A method and system for verifying performance of mpdb honeycomb aluminum

Abstract

The application relates to the technical field of vehicle collision test, in particular to an MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method and system. The method comprises sequentially performing a quasi-static compression test, a dynamic test and a real vehicle test on the honeycomb aluminum; the real vehicle test comprises a target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test and a test vehicle-trolley collision test; in the quasi-static compression test, the rigidity curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with a first set channel, and the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified; in the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum is impacted, the rigidity curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with a second set channel, and the deformation degree of the honeycomb aluminum is checked, so as to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum; the data collected in the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test is compared and analyzed with the data collected in the test vehicle-trolley collision test. The application realizes accurate, comprehensive and systematic verification of the performance of the honeycomb aluminum.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of vehicle crash testing technology, and more specifically, to an MPDB (Multi-Performance Detection and Testing) method and system for verifying the performance of aluminum honeycomb. Background Technology

[0002] The 50% overlap moving progressive deformable barrier (MPDB) frontal crash test is used to simulate real-world vehicle-to-vehicle collisions and evaluate a vehicle's occupant protection and aggressiveness. The MPDB trolley has deformable honeycomb aluminum installed at its front end to simulate the energy-absorbing structure of a vehicle's front end. It is a replaceable standard test piece and requires high-precision collision mechanics characteristics to accurately reproduce the vehicle's collision stiffness features.

[0003] Performance verification of honeycomb aluminum is an essential part of the honeycomb aluminum development process. The verification results not only serve as a reference for the quality of the honeycomb aluminum product but also as feedback on the development results, guiding the optimization of design schemes and production processes. In the complete development cycle of honeycomb aluminum, the performance verification stage occurs between the initial parameter determination and parameter finalization. After the MPDB honeycomb aluminum sample is produced, a series of tests are required to verify its performance. If problems are found in the performance verification results, it can assist developers in adjusting the honeycomb aluminum design parameters or production processes in a timely manner. However, in current technology, there is no comprehensive and systematic performance verification scheme for honeycomb aluminum.

[0004] In view of the above, this application is hereby submitted. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this application is to provide an MPDB method and system for verifying the performance of cellular aluminum, so as to achieve accurate, comprehensive and systematic verification of the performance of cellular aluminum.

[0006] To achieve the above objectives, this application adopts the following technical solution:

[0007] Firstly, this application provides a method for verifying the performance of MPDB honeycomb aluminum alloys, including:

[0008] The honeycomb aluminum was subjected to quasi-static compression test, dynamic test and real vehicle test in sequence; the real vehicle test included target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test and test vehicle-trolley collision test; wherein the honeycomb aluminum was installed at the front end of the trolley;

[0009] In the quasi-static compression test, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with that of the first set channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum;

[0010] In the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum was impacted, and the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum was compared with that of the second set channel. The degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum was also checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0011] In the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test, the acceleration-displacement curves of the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle, the deformation of the target vehicle, and the damage values ​​of the dummy inside the target vehicle were collected.

[0012] In the test vehicle-trolley collision test, the acceleration-displacement curves of the test vehicle and the acceleration-displacement curves of the trolley, the deformation of the test vehicle, and the damage values ​​of the dummy inside the test vehicle were collected.

[0013] The data collected in the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test were compared and analyzed with the data collected in the test vehicle-trolley collision test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0014] Secondly, this application provides an MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification system, including: honeycomb aluminum, trolley, test vehicle, target vehicle, bullet vehicle, force wall, rigid impact head and data processing unit;

[0015] The rigid impact head includes at least: a rigid rounded corner flat plate barrier, a rigid rounded corner column barrier, a rigid pipe frame barrier, a rigid cuboid box barrier, and a rigid beam barrier;

[0016] The data processing unit executes the MPDB (Multi-Level Database) method for verifying the performance of aluminum cellular batteries.

