Simulation design method of transmission shaft, electronic device, storage medium and program product

Abstract

The application provides a simulation design method of a transmission shaft, an electronic device, a storage medium and a program product, and relates to the technical field of simulation. The method embeds finite element calculation into an optimization process guided by threshold determination, so that each round of adjustment of the candidate set of plies has a clear physical criterion as a correction basis. All checking results meet multiple set requirements, ensuring that the final output target process parameter set can be directly used to guide the actual production operation of the winding forming equipment. In this way, the simulation design no longer stays at the virtual checking level, but provides sufficient theoretical basis for the target process parameter set, so that the physical transmission shaft manufactured according to the parameter set can have reliable design traceability in performance indicators, thereby effectively reducing the process deviation and geometric error introduced by the disconnection between design input and manufacturing execution, and further improving the consistency, reliability and pass rate of the transmission shaft product.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] This application relates to the field of simulation technology, and more specifically, to a simulation design method for a drive shaft, electronic equipment, storage medium, and program product. Background Technology

[0002] As a core component of power transmission systems, driveshafts are widely used in the automotive, aerospace, and high-end equipment manufacturing industries. Their basic function is to transmit the torque and rotational motion generated by the power source from the input end to the output end, while simultaneously bearing the torsional, bending, and vibration loads generated during operation. Traditional driveshafts are mostly made of steel or aluminum. These metal driveshafts have mature technologies in manufacturing processes, material properties, and interface compatibility, and can well meet the requirements of conventional operating conditions. However, with the increasing demands for lightweighting and high speed in aerospace equipment and new energy vehicles, the inherent drawbacks of traditional metal driveshafts—their large mass and moment of inertia—are becoming increasingly prominent. The greater mass not only increases the overall weight of the machine but also reduces the response speed of the power system and increases the dynamic load on the support bearings, thus limiting further improvements in system efficiency.

[0003] To reduce the weight of driveshafts, carbon fiber composites are increasingly being used in driveshaft manufacturing due to their advantages such as high specific strength and specific modulus, low density, and high design flexibility. Carbon fiber composite driveshafts can achieve significant weight reduction while maintaining load-bearing capacity and stiffness comparable to or even higher than metal driveshafts.

[0004] However, composite tubes formed using lay-up, roll-up, or twist-rolling methods rely on manual experience to set process parameters, making them prone to defects such as overlapping steps, localized resin overload, fiber angle dispersion, and winding wrinkling during manufacturing. These defects make it difficult to stably control the tube's outer diameter runout, wall thickness uniformity, and dynamic balance. Since drive shafts require extremely high geometric precision under high-speed rotation, this limits the application of drive shafts manufactured using this method in high-speed scenarios. Summary of the Invention

[0005] The purpose of this application is to provide a simulation design method, electronic device, storage medium, and program product for a drive shaft, so as to improve the problem that the existing technology cannot be applied due to manufacturing defects of the drive shaft.

[0006] In a first aspect, embodiments of this application provide a simulation design method for a transmission shaft, the method comprising: Obtain design input parameters, which include the target load-bearing parameters of the entire shaft, the target dynamic characteristic parameters, and the end interface assembly constraints. The structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft are determined based on the design input parameters. The structural boundary conditions include the inner diameter limit of the tube, the lower limit of the wall thickness, and the size of the end overlap area. An initial ply candidate set is generated based on the structural boundary conditions. The initial ply candidate set includes a first-angle helical winding layer for bearing the main shear load, a second-angle helical winding layer for improving axial stiffness and bending mode, and a third-angle circumferential winding layer for constraining tube roundness and assembly dimensional stability. The initial ply candidate set was subjected to multi-objective verification calculations using a finite element simulation model to obtain multi-dimensional quantitative indicators. The multi-dimensional quantitative indicators are compared one by one with the corresponding preset thresholds. If any indicator does not meet the preset threshold, the adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set are adjusted according to the preset hierarchical feedback rules. The candidate set of layup is updated with the adjusted adjustable design parameters, and the multi-objective verification calculation is performed again until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators meet the corresponding preset thresholds. The target process parameter set is then output, which is used to guide the drive shaft winding forming equipment to perform tube solid forming operation.

[0007] In the above implementation process, by embedding finite element calculations into a threshold-based optimization process, each round of adjustment of the layup candidate set has clear physical criteria as the basis for correction. All verification results meet multiple set requirements, ensuring that the final output target process parameter set can be directly used to guide the actual production operation of the winding forming equipment. In this way, simulation design no longer stops at the virtual verification level, but provides sufficient theoretical basis for the target process parameter set, enabling the physical drive shaft manufactured based on this parameter set to have reliable design traceability in performance indicators. This effectively reduces process deviations and geometric errors introduced by the disconnect between design input and manufacturing execution, thereby improving the consistency, reliability, and pass rate of drive shaft products.

[0008] Secondly, embodiments of this application provide a simulation design device for a transmission shaft, the device comprising: The parameter acquisition module is used to acquire design input parameters, which include the target load-bearing parameters of the entire shaft, the target dynamic characteristic parameters, and the end interface assembly constraints. The condition determination module is used to determine the structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft based on the design input parameters. The structural boundary conditions include the inner diameter limit of the tube, the lower limit of the wall thickness, and the size of the end overlap area. A ply candidate generation module is used to generate an initial ply candidate set based on the structural boundary conditions. The initial ply candidate set includes a first-angle helical winding layer for bearing the main shear load, a second-angle helical winding layer for improving axial stiffness and bending mode, and a third-angle circumferential winding layer for constraining tube roundness and assembly dimensional stability. The multi-dimensional calculation module is used to perform multi-objective verification calculations on the initial ply candidate set using a finite element simulation model to obtain multi-dimensional quantitative indicators. The comparison module is used to compare the multi-dimensional quantitative indicators one by one with the corresponding preset thresholds. If any indicator does not meet the preset threshold, the adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set are adjusted according to the preset hierarchical feedback rules. The parameter output module is used to update the layup candidate set with the adjusted adjustable design parameters and recalculate the multi-objective verification until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators meet the corresponding preset thresholds, and output the target process parameter set. The target process parameter set is used to guide the drive shaft winding forming equipment to perform tube solid forming operation.

[0009] Thirdly, embodiments of this application provide an electronic device, including a processor and a memory, wherein the memory stores computer-readable instructions, and when the computer-readable instructions are executed by the processor, the steps of the method provided in the first aspect above are performed.

[0010] Fourthly, embodiments of this application provide a computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, which, when executed by a processor, performs the steps of the method provided in the first aspect above.

[0011] Fifthly, embodiments of this application provide a computer program product, including computer program instructions, which, when read and executed by a processor, perform the steps of the method provided in the first aspect above.

[0012] Other features and advantages of this application will be set forth in the following description and will be apparent in part from the description or may be learned by practicing embodiments of this application. The objectives and other advantages of this application may be realized and obtained by means of the structures particularly pointed out in the written description, claims, and drawings. Attached Figure Description

[0013] To more clearly illustrate the technical solutions of the embodiments of this application, the accompanying drawings used in the embodiments of this application will be briefly introduced below. It should be understood that the following drawings only show some embodiments of this application and should not be regarded as a limitation of the scope. For those skilled in the art, other related drawings can be obtained based on these drawings without creative effort.

[0014] Figure 1 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of a transmission shaft provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating a simulation design method for a drive shaft provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 3 A structural block diagram of a simulation design device for a transmission shaft provided in an embodiment of this application; Figure 4 This is a schematic diagram of the structure of an electronic device for performing a simulation design method for a drive shaft, provided in an embodiment of this application. Detailed Implementation

[0015] The technical solutions in the embodiments of this application will be clearly and completely described below with reference to the accompanying drawings.

[0016] It should be noted that the terms "system" and "network" in the embodiments of this invention can be used interchangeably. "Multiple" refers to two or more; therefore, in the embodiments of this invention, "multiple" can also be understood as "at least two". "And / or" describes the relationship between related objects, indicating that three relationships can exist. For example, A and / or B can represent: A existing alone, A and B existing simultaneously, and B existing alone. Additionally, the character " / ", unless otherwise specified, generally indicates that the preceding and following related objects have an "or" relationship.

