Optimal Subassembly Partitioning of Space Frame Structures for In-Process Dimensional Adjustability and Stiffness

A method for optimally synthesizing multicomponent structural assemblies of an aluminum space frame (ASF) vehicle body is presented, which simultaneously considers structural stiffness, manufacturing and assembly costs and dimensional integrity under a unified framework based on joint libraries. The...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of mechanical design (1990) 2006-05, Vol.128 (3), p.527-535
Hauptverfasser: Lyu, Naesung, Lee, Byungwoo, Saitou, Kazuhiro
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:A method for optimally synthesizing multicomponent structural assemblies of an aluminum space frame (ASF) vehicle body is presented, which simultaneously considers structural stiffness, manufacturing and assembly costs and dimensional integrity under a unified framework based on joint libraries. The optimization problem is posed as a simultaneous determination of the location and feasible types of joints in a structure selected from the predefined joint libraries, combined with the size optimization for the cross sections of the joined structural frames. The structural stiffness is evaluated by finite element analyses of a beam-spring model modeling the joints and joined frames. Manufacturing and assembly costs are estimated based on the geometries of the components and joints. Dissimilar to the enumerative approach in our previous work, dimensional integrity of a candidate assembly is evaluated as the adjustability of the given critical dimensions, using an internal optimization routine that finds the optimal subassembly partitioning of an assembly for in-process adjustability. The optimization problem is solved by a multiobjective genetic algorithm. An example on an ASF of the midsize passenger vehicle is presented, where the representative designs in the Pareto set are examined with respect to the three design objectives.
ISSN:1050-0472
1528-9001
DOI:10.1115/1.2181599