Topology optimization of automotive

components subjected to low cycle fatigue

András TANOS, R&D Engineer Frankenthal, 28.06.2017

 Contents
 FÉMALK Co. – at a glance
 Usual requirements of engine suspension mounts
 Material testing
• Monotonic properties
• Cyclic properties
 Validation of material models
 Optimization with fatigue constraint
 CAD interpretation
 Verification
 Questions

1/14
Introduction - FÉMALK Co.
 Aluminium high pressure
die casting foundry
 Founded in 1989
 100 % family ownership
 100 % automotive industry
 € 93,3 million income in 2016
 250 - 1000 ton machines
 More than 1100 coworkers

2/14
Major customers - FÉMALK Co.

3/14
 Development project - Requirements

 Dimensions
 Feasibility
 Prescribed minimum breaking force
 Low-cycle fatigue requirementss of fully reversed load cycles
 Maximum mass
 Prescribed minimum of the
first natural frequency

4/14
 Monotonic material properties

𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅𝑅.2 - 0.2% Offset yield strength

𝑅𝑅𝑚𝑚 - Ultimate tensile strength
𝐸𝐸 - Modulus of elasticity (Young’s modulus)
𝐾𝐾 - Monotonic strength coefficient
𝑛𝑛 - Monotonic strain hardening exponent

𝜎𝜎 𝜎𝜎 1
𝜀𝜀 = 𝜀𝜀 𝑒𝑒 + 𝜀𝜀 𝑝𝑝 = + 𝑛𝑛
𝐸𝐸 𝐾𝐾

5/14
 Cyclic measurements

𝐾𝐾𝐾 - Cyclic strength coefficient

𝑛𝑛𝑛 - Cyclic strain hardening exponent

1
𝜎𝜎 𝜎𝜎 𝑛𝑛′
𝜀𝜀 = 𝜀𝜀 𝑒𝑒 + 𝜀𝜀 𝑝𝑝 = +
𝐸𝐸 𝐾𝐾′

6/14
 Cyclic measurements

𝜎𝜎𝑓𝑓 ′ - Fatigue strength coefficient

𝑏𝑏 - Fatigue strength exponent
𝜀𝜀𝑓𝑓 ′ - Fatigue ductility coefficient
𝑐𝑐 - Fatigue ductility exponent

𝑝𝑝 𝜎𝜎𝑓𝑓 ′ 𝑏𝑏 𝑐𝑐
𝜀𝜀𝑎𝑎 = 𝜀𝜀𝑎𝑎𝑒𝑒 + 𝜀𝜀𝑎𝑎 = 2𝑁𝑁𝑓𝑓 + 𝜀𝜀𝑓𝑓 ′ 2𝑁𝑁𝑓𝑓
𝐸𝐸

7/14
Validation, FEM

8/14
 Validation

𝐹𝐹, kN Life, -
9 450
9 440
9 370

9/14
Development of a new component

10/14
Interpretation, CAD

11/14
 Verification of final design

Ansys results Optistruct results

1st natural
feasibility static strength Fatigue life mass
frequency
original proposal not OK questionable unknown 2111 g 755 Hz

final geometry OK OK OK 1755 g 866 Hz

12/14
 Similar, optimized project

Mass: -400 g
Rigidity: ↑
Strength : ↑
Feasibility : OK

Predecessor Optimized design

geometry 1250 g
1650 g

STL from OSSmooth

13/14
 References

 Y.-L. Lee, J. Pan, R. Hathaway and M. Barkey, Fatigue Testing and Analysis, Burlington:
Elsevier Butterworth-Heinemann, 2005.
 ASTM, “Standard practice for statistical analysis of linear or linearized stress-life (S-N) and
strain-life (e-N) fatigue data,” ASTM Standard E 739, Vols. ASTM Designation E 739-91, pp.
1-7, 1998.
 Altair, “OptiStruct optimization training material,” Cologne, 2016.
 ASTM, “Standard practice for strain-controlled fatigue testing,” ASTM Standard E 606, Vols.
ASTM Designation: E 606-92, pp. 1-7, 1998.
 C. R. Williams, Y.-L. Lee and J. Rilly, “A practical method for statistical analysis of strain–life
fatigue data,” International Journal of Fatigue, vol. 25, no. 5, pp. 427-436, 2003.
 M. Avalle, G. Belingardi, M. P. Cavatorta and R. Doglione, "Casting defects and fatigue
strength of a die cast aluminium alloy: a comparison between standard specimens and
production components," International Journal of Fatigue, vol. 24, pp. 1-9, 2002.
 B. Desmorat and R. Desmorat, “Topology optimization in damage governed low cycle
fatigue,” Comptes Rendus Mécanique, vol. 336, pp. 448-453, 2008.

14/14
Thank you for your attention!
16