[0017] It should also be noted that all actions involving the acquisition of signals, information, or data in this application are carried out in compliance with the relevant data protection laws and policies of the country where the application is located, and with the authorization granted by the owner of the relevant device.

[0018] This application provides a simulation design method for drive shafts. This method embeds finite element calculations into a threshold-based optimization process, ensuring that each adjustment of the layup candidate set has clear physical criteria as the basis for correction. All verification results meet multiple set requirements, ensuring that the final output target process parameter set can be directly used to guide the actual production operation of the winding forming equipment. In this way, simulation design no longer merely remains at the virtual verification level, but provides sufficient theoretical basis for the target process parameter set. This enables the physical drive shaft manufactured based on this parameter set to have reliable design traceability in performance indicators, thereby effectively reducing process deviations and geometric errors introduced by the disconnect between design input and manufacturing execution, and ultimately improving the consistency, reliability, and yield rate of drive shaft products.

[0019] To facilitate understanding of the simulation design method for the subsequent driveshaft, a brief introduction to its structure is provided below. This driveshaft is a lightweight design combining metal end components and a carbon fiber composite tube body. Its overall configuration uses the metal end components at both ends as the interface carriers for power input and output, and the carbon fiber composite tube body in the middle as the main load-bearing component. The three components form a coaxial torque transmission path through an adhesive interface. Figure 1 As shown.

[0020] Specifically, the two metal end components include a first metal end component and a second metal end component, which are respectively disposed at both ends of the drive shaft, arranged axially opposite each other and maintaining coaxiality. The outer end of each metal end component is machined into a corresponding mating form according to the requirements of the external transmission interface, and can be any one of an internal spline joint, external spline joint, flange joint, fork joint, or gear sleeve joint, used to achieve torque coupling with the corresponding interface of the engine output shaft, gearbox input shaft, test bench, or load end. The inner end of each metal end component extends to form a cylindrical overlap section, the outer diameter of which is smaller than the inner diameter of the tube, for insertion into the end cavity of the carbon fiber composite tube. The cylindrical overlap section can be further configured with an axial limiting shoulder, located at the root of the cylindrical overlap section, forming an axial abutment relationship with the end face of the tube, used to precisely control the insertion depth and prevent excessive displacement of the metal end component under axial load. The surface of the cylindrical overlap section undergoes pre-bonding treatment, such as phosphoric acid anodizing, sandblasting with primer, plasma treatment, or silane primer, to form an active surface layer at the microscopic level, enhancing the chemical bonding and mechanical locking effect with the adhesive. The annular gap between the cylindrical overlap section and the inner wall of the tube is filled with a structural adhesive layer of controlled thickness. After curing, this adhesive layer forms a first bonding interface and a second bonding interface, respectively enabling shear force transfer between the metal end components at both ends and the tube body.

[0021] The carbon fiber composite tube is the middle section of the entire shaft, which is formed by continuously laying fiber reinforcement directly on the mandrel and curing it using a winding process. The tube is a hollow, thin-walled cylindrical structure, with its inner wall and the cylindrical overlap sections of the metal end components at both ends bonded together via adhesive interfaces. The reinforcing layers of the tube are composed of winding layers with various functional orientations combined in a specific order and thickness ratio. Specifically, the ±45-degree helical torsion-bearing layer is wound in an alternating positive and negative helical pattern, with the fiber orientation close to the principal stress direction under pure torsional load, serving as the core layer bearing the main shear torque; the 5- to 15-degree near-axial small-angle helical reinforcement layer is wound in a small-angle helical pattern close to the axial direction to improve the axial stiffness, first-order bending mode frequency, and critical speed of the tube, while maintaining the continuity of the winding process; the 80- to 90-degree circumferential stabilizing winding layer is wound in a near-circumferential direction to constrain the roundness deformation of the tube under curing shrinkage and service loads, improving the dimensional stability and compressive strength of the end adhesive area. The three types of layers are arranged in an alternating or symmetrical manner to form a composite material laminate structure with a clear division of functions. The thickness ratio and number of layers are quantitatively allocated according to the target torque, critical speed and assembly accuracy requirements.

[0022] The metal end components and the carbon fiber composite tube body are continuously connected by an adhesive layer to achieve load transfer. Specifically, the external input torque is transmitted from the outer end interface of the first metal end component to its cylindrical overlap section, and then through the shearing action of the adhesive interface to the inner wall of the carbon fiber composite tube body. It is then transmitted along the length of the tube body to the other end, and finally through the adhesive interface and cylindrical overlap section of the second metal end component to the outer end interface for output. The adhesive interface, as a critical link in the entire shaft load path, has its load-bearing capacity determined by the overlap length, adhesive layer thickness, adhesive shear strength, and surface treatment condition. The structural integrity of the entire shaft depends on the reliability of the adhesive interface under torque and dynamic loads.

[0023] Furthermore, the installation phase relationship between the two metal end components, namely the relative circumferential angle between the outer interfaces of the first and second metal end components, is precisely controlled during the adhesive bonding process using a coaxial assembly positioning fixture. This phase consistency directly affects the initial dynamic balance quality of the entire shaft. The coaxial assembly fixture simultaneously controls the insertion depth, adhesive layer thickness uniformity, and overall shaft straightness at both ends, ensuring that the axis of the metal component coincides with the axis of the tube body, thus providing a structural foundation for subsequent dynamic balance correction and high-speed rotational stability.

[0024] Furthermore, the metal end components ensure compatibility and assembly precision with external system interfaces. The CFRP wound tube achieves a balance between lightweight design and load-bearing capacity through three functionally oriented winding layers. The adhesive interface acts as a connecting bridge, enabling reliable load transfer between the two dissimilar materials. Together, these three elements constitute the complete structural system of this lightweight drive shaft. The characteristic parameters of this structural system, including the angle and thickness of each winding layer, the inner and outer diameters of the tube, the end overlap length, and the adhesive layer thickness, collectively constitute the design variables and structural boundaries in the subsequent simulation design method. The winding forming method of the tube determines the strong coupling relationship between manufacturing process parameters and structural geometric accuracy, thus providing a reference for subsequent closed-loop feedback design.

[0025] Please refer to Figure 2 , Figure 2 A flowchart illustrating a simulation design method for a drive shaft provided in this application embodiment is shown. The method includes the following steps: Step S110: Obtain design input parameters.

[0026] The design input parameters can be input into the simulation design system by the designer or the host computer. They are the design baseline parameters and serve as the initial boundary conditions for the entire simulation design process.

[0027] The design input parameters include the target load-bearing parameters of the entire shaft, the target dynamic characteristic parameters, and the end interface assembly constraints.

[0028] Among them, the target load-bearing parameters of the shaft may include the shaft length (determined according to the installation space provided by the OEM), the shaft outer diameter (limited by the bearing housing or coupling interface size), and the nominal wall thickness of the tube (preliminarily set according to the weight reduction target and load-bearing requirements).

[0029] Target dynamic characteristic parameters may include target torque T0 (determined based on the maximum output torque of the engine or motor combined with a safety factor), target torsional stiffness K0 (determined based on the dynamic requirements of the transmission system), target critical speed n0 (usually required to be 1.2-1.5 times the maximum operating speed to avoid resonance within the normal operating speed range), and allowable outer diameter runout R. allow And the allowable torsional angle θ_allow (usually taken as 0.3°-0.5° / m). Target torque refers to the maximum torque value that the drive shaft needs to transmit under working conditions. This parameter directly determines the required wall thickness of the tube and the lower limit of the load-bearing capacity of the winding layer assembly. Torsional stiffness refers to the drive shaft's ability to resist torsional deformation. The higher the value, the smaller the angular displacement of the transmission system. For precision transmission systems, the matching of torsional stiffness directly affects the system's control accuracy and dynamic response characteristics.

[0030] The assembly constraints for the end interfaces may include the external interface type of the metal end components (any one of internal splines, external splines, flanges, forks, or toothed sleeves), as well as key dimensional parameters of the interface such as spline module m, number of teeth z, pressure angle α (typically 30° or 45°), and tooth width B (in mm). They may also include the assembly phase requirements between the two end interfaces, i.e., the relative circumferential angular relationship between the first and second end interfaces. These end interface parameters not only determine the external structure of the metal end components, but more importantly, they directly limit the maximum permissible inner diameter of the carbon fiber composite tube, because the inner diameter of the tube must be greater than the spline root diameter or the flange bolt distribution circle diameter; otherwise, the end structure cannot meet the strength requirements.

