Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, September 09, 2018

Closure Slam CAE Method Investigation for Automobiles 2016-01-1349

Published 04/05/2016

Siddharth Bhupendra Unadkat, Suhas Kangde, Mahalingesh Burkul, and Mahesh Badireddy
Mahindra and Mahindra Ltd.

CITATION: Unadkat, S., Kangde, S., Burkul, M., and Badireddy, M., "Closure Slam CAE Method Investigation for Automobiles,"
SAE Technical Paper 2016-01-1349, 2016, doi:10.4271/2016-01-1349.

Copyright © 2016 SAE International

Abstract Introduction
In the current scenario, the major thrust is to simulate the customer Closures of automobiles are required to be frequently opened for
usage pattern and lab test using virtual simulation methods. Going passenger entry or exit of the cabin. Every opening event of closure is
ahead, prime importance will be to reduce the number of soft tool followed by closing event. A car door closing event is termed as door
prototype for all tests which can be predicted in CAE. Automotive slam. Slam closing velocity varies from person to person. Some
door slam test is significantly complex in terms of prediction through people manage to close the door with optimal effort and minimum
simulation. Current work focuses on simulating the slam event and velocity of the door. Whereas, some apply higher effort and in turn,
deriving load histories at different mounting locations through higher slam velocity for the door. As the slam events are much more
dynamic analysis using LSDyna. These extracted load histories are frequent during the vehicle usage life, it becomes of prime
applied to trimmed door Nastran model and modal transient analysis importance to limit stresses in the structure to an acceptable value.
is performed to find the transient stress history. This approach has a The inner panel of the door has multiple cut-outs to enable access for
significant advantage of less computation time and stress- assembling interface subsystems like window mechanism, electrical
convergence with Nastran for performing multiple design iterations cables etc. These cutouts weaken inner panel and reduce the stiffness,
compared to LSDyna. Good failure correlation is achieved with the leading to lower natural modal frequencies of vibration. During the
test using this approach. Using these load histories, design door slam event, inner panel is having the highest vibrational effect
improvements are evaluated and robustness of the approach is and is more prone to failures. It takes long time, higher cost and
validated. An attempt is made to extract load histories using virtual manpower to test the prototype in the lab. In case of failure in the
mule in LSDyna. So, at an early stage in a project, using the only structure, modification of design, tool changes and additional time of
hinge and latch CAD location with closure mass, inertia and center of testing the system will lead to delay in the vehicle development.
gravity, the load histories can be extracted and design improvement Hence, there is an immense need to develop a methodology to
can be evaluated. Detailed analysis of predicting over-slam through simulate the closure slam event and carry out faster design iterations
simulation and effect of the position of glass on strain at different to meet the acceptance criteria. Current work showcases an effort
locations is highlighted. made for developing closure slam test to predict the structural
behavior early in the program and modify the design if any high-
stress zones are observed. This will ensure that physically prototype
validation will become mere verification.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, September 09, 2018

Test setup and procedure

Figure 1. Front door Slam Test set up Figure 2. LSDyna model for front door Slam.

Figure 1 highlights the lab test setup for front door slam test. The
door is mounted on the vehicle, which is constrained to move during
the door slam testing. Along with the door, other subassemblies like
lock striker, fender, applique, seal and over-slam bump-stoppers are
assembled as per design condition. The door is opened and slammed
to close completely. For achieving consistent door slam velocity
during the measurement of strain at various location, use of elastic
bungee rope was done as shown in figure 1. The door was released
under bungee rope in tension from predetermined location. After
releasing door, it slams with velocity and same is measured near door
edge using optical speed sensor as shown in figure 1. The slam event
causes impact force on the latch, striker, seal, bump-stopper and
hinge mounting areas. During the slam, bump-stopper and door seal
acts as stopper & dampener respectively, reduces the impact forces
and over-slam travel.
Figure 3. Detailed latch and striker modelling in LSDyna

CAE Methodology The latch mechanism is modelled as shown in Figure 3 with the help
of solid elements. Latch assembly consists of linear and rotational
The simulation model consists of body, side door, hinges, latch
springs modelled using discrete elements with preload as per design
mechanism, bump stoppers and window glass with the mechanism as
condition. Revolute joint elements are modeled to simulate the hinge
shown in Figure 2. The analysis performed using LSDyna has side
joint between body-side and door-side hinges. BIW-cut model has
door rotated about the hinge axis to the position when it is about to
been constrained in all six degrees of freedom.
touch the primary latch striker. Initial rotational velocity is input to
door assembly with reference to the hinge axis. The linear velocity
Door seal modelled using solid element has been connected to the
from test was converted to rotational velocity and input to the
door at discrete locations along BNR defined as per CAD. Simplified
simulation model for analysis [1].
elastic material model is used for seal component. The seal reaction
force was obtained from the test in the closed condition. Seal
modeled as a closed volume in LSDyna and stiffness calibrated to
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, September 09, 2018

match reaction force on seal periphery. Force transducer is defined

between the seal and the body to take the contact force output. Figure
4 shows the seal deformation for different instances from initial to
primary latched and secondary latched condition.

Figure 7. Strain plot for location 3 on inner panel from test.

For the door slam CAE simulation event, strain were plotted for two
different locations in the model. To verify the simulation results,
strain gauging was done on a physical prototype at three high-stress
locations identified through simulation. The door slam event was
performed with door opened at a predetermined angle to slam by
Figure 4. Door seal deformation pattern at different time intervals. virtue of the bungee rope. Strain data for above mentioned three
locations were acquired during the hood slam test. Figure 8 shows
The load histories for door-side latch, hinges and seal in X, Y and Z
one of the strain gauge location on door inner panel in actual test.
direction are extracted from LSDyna analysis. These load histories
are applied to the durability model to perform modal transient
analysis using (SOL112) NASTRAN solver.

