Portfolio Qingguo Wang

www.qingguowang.portfoliobox.net

1. Bus Rollover SimulationMotor Coach Industries

Bus rollover under ECE R66

The modification effectively decreased the intrusion of the bus structure to the survival space during the rollover collision.

Design of the bus bay section based on ECE R66- a): Specification of bus rollover test under ECE R66; b): Max deformation of the original structure during rollover; c): Max

deformation of the modified structure during rollover.

(a)

(b) (c)

Force testing of vehicle components

Force testing of bus cross window pillars. Force testing of parcel rack strut.

2. R&D EngineerFAW-Volkswagen

Vehicle structural design and analysis

Stress (top) and fatigue SF (bottom) of a shifting fork

EV engine assembly

Hub of a heavy truck

Tank assembly of a truck Steering-gear bracket

Steering knuckle

Gear shaft

Optimization of braking pedal bracket

159 240

Revised Original

Dynamic simulation of HEM using strong coupling FEA

Static stiffness

Dynamic stiffness

CAD model FEA model

3. U* Index and Load PathsUniversity of Manitoba

Fig. 1: Isotropic system for Original U* calculation- a): Original system; b): Modified system.

𝑈∗=1− 𝑈𝑈 ′=[1− 2𝑈

(𝐾 𝐴𝐶𝑑𝐶 ) ∙𝑑𝐴 ]−1

(a) (b)

U* index represents the coupling stiffness between an arbitrary point and the loading point.

total strain energy of original system

total strain energy of modified system

Original U* index

Fig. 2: Load transfer analysis of a plate with a hole- a): U* distribution and main load paths; b): Von Mises stress distribution.

U* index predicts accurate load paths, while stress concentrations make the load paths analysis difficult

U* VS. stress

𝐾 𝐴𝐶=𝐾 𝐴𝐶 (𝐸𝑥 (𝜃 ) )=𝐾 𝐴𝐶 (𝜃 ) 𝑈𝑂∗=[1− 2𝑈

(𝐾 𝐴𝐶 (𝜃 ) 𝑑𝐶 ) ∙𝑑𝐴 ]− 1

Fig. 3: Orthotropic system for U*O calculation- a): Original system; b):

Modified system.

U*O index for composite materials

(a) (b)

(a) (c)(b)

Fig. 4: The U* or U*O distribution (contours) and the main load paths

(solid black lines) for- a): Isotropic structure, b): [90°]s fibre reinforced composite, c): [45°]s fibre reinforced composite.

Case study 1

(a) (c)(b)

Fig. 5: The U* or U*O distribution (contours), the main load paths (solid

black lines), and the reaction forces (bars) for- a): Isotropic structure, b): [0°/90°]s fibre reinforced composite, c): [±45°]s fibre reinforced composite.

(a) (c)(b)

Case study 2

(a) (c)(b)

4. U* Index in DesignUniversity of Manitoba

Load paths of a complex structure

(a)

(b) (d)

(c)

Fig. 6: Load paths analysis of a bus parcel rack strut- a): The parcel rack strut; b): Computational model; c): U* and main load paths; d): Von Mises Stress.

Prediction of failure mode

(a) (b)

Fig. 7: Prediction of the failure location- a): Singularity of U* variation; b): Failure location of the structure in force testing.

Design optimization

Increase of the consistency of U*

sum distribution can lead to improvement of structural efficiency.

The modified structure is 18.3% higher than the original one in terms of stiffness to mass ratio.

Fig. 8: Size optimization of a bus parcel rack strut- a): U*sum of the original

strut; b): U*sum of the modified strut; c): Process of the design optimization.

(a)

(b) (c)

Thanks for WatchingQingguo Wang

www.qingguowang.portfoliobox.net