engineering design of a vehicle glovebox

Download Engineering Design of a Vehicle Glovebox

Post on 22-Jan-2018

419 views

Category:

Engineering

0 download

Embed Size (px)

TRANSCRIPT

  1. 1. Engineering Design of an Automotive Glovebox Presentation by Charlie Tokowitz
  2. 2. Overview Research Problem Definition Competitive benchmarking Patent research Embodiment Design Industrial design Concept generation Evaluating concepts Detail Design Mechanical analysis CAD design Materials Selection Location strategies and tolerance Validation FEA FMEA Cost Target quantification (Prototyping) (User Testing) Manufacturing & Assembly Craftsmanship
  3. 3. Getting Started
  4. 4. Problem Definition Functional requirements User needs Opportunity identification Looking back Looking ahead Manufacturing + Craftsmanship
  5. 5. Competitive Benchmarking Determine relevant specifications Gap & flush (fit) Time to open Usable storage volume Yield point Qualitative analysis Location Finish Mechanisms Source: The Automotive Body Vol I: Components Design Morello et al.
  6. 6. Specifications Sheet Benchmarks Metric (units) Ideal Value Source 07 BMW 3 Srs. 11 Subaru Out. 07 Acura TSX 15 Volkswagen SportWagen Volume (l) 6-8 The Automotive Body Vol I n/a n/a n/a n/a Gap (in) .15 The Automotive Body Vol I .15 .175 .08 .17 Flush (in) .15 The Automotive Body Vol I .10 n/a .20 .08 Time to open (s) 5 benchmarkin g 12.1 3.0 2.9 0.9 Cost (USD) $66.25 (As low as possible) 3rd party resellers 75.00 46.99 92.95 50.00
  7. 7. Patent Research Learning from prior art Mechanical insight Product evolution Avoid infringement and identify innovation opportunities Understand market to differentiate and add value
  8. 8. Audi AG 1996 Movable glove compartment having a rear mounted, remotely actuated lock Ford Global 2017 Versatile instrument panel storage Ford Global 2012 Vehicle stowage assembly having electromagnetic enclosure
  9. 9. Embodiment Design
  10. 10. Concept Study
  11. 11. Detail Design
  12. 12. The Classic
  13. 13. Engineering Analysis Fg Fd Ry Rx vd vxcom + 2 = 180 = 90 /2 = = = cos 2 = 2 = 2 cos 2 = 2 2 = sin 2 2 cos 2 2 cos 2 = 2 [ sin 2 2 cos 2 2 ]
  14. 14. Latch Design M Rx Flatch L/3 L dashboard Glove door M Rx Fspring L/3 L Ry
  15. 15. Latch Design L/3 L h b Flatch = 3 12 = = 3 2 3 < Moment
  16. 16. Latch Design L/3 L h b Flatch = 3 12 = = cos 45 2 3 < Moment
  17. 17. Materials Selection Which characteristics are most important for the application? YS Cost Flammability Manufacturability Craftsmanship considerations Visual quality Mechanical loss coefficient Predominantly the material used is Polypropylene with mineral filler. Usually, the drawer is a separate injection moulded part assembled on the dashboard body. This choice does not only arise due to economical reasons, but from technical reasons as well; in fact the sound absorption characteristic of polypropylene is taken into account since in this application it is particularly important to attenuate possible noises caused by the objects contained in the drawer. Source: The Automotive Body Vol 1 p. 516
  18. 18. PPH vs PPC H: stiffer, stronger C: better impact resistance V-0 vs HB CTE Cost of part: $3.30
