Composite Vehicle Beams With Mixed Fiber Layout for Crash Resistance

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative Solutions
Generate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Current vehicle structural components, despite using composite materials, do not fully leverage the weight-saving and safety benefits of these materials, particularly in absorbing kinetic energy during collisions and minimizing damage in low-speed impacts.

Innovation Solution

A vehicle component design featuring a first beam made of chopped fiber-reinforced thermoset resin and a second beam made of unidirectional fiber-reinforced composite, with specific surface area ratios and orientations to enhance crash resistance and manufacturability, while reducing weight.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Ease of manufacture

If chopped fiber-reinforced composite is used for the first beam, then the component can be manufactured using conventional SMC processes, but the strength and stiffness are insufficient compared to unidirectional fiber composites

Engineering Contradiction:
ImprovemanufacturabilityVSAvoidbeam strength
Core Design Contradiction:
Ease of manufactureVSStrength

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle component is divided into two separate beams: a first beam made of chopped fiber-reinforced composite material and a second beam made of unidirectional fiber-reinforced composite material. This segmentation allows each beam to be optimized for its specific function while maintaining overall manufacturability of the component assembly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different regions of the vehicle component use different fiber reinforcement types. The first beam uses chopped fibers for areas requiring ease of manufacture and complex shaping, while the second beam uses unidirectional fibers for areas requiring maximum strength and stiffness. This local quality approach optimizes the overall component performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

2Strength

If unidirectional fiber-reinforced composite is used for the second beam, then the strength and stiffness are maximized, but the manufacturing complexity increases compared to chopped fiber composites

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvebeam strengthVSAvoidmanufacturability
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSEase of manufacture

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle component is divided into two separate beams: a first beam made of chopped fiber-reinforced composite material and a second beam made of unidirectional fiber-reinforced composite material. This segmentation allows each beam to be optimized for its specific function while maintaining overall manufacturability of the component assembly.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Solution Approach 2:

Different regions of the vehicle component use different fiber reinforcement types. The first beam uses chopped fibers for areas requiring ease of manufacture and complex shaping, while the second beam uses unidirectional fibers for areas requiring maximum strength and stiffness. This local quality approach optimizes the overall component performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #3Local quality

3Strength

If traditional metal structural components are used, then the strength and safety performance are ensured, but the vehicle weight increases reducing fuel efficiency

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural strengthVSAvoidvehicle weight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

The vehicle component uses composite materials consisting of fiber reinforcements embedded in a resin matrix for both beams. These composite materials provide high strength-to-weight ratio, ensuring structural integrity while significantly reducing vehicle weight compared to traditional metal components, thereby improving fuel efficiency.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #40Composite materials

4Strength

If a single complex beam design is used, then the structural integrity is maintained, but the weight cannot be further reduced and manufacturing becomes more difficult

Engineering Contradiction:
Improvestructural integrityVSAvoidcomponent weight
Core Design Contradiction:
StrengthVSWeight of moving object

Solution Approach 1:

Instead of using a single complex beam, the invention divides the structure into two separate beams with different material compositions. This segmentation allows optimization of each beam's weight and manufacturing process while maintaining the overall structural integrity required for safety performance.

Inventive Principle:
Principle #1Segmentation

Data Source

PatentEP3938230B1Composite vehicle components formed of sheet molding compound reinforced with continuous fibers
Publication Date: 2025.01.08 TEIJIN LTD
  • EP3938230B1 patent drawingFigure 1~3A
  • EP3938230B1 patent drawingFigure 3B~3E
  • EP3938230B1 patent drawingFigure 4~5

AI summary

A vehicle component includes a body, a first beam, and a second beam. The body has a first fixture region and a second fixture region. The first beam is formed of a first composite material and has a first beam shape. The first beam is attached to the body and extends between the first fixture region and the second fixture region of the body. The second beam is formed of a second composite material and has a second beam shape that is simple compared to the first beam shape. The second beam is attached to the body and extends between the first fixture region and the second fixture region of the body.