[0031] In addition, design input parameters may include quality targets, environmental and process constraints. Quality targets (including the target weight reduction rate η_target or the upper limit of the shaft mass m_target, in kg) are also important. The critical speed refers to the speed at which the drive shaft resonates during rotation. When the operating speed approaches the critical speed, even a small mass eccentricity can trigger severe lateral vibration, potentially leading to drive shaft breakage. Quality targets reflect lightweight requirements and are typically measured as a percentage weight reduction relative to a steel drive shaft with equal torque transmission capacity. Environmental and process constraints may specify the maximum operating temperature, humid environment requirements, minimum winding angle for the winding equipment, mandrel material and coefficient of thermal expansion, and curing oven temperature control accuracy.

[0032] Step S120: Determine the structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft based on the design input parameters.

[0033] The simulation design system can first determine the structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft based on the design input parameters. Structural boundary conditions refer to the geometric constraint framework that remains unchanged during subsequent ply design and iterative optimization, including the inner diameter limit of the tube, the lower wall thickness limit, and the dimensions of the end overlap area.

[0034] The tube inner diameter limit refers to the upper limit of the tube's inner diameter, which is constrained by the structural dimensions of the end metal joints. Taking a spline connection as an example, the root diameter of the spline (i.e., the diameter of the spline tooth root circle) determines the minimum material size of the metal end component, and the tube inner diameter must be larger than this size to accommodate the metal overlap section, while also allowing space for the adhesive layer. Determining the upper limit of the inner diameter ensures that the metal end components at both ends can be smoothly inserted into the tube and glued together.

[0035] The lower wall thickness limit refers to the minimum wall thickness required for the pipe body, which is determined by the target torque T0 and the allowable shear stress of the pipe material. This lower wall thickness limit represents the minimum threshold for load-bearing capacity, and the total wall thickness of any feasible ply candidate scheme must not be less than this value.

[0036] The dimension of the end overlap area refers to the adhesive bonding length between the overlapping section of the metal cylinder and the inner wall of the tube. This dimension is determined based on the shear strength requirements of the adhesive interface. A longer overlap length results in a larger adhesive area and a lower average shear stress at the interface, but an excessively long overlap length increases structural weight and assembly difficulty.

[0037] In addition, structural boundary conditions may include the upper limit of the outer diameter of the tube (constrained by the installation space) and the fixed value of the overall shaft length (limited by the installation space provided by the OEM). These dimensional parameters are fixed values ​​throughout the simulation design process and do not change with iteration.

[0038] At this point, the design space is fully defined: the inner diameter of the tube has an upper limit (it cannot exceed the capacity of the end interface), the wall thickness has a lower limit (it cannot be lower than the load-bearing requirements), and the overlap length has a lower limit (it cannot be lower than the adhesive strength requirements). All subsequent generation and adjustment of ply candidates must be carried out within the constraints of these boundary conditions.

[0039] Step S130: Generate an initial ply candidate set based on structural boundary conditions.

[0040] Within the constraints of the structural boundary conditions, the simulation design system generates an initial set of candidate layup schemes according to preset layup design rules. The "candidate set" refers to a complete set of winding layup schemes, composed of three types of winding layers with different functional orientations combined according to a specific thickness ratio and layer order. This set is the object of the finite element verification calculation. It is important to emphasize that the "candidate set" in each iteration is the layup scheme to be verified, not multiple alternative schemes generated simultaneously for selection.

[0041] The initial layup candidate set includes a first-angle helical winding layer for bearing the main shear load, a second-angle helical winding layer for improving axial stiffness and bending mode, and a third-angle circumferential winding layer for constraining tube roundness and assembly dimensional stability.

[0042] In some embodiments, the initial winding angle range of the first angle spiral winding layer is set to ±30° to ±60°, optionally ±45°, and it is wound onto the tube in an alternating positive and negative spiral pattern. The term "±" indicates that the same layer group contains fiber layers with two spiral angles in opposite directions, appearing in pairs to maintain the balance and symmetry of the laminated structure and prevent warping deformation caused by thermal stress after curing. The selection of this angle range is based on the fact that under pure torsional load, the tube bears tensile and compressive principal stresses along the 45° direction. Therefore, a fiber orientation of ±45° is closest to the principal stress direction, most effectively utilizing the axial strength advantage of the fibers to resist shear loads. This layer bears the main shear torque of the tube and is the core load-bearing layer group; its initial thickness ratio is set to 50%-70% (optionally 60%) of the total wall thickness.

[0043] The initial winding angle range for the second-angle helical winding layer is 3° to 20° (optional 5° to 15°), with a small-angle helical winding close to the tube's axial direction. The lower limit of the angle is constrained by the nozzle limit of the winding equipment. If the minimum winding angle of the equipment is 5°, then the lower limit of this layer's angle is 5°; if the equipment limit is 3°, then the lower limit can be 3°. The fiber orientation within this angle range is close to the axial direction, which can effectively improve the axial elastic modulus and bending stiffness of the tube, thereby increasing the first-order bending mode frequency and critical speed of the drive shaft. The initial thickness ratio is set to 20%-40% of the total wall thickness (optional 30%).

[0044] The initial winding angle of the third-angle circumferential winding layer ranges from 70° to 90°, wound in a circumferential manner nearly perpendicular to the axis. It should be noted that this angle is not exactly equal to a pure 90° circumferential winding, as a pure 90° winding carries the risk of ineffective fiber fixation at equipment transitions and end convergence points. Therefore, it is set to 70° to 90° to balance circumferential constraint effect and process feasibility. The main function of this layer is to constrain the roundness deformation of the tube body under curing shrinkage and operating loads, and to improve the dimensional stability of the end adhesive bonding assembly area. The initial thickness ratio is set to 5%-15% of the total wall thickness (optional 10%).

[0045] The adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set can be divided into three categories: ply design variables (thickness ratio of each winding layer, number of layers, layer group sequence, and winding angle value), connection structure variables (end overlap length, adhesive layer thickness), and forming compensation variables (mandrel radial compensation amount, winding tension value). These three types of variables are assigned default values ​​during initial generation and are adjusted according to rules based on the verification results in subsequent iterations. Among them, the ply design variables determine the load-bearing capacity of the fiber skeleton, the connection structure variables determine the load transfer efficiency of the heterogeneous material interface, and the forming compensation variables reserve a margin for dimensional deviation control in actual manufacturing.

[0046] The layup sequence typically employs a symmetrical and balanced arrangement, for example, arranged from the inner wall to the outer wall in the order of [third-angle circumferential winding layer / first-angle spiral winding layer / second-angle spiral winding layer / first-angle spiral winding layer / third-angle circumferential winding layer], ensuring that the tube does not warp after curing. The thickness of each single layer is calculated based on the areal density and fiber volume fraction (typically 60% ± 3%) of the selected prepreg. The total wall thickness is obtained by summing the thicknesses of each layer and is not less than the aforementioned lower limit for wall thickness.

[0047] Step S140: Use the finite element simulation model to perform multi-objective verification calculations on the initial ply candidate set to obtain multi-dimensional quantitative indicators.

[0048] The simulation design system uses the generated initial set of candidate layups as input to build a finite element simulation model for multi-objective verification calculations. "Multi-objective" means that the simulation outputs multiple quantitative indicators representing different performance dimensions, rather than focusing solely on a single strength indicator. The purpose of this step is to evaluate in a virtual environment whether the current layup scheme meets all design requirements.

[0049] Finite element models can be established using either laminated shell models or solid models. Laminated shell models are suitable for rapid calculations of thin-walled tubes, employing shell elements to simulate the tube structure, with each layup treated as an independent layer and assigned orthotropic material properties. Solid models are suitable for thick-walled tubes or applications requiring precise capture of interlaminar stress distribution, using three-dimensional solid elements for layer-by-layer modeling. The input material property parameters include: longitudinal elastic modulus E1 (along the fiber direction), transverse elastic modulus E2 (perpendicular to the fiber direction), and in-plane shear modulus G. 12 Poisson's ratio ν 12 In addition, the strength parameters in each direction were obtained through composite material mechanical property testing.

