A novel approach for the assessment of robustness of vehicle structures under crash

References

• M. Avalle, G. Belingardi, A. Ibba, K. Kayvantash, and F. Delcroix, Stochastic crash analysis of vehicle models for sensitivity analysis and optimization, The 20th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Lyon, France, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• H.-G. Beyer and B. Sendhoff, Robust optimization – a comprehensive survey, Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 196 (33–34) (2007), pp. 3190–3218.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.L. Brumbelow and D.S. Zuby, Impact and injury patterns in frontal crashes of vehicles with good ratings for frontal crash protection, The 21st International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Washington, DC, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• M.J. Chalupnik, D.C. Wynn, and P.J. Clarkson, Approaches to mitigate the impact of uncertainty in development processes, International Conference on Engineering Design, ICED'09. Stanford, CA, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• K. Dehnad, Quality Control, Robust Design, and the Taguchi Method, Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole Advanced Books & Software: The Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole statistics/probability series, Pacific Grove, CA, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• Deutsches Institut für Normung e.V., 2008DIN EN 12020-2. Aluminium und Aluminiumlegierungen - Stranggepresste Präzisionsprofile aus Legierungen EN AW-6060 und EN AW-6063 - Teil 2: Grenzabmaße und Formtoleranzen; Deutsche Fassung EN 12020-2:2008, Beuth Verlag, Berlin. Filing date: June 2008.
   Google Scholar
• F. Duddeck, Survey on robust design and optimisation for crashworthiness, Proceedings of the EUROMECH Colloquium 482, Queen Mary University London, London, UK, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• Euro NCAP, Frontal Impact Testing Protocol, Brussels, Belgium, 2013.
   Google Scholar
• M.H. Faber, M.A. Maes, D. Straub, and J. Baker, On the quantification of robustness of structures, Proceedings of the 25th International Conference on Offshore Mechanics and Arctic Engineering, Hamburg, Germany, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• F.F. Gan and K.J. Koehler, Goodness-of-fit tests based on P–P probability plots. Technometrics. 32 (3) (1990), pp. 289–303.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J. Hartung, B. Elpelt, and K.-H. Klösener, Statistik. Lehr- und Handbuch der angewandten Statistik, 15th ed., Oldenbourg, München, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• J.C. Helton, Uncertainty and sensitivity analysis in the presence of stochastic and subjective uncertainty. J. Stat. Comput. Simulat. 57 (1–4) (1997), pp. 3–76.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K. Hessenberger, R. Henninger, and H. Müllerschön, Robustness investigation of a numerical simulation of the ECE-R14 with particular regard to correlation analysis, 4th LS-DYNA User Forum, Bamberg, Germany, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• D.E. Huntington and C.S. Lyrintzis, Improvements to and limitations of Latin hypercube sampling. Probab. Eng. Mech. 13 (4) (1998), pp. 245–253.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• K.H. Hwang and G.J. Park, Development of a robust design process using a new robustness index, ASME 2005 International Design Engineering Technical Conference & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, Long Beach, CA, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• R.L. Iman and W.J. Conover, A distribution-free approach to inducing rank correlations among input variable. Comm. Statist. Simulation Comput. 11 (3) (1982), pp. 311–334.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P.N. Koch, R.-J. Yang, and L. Gu, Design for six sigma through robust optimization. Struct. Multidiscip. Optim. 26 (3–4) (2004), pp. 235–248.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• W. Kohn, Statistik. Datenanalyse und Wahrscheinlichkeitsrechnung. Springer, Berlin, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• K.-H. Lee and G.-J. Park, Robust optimization in discrete design space for constrained problems. AIAA J. 40 (4) (2002), pp. 774–780.
   Google Scholar
• C-h. Lin., R. Gao, and Y.-P. Cheng, A stochastic approach for the simulation of an integrated vehicle and occupant model, The 17th International Technical Conference on the Enhanced Safety of Vehicles (ESV), Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2001.
   Google Scholar
• D. Lomario, G.P. De Poli, L. Fattore, and J. Marczyk, A complexity-based approach to robust design and structural assessment of aero engine components, ASME Turbo Expo 2007: Power for Land, Sea and Air, Montreal, Canada, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• J. Marczyk, Stochastic multidisciplinary improvement - beyond optimization, 8th Symposium on Multidisciplinary Analysis, Long Beach, CA, 2000.
   Google Scholar
• J. Marczyk, M. Holzner, H. Mader, J. Clinkemaillie, S. Meliciani, M. Noack, J. Seybold, and C. Tanasescu, Stochastic automotive crash simulation: a new frontier in virtual prototyping. Proceedings of the PAM 97 User Conference. Prag, Czech Republic, 1997.
   Google Scholar
• M.D. Mckay, R.J. Beckman, and W.J. Conover, A comparison of three methods for selecting values of input variables in the analysis of output from a computer code. Technometrics. 21 (2) (1979), pp. 239–245.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Z.P. Mourelatos and L. Jinghong, A reliability-based robust design methodology, SAE World Congress. Detroit, MI, 2005.