  19. 19. Drawer Fabric Functional requirements Stain resistance Cabin temperature Sensory targets Automotive velour suede: Cost of material: $1.45 Bonds to plastic: $0.30
  20. 20. Drawer Trim Functional requirements Sensory targets Automotive leather: Cost of material: $6.27 Bonds to plastic: $0.30
  21. 21. Prefabricated Components Piano Hinge (steel) $1.48/unit 0.09 lbs. Linear Speed Limiter (Cr-plated steel) $40.84/unit 0.778 lbs.
  22. 22. 1 3 2 4 Number Part 1 Dashboard 2 Glovebox Drawer 3 Linear Damper 4 Hinge
  23. 23. 55 6.75 9.1750 0.075 1.00 A A B F 90 0.75 A 1.075 A A 3.00 0.01 0.10 +0.02 0.00 11.80 0.05 0.10 +0.02 0.00 3.00 0.01 0.138 +0.012 0.000 8.936 +0.014 0.000 VIEW NORMALTO SURFACEOFDASH (DATUM B) A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H H J J K K L L M M 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 DRAWN CHK'D APPV'D MFG Q.A UNLESSOTHERWISESPECIFIED: DIMENSIONSAREIN MILLIMETERS SURFACEFINISH: TOLERANCES: LINEAR: ANGULAR: FINISH: DEBURRAND BREAKSHARP EDGES NAME SIGNATURE DATE MATERIAL: DO NOTSCALEDRAWING REVISION TITLE: DWG NO. SCALE:1:5 SHEET1 OF1 A1 WEIGHT: assembly_view
  24. 24. 55 6.75 9.1750 0.075 1.00 A A B F 90 0.75 A 1.075 A A 0.138 +0.012 0.000 8.936 +0.014 0.000 VIEW NORMALTO SURFACEOFDASH (DATUM B) D E F G H J K L M 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 6.75 9.1750 0.075 1.00 A B 90 0.75 A 1.075 A A 3.00 0.01 0.10 +0.02 0.00 11.80 0.05 0.10 +0.02 0.00 3.00 0.01 0.138 +0.012 0.000 8.936 +0.014 0.000 VIEW NORMALTO SURFACEOFDASH (DATUM B) A B C D E F G H J K L 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 9 8 7 6 5
  25. 25. 55 6.75 9.1750 0.075 1.00 A A B F F G H J K L M 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 6. A F 90 1.075 A A 0.10 +0.02 0.00 11.80 0.05 0.10 +0.02 0.00 3.00 0.01 VIEW NORMALTO SURFACEOFDASH (DATUM B) A B C D E F G H DRAWN CHK'D APPV'D MFG Q.A UNLESSOTHERWISESPECIFIED: DIMENSIONSAREIN MILLIMETERS SURFACEFINISH: TOLERANCES: LINEAR: ANGULAR: FINISH: DEBURRAND BREAKSHARP EDGES NAME SIGNATURE DATE MATERIAL: DO NOTSCALEDRAWING REVISION TITLE: DWG NO. SCALE:1:5 SHEET1 OF1 A1 WEIGHT: assembly_view
  26. 26. R0.225 R2.00 7.08 R0.06 R0.60 R0.225 0.50 A .01 F .01 B 11.80 8.65 11.00 C D R0.125 0.30 DETAILA SCALE10 : 1 .01 E 0.25 0.35 0.08 R0.01 0.30 DETAILC SCALE5 : 1 .01 D D E A A B B C C D D E E F F G G H H J J K K L L M M 16 16 15 15 14 14 13 13 12 12 11 11 10 10 9 9 8 8 7 7 6 6 5 5 4 4 3 3 2 2 1 1 DRAWN CHK'D APPV'D MFG Q.A UNLESSOTHERWISESPECIFIED: DIMENSIONSAREIN MILLIMETERS SURFACEFINISH: TOLERANCES: LINEAR: ANGULAR: FINISH: DEBURRAND BREAKSHARP EDGES NAME SIGNATURE DATE MATERIAL: DO NOTSCALEDRAWING REVISION TITLE: DWG NO. SCALE:1:2 SHEET1 OF1 A1 WEIGHT: DRAWER
  27. 27. R0.06 R0.125 0.30 DETAILA SCALE10 : 1 .01 E 0.25 0.35 0.08 R0.01 0.30 DETAILC SCALE5 : 1 .01 D D E E F G H J K L M 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 R0.225 R2.00 7.08 R0.06 R0.60 R0.225 0.50 A .01 F .01 B C D A B C D E F 1 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 DRAWN CHK'D APPV'D MFG Q.A UNLESSOTHERWISESPECIFIED: DIMENSIONSAREIN MILLIMETERS SURFACEFINISH: TOLERANCES: LINEAR: ANGULAR: FINISH: DEBURRAND BREAKSHARP EDGES NAME SIGNATURE DATE MATERIAL: DO NOTSCALEDRAWING REVISION TITLE: DWG NO. SCALE:1:2 SHEET1 OF1 A1 WEIGHT: DRAWER