[0050] Boundary conditions and load application are set according to the actual working state of the drive shaft. In the torsional stiffness analysis, a fixed constraint (constraining all degrees of freedom) is applied to one end of the tube, and a shear load corresponding to the target torque T0 is applied to the other end. In the critical speed analysis, free-free boundary conditions (simulating unsupported rotational state) or simply supported boundary conditions (simulating the bearing-supported state at both ends) are used. The mesh is generated using quadrilateral shell elements or hexahedral solid elements, and the mesh is refined in the glued region at the ends to accurately capture the stress gradient.

[0051] In some implementations, the multi-dimensional quantitative indicators include at least two of the following: torsional stiffness index, end interface connection strength index, material failure index, buckling safety factor index, critical speed index, and tube geometric accuracy deviation index.

[0052] Torsional stiffness index K t By extracting the torsion angle θ at the torsion end, according to Calculated. This index characterizes the tube's ability to resist torsional deformation and must meet the following requirements. Otherwise, it indicates that the tube body will produce excessive angular displacement under the target torque, affecting the phase accuracy of the transmission system. K0 represents the target torque, which is the input torque at the end.

[0053] End interface connection strength index By extracting the shear stress components of the adhesive interface unit, according to the formula... Calculate the average shear stress of the adhesive layer, where The bonding radius is [missing information]. This refers to the overlap length. This specification must meet the following requirements. , This indicates the permissible strength index, which is a preset value; otherwise, it indicates a risk of debonding at the adhesive interface under the target torque. When the shear stress reaches a concentrated peak at the end of the lap joint, the finite element model can capture this local stress concentration phenomenon and use its maximum value as the criterion for judgment.

[0054] Material Failure Index By extracting the principal stress components of each ply , , Calculated according to the Tsai-Hill failure criterion Where X, Y, and S represent longitudinal strength, transverse strength, and in-plane shear strength, respectively, all of which can be obtained through standard material testing methods. This index must meet the following requirements: , It is a preset indicator value; when the index value exceeds... The time indicates that the material has failed, below This represents the safety margin under the current load.

[0055] In some implementations, the material failure index can also be calculated using any one of the Tsai-Wu, Hashing, Puck, maximum stress, or maximum strain criteria.

[0056] Buckling safety factor index First-order buckling eigenvalues ​​were extracted using linear buckling analysis. (i.e., the critical torque at which the pipe body becomes unstable), according to Calculation. This indicator must meet the following requirements. (Typically 1.5-2.0), meaning the tube body must have sufficient buckling margin under the target torque. When If the material is insufficient, the pipe may become unstable overall or wrinkle locally before reaching the material strength limit.

[0057] Critical speed index First-order bending mode frequencies were extracted through modal analysis. (Unit: Hz), according to The calculation yielded a coefficient of 60 (derived from the unit conversion between r / min and Hz). This indicator must meet the following requirements. (Indicates the target critical speed), ensuring that the operating speed range of the drive shaft avoids the resonance zone. When When the speed is insufficient, the pipe body will experience severe lateral vibration near the operating speed.

[0058] Pipe geometric accuracy deviation indicators include diameter deviation Wall thickness deviation and outer circle runout These geometric accuracy indicators, during the finite element verification stage, are mainly based on the calculation of the theoretical manufacturing deviation range using the set values ​​of ply thickness and process parameters, and are used as the basis for judging the rationality of subsequent process parameters. The calculation formula is: , This represents the measured diameter of the pipe at the k-th measurement section. This represents the theoretical design value of the pipe diameter. This indicates that the maximum absolute value of the diameter deviation is taken for all k measured sections. This represents the measured value of the pipe wall thickness at the k-th measurement point. This represents the theoretical design value of the pipe wall thickness. This represents the maximum absolute value of the deviation between the actual wall thickness and the theoretical wall thickness at each measuring point on the pipe. This indicates the allowable external circle runout value.

[0059] In addition to the indicators listed above, multi-dimensional quantitative indicators may also include other indicators, such as polar moment of inertia, torsional shear stress of the tube, weight reduction rate, and layer thickness ratio. In practical applications, all of the above indicators and those listed here can be used, or they can be combined arbitrarily according to design requirements.

[0060] The polar moment of inertia J is a geometric characteristic quantity describing the resistance of the tube's cross-section to torsional deformation, and can be obtained through the following calculation formula: D0 and D i These represent the outer and inner diameters of the tube, respectively, and t represents the wall thickness. The radius of the median diameter of the pipe wall thickness.

[0061] Torsional shear stress in the tube The shear stress generated along the circumferential direction on the cross-section of the tube under torque is calculated using the following formula: .

[0062] weight loss rate This refers to the percentage reduction in mass of the hybrid driveshaft in this design compared to a traditional metal driveshaft, calculated using the following formula: , This indicates the reference mass of a traditional metal drive shaft. This indicates the mass of the hybrid drive shaft in this design.

[0063] Layer thickness ratio The thickness ratio of the i-th type of winding layer is represented by the following formula: , Indicates the thickness of the i-th type of winding layer. This represents the sum of the thicknesses of all types of winding layers.

[0064] Step S150: Compare the multi-dimensional quantization indexes with the corresponding preset thresholds one by one. If any index does not meet the preset threshold, adjust the adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set according to the preset hierarchical feedback rule.

[0065] The simulation design system compares the above multi-dimensional quantization indexes with the corresponding preset thresholds one by one and performs hierarchical feedback correction according to the comparison results. The core logic of this step is that different types of index failures correspond to different physical reasons, so different correction strategies need to be adopted instead of homogenizing all failures. If any index does not meet the preset threshold, adjust the adjustable design parameters in the ply candidate set according to the preset hierarchical feedback rule.

[0066] In some embodiments, the hierarchical feedback rule specifically includes: (1) Feedback correction for insufficient torsional stiffness. When the torsional stiffness index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the first-angle helical winding layer.

[0067] For example, when K t <K0 or the torsional angle θ>θ_allow, it indicates that the tube body generates excessive shear deformation under the target torque. The system preferentially adjusts the thickness ratio or number of layers of the first-angle helical winding layer. The specific operation is to add a pair of helical layers in opposite directions (both appear in pairs to maintain balance) on the basis of the existing angle layer, or fine-tune the winding angle value within its angle range (±30° to ±60°) (for example, adjust from ±45° to ±42°) to make the fiber direction closer to the maximum shear stress direction, thereby improving the torque-bearing efficiency. Recalculate the total wall thickness after each adjustment and verify whether it still meets the wall thickness lower limit constraint.

[0068] (2) Feedback correction for insufficient interfacial connection strength or material failure index. When the end interfacial connection strength index or the material failure index index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the end lap length or the adhesive layer thickness, and / or adjust the layer group order or the end reinforcement layer ratio.

[0069] For example, when > or >1, it indicates that there is a risk of debonding at the bonded interface or the material has reached the failure state. The system first adjusts the layer group order in the ply design variables (move the stiffer layer to the outside and the softer layer to the inside to change the stress distribution), and secondly adjusts the end lap length L b (increase the lap length to reduce the average shear stress at the interface) or the adhesive layer thickness t_adhesive (reduce the adhesive layer thickness to improve the shear transfer efficiency, but ensure that the lower limit is not less than 0.05 mm to prevent lack of adhesive), and add end reinforcement layers if necessary (that is, add additional winding layers at both ends of the tube body to locally thicken).

[0070] (3) Feedback correction for insufficient buckling or critical speed. When the buckling safety factor index or critical speed index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the second angle helical winding layer.

[0071] For example, when < or < If this occurs, it indicates that the axial stiffness or bending stiffness of the pipe body is insufficient. The system first adjusts the thickness ratio of the second-angle spiral winding layer (increasing the number of layers) or reduces the winding angle value within the range of 3° to 20° (e.g., from 10° to 6°) to improve the axial modulus of elasticity and bending stiffness. If adjusting the small-angle layer alone cannot meet the requirements, the system prompts that the designer needs to confirm whether to adjust the overall shaft length or support conditions.

[0072] (4) Feedback correction of geometric accuracy deviation. When the geometric accuracy deviation index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the radial compensation amount of the mandrel or the winding tension value, and / or adjust the thickness ratio of the third angle circumferential winding layer.

