Intake Manifold Mounting Rigidity for Collision Safety

Resolve Bottlenecks,
Find Innovative SolutionsGenerate Solutions

Solution Overview

Problem

Existing intake manifold structures do not effectively prevent interference between the intake manifold and fuel pipes during a vehicle front collision when the engine is longitudinally placed in the engine room.

Innovation Solution

The intake manifold is configured with a mounting portion that has a higher rigidity on the rear side than the front side, featuring thicker dimensions and more lateral and vertical ribs on the rear side, allowing the front side to deform and absorb collision load while minimizing rear side deformation, thus preventing interference with the fuel pipe.

Engineering Contradictions & Design Principles

VSEngineering Contradiction Analysis

1Reliability

If the intake manifold is made with uniform rigidity throughout, then the structure is simple and easy to manufacture, but the intake manifold cannot effectively prevent interference with the fuel pipe during collision

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvecollision safetyVSAvoidmounting portion structure

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The mounting portion is designed with non-uniform rigidity distribution, where the rear-side mounting portion has higher rigidity than the front-side mounting portion. This local differentiation allows the front side to deform and absorb collision energy while the rear side maintains structural integrity to prevent fuel pipe interference.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Solution Approach 2:

The mounting portion is segmented into distinct front-side and rear-side regions with different rigidity characteristics. This segmentation enables independent behavior of each region during collision, allowing the front side to yield while the rear side resists deformation.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #1Segmentation

2Stability of the object's composition

If the front-side mounting portion is made more rigid, then the intake manifold maintains better position during collision, but the collision load cannot be absorbed through deformation

Engineering Contradiction:

Improveintake manifold positionVSAvoidcollision energy absorption

Core Design Contradiction:

Stability of the object's compositionVSLoss of energy

Solution Approach 1:

The front-side mounting portion is designed with lower rigidity compared to the rear side, enabling it to deform under collision load and absorb energy. This local quality differentiation ensures that the front side sacrifices itself to protect the rear side and fuel pipe.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

3Reliability

If the rear-side mounting portion is made more rigid, then the fuel pipe is protected from interference, but the overall intake manifold structure becomes more complex

Engineering Contradiction:

Improvefuel pipe protectionVSAvoidmounting portion structure

Core Design Contradiction:

ReliabilityVSDevice complexity

Solution Approach 1:

The rear-side mounting portion is designed with higher rigidity to protect the fuel pipe from interference during collision. This local reinforcement provides targeted protection without requiring complete redesign of the entire intake manifold structure.

Inventive Principle:

Principle #3Local quality

Applied Scientific Principles

This section explains which scientific principles are used to turn an abstract innovation direction into a practical engineering solution.

Function Achieved in This Case

This configuration effectively prevents the intake manifold from interfering with the fuel pipe during a vehicle front collision by ensuring the rear side mounting portion maintains its structure and absorbs the collision load, reducing the likelihood of interference and damage.

Implementation Method 1

deforming the front-side mounting portion by the collision load and preventing the rear-side mounting portion from deforming as much as possible

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectDeformation: Deformation

Implementation Method 2

by absorbing the collision load by the deformation of the front-side mounting portion, the load received by the rear-side mounting portion can be reduced

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectEnergy absorption: Absorption (physical)

Implementation Method 3

the rear-side mounting portion is configured to have a higher rigidity than the front-side mounting portion

Methodology Applied

Scientific EffectRigidity:

Data Source

PatentUS11549470B2Intake manifold structure

Publication Date: 2023.01.10 MAZDA MOTOR CORP

AI summary

Interference between an intake manifold and a fuel pipe during a vehicle front collision is prevented in an engine which is longitudinally mounted in an engine room. A vehicle component is arranged on the front side of an intake manifold, and a fuel pipe is arranged on the rear side of the intake manifold. The intake manifold includes a mounting portion on the intake-air downstream end side of a plurality of independent intake pipe portions and connects each of the plurality of independent intake pipe portions to a portion of the engine on one side of the engine in the vehicle width direction. The mounting portion has a front-side mounting portion relatively positioned on the front side and a rear-side mounting portion relatively positioned on the rear side, and the rear-side mounting portion has a higher rigidity than the front-side mounting portion.