Search Results

Computer programs and models are playing an increasing role in simulating vehicle crashworthiness, dynamic, and fuel efficiency. To maximize the effectiveness of these models, the validity and predictive capabilities of these models need to be assessed quantitatively. For a successful implementation of Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) models as an integrated part of the current vehicle development process, it is necessary to develop objective validation metric that has the desirable metric properties to quantify the discrepancy between multiple tests and simulation results. However, most of the outputs of dynamic systems are multiple functional responses, such as time history series. This calls for the development of an objective metric that can evaluate the differences of the multiple time histories as well as the key features under uncertainty.

To date, model validation metric is prominently designed for non-dynamic model responses. Though metrics for dynamic responses are also available, they are specifically designed for the vehicle impact application and uncertainties are not considered in the metric. This paper proposes the validation metric for general dynamic system responses under uncertainty. The metric makes use of the popular U-pooling approach and extends it for dynamic responses. Furthermore, shape deviation metric was proposed to be included in the validation metric with the capability of considering multiple dynamic test data. One vehicle impact model is presented to demonstrate the proposed validation metric.

Simulation based design optimization has become the common practice in automotive product development. Increasing computer models are developed to simulate various dynamic systems. Before applying these models for product development, model validation needs to be conducted to assess their validity. In model validation, for the purpose of obtaining results successfully, it is vital to select or develop appropriate metrics for specific applications. For dynamic systems, one of the key obstacles of model validation is that most of the responses are functional, such as time history curves. This calls for the development of a metric that can evaluate the differences in terms of phase shift, magnitude and shape, which requires information from both time and frequency domain. And by representing time histories in frequency domain, more intuitive information can be obtained, such as magnitude-frequency and phase-frequency characteristics.

Model validation is a process of determining the degree to which a model is an accurate representation of the real world from the perspective of the intended uses of the model. In reliability based design, the intended use of the model is to identify an optimal design with the minimum cost function while satisfying all reliability constraints. It is pivotal that computational models should be validated before conducting the reliability based design. This paper presents an ensemble approach for model bias prediction in order to correct predictions of computational models. The basic idea is to first characterize the model bias of computational models, then correct the model prediction by adding the characterized model bias. The ensemble approach is composed of two prediction mechanisms: 1) response surface of model bias, and 2) Copula modeling of a series of relationships between design variables and the model bias, between model prediction and the model bias.

Finite Element (FE) models are widely used in automotive for vehicle design. Even with increasing speed of computers, the simulation of high fidelity FE models is still too time-consuming to perform direct design optimization. As a result, response surface models (RSMs) are commonly used as surrogates of the FE models to reduce the turn-around time. However, RSM may introduce additional sources of uncertainty, such as model bias, and so on. The uncertainty and model bias will affect the trustworthiness of design decisions in design processes. This calls for the development of stochastic model interpolation and extrapolation methods that can address the discrepancy between the RSM and the FE results, and provide prediction intervals of model responses under uncertainty.

Analytical models (math or computer simulation models) are typically built on the basis of many assumptions and simplifications and hence model prediction could be inaccurate in intended applications. Model validation is thus critical to quantify and improve the degree of accuracy of these models. So far, little work considers model validation for various design configurations so that model prediction is accurate in the intended design space. Furthermore, there is a lack of effective approaches that can be used to quantify model accuracy considering different number of experimental data. To overcome these limitations, objective of this paper is to develop a model validation approach for various design configurations with a reference metric for model accuracy check considering different number of experimental data.