[0073] For example, when the geometric accuracy deviation indicators of the tube body (diameter deviation, wall thickness deviation, outer circle runout) exceed the preset tolerance, it indicates that the dimensional stability of the tube body is insufficient under the given process conditions. The system prioritizes adjusting the radial compensation amount of the mandrel in the forming compensation variables (increasing or decreasing the radial dimension of the corresponding area of ​​the mandrel according to the deviation direction), or adjusting the thickness ratio of the third angle circumferential winding layer (increasing this layer to strengthen the radial constraint of the tube body), and adjusting the winding tension value (reducing porosity and increasing compaction by increasing tension, but the adjustment range must be controlled within ±5% to prevent fiber buckling).

[0074] Step S160: Update the layup candidate set with the adjusted adjustable design parameters, and recalculate the multi-objective verification until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators meet the corresponding preset thresholds, and output the target process parameter set.

[0075] The above feedback correction is a cyclical iterative process. After each adjustment, the simulation design system regenerates the candidate set of layup layers with the updated adjustable design parameter values ​​and performs finite element multi-objective verification calculations again. The iteration continues until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators simultaneously meet the corresponding preset thresholds. If the number of iterations exceeds the preset upper limit (e.g., 20 rounds) and convergence is still not achieved, the system outputs a warning that "no feasible solution is available under the current constraints" and suggests relaxing a certain constraint (e.g., allowing an increase in total wall thickness or a reduction in the critical speed requirement). After the iteration converges, the system outputs a target process parameter set, which includes at least one of the following: the corrected layup sequence and number of layers, the corrected winding angle and thickness ratio of each layer, the mandrel radial compensation dimension, the winding tension value, the adhesive layer control thickness, the end overlap control length, and the coaxial assembly phase control amount, which are used to guide the subsequent drive shaft winding forming equipment to perform the tube body forming operation.

[0076] In the above implementation process, by embedding finite element calculations into a threshold-based optimization process, each round of adjustment of the layup candidate set has clear physical criteria as the basis for correction. All verification results meet multiple set requirements, ensuring that the final output target process parameter set can be directly used to guide the actual production operation of the winding forming equipment. In this way, simulation design no longer stops at the virtual verification level, but provides sufficient theoretical basis for the target process parameter set, enabling the physical drive shaft manufactured based on this parameter set to have reliable design traceability in performance indicators. This effectively reduces process deviations and geometric errors introduced by the disconnect between design input and manufacturing execution, thereby improving the consistency, reliability, and pass rate of drive shaft products.

[0077] After outputting the target process parameter set, the drive shaft winding forming equipment can perform tube body solid forming operations based on the target process parameter set. Specifically, the winding forming equipment can be controlled according to the target process parameter set to complete tube body winding forming, curing and demolding, end processing, metal end component gluing assembly, and whole shaft precision machining to obtain a solid drive shaft. Subsequently, in order to perform feedback closed-loop design, the solid drive shaft can be placed at the testing station, and measured data can be obtained item by item according to the preset testing items. Then, feedback redesign can be performed based on the measured data.

[0078] Specifically, measured data of the physical drive shaft can be obtained, including measured values ​​of geometric accuracy and dynamic performance. Then, the measured data is compared with the theoretical values ​​corresponding to the target process parameter set. Based on the deviation comparison results, the correction amount of the adjustable design parameters is generated. This correction amount is used as the initial compensation parameter for subsequent iterations.

[0079] Among them, the measured values ​​of geometric accuracy are obtained directly through physical measurement methods, and specifically include the following items: Measured values ​​of the outer and inner diameters of the pipe: An outside micrometer can be used to measure the outer diameter at three equidistant cross-sections (both ends and the middle) along the axial direction of the pipe. Each cross-section is divided into eight circumferential positions. The maximum deviation between each measured value and the average value of that cross-section is taken as the measured diameter deviation Δ_D_actual. The inner diameter of the pipe is measured using a pneumatic gauge or an inside micrometer at the same cross-section and positions to obtain the actual inner diameter distribution data. The measured values ​​of the outer and inner diameters are used to calculate the actual wall thickness distribution and serve as the basis for determining whether the pipe cross-sectional dimensions meet the design tolerance requirements.

[0080] Measured wall thickness distribution: An ultrasonic thickness gauge was used to select a measurement section every 50 mm along the axial direction of the pipe. At each section, a wall thickness value was measured every 45° circumferentially, generating a wall thickness distribution cloud map covering the entire pipe. The measured wall thickness distribution reflects the uniformity of fiber accumulation and resin flow during the winding process and is key data for determining whether there are areas of excessive thinness or thickness in the pipe. The wall thickness deviation Δ_t_actual is taken as the absolute value of the largest deviation from the nominal wall thickness among all measuring points.

[0081] Measured roundness: The roundness of the tube was measured at three cross-sections—at both ends and the middle—using a roundness meter. The difference between the maximum and minimum radii at each cross-section was recorded, and the maximum value of the three cross-sections was taken as the measured roundness error. Roundness error reflects the degree to which the cross-sectional shape of the tube deviates from an ideal circle, directly affecting the vibration characteristics of the drive shaft during high-speed rotation.

[0082] Measured straightness: The center holes at both ends of the drive shaft are supported on a precision runout gauge. A dial indicator is used to measure the radial runout along the upper, lower, and side generatrices of the tube (i.e., measuring radial runout at 50mm intervals along the axial direction, scanning at the top, bottom, and side of the tube). The maximum value of the three sets of measurements is taken as the measured straightness value. Straightness reflects the degree to which the tube axis deviates from an ideal straight line and directly affects the additional load on the bearings at both ends.

[0083] Measured External Circle Runout: The radial runout of the outer circle of the tube relative to the axis of the center holes at both ends is measured using a diagonal gauge. The specific procedure is as follows: Support the center holes at both ends of the drive shaft between the pins of the diagonal gauge. Take a measurement section at the middle and both ends of the tube. Slowly rotate the drive shaft one revolution, and record the peak radial runout at each section using a dial indicator. Take the maximum value of the three sections as the measured external circle runout value R_out_actual. External circle runout is an important characteristic parameter of the dynamic balance quality of the drive shaft, directly determining the magnitude of the centrifugal force during high-speed rotation.

[0084] Measured coaxiality at both ends: The axial positions of the outer circles or spline pitch circles of the metal end components at both ends are measured using a coordinate measuring machine. The spatial deviation distance between the two axes is calculated, and this distance value is taken as the measured coaxiality value. Coaxiality reflects the degree of coincidence of the axes of the metal end components and the pipe body after adhesive bonding assembly, and is an important geometric parameter affecting the uniformity of stress distribution at the adhesive interface.

[0085] Measured phase values ​​of spline ends: For drive shafts with spline interfaces, the actual angle between the circumferential positions of the first and second spline teeth is measured using a spline phase measuring instrument or a coordinate measuring machine. The difference between the measured value and the designed phase angle is taken as the measured phase deviation. This deviation directly affects the initial dynamic balance quality of the shaft. If the deviation is too large, even if the tube body itself has a uniform wall thickness, the shaft will still generate a large initial imbalance.

[0086] The measured values ​​of dynamic performance are obtained through dynamic testing, and specifically include the following items: The measured torsional stiffness K_t_actual is determined by mounting the entire shaft on a static torsion test bench, connecting both ends to the test bench's output and torque sensor via splines or flange adapters. A constant rate of torque is applied, gradually increasing from 0 to the target torque T0. The test bench control system automatically records the torsional angle corresponding to each torque value. The actual torsional stiffness K_t_actual = ΔT / Δθ is calculated from the linear segment of the torque-torsion angle curve (typically within the 20%-80% T0 range). This measured value is the most direct basis for determining whether the pipe's shear stiffness meets design requirements.

[0087] Measured critical speed n_cr_actual: The entire shaft is mounted on a high-speed rotating test bench, and eddy current displacement sensors or acceleration sensors are placed at the bearing housings at both ends. The test bench drives the entire shaft from a low speed to 1.2 times the target maximum speed, with an acceleration rate of 200-300 r / (min·s). The control system records the vibration amplitude at each speed in real time. When a significant peak value appears in the vibration amplitude, the speed corresponding to that peak point is the actual first-order critical speed n_cr_actual. If no significant peak value appears in the vibration amplitude within the scanning range, the actual critical speed is determined to be higher than the maximum scanning speed and recorded as "greater than the upper limit value".

