Search Results

This paper presents some of the challenges and successful outcomes in developing the aerodynamic characteristics of the Chevrolet Volt, an electric vehicle with an extended-range capability. While the Volt's propulsion system doesn't directly affect its shape efficiency, it does make aerodynamics much more important than in traditional vehicles. Aerodynamic performance is the second largest contributor to electric range, behind vehicle mass. Therefore, it was critical to reduce aerodynamic drag as much as possible while maintaining the key styling cues from the original concept car. This presented a number of challenges during the development, such as evaluating drag due to underbody features, balancing aerodynamics with wind noise and cooling flow, and interfacing with other engineering requirements. These issues were resolved by spending hundreds of hours in the wind tunnel and running numerous Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) analyses.

To cope with the increasing number of advanced features (e.g., smart-phone integration and side-blind zone alert.) being deployed in vehicles, automotive manufacturers are designing flexible hardware architectures which can accommodate increasing feature content with as fewer as possible hardware changes so as to keep future costs down. In this paper, we propose a formal and quantitative definition of flexibility, a related methodology and a tool flow aimed at maximizing the flexibility of an automotive hardware architecture with respect to the features that are of greater importance to the designer. We define flexibility as the ability of an architecture to accommodate future changes in features with no changes in hardware (no addition/replacement of processors, buses, or memories). We utilize an optimization framework based on mixed integer linear programming (MILP) which computes the flexibility of the architecture while guaranteeing performance and safety requirements.

Current manufacture of alternative energy sources for automobiles, such as fuel cells and lithium-ion batteries, uses repeating energy modules to achieve targeted balances of power and weight for varying types of vehicles. Specifically for lithium-ion batteries, tens to hundreds of identical plastic parts are assembled in a repeating fashion; this assembly of parts requires complex dimensional planning and high degrees of quality control. This paper will address the aspects of dimensional quality for repeated, injection molded thermoplastic battery components and will include the following: First, dimensional variation associated with thermoplastic components is considered. Sources of variation include the injection molding process, tooling or mold, lot-to-lot material differences, and varying types of environmental exposure. Second, mold tuning and cavity matching between molds for multi-cavity production will be analyzed.

In designing vehicles with significant electric driving range, optimizing vehicle energy efficiency is a key requirement to maximize the limited energy capacity of the onboard electrochemical energy storage system. A critical factor in vehicle energy efficiency is the vehicle mass. Optimizing mass allows for the possibility of either increasing electric driving range with a constant level of electrochemical energy storage or holding the range constant while reducing the level of energy storage, thus reducing storage cost. In this paper, a methodology is outlined to study the tradeoff between the battery cost savings achieved by vehicle mass reduction for a constant electric driving range and the cost associated with lightweighting a vehicle. This methodology enables informed business decisions about the available engineering options for lightweighting early in the vehicle development process. The methodology was applied to a compact extended-range electric vehicle (EREV) concept.

Great work has been done already in developing robust engineering techniques to improve ideal functions for systems and sub systems. Characterizing an ideal function as a dynamic response type is most preferred way to build quality into a product over a range of input signal values. However, when it is difficult to measure ideal functions, symptomatic outputs such as oil leaks, vibrations, and squeaks, are selected and treated as “Smaller-the-Better” response in non-dynamic response manner. A better approach is to reduce the symptomatic responses over the entire usage range. In order to accomplish this goal, engineers often switch output response and signal axes and apply dynamic response formulation for making the design robust. In this paper, a new and better formulation is proposed and compared with the other formulation. These two formulations were applied on a real automotive case study of decklid bobble and inaccuracies associated with the other formulation were discussed.

One of the keys to a good reliable design is evaluating potential and past issues, ascertaining and then mitigating the risk that past and future issues will potentially occur. This is even more important with the automobile designs of today and for those in the future, specifically the hybrid and fuel cell vehicle. DFMEA and FTA are tools that aid in the understanding of complex design risks, from the system level down to the component level. This session will look at different case studies (from simple to complex) and the strategies used to understand systemic failure modes using both DFMEA and FTA.