” Fracture Mechanics for Durability, Reliability and Safety , 97-105, in 19th European Conference on Fracture (ECF19), Kazan, Russia, August 26-31, 2012, ISBN: 978-5-905576-18-8.
- Engler-Pinto, C.C. Jr., Lasecki, J.V., Frisch, R.J. Sr., DeJack, M.A., and Allison, J.E. , “Statistical Approaches Applied to Fatigue Test Data Analysis,” SAE Technical Paper 2005-01-0802, 2005, https://doi.org/10.4271/2005-01-0802.
- Narayanan, G., Rezaei, K., and Nackenhorst, U. , “Fatigue Life Estimation of Aero Engine Mount Structure Using Monte Carlo Simulation,” International Journal of Fatigue 83:53-58, 2016.
- Yılmaz, T.G., Tufekci, M., and Karpat, F. , “A Study of Lightweight Door Hinges of Commercial Vehicles Using Aluminum Instead of Steel for Sustainable Transportation,” Sustainability 9:1661, 2017.
- Bayraktar, M., Bilyaz, H., and Demir, C. , “Kinematic, Kinetic and Fatigue Analyses of Cup Hinge with Brake,” Sak. Univ. J. Sci. 2, 2018.
- United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) , available online at: https://www.unece.org/file admin/DAM/trans/main/wp29/wp29regs/2013/R011r2e.pdf, accessed October 9, 2018.
- Lawless, J.F. , Statistical Models and Methods for Lifetime Data Second Edition (Hoboken, NJ: Wiley-Interscience, 2003).
- Lipson, C. and Sheth, N.J. , Statistical Design and Analysis of Engineering Experiments (McGraw-Hill, 1973).
- Wu, D., Zhou, J., and Li, Y. , “Unbiased Estimation of Weibull Parameters with the Linear Regression Method,” J Euro Ceram Soc 26:1099-1105, 2006. http://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeurceramsoc.2005.01.044.
- Ambrozic, M., Bermejo, R., Supancic, P., and Kosmac, T. , “Monte Carlo Simulation of Weibull Distribution of Ceramic Strength Values,” in Proc. of the XIth Int. Congress and Exposition, USA, June 2-5, 2008.