[0088] Measured static torsional load: Continue loading onto the static torsion test bench until the ultimate torque (1.5-2.0 times the target torque) is reached, or until the specimen fails. Record the maximum torque value T_ult_actual at failure and the failure mode (e.g., tube bursting, adhesive layer debonding, yielding of metal end components, etc.). This measured value is the direct basis for verifying the actual load margin of the drive shaft.

[0089] Measured dynamic balance values: The entire shaft is mounted on a rigid support dynamic balancing machine, with the balancing speed set to 30%-50% of the operating speed. The dynamic balancing machine measures the magnitude and phase angle of the initial imbalance on the correction planes at both ends. If the initial imbalance exceeds the allowable value, the dynamic balancing machine can correct it by drilling holes or adding weight to the pre-reserved balancing and weight-removing surfaces at the metal ends. Record the imbalance values ​​before and after weight removal; the initial imbalance and its phase before weight removal serve as crucial feedback data. The dynamic balance reflects the degree of eccentricity of the shaft's mass distribution relative to the axis of rotation and is a core indicator for judging the high-speed rotational stability of the drive shaft.

[0090] The simulation design system compares the measured data with the theoretical design values ​​corresponding to the target process parameters item by item to identify the physical causes of the deviations through correlation analysis, providing direction for the generation of subsequent corrections.

[0091] (1) Correlation analysis between wall thickness deviation and dynamic balance eccentricity.

[0092] The simulation design system superimposes and compares the circumferential distribution data of wall thickness obtained by ultrasonic thickness measurement with the phase angle of the initial imbalance measured by the dynamic balancing machine. If the angle of the thinner area differs from the angle of the dynamic balancing point by about 180° (i.e., relative), the root cause of the deviation is determined to be "uneven density distribution". That is, although the geometric thickness of this area is normal, the fiber volume fraction is low (resin enrichment), resulting in lighter weight and thus mass eccentricity.

[0093] That is, when generating the correction amount, when the circumferential distribution deviation of the wall thickness coincides with the eccentricity direction of the dynamic balance in the circumferential angle, the corresponding mandrel radial compensation correction amount and / or winding tension gradient correction amount are generated in the angular direction.

[0094] Among them, the circumferential distribution deviation of wall thickness refers to the azimuth angle of the thinner wall thickness in the circumferential distribution of wall thickness.

[0095] The direction of dynamic balancing eccentricity can be detected as follows: When a solid drive shaft is mounted on a dynamic balancing machine and rotated, if the mass distribution of the tube is not perfectly symmetrical with respect to the axis of rotation, a centrifugal force vector pointing in a specific direction will be generated, called the dynamic balancing eccentricity vector. The magnitude of this vector represents the eccentricity, and the direction represents the azimuth angle of the excess weight (mass surplus). The dynamic balancing machine can accurately output this angle value.

[0096] The overlap here can be understood as the deviation between the two being within a set range. If the deviation is within the set range, a correction amount is generated.

[0097] For example, the mandrel radius compensation value can be increased (e.g., +0.015-0.025mm) in the direction of thinner wall thickness and decreased (e.g., -0.015-0.025mm) in the direction of thicker wall thickness, so that the mandrel used in the next round of production will have a slightly elliptical shape in the corresponding angular orientation, in order to compensate for uneven curing shrinkage and uneven material distribution. The specific compensation value can be determined by multiplying the ratio of the wall thickness deviation to the nominal wall thickness by the mandrel diameter and then proceeding in the opposite direction.

[0098] For example, the winding tension in the direction of thinner wall thickness can be increased (e.g., by 3%-8% of the original tension) to force more fibers to accumulate and compact in that area; conversely, the winding tension in the direction of thicker wall thickness can be decreased (e.g., by 3%-8% of the original tension) to reduce fiber accumulation in that area. It's important to note that "angle direction" here does not refer to dynamically adjusting the tension within a single circumferential cycle. Real-time tension adjustment by angle direction during actual winding is difficult to achieve on the equipment. Instead, in the next winding cycle, the fiber placement at different circumferential angles is slightly altered by adjusting the rotational speed of the mandrel and the axial movement of the nozzle to compensate for wall thickness deviations.

[0099] The specific implementation principle is as follows: The corrected tension value is plotted as a tension distribution curve with the angle and orientation as the horizontal axis and the tension value as the vertical axis. The tension setting value is increased in areas with thinner wall thickness and decreased in areas with thicker wall thickness. The tension is smoothly transitioned along the circumference, so that the fibers can achieve differentiated accumulation in the next round of winding, and the wall thickness uniformity is gradually corrected.

[0100] (2) Identification of the root cause of critical speed deviation.

[0101] The simulation design system compares the measured critical speed value n_cr_actual with the theoretical design value n. cr Compare them. If n_cr_actual <n cr If the deviation exceeds 5% (i.e., the measured value is more than 5% lower than the design value), the root cause of the deviation is determined to be "insufficient axial stiffness." The overall bending stiffness of the pipe is lower than the design expectation. This may be due to the actual thickness ratio of the near-axial small-angle spiral reinforcement layer being lower than the design value, the actual fiber winding angle being greater than the design value (e.g., it should be 10° but is wound at 15°), or the resin modulus after curing not reaching the design value. If n_cr_actual>n cr If the deviation exceeds 5%, it indicates that the actual stiffness of the pipe is higher than expected, which usually will not trigger a correction. However, if the deviation is too large (more than 10%), it may mean that the wall thickness is too thick, resulting in increased mass, and it is necessary to check whether there is over-design.

[0102] That is, when generating the corrective amount, if the measured critical speed value in the measured dynamic performance is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range, a corrective amount for increasing the thickness ratio of the second-angle spiral winding layer is generated.

[0103] For example, the thickness ratio of the second-angle spiral winding layer can be increased by 2 - 4 percentage points (e.g., from 30% to 33% - 34%), that is, increasing the number of winding layers of this layer or increasing its single-layer thickness to improve the axial elastic modulus and overall bending stiffness.

[0104] If the actual winding angle detection shows that it is greater than the design value (e.g., the design value is 10° and the actual winding is 12°), then in the next round, the angle setting value of this layer is adjusted to 8° to compensate for the actual deviation; if the design itself needs to be adjusted, the angle value is decreased in steps of 1° within the range of 3° - 20°.

[0105] (3)Identification of the root cause of torsional stiffness deviation.

[0106] The simulation design system compares the measured torsional stiffness value K_t_actual with the design target value K0. If K_t_actual < K0 and the deviation exceeds 5%, it is determined that the root cause of the deviation is "insufficient shear stiffness", and the torsional resistance of the pipe body is lower than the design expectation. The reason may be that the actual thickness ratio of the ±45° spiral torsion-bearing layer is lower than the design value, or the actual winding angle of the ±45° layer deviates from the design angle (e.g., the deviation exceeds ±2°), or the matrix shear modulus is low due to insufficient resin curing. If K_t_actual > K0 and the deviation exceeds 5%, it indicates that the torsional stiffness of the pipe body is higher than the design value. At this time, check whether the overall shaft quality exceeds the target. If the quality does not exceed the standard, no correction is triggered.

[0107] That is, when generating the corrective amount, if the measured torsional stiffness value in the measured dynamic performance is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range, a corrective amount for increasing the thickness ratio of the first-angle spiral winding layer is generated.

[0108] For example, the thickness ratio of the first-angle spiral winding layer is increased by 2 - 4 percentage points (e.g., from 60% to 63% - 64%), that is, increasing the number of winding layers of this layer to improve the shear stiffness and torque-bearing capacity of the pipe body.

[0109] If the actual winding angle detection shows a deviation from the design value (e.g., the design value is ±45° and the actual winding is ±48°), then in the next round, the angle setting value of this layer is adjusted to ±42° to compensate for the actual deviation.

[0110] In addition, the measured outer circle runout value R_out_actual can also be compared with the design theoretical value R allow for comparison. When R_out_actual > Rallow At this time, the proportion of the third circumferential winding layer or the cooling rate can be adjusted.

[0111] For example, the thickness ratio of the third-angle circumferential winding layer can be increased by 1-3 percentage points (e.g., from 10% to 12%) to enhance the radial constraint stiffness of the tube and suppress uneven shrinkage during the curing and cooling process. The specific increase value is determined based on the severity of the roundness deviation.

