Search Results

With increasing evidence for climate change in response to greenhouse gasses (GHG) emitted by human activities, pressure is growing to reduce fuel consumption via increased vehicle efficiency and to replace fossil fuels with renewable fuels. While real-world experience with bio-ethanol and a growing body of research on many other renewable fuel pathways provide some guidance as to the cost of renewable transportation fuel, there has been little work comparing that cost to alternative means for achieving equivalent GHG reductions. In earlier work, we developed an optimization model that allowed the transportation and electricity generation sectors to work separately or jointly to achieve GHG reduction targets, and showed that cooperation can significantly reduce the society cost of GHG reductions.

Greenhouse gas (GHG) emission targets are becoming more stringent for both automakers and electricity generators. With the introduction of plug-in hybrid and electric vehicles, transportation and electricity generation sectors become connected. This provides an opportunity for both sectors to work together to achieve the cost efficient reduction of CO2 emission. In addition, the abundant natural gas (NG) in USA is drawing increased attention from both policy makers and various industries due to its low cost and low carbon content. NG has the potential to ease the pressure from CO2 emission constraints for both the light duty vehicle (LDV) and the electricity generation sectors while simultaneously reducing their fuel costs. To quantify the benefit of this collaboration, an analytical model is developed to evaluate the total societal cost and CO2 emission for both sectors.

Reliability-based design optimization (RBDO) has been widely used to obtain a reliable design via an existing CAE model considering the variations of input variables. However, most RBDO approaches do not consider the CAE model bias and uncertainty, which may largely affect the reliability assessment of the final design and result in risky design decisions. In this paper, the Gaussian Process Modeling (GPM) approach is applied to statistically correct the model discrepancy which is represented as a bias function, and to quantify model uncertainty based on collected data from either real tests or high-fidelity CAE simulations. After the corrected model is validated by extra sets of test data, it is integrated into the RBDO formulation to obtain a reliable solution that meets the overall reliability targets while considering both model and parameter uncertainties.

Computer Aided Engineering (CAE) has become a vital tool for product development in automotive industry. Increasing computer models are developed to simulate vehicle crashworthiness, dynamic, and fuel efficiency. Before applying these models for product development, model validation needs to be conducted to assess the validity of the models. However, one of the key difficulties for model validation of dynamic systems is that most of the responses are functional responses, such as time history curves. This calls for the development of an objective metric which can evaluate the differences of both the time history and the key features, such as phase shift, magnitude, and slope between test and CAE curves. One of the promising metrics is Error Assessment of Response Time Histories (EARTH), which was recently developed. Three independent error measures that associated with physically meaningful characteristics (phase, magnitude, and slope) were proposed.

Response surface methods have been widely used in robust design for reducing turn-around time and improving quality. That is, from a given set of CAE data (design-of-experiments results), many different robust optimization studies can be performed with different constraints and objectives without large, recurring, computation costs. However, due to the highly nonlinear and non-convex nature of occupant injury responses, it is difficult to generate high quality response surface models from them. In this paper, we apply a cross validation technique to estimate the accuracy of response surface models, particularly in the context of robustness assessment. We then decompose selected occupant injury responses into more fundamental signals before fitting surfaces to improve the predictivity of the response surface models. Real-world case studies on an occupant restraint system robust design problem are used to demonstrate the methodology.

Response surface methodologies (RSMs) have been proposed as surrogate models in vehicle design processes to gain insight and improve turnaround time for optimization and robust design. However, when studying the vehicle occupants during crash events, nonlinearities in responses, coupled with the relatively high dimensionality of vehicle design, can yield misleading results with little or no warning from the response surface algorithms. To ensure the accuracy and reliability of RSMs, fast and dependable error estimation procedures are essential for enlightening how well a response surface predicts highly nonlinear phenomena, given a limited number of model simulations. Such error estimation methods are also useful for providing guidance on how many simulation runs are needed for reliable RSM construction. In this paper, a fast cross validation error estimate procedure is first presented, applied to the multivariable adaptive regression spline (MARS) response surface method.