Materials for consideration and use in automotive body structures

Davies, Geoffrey

doi:10.1016/b978-0-08-096979-4.00003-7

Cited by 8 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the full down-weighting potential cannot be realized as the modulus (69 GPa) is considerably lower than that of steel (210 GPa), and as stiffness is a primary influence on the design of most automotive parts, some compensation must be made which would make the thickness and overall weight increased. 75 This inadvertently explained why composite is ranked higher than the aluminium group from the proposed framework. The 6xxx series alloys are rated higher than the 5xxx series due to higher yield strength and better high-temperature performance.…”

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…It is also important that end-of-life vehicle (ELV) which ranks with CO 2 emissions and refers to the treatment/recycling of the vehicle as well as risk concern on societal (health and safety) are considered during the initial choice of material selection. 75…”

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 11 shows the considered alternatives and criteria’s that are commonly used for automotive panels assestment. 75…”

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Furthermore, it was not worthwhile to sacrifice sustainable performances to a cost function without a significant increase to the technical performance as explained by DMs. While the metallic content represents most of the 75% recycled content, 75 polymers such as thermoplastic and thermoset, used in composites construction have higher difficulties in recycling. The resultant material from thermoset cannot be re-melted or reformed and thermoset are also difficult in recycling.…”

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Development of a fuzzy-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision-making model for material selection with the integration of safety, health and environment risk assessment

Rahim

Musa

Ramesh

et al. 2021

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study presents the development of a fuzzy-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) model for material selection with integrated safety, health, and environment risk assessment. As safety, health, and environment is very much linked to sustainable design and manufacturing, it is imperative that safety, health, and environment is taken into consideration in ensuring a comprehensive and holistic material selection process. This paper shows the possibility of fuzzy logic utilization in assessing safety, health, and environment risk and proposed a methodology based on fuzzy-TOPSIS MCDM model for material selection suitable for the manufacturing sector. This method has the capability of producing a ranking result with strong reasonings. The proposed method facilitates the designer to select, evaluate, and rank material alternatives based on given attributes from design requirements and weighting given by the decision-makers. Additionally, the other benefits of the proposed methodology are the elimination of a complex structure and/or a black-box algorithm. The fuzzy-TOPSIS approach capable of considering not only the uncertainty related to qualitative judgments but also the uncertainty that may reside in the measurement of quantitative or qualitative parameters that exist within the safety, health, and environment risks assessment. A numerical example of selecting material for automotive body panels using the proposed method has been discussed.

show abstract

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Table 11 shows the considered alternatives and criteria’s that are commonly used for automotive panels assestment. 75…”

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: A Numerical Example Of the Proposed Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Development of a fuzzy-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision-making model for material selection with the integration of safety, health and environment risk assessment

Rahim

Musa

Ramesh

et al. 2021

Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part L:

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Steel has been extensively used in the automotive industry because of its uniqueness. Steel as an automobile body material is typically known to have good crash energy absorption qualities [1]. New materials are considered for incorporation into automobile designs for better weight efficiency.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effect of Automotive Side Member Materials on the Head Injury Criteria (HIC) and Chest Severity Index (CSI) of Adult Passenger

Salwani

Ali

Sahari

et al. 2016

IJET

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This paper presents the results for Head Injury Criteria (HIC) and Chest Severity Index (CSI) of an adult occupant in frontal impact. The component being studied is side member as impact energy absorber. Steel side member is used as the benchmark material, whereas aluminum alloy is used as lightweight material. Crash analyses are conducted using nonlinear finite element analysis software Ls-dyna. The effect of different types of aluminum alloy and component thickness on the HIC, CSI, weight and energy absorbed is assessed and discussed. A cost function is then formulated with the geometrical average method to solve the multi-objective problem. The HIC36 and CSI are set as minimum requirements in the optimization. The materials used was Aluminium alloy of AA 5182 AA5751. It was found that AA5751 with inner and outer thickness of 2.8 mm and 4.9 mm respectively, provides a reduction in mass of 1.03 kg compared with steel and has energy absorbed of 11.9 kJ. The lowest values of HIC36 and CSI obtained are 1146 and 665.4 respectively.

show abstract

Introduction and Background of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials

Zhong

Nsengiyumva

2022

Nondestructive Testing and Evaluation of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Structures

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Materials for consideration and use in automotive body structures

Cited by 8 publications

References 2 publications

Development of a fuzzy-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision-making model for material selection with the integration of safety, health and environment risk assessment

Development of a fuzzy-TOPSIS multi-criteria decision-making model for material selection with the integration of safety, health and environment risk assessment

Effect of Automotive Side Member Materials on the Head Injury Criteria (HIC) and Chest Severity Index (CSI) of Adult Passenger

Introduction and Background of Fiber-Reinforced Composite Materials

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About