[0112] If the roundness deviation manifests as multiple harmonics along the circumference of the pipe (i.e., there are multiple irregular protrusions or depressions), the simulation design system suggests reducing the curing cooling rate from 2°C / min to 0.5-1.0°C / min, or adding intermediate insulation steps during the cooling process (such as insulation at 120°C and 80°C for 30 minutes each) to reduce curing shrinkage stress.

[0113] In addition, if the initial imbalance phase angle measured by the dynamic balancing machine shows a consistent distribution pattern in the actual measurement of multiple consecutive drive shafts (such as the dynamic balancing focus of the same batch of products appearing in the same angular position), then the root cause of the deviation is determined to be systematic. For example, the thread nozzle of the winding equipment has a positioning deviation in a certain angular position, or the mandrel has a repeatable geometric deviation in that position, rather than being caused by random factors. In this case, the system can generate a systematic correction rather than compensate for each piece individually.

[0114] In addition, corresponding correction values ​​can be generated for adhesive layer defects, including adjusting the adhesive layer thickness control value, adjusting the pressing speed, and adjusting the coaxial assembly phase control value.

[0115] In some implementations, the environmental adaptability of the physical drive shaft can also be verified, such as temperature cycling test, damp heat test, etc. If the test fails, the temperature and humidity during the manufacturing process can be adjusted accordingly.

[0116] Therefore, after manufacturing the physical drive shaft according to the target process parameter set, this solution can verify the static torsion, torsional stiffness, dynamic balance, critical speed, and environmental adaptability of the physical drive shaft, and then obtain the corresponding correction amount.

[0117] The simulation design system categorizes the generated correction quantities according to variable type and writes them back to the corresponding initial value positions in the adjustable design parameters. Specifically: The mandrel radial compensation correction amount is written back to the initial value of the mandrel radial compensation amount in the forming compensation variable, and used as the basis for dimensional modification of the mandrel machining drawing before the next round of production.

[0118] The winding tension gradient correction is written back to the initial value of the winding tension in the forming compensation variable, serving as the basis for the tension curve setting of the next round of winding process parameters.

[0119] The thickness ratio correction and winding angle correction of each layer are written back to the corresponding initial values ​​of the thickness ratio and angle in the layup design variables, as the default values ​​when generating the initial layup candidate set in the next round.

[0120] In addition, the correction amounts for adhesive layer thickness, pressing speed, and phase control are written back to the initial values ​​of the corresponding adhesive layer thickness, assembly speed, and phase control values ​​in the connection structure variables, serving as the basis for the next round of coaxial assembly tooling parameter adjustments.

[0121] After the corrections are written back, the simulation design system uses the updated initial values ​​as the initial compensation parameters for the next iteration, and re-executes all the aforementioned steps of generating the candidate ply set, finite element verification calculation, and quantification judgment. At this point, the initial candidate ply set carries compensation information from the previous round of physical prototype manufacturing; its initial values ​​for ply ratio, angle, and process parameters are no longer simply default values, but optimized values ​​calibrated with measured data. After multiple iterations, the measured values ​​of various geometric accuracies and dynamic performance will gradually converge to near the theoretical design values, allowing subsequent mass-produced drive shafts to directly adopt the converged combination of process parameters.

[0122] During mass production, the simulation design system can periodically incorporate measured data from sampled products into the existing process-performance mapping database as new samples. By accumulating historical data, the system continuously optimizes the accuracy of the initial compensation parameters. This database records the mapping relationship between the process parameter settings and corresponding measured results for each round. As the amount of data accumulates, the simulation design system can use response surface methodology or surrogate models to intelligently recommend the selection of initial values, enabling the closed-loop feedback to evolve from single-round corrections to continuous optimization.

[0123] In the aforementioned implementation process, the measured values ​​of geometric accuracy and dynamic performance are compared with their theoretical design values ​​item by item to identify deviations. Based on the type and direction of the deviations, targeted adjustable design parameter corrections are generated, achieving quantitative capture and parameter attribution of manufacturing errors. These corrections are written back into subsequent iterations as initial compensation parameters, enabling targeted adjustments to processes such as layup design, mandrel compensation, tension control, and adhesive assembly, driven by actual manufacturing results. This eliminates the impact of process deviations such as curing shrinkage, thermal stress deformation, and assembly gap fluctuations, which are difficult to fully reflect in simulation calculations, on product performance. This mechanism effectively bridges the error chain between virtual simulation and physical manufacturing, giving the design method self-learning and continuous evolution capabilities, allowing for progressively improved geometric consistency and performance stability in subsequent batches of products.

[0124] Please refer to the above method embodiments. Figure 3 , Figure 3This is a structural block diagram of a simulation design device 200 for a drive shaft provided in an embodiment of this application. The device 200 may be a module, program segment, or code on an electronic device. It should be understood that the device 200 corresponds to the above method embodiment and is capable of performing the various steps involved in the method embodiment. The specific functions of the device 200 can be found in the description above. To avoid repetition, detailed descriptions are appropriately omitted here.

[0125] Optionally, the device 200 includes: The parameter acquisition module 210 is used to acquire design input parameters, which include the target load-bearing parameters of the entire shaft, the target dynamic characteristic parameters, and the end interface assembly constraints. The condition determination module 220 is used to determine the structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft according to the design input parameters. The structural boundary conditions include the inner diameter limit of the tube, the lower limit of the wall thickness, and the size of the end overlap area. The ply candidate generation module 230 is used to generate an initial ply candidate set based on the structural boundary conditions. The initial ply candidate set includes a first-angle helical winding layer for bearing the main shear load, a second-angle helical winding layer for improving axial stiffness and bending mode, and a third-angle circumferential winding layer for constraining the roundness of the tube and the stability of the assembly dimensions. The multi-dimensional calculation module 240 is used to perform multi-objective verification calculations on the initial ply candidate set using a finite element simulation model to obtain multi-dimensional quantitative indicators. The comparison module 250 is used to compare the multi-dimensional quantitative indicators one by one with the corresponding preset thresholds. If any indicator does not meet the preset threshold, the adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set are adjusted according to the preset hierarchical feedback rules. The parameter output module 260 is used to update the layup candidate set with the adjusted adjustable design parameters and re-perform multi-objective verification calculations until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators meet the corresponding preset thresholds, and output the target process parameter set. The target process parameter set is used to guide the drive shaft winding forming equipment to perform tube body solid forming operations.

[0126] Optionally, the device 200 further includes: The feedback module is used to acquire measured data of the physical drive shaft, including measured values ​​of geometric accuracy and dynamic performance; compare the measured data with the theoretical values ​​corresponding to the target process parameter set, and generate a correction amount for the adjustable design parameters based on the deviation comparison result. The correction amount is used as the initial compensation parameter for subsequent iterations.

[0127] Optionally, the feedback module is configured to generate a mandrel radial compensation correction and / or winding tension gradient correction in the corresponding angular direction when the circumferential distribution deviation of the wall thickness in the measured geometric accuracy values ​​coincides with the eccentricity direction of the dynamic balance in the circumferential angle; generate a correction to increase the thickness ratio of the second angle spiral winding layer when the measured critical speed in the measured dynamic performance values ​​is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range; and generate a correction to increase the thickness ratio of the first angle spiral winding layer when the measured torsional stiffness in the measured dynamic performance values ​​is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range.

[0128] Optionally, the multi-dimensional quantitative indicators include at least two of the following: torsional stiffness index, end interface connection strength index, material failure index, buckling safety factor index, critical speed index, and tube geometric accuracy deviation index.

[0129] Optionally, the comparison module 250 is configured to: adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the first angle spiral winding layer when the torsional stiffness index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold; adjust the end overlap length or adhesive layer thickness, and / or adjust the layer group sequence or end reinforcement layer ratio when the end interface connection strength index or the material failure index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold; adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the second angle spiral winding layer when the buckling safety factor index or the critical speed index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold; and adjust the mandrel radial compensation amount or winding tension value, and / or adjust the thickness ratio of the third angle circumferential winding layer when the geometric accuracy deviation index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold.

[0130] Optionally, the winding angle range of the first angle spiral winding layer is ±30° to ±60°, the winding angle range of the second angle spiral winding layer is 3° to 20°, and the winding angle range of the third angle circumferential winding layer is 70° to 90°.

[0131] Optionally, the target process parameter set includes at least one of the following: the corrected layup sequence and number of layers, the corrected winding angle and thickness ratio of each layer, the mandrel radial compensation dimension, the winding tension value, the adhesive layer control thickness, the end overlap control length, and the coaxial assembly phase control amount.

[0132] It should be noted that those skilled in the art will clearly understand that, for the sake of convenience and brevity, the specific working process of the device described above can be referred to the corresponding process in the foregoing method embodiments, and will not be repeated here.

[0133] Please refer to Figure 4 , Figure 4This application provides a schematic diagram of an electronic device for executing a simulation design method for a drive shaft. The electronic device may include: at least one processor 310, such as a CPU; at least one communication interface 320; at least one memory 330; and at least one communication bus 340. The communication bus 340 is used to establish communication between these components. In this embodiment, the communication interface 320 is used for signaling or data communication with other node devices. The memory 330 may be a high-speed RAM or non-volatile memory, such as at least one disk storage device. Optionally, the memory 330 may also be at least one storage device located remotely from the processor. The memory 330 stores computer-readable instructions, which, when executed by the processor 310, cause the electronic device to perform the aforementioned method process.

[0134] Understandable. Figure 4 The structure shown is for illustrative purposes only; the electronic device may also include components that are more advanced than those shown. Figure 4 The more or fewer components shown, or having the same Figure 4 The different configurations shown. Figure 4 The components shown can be implemented using hardware, software, or a combination thereof.

[0135] This application provides a computer-readable storage medium storing a computer program thereon. When the computer program is executed by a processor, it performs the method process executed by the electronic device in the above method embodiments.

[0136] This embodiment discloses a computer program product, which includes a computer program stored on a non-transitory computer-readable storage medium. The computer program includes program instructions, and when the program instructions are executed by a computer, the computer can perform the methods provided in the above-described method embodiments.

[0137] In summary, this application provides a simulation design method, electronic device, storage medium, and program product for a drive shaft. This method embeds finite element calculations into a threshold-based optimization process, ensuring that each adjustment of the layup candidate set has clear physical criteria as the basis for correction. All verification results meet multiple set requirements, ensuring that the final output target process parameter set can be directly used to guide the actual production operation of the winding forming equipment. In this way, simulation design no longer merely remains at the virtual verification level, but provides sufficient theoretical basis for the target process parameter set. This enables the physical drive shaft manufactured based on this parameter set to have reliable design traceability in performance indicators, effectively reducing process deviations and geometric errors introduced by the disconnect between design input and manufacturing execution, thereby improving the consistency, reliability, and yield rate of the drive shaft product.

[0138] In the embodiments provided in this application, it should be understood that the disclosed apparatus and methods can be implemented in other ways. The apparatus embodiments described above are merely illustrative. For example, the division of units is only a logical functional division, and in actual implementation, there may be other division methods. Furthermore, multiple units or components may be combined or integrated into another system, or some features may be ignored or not executed. Additionally, the displayed or discussed mutual couplings, direct couplings, or communication connections may be through some communication interfaces; indirect couplings or communication connections between devices or units may be electrical, mechanical, or other forms.

[0139] Furthermore, the units described as separate components may or may not be physically separate. The components shown as units may or may not be physical units; that is, they may be located in one place or distributed across multiple network units. Some or all of the units can be selected to achieve the purpose of this embodiment according to actual needs.

[0140] Furthermore, the functional modules in the various embodiments of this application can be integrated together to form an independent part, or each module can exist independently, or two or more modules can be integrated to form an independent part.

[0141] In this document, relational terms such as first and second are used only to distinguish one entity or operation from another entity or operation, without necessarily requiring or implying any such actual relationship or order between these entities or operations.

[0142] The above description is merely an embodiment of this application and is not intended to limit the scope of protection of this application. Various modifications and variations can be made to this application by those skilled in the art. Any modifications, equivalent substitutions, improvements, etc., made within the spirit and principles of this application should be included within the scope of protection of this application.

Claims

1. A simulation design method for a drive shaft, characterized in that, The method includes: Obtain design input parameters, which include the target load-bearing parameters of the entire shaft, the target dynamic characteristic parameters, and the end interface assembly constraints. The structural boundary conditions of the drive shaft are determined based on the design input parameters. The structural boundary conditions include the inner diameter limit of the tube, the lower limit of the wall thickness, and the size of the end overlap area. An initial ply candidate set is generated based on the structural boundary conditions. The initial ply candidate set includes a first-angle helical winding layer for bearing the main shear load, a second-angle helical winding layer for improving axial stiffness and bending mode, and a third-angle circumferential winding layer for constraining tube roundness and assembly dimensional stability. The initial ply candidate set was subjected to multi-objective verification calculations using a finite element simulation model to obtain multi-dimensional quantitative indicators. The multi-dimensional quantitative indicators are compared one by one with the corresponding preset thresholds. If any indicator does not meet the preset threshold, the adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set are adjusted according to the preset hierarchical feedback rules. The candidate set of layup is updated with the adjusted adjustable design parameters, and the multi-objective verification calculation is performed again until all multi-dimensional quantitative indicators meet the corresponding preset thresholds. The target process parameter set is then output, which is used to guide the drive shaft winding forming equipment to perform tube solid forming operation.

2. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, After the output target process parameter set, it also includes: Obtain measured data of the physical drive shaft, including measured values ​​of geometric accuracy and measured values ​​of dynamic performance; The measured data is compared with the theoretical values ​​corresponding to the target process parameter set. Based on the deviation comparison results, the correction amount of the adjustable design parameter is generated. The correction amount is used as the initial compensation parameter for subsequent iterations.

3. The method according to claim 2, characterized in that, The step of generating the correction amount for the adjustable design parameters based on the deviation comparison results includes: When the circumferential distribution deviation of the wall thickness in the measured value of the geometric accuracy coincides with the eccentricity direction of the dynamic balance in the circumferential angle, the radial compensation correction amount of the mandrel and / or the winding tension gradient correction amount in the corresponding angular direction are generated. When the measured critical speed in the measured dynamic performance values ​​is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range, a correction amount is generated to increase the thickness ratio of the second angle spiral winding layer. When the measured value of torsional stiffness in the dynamic performance is lower than the theoretical value corresponding to the target process parameter set and the deviation exceeds the allowable range, a correction amount is generated to increase the thickness ratio of the first angle helical winding layer.

4. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The multi-dimensional quantitative indicators include at least two of the following: torsional stiffness index, end interface connection strength index, material failure index, buckling safety factor index, critical speed index, and tube geometric accuracy deviation index.

5. The method according to claim 4, characterized in that, The adjustable design parameters of the ply candidate set adjusted according to the preset hierarchical feedback rules include: When the torsional stiffness index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the first angle spiral winding layer. When the end interface connection strength index or the material failure index index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the end overlap length or adhesive layer thickness, and / or adjust the layer group order or end reinforcement layer ratio. When the buckling safety factor index or the critical speed index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the thickness ratio or winding angle value of the second angle spiral winding layer. When the geometric accuracy deviation index does not meet the corresponding preset threshold, adjust the radial compensation amount of the mandrel or the winding tension value, and / or adjust the thickness ratio of the third angle circumferential winding layer.

6. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The first angle spiral winding layer has a winding angle range of ±30° to ±60°, the second angle spiral winding layer has a winding angle range of 3° to 20°, and the third angle circumferential winding layer has a winding angle range of 70° to 90°.

7. The method according to claim 1, characterized in that, The target process parameter set includes at least one of the following: the corrected layup sequence and number of layers, the corrected winding angle and thickness ratio of each layer, the mandrel radial compensation dimension, the winding tension value, the adhesive layer control thickness, the end overlap control length, and the coaxial assembly phase control amount.

8. An electronic device, characterized in that, It includes a processor and a memory, the memory storing computer-readable instructions that, when executed by the processor, perform the method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

9. A computer-readable storage medium having a computer program stored thereon, characterized in that, When the computer program is executed by a processor, it performs the method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

10. A computer program product, characterized in that, It includes computer program instructions, which, when read and executed by a processor, perform the method as described in any one of claims 1-7.

Images