[0017] Compared with the prior art, the beneficial effects of this application are as follows:

[0018] This application sequentially conducts quasi-static compression tests, dynamic tests, and real-vehicle tests on honeycomb aluminum, providing a comprehensive and systematic verification system for the mechanical properties of honeycomb aluminum. The three test components are logically related in sequence, each with an independent function and mutually reinforcing. This application's solution verifies the performance of honeycomb aluminum under static, dynamic, and typical operating conditions. The method is systematic and comprehensive, effectively applicable to the development, manufacturing, and quality assurance inspection of honeycomb aluminum, effectively verifying its performance. Attached Figure Description

[0019] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions in the specific embodiments of this application or the prior art, the drawings used in the description of the specific embodiments or the prior art will be briefly introduced below. Obviously, the drawings described below are some embodiments of this application. For those skilled in the art, other drawings can be obtained from these drawings without creative effort.

[0020] Figure 1 This is a flowchart of an MPDB (Multi-Layered Calcium Dioxide) honeycomb aluminum performance verification method provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0021] Figure 2 This is the static stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum block provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0022] Figure 3 This is a schematic diagram of a force wall installed on a fixed rigid barrier, as provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0023] Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of a full-width force-wall collision test provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0024] Figure 5 This is a schematic diagram of the impact test of the offset rounded corner plate provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0025] Figure 6 This is a schematic diagram of the impact test of the rounded corner column provided in the embodiment of this application;

[0026] Figure 7 This is a schematic diagram of the tube frame impact test provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0027] Figure 8 This is a schematic diagram of the impact test of the cuboid box provided in the embodiments of this application;

[0028] Figure 9 This is a schematic diagram of the offset beam impact test provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0029] Figure 10 This is a schematic diagram of a target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test provided in an embodiment of this application;

[0030] Figure 11 This is a schematic diagram of the test vehicle-trolley collision test provided in the embodiments of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0031] The following description, in conjunction with the accompanying drawings, illustrates exemplary embodiments of this application, including various details to aid understanding. These should be considered merely exemplary. Therefore, those skilled in the art will recognize that various changes and modifications can be made to the embodiments described herein without departing from the scope and spirit of this application. Similarly, for clarity and brevity, descriptions of well-known functions and structures are omitted in the following description.

[0032] The present application will be further described in detail below with reference to the embodiments.

[0033] Figure 1This is a flowchart illustrating an MPDB (Multi-Level Diode) honeycomb aluminum performance verification method provided in this application embodiment. This method can be executed by a computer program and integrated into an electronic device. The method provided in this embodiment includes the following steps:

[0034] S110. The honeycomb aluminum is subjected to a quasi-static compression test, a dynamic test, and a real vehicle test in sequence; the real vehicle test includes a target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test and a test vehicle-trolley collision test; wherein the honeycomb aluminum is installed at the front end of the trolley and the honeycomb aluminum is installed at the front end of the bullet vehicle.

[0035] S120. In the quasi-static compression test, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with the first set channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0036] The design and manufacturing process of honeycomb aluminum may involve honeycomb aluminum blocks of different specifications. These different specifications are characterized by varying wall thicknesses and side-to-side distances within a regular hexagonal honeycomb structure, leading to differences in stiffness and other mechanical properties. For all specifications of honeycomb aluminum involved in the manufacturing process, quasi-static compression tests were conducted on 200mm × 250mm honeycomb aluminum blocks at a compression rate of 100mm / min. The directly measured force-displacement curves were then processed into stress-displacement curves, i.e., stiffness curves.

[0037] The stress-displacement theoretical curve (which can be a straight line) is shifted upwards and downwards by a predetermined distance (a percentage of the theoretical curve) to obtain the first predetermined channel. The first predetermined channel is a pair of parallel straight lines, corresponding to the upper and lower boundaries of the channel, respectively, as shown in the following formula:

[0038] ;

[0039] ;

[0040] In the formula, σ0 is the theoretical stiffness value, t is the tolerance ratio, and σ 上 It is the upper boundary, σ 下 It is the lower boundary.

[0041] The stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with that of the first set channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Figure 2 The static stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum block is shown. The horizontal axis represents displacement in mm, and the vertical axis represents stress in MPa. Figure 2 The diagram shows: channel limits (including upper and lower boundaries), test curves (i.e., the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum), and theoretical curves. It can be seen that after a displacement of 50 mm, if the test curves are within the channel limits, the quasi-static compression test is passed, and subsequent tests can continue. If any part of the test curves is outside the channel limits, the quasi-static compression test is not passed.

