liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Optimization of the new Saab 9-3 exposed to impact load using a space mapping technique
Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Solid Mechanics. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.
Linköping University, Department of Management and Engineering, Solid Mechanics. Linköping University, The Institute of Technology.
2004 (English)In: Structural and multidisciplinary optimization (Print), ISSN 1615-147X, E-ISSN 1615-1488, Vol. 27, no 5, 411-420 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

The aim of this work is to illustrate how a space mapping technique using surrogate models together with response surfaces can be used for structural optimization of crashworthiness problems. To determine the response surfaces, several functional evaluations must be performed and each evaluation can be computationally demanding. The space mapping technique uses surrogate models, i.e. less costly models, to determine these surfaces and their associated gradients. The full model is used to correct the gradients from the surrogate model for the next iteration. Thus, the space mapping technique makes it possible to reduce the total computing time needed to find the optimal solution. First, two analytical functions and one analytical structural optimization problem are presented to exemplify the idea of space mapping and to compare the efficiency of space mapping to traditional response surface optimization. Secondly, a sub-model of a complete vehicle finite element (FE) model is used to study different objective functions in vehicle crashworthiness optimization. Finally, the space mapping technique is applied to a structural optimization problem of a large industrial FE vehicle model, consisting of 350.000 shell elements and a computing time of 100 h. In this problem the intrusion in the passenger compartment area was reduced by 32% without compromising other crashworthiness parameters.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2004. Vol. 27, no 5, 411-420 p.
Keyword [en]
crashworthiness, finite element, optimization, response surface, space mapping
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-46216DOI: 10.1007/s00158-004-0396-xOAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-46216DiVA: diva2:267112
Available from: 2009-10-11 Created: 2009-10-11 Last updated: 2017-12-13
In thesis
1. On vehicle crashworthiness design using structural optimization
Open this publication in new window or tab >>On vehicle crashworthiness design using structural optimization
2004 (English)Doctoral thesis, comprehensive summary (Other academic)
Abstract [en]

This dissertation addresses the problems and possibilities of using structural optimization in vehicle crashworthiness design. The first part of the thesis gives an introduction to vehicle crashworthiness design. The optimization methods presented are also used to exemplify how structural optimization and robustness analysis can be used in vehicle crashworthiness design.

In the second part of the thesis, five papers are appended, where different optimization methods are evaluated and improved for the usage in vehicle crashworthiness design. These papers concern the optimization methods Response Surface Methodology (RSM), Stochastic Optimization (SO) and Space Mapping (SM).

Each method has its advantages and disadvantages. The Response Surface Methodology is the easiest method to use and the method that most often finds the best design of these three methods. Generally RSM is rather expensive, especially when many design variables are used. Then, SO is an effective alternative because in this method the number of evaluations is independent of the number of design variables, which is not the case for RSM. Space Mapping is the cheapest method, because it needs only one or two evaluations per iteration. However, SM is generally a method to fmd an improved design with fulfilled constraints and sometimes not the absolute optimum solution but to a low cost. Hence, both RSM and SO may produce better designs but at the price of more response evaluations.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
Linköping: Linköpings univeristet, 2004. 46 p.
Series
Linköping Studies in Science and Technology. Dissertations, ISSN 0345-7524 ; 863
National Category
Engineering and Technology
Identifiers
urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-24070 (URN)3630 (Local ID)91-7373-898-0 (ISBN)3630 (Archive number)3630 (OAI)
Public defence
2004-03-12, Hörsal Planck, Fysikhuset, Linköpings Universitet, Linköping, 10:15 (Swedish)
Opponent
Available from: 2009-10-07 Created: 2009-10-07 Last updated: 2013-01-22

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full text

Authority records BETA

Redhe, MarcusNilsson, Larsgunnar

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Redhe, MarcusNilsson, Larsgunnar
By organisation
Solid MechanicsThe Institute of Technology
In the same journal
Structural and multidisciplinary optimization (Print)
Engineering and Technology

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
urn-nbn
Total: 74 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf