Search Results

This paper presents the second part of a multi-phased, both experimental and numerical project, devoted to the use of Virtual Prototyping techniques for seat design. The aim of this stage is to assess the capabilities of a CAE methodology to predict some comfort-related mechanical parameters, such as overall hardness and plushness, as a base engineering approach to quantify an occupant perception of both long- and short-term comfort. For hardness, a simple human surrogate (SAE AM50 Buttock Form) is applied on the bottom cushion of a fully trimmed, current production FORD seat, following a load cycle. For initial softness, a round probe is indented at different locations of both backrest and bottom cushions, following loading cycles. The resulting load-deflection curves predicted by numerical simulation are in good agreement with the experimental ones.

Traditional automotive seat development has relied on a series of physical prototypes that are evaluated and refined in an iterative fashion. Costs are managed by sharing prototypes across multiple attributes. To further manage costs, many OEMs and Tier 1s have, over the past decade, started to investigate various levels of virtual prototyping. The change, which represents a dramatic paradigm shift, has been slow to materialize since virtual prototyping has not significantly reduced the required number of physical prototypes. This is related to the fact virtual seat prototyping efforts have been focused on only selected seat attributes - safety / occupant positioning and mechanical comfort are two examples. This requires that physical prototypes still be built for seat attributes like craftsmanship, durability, and thermal comfort.

The comfort assessment of seats in the automotive industry has historically been accomplished by subjective ratings. This approach is expensive and time consuming since it involves multiple prototype seats and numerous people in supporting processes. In order to create a more efficient and robust method, objective metrics must be developed and utilized to establish measurable boundaries for seat performance. Objective measurements already widely accepted, such as IFD (Indentation Force Deflection) or CFD (Compression Force Deflection) [1], have significant shortcomings in defining seat comfort. The most obvious deficiency of these component level tests is that they only deal with a seats' foam rather than the system response. Consequently, these tests fail to take into account significant factors that affect seat comfort such as trim, suspension, attachments and other components.