[0042] S130. In the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum is impacted, and the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with the second set channel. The degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is also checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0043] Dynamic tests include full-width wall impact test, offset rounded-corner plate impact test, rounded-corner column impact test, tube frame impact test, cuboid box impact test, and offset beam impact test. Each dynamic test is described in detail below.

[0044] 1. Full-width force wall collision test.

[0045] The honeycomb aluminum is installed on the trolley, and the force wall is installed on a fixed rigid barrier. The force wall cannot be moved during the test. Figure 3 This illustrates a force wall mounted on a fixed rigid barrier. A force wall is defined as a fixed, rigid concrete wall (“force wall”). A large array of force measuring cells is mounted on the wall to measure the pressure exerted on it throughout the impact. See also: Trolley impacting the force wall. Figure 4 .

[0046] An acceleration sensor is installed at the center of gravity of the trolley to record the trolley's displacement and the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the force wall need to be precisely positioned, which can be summarized by two principles: first, the overlap rate with the force wall in the lateral (i.e., left-right direction from the driver's perspective) and vertical (perpendicular to the horizontal plane) directions must be 100%; second, if the internal structure of the honeycomb aluminum is layered or segmented in the lateral or vertical directions, the seam positions between different segments should be aligned with the seam positions between the force wall's force measuring units, ensuring that each force measuring unit is aligned with only one piece of honeycomb aluminum to avoid confusion and inaccuracy in the measurement data. The trolley should not be subjected to any additional deflection or propulsion force at the moment of impact. Upon reaching the force wall, it should be perpendicular to the front surface of the force wall, and the test offset should be controlled within ±10mm. The instrument used to record the impact velocity should be accurate to within 0.1%.

[0047] After the experiment, data from the trolley's center of gravity acceleration sensor and the pressure collected by the force-measuring unit on the force wall were collected to check the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. The stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum, i.e., the stress-displacement curve, was determined using the pressure collected by the force-measuring unit on the force wall. The method for obtaining this curve can be found in CN120177054A, and will not be elaborated here.

[0048] The full-width force-wall test is the most basic and also the most important dynamic test, capable of comprehensively collecting and verifying the stiffness performance of various components of the honeycomb aluminum. The second set channel of the dynamic test is determined by stacking the stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) full-width force-wall tests. For example, the upper boundary point of the stacked channel is fitted to obtain the upper boundary of the second set channel, and the lower boundary point is fitted to obtain the lower boundary of the second set channel. The upper and lower boundaries can be straight lines or curves.

[0049] The dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified by comparing its stiffness curve with the second set channel and checking the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the honeycomb aluminum stiffness curve should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not tear, the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should remain bonded and not fall off, then the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the full-width force wall impact test, and subsequent tests can continue. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the full-width force wall impact test.

[0050] 2. Offset rounded corner plate impact test.

[0051] The honeycomb aluminum is mounted on a force wall, which is then mounted on a fixed rigid barrier. The force wall must not move during the test. A rigid, rounded-corner plate barrier is mounted on the front end of the trolley. An accelerometer is installed at the center of gravity to record the trolley displacement and the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the rounded-corner plate barrier need to be precisely positioned. The rounded-corner plate barrier and the honeycomb aluminum are offset and overlapped laterally, with the offset rate set according to requirements. Vertically, the barrier should completely cover the honeycomb aluminum. The design of the lateral offset overlap aims to simulate the deformation effect of the honeycomb aluminum in the MPDB test. The test offset should be controlled within ±10mm.

[0052] The trolley impacts the force wall, as shown in the experimental diagram. Figure 5 As shown. The stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum was determined by collecting pressure data from the force measuring unit on the force wall; after the test, data from the trolley's center of gravity acceleration sensor and the force measuring unit on the force wall were collected to check the deformation and failure mode of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0053] Based on the stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) offset rounded corner plate impact tests, the second set channel is determined by stacking them; see the above text for details, which will not be repeated here. The stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum are compared with the second set channel, and the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not be torn, the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should maintain an adhesive relationship and should not fall off, then the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the offset rounded corner plate impact test, and subsequent tests are continued. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the offset rounded corner plate impact test.