  28. 28. Validation
  29. 29. Design FMEA Item and Function Potential Failure Mode Potential Effects of Failure SEV Potential Cause(s) or Failure Mechanism(s) OCC Current Design Controls Recommended Action(s) Linear damper: dampens motion of drawer door Damper fails and drawer swings open quickly Contents of glovebox can spill out Glovebox drawer crashes onto knees ++ Hydraulic fluid leaks out of damper Limited to life cycle of damper Part is purchased from reputable distributor Conduct further research and testing on damper specs Damper becomes dislodged Unrestricted motion Damper could fall into dashboard interior + Extreme rattling could cause damper to travel over lip Further research needed Damper is interference-fit over retaining boss Ensure that path in event of fall does not lead to void in dashboard Latch: allows user to open glovebox drawer Handle fails to trigger latch operation Items like insurance + registration unreachable Space becomes unusable +++ Latch separates from handle due to excessive force while in closed position Unlikely None Perform mechanical analysis on latch to determine F.S. Latch retainer: captures latch when drawer is closed Latch retainer fails or dislodges from dashboard Glovebox drawer can no longer close + User pulls drawer open without grasping handle to release latch Potential to occur every time drawer is operated Latch retainer has been designed to maximize moment of inertia about failure rotational axis Perform FEA on the latch/retainer system
  30. 30. Tolerance Analysis Description Mean Tolerance T-squared Drawer width 1 -11.8 0.05 0.0025 Gap 1 -0.1 0.02 0.0004 Dash width 1 -3 0.01 0.0001 Assembly width 18 0.05 0.0025 Dash width 2 -3 0.01 0.0001 Gap (*sqrt) 0.1 0.14 0.075* min max RSS 0.025 0.175 Evaluating the gap between the drawer and dash assembly Further inquiry Monte Carlo Simulation Visualizing results 90 1.075 A 3.00 0.01 0.10 +0.02 0.00 11.80 0.05 0.10 +0.02 0.00 3.00 0.01 0.138 +0.012 0.000 8.936 +0.014 0.000 A B C D E F G H Source: Visualising the Impact of Tolerances on Cosmetic Product Quality (2001), Juster et al.
  31. 31. F = 50 lbs. Displacement
  32. 32. F = 50 lbs. Stress
  33. 33. Stress F = 50 lbs.
  34. 34. F = 200 lbs. F.S. = 2.5 Stress
  35. 35. F = 200 lbs. Stress Flow
  36. 36. Bill of Materials Item Description Quantity Cost Glovebox drawer Injection-molded self-extinguishing polypropylene 1 $3.30 Suede trim for drawer interior 220 square in. $1.45 Leather trim for drawer exterior 150 square in. $6.27 3M 1099 adhesive oz. x 2 $0.60 Tooling Per 10,000 units $8.57 Linear Damper Speed limiter for motion of drawer; sold by McMaster- Car 1 $40.84 Piano hinge Controls x and y-axis motion of drawer 1 $1.48 #4 Fasteners For attaching piano hinge to drawer and dashboard 10 $1.40 Total $63.91
  37. 37. Target Measurement Description Target Realized Drawer Volume 6-8 L 7.37 L Flush .15 .06 Gap .15 .1 Time to open 5 5.3 Price $66.25 $63.91 Objective vs. subjective criteria Further testing User experience Prototyping Durability Final mass: 1.5 kg
  38. 38. Questions?

Recommended

View more >