Simulation Results and Correlation with

Physical Test
The door slam test was performed for different slam velocities and
window glass positions. The velocity of door slam varied from 1.1
m/s to 1.6 m/s. Window glass conditions were fully closed, 3/4th
closed and fully open. Figure 5, Figure 6 and Figure 7 show the max
strain values for different velocities and window glass position for
location 1, location 2 and location 3 respectively on inner panel.
Location 2 does not show sensitivity for window glass condition.
Whereas, location 1 and location 3 are very sensitive to window glass Figure 8. Strain gauge location on door inner panel in test.
position.

Figure 9. Strain plot on inner panel from Modal Transient Analysis.

Figure 5. Strain plot for location 1 on inner panel from test.

Figure 10. Strain plot acquired on inner panel from physical test.

As seen from the Figure 9 and Figure 10, strain correlates by 81% for
door inner panel location shown in Figure 8.

Figure 6. Strain plot for location 2 on inner panel from test.

 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, September 09, 2018

Figure 13. Strain plot comparison on inner panel with and without door seal
from CAE.

Figure 11. Strain PSD overlap for test and CAE.

Figure 11 shows the PSD for strain curves obtained from test and
CAE for the location mentioned in Figure 8. Figure 12 shows the
comparison of acceleration in Y-direction between test and CAE at a
location near door latch. This clearly depicts the frequency content is
correlating well with measured data.

Figure 14. Fatigue life plot on inner panel.

Figure 12. Acceleration comparison near latch location between test and CAE.

Figure 13 shows the strain plot comparison with and without door
seal considered in the LSDyna simulation. The door slam where no
seal considered, will not require any seal force history to be fed to
NASTRAN modal transient analysis. Similar trend was observed in
the test at the same location. Figure 14 shows the fatigue life plot for
location showed in figure 8. To validate the result, the front door was
slammed to find the fatigue behaviour. With this developmental test,
the CAE failure location correlated with test failure location. Further
design modifications were carried out based on simulation and fatigue
life was improved. The test showed similar trend and cleared without
any failure. Figure 15 shows fatigue life plot with the modified design
of the inner panel. This helped to validate the robustness of the Figure 15. Fatigue life plot on modified inner panel.
process developed for door slam.
 Downloaded from SAE International by University of Liverpool, Sunday, September 09, 2018

Summary/Conclusions
This work has established a methodology for evaluating the closure
slam event virtually with detail modelling of latch and rubber seal. A
nonlinear analysis was performed in LSDyna and forces acting on the
contact pairs like latch striker and seal body were determined.
Derived loads were used with NASTRAN solver for transient
analysis. This gave advantage of faster design proposals evaluation
for door slam durability during product development cycle. The effect
of window position on measured strains on door inner panel was
studied at different velocities. Fatigue life from test will have scatter
Figure 16. Door side latch displacement Y vs. displacement Z. due to scatter in physical material properties and actual loads. Method
established is correlated with failure location in terms of strain
From the LSDyna simulation, over slam travel in Y directions can be magnitude and frequency. However life correlation needs to be
predicted. In Figure 16, the final latch position has been shown based improved at captured failure locations. Prediction of over slam and
on stabilized Y displacement from LS Dyna simulation. Over slam latch force magnitude can be used for faster design maturity. This
travel of 2.5mm can be clearly captured from the graph. will enable door slam to pass physical test in first time right and
going ahead physical test will become mere verification.

References
1. Su, H., Dunn, C., and Krajcirovic, A., "CAE Virtual Door Slam
Test for Plastic Trim Components," SAE Technical Paper 2003-
01-1209, 2003, doi:10.4271/2003-01-1209.

Contact Information
Siddharth Bhupendra Unadkat
Figure 17. Door side latch force in Y-direction vs door displacement in unadkat.siddharth@mahindra.com
Y-direction.
Mahindra Research Valley, 2nd Floor FD side, Mahindra World
Figure 17 shows the door side latch force for Y-direction with respect City, New Chennai, Pin-603002, Ph. No: +91 44 2216 7580, M:
to door travel in Y direction. As the door seal acts effectively in Y 09840146833
direction, the force in Y direction dampens soon after latching event.

Application
Force vs time histories for the hinge, latch and seal contact patch in
X, Y and Z directions are extracted from LSDyna run. These load
histories are utilized to perform modal transient analysis (SOL 112)
using Nastran. Transient analysis performed with finer mesh model.
Hence, the features are captured properly and stress convergence is
achieved. The advantage of NASTRAN solver is that the run time is
low as it is subassembly level transient analysis. This also helps in
faster design iterations. With the stress history from modal transient
analysis results, fatigue life is calculated to understand hot-spot
locations for given design. The methodology explained helps to
predict the failure locations upfront and carry out design
modifications to meet the acceptance criteria. This exercise helped to
explore door slam and criticality of inner panel cut-out design.

The Engineering Meetings Board has approved this paper for publication. It has successfully completed SAE’s peer review process under the supervision of the session organizer. The process
requires a minimum of three (3) reviews by industry experts.

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or
otherwise, without the prior written permission of SAE International.

Positions and opinions advanced in this paper are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of SAE International. The author is solely responsible for the content of the paper.

ISSN 0148-7191

http://papers.sae.org/2016-01-1349