[0054] 3. Impact test of rounded corner column.

[0055] The honeycomb aluminum is mounted on a force wall, which is then mounted on a fixed rigid barrier. The force wall must not move during the test. A rigid rounded-corner column barrier is mounted on the front end of the trolley. An accelerometer is installed at the center of gravity to record the trolley displacement and the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the rigid rounded-corner column barrier must be precisely positioned. The vertical plane of the rounded-corner column barrier in the lateral direction should be aligned with the vertical plane of the front end of the honeycomb aluminum. Vertically, the bottom surface of the rounded-corner column barrier should be the same as the ground height of the honeycomb aluminum. The test offset should be controlled within ±10mm. After the test, data from the trolley's center of gravity accelerometer and the force measurement unit on the force wall are collected to check the deformation and failure mode of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0056] The trolley impacts the force wall, as shown in the experimental diagram. Figure 6 As shown, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is determined by collecting pressure data from the force measuring unit on the force wall.

[0057] Based on the stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) rounded corner column impact tests, a second set channel is determined by stacking the curves; see the above text for details, which will not be repeated here. The honeycomb aluminum stiffness curves are compared with the second set channel, and the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the honeycomb aluminum stiffness curve should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not tear, and the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should maintain an adhesive relationship and should not fall off. If so, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the rounded corner column impact test, and subsequent tests are continued. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the rounded corner column impact test.

[0058] 4. Pipe frame impact test.

[0059] The honeycomb aluminum is mounted on a force wall, which is then mounted on a fixed rigid barrier. The force wall must not move during the test. A rigid tubular frame barrier is mounted at the front end of the trolley. An accelerometer is installed at the center of gravity to record the trolley displacement and the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. The tubular frame is a simplified rigid barrier simulating the front-end structure of a vehicle. During installation, the smaller diameter circular tube beam is on top, simulating structures such as the vehicle's water tank frame; the larger diameter circular tube beam is on the bottom, simulating structures such as the vehicle's bumper and longitudinal beams. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the tubular frame barrier need to be precisely positioned. The tubular frame barrier and the honeycomb aluminum are offset and overlapped laterally, with the offset rate set according to requirements. Vertically, the tubular frame is centered relative to the honeycomb aluminum to ensure sufficient contact. The design of the lateral offset overlap is intended to simulate the deformation effect of the honeycomb aluminum in the MPDB test. The test offset should be controlled within ±10mm. After the test, data from the trolley's center of gravity accelerometer and the force measurement unit on the force wall are collected to check the deformation and failure mode of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0060] The trolley impacts the force wall, as shown in the experimental diagram. Figure 7As shown, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is determined by collecting pressure data from the force measuring unit on the force wall.

[0061] Based on the stacked stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) tube frame impact tests, a second set channel is determined; see the above text for details, which will not be repeated here. The honeycomb aluminum stiffness curves are compared with the second set channel, and the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the honeycomb aluminum stiffness curve should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not be torn, the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should maintain an adhesive relationship and should not fall off, then the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the tube frame impact test, and subsequent tests are continued. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the tube frame impact test.

[0062] 5. Rectangular box impact test.

[0063] The honeycomb aluminum is mounted on a force wall, which is then mounted on a fixed rigid barrier. The force wall must not move during the test. A rigid cuboid box barrier is mounted on the front end of the trolley. An accelerometer is installed at the center of gravity to record the trolley displacement and honeycomb aluminum deformation. The cuboid box is a simplified rigid barrier simulating the longitudinal beam at the front of a vehicle, with a square cross-section on its shorter side. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the rigid cuboid box barrier need to be precisely positioned. The perpendicular bisector of the barrier in the lateral direction should be aligned with the perpendicular bisector of the front end plane of the honeycomb aluminum. Vertically, the barrier is generally centered relative to the honeycomb aluminum, but this can be adjusted according to actual needs. The test offset should be controlled within ±5mm. After the test, data from the trolley's center of gravity accelerometer and the force measurement unit on the force wall are collected to check the deformation and failure mode of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0064] The trolley impacts the force wall, as shown in the experimental diagram. Figure 8 As shown, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is determined by collecting pressure data from the force measuring unit on the force wall.