   Google Scholar
• A. Najafi and M. Rais-Rohani, Mechanics of axial plastic collapse in multi-cell, multi-corner crush tubes. Thin-Walled Struct. 49 (1) (2011), pp. 1–12.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• A. Parkinson, Robust mechanical design using engineering models. ASME Special 50th Anniversary Design Issue. 117 (1995), pp. 48–54.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M.S. Phadke, Quality Engineering Using Robust Design. Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1989.
   Google Scholar
• T. Ray, M. Asafuddoula, H.K. Singh, and K. Alam, An approach to identify six sigma robust solutions of multi/many-objective engineering design optimization problems. J. Mech. Des. 137 (5) 2015, pp. 1–14.
   Google Scholar
• D. Riha, J. Hassan, M. Forrest, and D. Ke, Development of a stochastic approach for vehicle FE models, 2003 ASME International Mechanical Engineering Congress, Washington, DC, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• W. Roux, N. Stander, F. Günther, and H. Müllerschön, Stochastic analysis of highly non-linear structures. Int. J. Numeric. Methods. Eng. 65 (8) (2006), pp. 1221–1242.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• J.P. Royston, An extension of Shapiro and Wilk's W test for normality to large samples. Appl. Statis. 31 (2) (1982), pp. 115–124.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• P. Royston, Approximating the Shapiro-Wilk W-test for non-normality. Stat. Comput. 2 (3) (1992), pp. 117–119.
   Google Scholar
• J. Saunders, M. Craig, and D. Parent, Moving deformable barrier test procedure for evaluating small overlap/oblique crashes. SAE Int J Commercial Vehicles 5 (1) (2012), pp. 172–195.
   Google Scholar
• A. Schumacher and C. Olschinka, Robust design considering highly nonlinear structural behavior. Struct Multidiscip. Optim. 35 (3) (2008), pp. 263–272.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.S. Shapiro and M.B. Wilk, An analysis of variance test for normality (Complete Samples). Biometrika 52 (3/4) (1965), pp. 591–611.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• S.S. Shapiro, M.B. Wilk, and H.J. Chen, A comparative study of various tests for normality. J. Am. Statis. Assoc. 63 (324) (1968), pp. 1343–1372.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• H. Sippel and J. Marczyk, Application Strategies of Robust Design & Complexity Management in Engineering. Current Status & Future Trends in Multi-disciplinary Product Development, WOK Kreuzer, Haar, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• T. Streilein and J. Hillmann, Stochastische Simulation und Optimierung am Beispiel VW Phaeton. VDI-Congress. Würzburg, Germany, 2002.
   Google Scholar
• N.P. Suh, Axiomatic Design. Advances and Applications. Oxford University Press, New York, NY, 2001. The MIT-Pappalardo series in mechanical engineering.
   Google Scholar
• G. Taguchi, Off-line and on-line quality control systems, International Conference on Quality Control. Tokyo, Japan, 1978.
   Google Scholar
• G. Taguchi, Introduction to Off-line Quality Control, Central Japan Quality Control Association. Tokyo, Japan, 1979.
   Google Scholar
• G. Taguchi, Introduction to Quality Engineering. Designing Quality into Products and Processes. The Organization, Tokyo, 1986.
   Google Scholar
• G. Taguchi, S. Chowdhury, and S. Taguchi, Robust Engineering, McGraw-Hill, New York, NY, 1999.
   Google Scholar
• C.-A. Thole, R. Iza-Teran, R. Lorentz, and H. Schwamborn, Scatter analysis of crash simulation results enabled by data compression, 9th International LS-DYNA Users Conference, Dearborn, MI, 2006.
   Google Scholar
• C.-A. Thole and L. Mei, Reasons for scatter in crash simulation results, 4th European LS-DYNA Users Conference, Ulm, Germany, 2003.
   Google Scholar
• A. Watai, S. Nakatsuka,, T. Kato, Y. Ujiie, and Y. Matsuoka, Robust design method for diverse conditions, Proceedings of the ASME 2009 International Design Engineering Technical Conferences & Computers and Information in Engineering Conference, San Diego, CA, 2009.
   Google Scholar
• D. Weigert, F. Duddeck, S. Brack, H. Schluder, and G. Geißler, Anwendung Stochastischer und Geometrischer Analysen zur Systematischen Robustheitsuntersuchung im Strukturcrash, 11th LS-DYNA Forum, Ulm, Germany, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• J. Will and T. Frank, Rechnerische Robustheitsbewertungen von Strukturcrashlastfällen bei der Daimler AG, 5th Annual Weimar Optimization and Stochastic Days, Weimar, Germany, 2008.
   Google Scholar
• J. Will and U. Stelzmann, Robustness evaluation crashworthiness simulation results, 6th European LS-DYNA Users Conference, Göteborg, Sweden, 2007.
   Google Scholar
• F. Wuttke, Robuste Auslegung von Mehrkörpersystemen. Frühzeitige Robustheitsoptimierung von Fahrzeugmodulen im Kontext modulbasierter Entwicklungsprozesse, Dissertation, Karlsruhe. Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, 2012.
   Google Scholar
• B. Yazici and S. Yolacan, A comparison of various tests of normality. J. Statist. Comput. Simulation. 77 (2) (2007), pp. 175–183.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• M. Zimmermann and J.E. von Hoessle, Computing solution spaces for robust design. Int. J. Numer. Methods Eng. 94 (3) (2013), pp. 290–307.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar