Search Results

Market demands for increased fuel economy and reduced emissions are placing higher aerodynamic and thermal analysis demands on vehicle designers and engineers. These analyses are usually carried out by different engineering groups in different parts of the design cycle. Design changes required to improve vehicle aerodynamics often come at the price of part thermal performance and vice versa. These design changes are frequently a fix for performance issues at a single performance point such as peak power, peak torque, or highway cruise. In this paper, the motivation for a holistic approach in the form of multi-disciplinary optimization (MDO) early in the design process is presented. Using a Response-surface Informed Transient Thermal Model (RITThM) a vehicle's thermal performance through a drive cycle is predicted and correlated to physical testing for validation.

The main objective of this work is to present an adjoint-based methodology to address combined optimization of drag force and cooling flow rate of an industrial vehicle. In order to cope with cooling effect, the volumetric flow rate is treated through a newly introduced cost function and the corresponding adjoint source term is derived. Also an alternative strategy is presented to tackle aerodynamic vehicle design improvement that relies on a so-called indirect force computation. The overall optimization is treated as a Multi-Objective problem and an original approach, called Optimize Both Favor One (OBFO), is introduced that allows selective emphasis on one or another objective without resorting to artificial cost function balancing. Finally, comparative results are presented to demonstrate the merit of the proposed methodology.

Aerodynamic vehicle design improvements require flow simulation driven iterative shape changes. The 3-D flow field simulations (CFD analysis) are not explicitly descriptive in providing the direction for aerodynamic shape changes (reducing drag force or increasing the down-force). In recent times, aerodynamic shape optimization using the adjoint method has been gaining more attention in the automotive industry. The traditional DOE (Design of Experiment) optimization method based on the shape parameters requires a large number of CFD flow simulations for obtaining design sensitivities of these shape parameters. The large number of CFD flow simulations can be significantly reduced if the adjoint method is applied. The main purpose of the present study is to demonstrate and validate the adjoint method for vehicle aerodynamic shape improvements.

The main objective of this work is to demonstrate the merits of the Adjoint method to provide comprehensive information for shape sensitivities and design directions to achieve low drag vehicle shapes. The adjoint method is applied to a simple 2D airfoil and a 3D vehicle shape. The discrete Adjoint equations in the flow solvers are used to investigate further potential shape improvements of the low drag vehicle shapes. The low drag vehicle used in this study was designed earlier using the conventional approach (i.e., extensive use of wind tunnel testing). The goal is to use the already low drag vehicle shape and reduce its drag even further using the adjoint methodology without using the time-consuming and the high cost of wind tunnel testing. In addition, the present study is intended to compare the results with the other computational techniques such as surface pressure gradients method.

Traditionally, powertrain generated thermal management in a vehicle's UH/UB (underhood/underbody) has relied primarily on physical testing. However, today's highly competitive marketplace is forcing the original equipment manufacturers (OEM) to constantly compress the vehicle development cycles. Under these conditions, math-based analytical tools are becoming increasingly popular. One of the key reasons for this can be attributed to their proven effectiveness in identifying and resolving thermal issues in the nascent stages of vehicle development cycle wherein no physical hardware is yet available for testing. However, accurate analytical predictions of maximum temperature at any location in a vehicle's UH/UB during a transient thermal validation procedure still remains a tremendous modeling challenge.