[0065] Based on the stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) cuboid box impact tests, a second set channel is determined by stacking the honeycomb aluminum; see the above text for details, which will not be repeated here. The honeycomb aluminum stiffness curves are compared with the second set channel, and the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the honeycomb aluminum stiffness curve should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not tear, and the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should maintain an adhesive relationship and should not fall off. If so, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the cuboid box impact test, and subsequent tests can continue. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the cuboid box impact test.

[0066] 6. Offset beam impact test.

[0067] The honeycomb aluminum is mounted on a force wall, which is then mounted on a fixed rigid barrier that cannot move during the test. A rigid crossbeam barrier is mounted on the front end of the trolley. An acceleration sensor is installed at the center of gravity to record the trolley displacement and the deformation of the honeycomb aluminum. The crossbeam is a simplified rigid barrier simulating a vehicle's front bumper. Before the test, the honeycomb aluminum and the tubular frame barrier need to be precisely positioned. The barrier and the honeycomb aluminum are offset and overlapped laterally, with the offset rate set according to requirements. Vertically, the barrier is generally centered relative to the honeycomb aluminum and can be adjusted according to actual needs. The design of the lateral offset overlap is intended to simulate the deformation effect of the honeycomb aluminum in the MPDB test. The test offset should be controlled within ±10mm. After the test, data from the trolley's center of gravity acceleration sensor and the force measurement unit on the force wall are collected to check the deformation and failure mode of the honeycomb aluminum.

[0068] The trolley impacts the force wall, as shown in the experimental diagram. Figure 9 As shown, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is determined by collecting pressure data from the force measuring unit on the force wall.

[0069] Based on the stacked stiffness curves of the honeycomb aluminum after multiple (≥10) offset beam impact tests, a second set channel is determined; see the above text for details, which will not be repeated here. The honeycomb aluminum stiffness curves are compared with the second set channel, and the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. Specifically, (1) the honeycomb aluminum stiffness curve should fall within the second set channel; (2) the honeycomb aluminum skin sheet metal should not be torn, the internal honeycomb aluminum blocks should maintain an adhesive relationship and should not fall off, then the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum meets the requirements of the offset beam impact test, and subsequent tests are continued. Otherwise, the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not meet the requirements of the offset beam impact test.

[0070] S140. In the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test, the acceleration-displacement curve of the target vehicle, the acceleration-displacement curve of the bullet vehicle, the deformation of the target vehicle, and the damage value of the dummy inside the target vehicle are collected.

[0071] One of the principles and purposes of developing MPDB test conditions is to reproduce real vehicle-to-vehicle frontal collision accidents. Therefore, real-vehicle verification testing is the highest-level and most comprehensive verification method for verifying the performance of honeycomb aluminum. It can compare the energy absorption characteristics of the vehicle's front end and the honeycomb aluminum, verifying the consistency of the mechanical properties of the honeycomb aluminum and the vehicle's front end structure. Real-vehicle verification testing consists of two parts: target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test and test vehicle-sled collision test.

[0072] In the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test, two real vehicles collide head-on: the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle. The bullet vehicle should be a model representing the MPDB moving barrier, such as a small sedan or compact SUV. There are no strict requirements regarding the vehicle class of the target vehicle, but two identical vehicles should be prepared, one for the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test and the other for the test vehicle-skeleton test; that is, the test vehicle in the test vehicle-skeleton test is the same as the target vehicle in the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test.

[0073] In a target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test, the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle travel at the same speed, for example, 50 km / h, towards each other, with a lateral overlap of 50%. Figure 10 As shown. Accelerometers were installed at the vehicle's center of gravity and below the B-pillar to record acceleration changes during the collision. Feature points were marked at key locations on the front bumper and passenger compartment (A-pillar, B-pillar, pedals, swivel joint, and driver and passenger footwell areas) to measure deformation before and after the test. Dummies were placed inside the target vehicle to record occupant injuries; the number and type of dummies depended on the specific circumstances. High-speed cameras were positioned around the vehicle to capture its motion and attitude during the collision. Data collected during the test included:

[0074] (1) Acceleration sensor data of the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle can be processed to generate acceleration-time curves and acceleration-displacement curves;

[0075] (2) The coordinate values ​​of the front bumper and crew compartment feature positions of the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle before and after the test, after processing, can be used to obtain the deformation of the front bumper and crew compartment feature positions.

