Methodology for mass minimisation of a seat structure with integrated safety belts constrained by biomechanical responses on the occupant in frontal crashes

A methodology using finite element (FE) modelling and simulation with a property-based model (PBM) is presented. A generic 3-D FE model of a seat structure with a three-point seat-integrated safety belt configuration was established. A 50th percentile Hybrid III FE dummy model was used as occupant. Metamodelling techniques were used in optimisation calculations performed in two steps. Step 1: Six separate optimisations minimising biomechanical responses of the FE dummy model. Step 2: Four separate optimisations with different start values of the design variables, with the total mass of the seat structure as objective function and with the minimised biomechanical responses from Step 1 as constraint values. Six design variables were used in both Step 1 and Step 2. The four optimisations performed in Step 2 generated four different results of the total mass. Thus, different local minima were found instead of one single global minimum. The presented methodology with a PBM may be used in a concept design phase. Some issues concerning the FE model suggest further improvement.

[1]  D K Smith,et al.  Numerical Optimization , 2001, J. Oper. Res. Soc..

[2]  Y.-s. Park,et al.  Crash analyses and design of a belt integrated seat for occupant safety , 2001 .

[3]  Claude Tarriere,et al.  Finite element simulation of the occupant/belt interaction: chest and pelvis deformation, belt sliding and submarining , 1993 .

[4]  Margaret J. Robertson,et al.  Design and Analysis of Experiments , 2006, Handbook of statistics.

[5]  Wei Hong,et al.  Design Targets of Seat Integrated Restraint System for Optimal Occupant Protection , 2001 .

[6]  Mats Lindquist,et al.  Modelling and simulation of seat-integrated safety belts including studies of pelvis and torso responses in frontal crashes , 2007 .

[7]  Lori Summers,et al.  ANALYTICAL EVALUATION OF AN ADVANCED INTEGRATED SAFETY SEAT DESIGN IN FRONTAL, REAR, SIDE AND ROLLOVER CRASHES , 2001 .

[8]  A Gavelina,et al.  Numerical studies concerning upper neck and head responses in frontal crashes with seat-integrated safety belts , 2007 .

[9]  Timothy W. Simpson,et al.  Metamodels for Computer-based Engineering Design: Survey and recommendations , 2001, Engineering with Computers.

[10]  Matthew Huang,et al.  A Study on Ride-Down Efficiency and Occupant Responses in High Speed Crash Tests , 1995 .

[11]  Harold J. Mertz,et al.  The Position of the United States Delegation to the ISO Working Group 6 on the Use of HIC in the Automotive Environment , 1985 .

[12]  Ola Boström,et al.  Benefits of a 3+2 point belt system and an inboard torso side support in frontal, far-side and rollover crashes , 2003 .

[13]  Geoffrey Grime,et al.  Handbook of Road Safety Research , 1987 .

[14]  Thomas A Jeffreys,et al.  Biomechanics of 4-point seat belt systems in farside impacts. , 2003, Stapp car crash journal.

[15]  H. J. Miller,et al.  Occupant Performance with Constant Force Restraint Systems , 1996 .

[16]  Jimmy Forsberg.  Structural optimization in vehicle crashworthiness design , 2005 .

[17]  Jasbir S. Arora,et al.  Introduction to Optimum Design , 1988 .

[18]  Douglas C. Montgomery,et al.  Response Surface Methodology: Process and Product Optimization Using Designed Experiments , 1995 .

[19]  Stephen W Rouhana,et al.  Biomechanics of 4-point seat belt systems in frontal impacts. , 2003, Stapp car crash journal.

[20]  Marcus Redhe.  On vehicle crashworthiness design using structural optimization , 2004 .