[0076] (3) The sensor data of the target vehicle dummy can be processed to obtain the dummy damage value.

[0077] S150. In the test vehicle-trolley collision test, the acceleration-displacement curve of the test vehicle, the acceleration-displacement curve of the trolley, the deformation of the test vehicle, and the damage value of the dummy inside the test vehicle are collected.

[0078] In the test vehicle-trolley collision test, the test vehicle and the trolley travel at the same speed of 50 km / h, heading towards each other, with a lateral overlap of 50%. The trolley is equipped with MPDB honeycomb aluminum. Figure 11 As shown.

[0079] Accelerometers are installed at the vehicle's center of gravity and below the B-pillar to record acceleration changes during the collision. Characteristic points are marked at key locations on the front bumper and passenger compartment (A-pillar, B-pillar, pedals, swivel joint, and driver and passenger footwell areas) to measure deformation before and after the test. Dummies are placed inside the test vehicle to record occupant injuries; the number, configuration, and seating position of the dummies should be identical to those in the target vehicle test. An acceleration sensor is installed at the sled's center of gravity to record acceleration changes during the collision. High-speed cameras are positioned around the vehicle to capture its motion during the collision. Data collected in the test vehicle-sled collision test includes:

[0080] (1) The acceleration sensor data of the test vehicle body can be processed to generate acceleration-time curves and acceleration-displacement curves;

[0081] (2) The acceleration sensor data of the trolley's center of gravity can be processed to generate acceleration-time curves and acceleration-displacement curves;

[0082] (3) The coordinate values ​​of the front bumper and passenger compartment feature positions of the test vehicle before and after the test, after processing, can be used to obtain the deformation of the front bumper and passenger compartment feature positions.

[0083] (4) The sensor data of the test vehicle dummy can be processed to obtain the dummy damage value.

[0084] After the data collection is completed, a comprehensive comparison operation is performed.

[0085] S160. Compare and analyze the data collected in the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test with the data collected in the test vehicle-trolley collision test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0086] In one embodiment, a first correlation coefficient, a first peak acceleration, and a first maximum displacement are calculated between the acceleration-displacement curve of the target vehicle and the acceleration-displacement curve of the test vehicle; based on the first correlation coefficient, the difference in the first peak acceleration, and the difference in the first maximum displacement, the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified to conform to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0087] A higher first correlation coefficient indicates better consistency between the two curves and smaller differences in parameter values. This proves that the test vehicle's results on the trolley are closer to the target vehicle's results on the bullet vehicle, and that the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is closer to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle. The first correlation coefficient is calculated using the following formula:

[0088] ;

[0089] Extract n points at equal intervals from both the acceleration-displacement curve of the target vehicle and the acceleration-displacement curve of the test vehicle. , Let be the acceleration value at the i-th point on the acceleration-displacement curve of the target vehicle, and be the average acceleration value. and and are the acceleration value at the i-th point on the acceleration-displacement curve of the test vehicle, respectively, and the average acceleration value. r is the first correlation coefficient.

[0090] If the first correlation coefficient is greater than or equal to the set value, and the difference between the first peak acceleration and the difference between the first maximum displacement are both less than or equal to the set value, it indicates that the two curves are basically in agreement, and the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle; otherwise, if the first correlation coefficient is less than the set value, or the difference between the first peak acceleration and the first maximum displacement is greater than the set value, it indicates that there is a certain difference between the two curves, and the performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not conform to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0091] In one embodiment, a second correlation coefficient, a second peak acceleration, and a second maximum displacement are calculated between the acceleration-displacement curves of the bullet vehicle and the trolley. Based on the second correlation coefficient, the difference in the second peak acceleration, and the difference in the second maximum displacement, the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified to conform to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0092] The calculation process for the second correlation coefficient is described above and will not be repeated here.

[0093] If the second correlation coefficient is greater than or equal to the set value, and the difference between the second peak acceleration and the difference between the second maximum displacement are both less than or equal to the set value, it indicates that the two curves are basically in agreement, and the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle; otherwise, if the second correlation coefficient is less than the set value, or the difference between the second peak acceleration and the second maximum displacement is greater than the set value, it indicates that there is a certain difference between the two curves, and the performance of the honeycomb aluminum does not conform to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0094] In one embodiment, from a macroscopic perspective, the closer the deformation of the test vehicle's body is to that of the target vehicle, the closer the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle. Based on this, the deformation of the target vehicle and the deformation of the test vehicle are compared and analyzed.

[0095] To address vehicle body structural deformation, a structural deformation difference index (BSI) is proposed to evaluate the consistency of vehicle body deformation. The deformation of the test vehicle caused by the collision barrier is calculated for each feature point. Deformation of the target vehicle body absolute value of the difference :

[0096] ;

[0097] Calculate all feature points of :

[0098] ;

[0099] Where m is the total number of feature points. This is a difference indicator.

[0100] The smaller the value, the closer the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle. Therefore, if the deformation difference index is less than or equal to the set value, the deformation performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle; otherwise, it does not conform to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0101] In one embodiment, the damage values ​​of the test vehicle dummy and the target vehicle dummy are compared and analyzed to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0102] For each position of the dummy, the closer the damage values ​​of the dummy at the same location, the closer the scores are. This indicates that the test vehicle-to-roller test results are closer to the target vehicle-to-bullet vehicle test results, and the performance of the honeycomb aluminum is closer to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle. Therefore, if the difference in damage values ​​for each part is less than or equal to the set value, then the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle; otherwise, it does not conform to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0103] It should be noted that if the comparative analysis results of the above four dimensions are consistent, it verifies that the performance of honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle; if any comparative analysis result is inconsistent, it indicates that the performance of honeycomb aluminum does not conform to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

[0104] This application embodiment also provides an MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification system, including: honeycomb aluminum, trolley, test vehicle, target vehicle, bullet vehicle, force wall, rigid impact head and data processing unit;

[0105] The rigid impact head includes at least: a rigid rounded corner flat plate barrier, a rigid rounded corner column barrier, a rigid tube frame barrier, a rigid cuboid box barrier, and a rigid beam barrier; the data processing unit executes the MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method provided in the above embodiments and has the corresponding technical effects.

[0106] It should be understood that the various forms of processes shown above can be used to rearrange, add, or delete steps. For example, the steps described in this application can be executed in parallel, sequentially, or in different orders, as long as the desired result of the technical solution disclosed in this application can be achieved, and this is not limited herein.

[0107] The specific embodiments described above do not constitute a limitation on the scope of protection of this application. Those skilled in the art should understand that various modifications, combinations, sub-combinations, and substitutions can be made according to design requirements and other factors. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, and improvements made within the spirit and principles of this application should be included within the scope of protection of this application.

Claims

1. A method for verifying the performance of MPDB (Multi-Level Diode) honeycomb aluminum alloy, characterized in that, include: The honeycomb aluminum was subjected to quasi-static compression test, dynamic test and real vehicle test in sequence; the real vehicle test included target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test and test vehicle-trolley collision test; wherein the honeycomb aluminum was installed at the front end of the trolley; In the quasi-static compression test, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with that of the first set channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum; In the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum was impacted, and the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum was compared with that of the second set channel. The degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum was also checked to verify the dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum. In the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test, the acceleration-displacement curves of the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle, the deformation of the target vehicle, and the damage values ​​of the dummy inside the target vehicle were collected. In the test vehicle-trolley collision test, the acceleration-displacement curves of the test vehicle and the acceleration-displacement curves of the trolley, the deformation of the test vehicle, and the damage values ​​of the dummy inside the test vehicle were collected. The data collected in the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test were compared and analyzed with the data collected in the test vehicle-trolley collision test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

2. The MPDB cell aluminum performance verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In a quasi-static compression test, the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with that of a first predetermined channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum, including: In a quasi-static compression test, obtain the theoretical stress-displacement curve; The stress-displacement theoretical curve is shifted upwards and downwards by a set distance to obtain the first set channel; The stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum is compared with that of the first set channel to verify the static performance of the honeycomb aluminum.

3. The MPDB cell aluminum performance verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The dynamic tests include full-width force wall impact test, offset rounded corner plate impact test, rounded corner column impact test, pipe frame impact test, cuboid box impact test and offset beam impact test.

4. The MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method according to claim 3, characterized in that, In the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum is impacted, and its stiffness curve is compared with that of a second predetermined channel. The degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is also checked to verify its dynamic performance, including: In the full-width force wall collision test, honeycomb aluminum was mounted on a trolley, and the force wall was mounted on a fixed rigid barrier; The trolley impacts the force wall, and the pressure collected by the force measuring unit on the force wall determines the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum. Based on the stiffness curves of honeycomb aluminum after multiple dynamic tests, the stacking was performed to determine the second set channel; The dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified by comparing its stiffness curve with the second set channel and checking the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum.

5. The MPDB cell aluminum performance verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that, In the dynamic test, the honeycomb aluminum is impacted, and its stiffness curve is compared with that of a second predetermined channel. The degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum is also checked to verify its dynamic performance, including: In the offset rounded plate impact test, rounded column impact test, tube frame impact test, cuboid box impact test or offset beam impact test, the honeycomb aluminum is installed on the force wall, the force wall is installed on the fixed rigid barrier, and the front end of the trolley is installed with a rigid rounded plate barrier, a rigid rounded column barrier, a rigid tube frame barrier, a rigid cuboid box barrier or a rigid beam barrier. The trolley impacts the force wall, and the pressure collected by the force measuring unit on the force wall determines the stiffness curve of the honeycomb aluminum. Based on the stiffness curves of honeycomb aluminum after multiple dynamic tests, the stacking was performed to determine the second set channel; The dynamic performance of the honeycomb aluminum is verified by comparing its stiffness curve with the second set channel and checking the degree of deformation of the honeycomb aluminum.

6. The MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method according to claim 1, characterized in that, Also includes: In the target vehicle-bullet vehicle collision test, the target vehicle and the bullet vehicle travel at the same speed and towards each other, with a lateral overlap of 50%. In the test vehicle-trolley collision test, the test vehicle and the trolley travel at the same speed and towards each other, with a lateral overlap rate of 50%.

7. The MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method according to claim 6, characterized in that, Data collected from the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test was compared and analyzed with data collected from the test vehicle-trolley crash test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle, including: Calculate the first correlation coefficient, first peak acceleration, and first maximum displacement between the acceleration-displacement curve of the target vehicle and the acceleration-displacement curve of the test vehicle; Based on the first correlation coefficient, the first peak acceleration difference, and the first maximum displacement difference, verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

8. The MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method according to claim 6, characterized in that, Data collected from the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test was compared and analyzed with data collected from the test vehicle-trolley crash test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle, including: Calculate the second correlation coefficient, second peak acceleration, and second maximum displacement between the acceleration-displacement curve of the bullet car and the acceleration-displacement curve of the trolley. Based on the second correlation coefficient, the second peak acceleration difference, and the second maximum displacement difference, verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conforms to the front stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

9. The MPDB honeycomb aluminum performance verification method according to claim 6, characterized in that, Data collected from the target vehicle-bullet vehicle crash test was compared and analyzed with data collected from the test vehicle-trolley crash test to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conformed to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle, including: The deformation of the target vehicle is compared and analyzed with that of the test vehicle. The damage values ​​of the test vehicle dummy and the target vehicle dummy were compared and analyzed to verify whether the performance of the honeycomb aluminum conformed to the front-end stiffness characteristics of a real vehicle.

10. An MPDB (Multi-Level Database) honeycomb aluminum performance verification system, characterized in that, include: Cellular aluminum, trolley, test vehicle, target vehicle, bullet vehicle, force wall, rigid impact head and data processing unit; The rigid impact head includes at least: a rigid rounded corner flat plate barrier, a rigid rounded corner column barrier, a rigid pipe frame barrier, a rigid cuboid box barrier, and a rigid beam barrier; The data processing unit performs the MPDB cell aluminum performance verification method according to any one of claims 1-9.

Images